What do I have here?

[DrGunner]

Interesting thread! I wanted to comment on a few things. Like anyone else, I enjoy a good mystery



Target grips in this era did not have a SN in the right grip panel. Some early 1950s target grips were numbered to revolvers, but that was not done for very long. The grips which have the SN in the right panel are those which reveal the grip frame. These are fit to the frame, and are given the SN so that they can be matched back up to the gun later during assembly.



I'm not seeing evidence of that. 4in was a factory length, and the roll mark looks right to me. A pic of the muzzle would be necessary.



This isn't possible. The early 5 screw guns did have assembly numbers in the yoke. In addition, this gun is a 3 screw frame (judging by photos). The 4th screw would be in front of the trigger guard, as others have said. The ampersand on the barrel is the thin/upright one, which indicates 1973 or later production for the barrel. For the record, 4 screw 44 magnums did not appear until late in 1957, and the bulk of 1957 44 magnums are 5 screw. All 1956 44 magnums are 5 screw. 3 screw frames debut in 1962 for the 44 magnum (and probably other models).

ATF agents generally know a little about a lot of guns, and are unlikely to know these kinds of details. They obviously don't need to know minute details, just as police don't either, but many think that both parties are "experts" on firearms which is far from the truth most often.



I think there is a good likelihood that the extractor won't be numbered. When you add it all together, the gun was probably assembled POST factory by an individual, and so although your statements about extractors are true, I think someone wanted to build a 44 magnum on an unmarked frame. Its anyone's guess as to how the frame left the factory prior to being marked. Its hard for me to believe that the frame had all of the factory markings, and they were all removed. IMO, the frame was likely intercepted BEFORE the factory applied any markings. The SN could have been present on the butt, but I don't believe the other markings were ever present, judging by the photos.

When you consider the frame having no markings, the extractor SN would only give a clue about the extractor and likely the cylinder, but nothing else.

My impression: First, the frame is not early at all. It does not have any assembly markings, and most importantly, it is a 3 screw frame. The lack of model number (on a correct S&W) in the yoke corresponds to 4 and 5 screw frames, not 3 screw frames. I don't believe these markings were removed, it appears that they were never applied.

The barrel is pinned, and I assume the cylinder to be recessed. The barrel has the upright ampersand, not the "lazy ampersand" so its 1973 or later. The rear sight assembly has a domed screw, which means production is 1960 or later for the assembly.

I think the prudent way of looking at this is judging each part for its own merit. I believe what we have here is not an early frame (it is 3 screw) but a frame that got out of the factory without markings, or had some markings removed (unlikely). Then, someone built this frame into a 44 magnum. We know that the gun (as it sits) was built in the 1970s or later , because had it been built in the 1960s, the barrel at the very least would not have been around, due to the ampersand change. If it was built earlier than the 1970s, then the barrel was replaced with a later one. When you add it all up, its not really possible to say anything more.

As for the extractor, I would not be surprised if it was blank, as I said. I think if its numbered, it could be anything from 1961 to 1980ish, assuming that the chambers are recessed. As DCWilson pointed out, the extractor is stepped down, which indicates the left hand thread. It looks like a band because of the knurling, but the last 1/8in of the extractor is all the same width, and narrower than the rest of the rod. The extractor number doesn't really tell us anything, because the frame itself is devoid of all factory markings. There isn't enough info here to suggest that any of the main parts are original to each other.

A neat gun, and neat story, nonetheless!

Wow!!!! Your knowledge and detail are impressive!!!

Thanks for the input.

The extractor is blank, and left hand threaded...


DrGunner

 

[scooter123]

Not a S&W serial number.
No model number stamped on the yoke...IE 29-2.
I see no S&W logo stamp. No assembly numbers.

In short...no clue.

This may actually be a CLUE. Removing the model number and assembly numbers by grinding would leave recessed areas unless they were TIG welded and then ground, something that requires a rather high degree of specialized skills not common among the typical Criminal.

