When the most trivial data is not the easiest to find

[French Grumpy Bear]

Hello everyone,

Having spent some time on the internet gathering information on the history of the Smith & Wesson Model 19, I am very surprised to have found nowhere a rather basic piece of data: how many Model 19s did Smith & Wesson produce from 1955 to 1999 (i.e. 19-8 included, before its reintroduction in 2018 as 19-9)?

It's not data of the utmost importance, but I confess to being very frustrated to remain in the dark about such a simple piece of data (whereas I have a whole bunch of figures to record special productions such as the M19-3 RS or M19P ).

If you have the information, I'd be very grateful ;-)

Sincerely,

 

[Sevens]

Trivial is probably not the proper word here. Nor is basic the proper term.

You are looking for an answer that might seem trivial or basic inside the operation at S&W but it is no data that's really been offered to the public.

I don't think finding that answer will be any matter of easy. I certainly do think it would be interesting, but I suspect you won't find that answer.

If you do find that answer… you might be one of the only folks that have it!

 

[French Grumpy Bear]

Trivial is probably not the proper word here. Nor is basic the proper term.

You are looking for an answer that might seem trivial or basic inside the operation at S&W but it is no data that's really been offered to the public.

I don't think finding that answer will be any matter of easy. I certainly do think it would be interesting, but I suspect you won't find that answer.

If you do find that answer… you might be one of the only folks that have it!

I'm disappointed by this answer... but thank you for giving it to me and it's reassuring in terms of my research skills.

On the other hand, I find it hard to understand why S&W would consider this to be "sensitive" or strategic information that the company wouldn't want to divulge. Especially as it is available for other models of the brand. So I remain