IIRC Elmer Keith was a resident of our Northwest and heavily involved in the development of the 44 Magnum. This has me wondering if this is actually a prototype that was somehow lost and never reported to the public. Because this revolver is so devoid of the typical production markings the only explanation that comes to mind is that it's a prototype. If so perhaps that inquiry to the ATF may yield some unexpected results, as in S&W asking for the return of this revolver.

 

[JSR III]

It is so nice to read a normal thread about a S&W with an unusual serial number story. It seems far too often that we hear that the sky is falling and that blackhawk helicopters are about to hover around your home with jack booted agents all dressed in black descending on ropes to take you to the nearest black ops base to begin your waterboarding.

Very refreshing.

As far as this gun is concerned, I kind of like the prototype theory. I own a .22/32 prototype that has no obvious markings.

the only explanation that comes to mind is that it's a prototype. If so perhaps that inquiry to the ATF may yield some unexpected results, as in S&W asking for the return of this revolver

I think this highly unlikely. The current owners of the S&W company are only interested in expanding the company and increasing the bottom line. They probably have no interest in one very old (perhaps prototype) firearm that has absolutely no value to them.

There are many factory prototypes out there in private collections and they only have value to us gun nuts.

 

[Göring's S&W]

I don't mean to rain on the prototype parade, but I would probably bet a 5 screw 44 magnum of mine against that theory

There wouldn't be a reason to make a prototype of a model that has the same general features as models before it. The regular production 44 magnums began production in Jan of 1956, and at the end of 1956 we see the first 4in guns. Regardless of how many 4in guns were made prior to the debut of the 3 screw frame, barrel length is obviously not grounds for a prototype gun. By the time the 3 screw 44 magnum appeared, the factory had made at least 50k 44 magnums. This gun appears no different (except for the lack of markings on frame) than other 3 screw model 29-2s. What could they have been testing this far into production with a plain jain 44 magnum?

Since this gun is a 3 screw frame, it really crushes the prototype theory. You have to ask yourself, what would be the idea of the prototype? To evaluate the 3 screw frame with the new cylinder stop plunger? Highly, highly unlikely. The 3 screw change was not significant enough to warrant a prototype gun which was devoid of most markings for testing. Of course, I am sure, the redesign of the cylinder stop plunger warranted some testing, but not enough to make a gun just to test the new cylinder stop plunger. I own one prototype S&W myself, and like many real prototypes, the SN has a X prefix, which means experimental. Even if this gun was a holy grail 44 magnum S&W prototype revolver, the SN was removed, and replaced with "3777".

My prototype was one of the first of its kind, and was made for test purposes. Generally, that is what prototype revolvers are: first of their kind. Looking at this gun, the fact that its devoid of frame markings is not enough to support a prototype possibility. Also, the barrel would not likely be marked the way it is if this gun were a prototype. Since the barrel is from the 1970s, are we saying that its a prototype with a replaced barrel, or are we saying its a 1970s prototype of a gun that was made since 1961 (3 screw frame debut)?

There are far too many holes in the prototype theory...

 

[Green Frog]

This has been a very interesting thread, and I'm both pleased and surprised it came to such a happy ending. Now if you can track the original serial number to a Montana State Senator or Attorney General or something, you'd have the bragging rights of the decade!!

Congratulations,
Froggie

 

[DrGunner]

This has been a very interesting thread, and I'm both pleased and surprised it came to such a happy ending. Now if you can track the original serial number to a Montana State Senator or Attorney General or something, you'd have the bragging rights of the decade!!

Congratulations,
Froggie

Given the mish mosh of parts and the "Serial Number" being crudely stamped where it's visible on the grip frame, my theory is that this was a "lunch box gun" that was serialed by law enforcement and carried by a Montana State Trooper.

I've looked very close and I can't find evidence that there are or were serial numbers that were removed... no filing marks, low spots, etc. Plus nothing on the cylinder yoke or extractor star is curious. I think it's different and nothing special, kind of a Mutt that doesn't know it's own Birthday having been adopted more than once, it's history is lost.

DrGunner

 

[MrG5122]

Dinging this just so I don't miss anything. Very interesting.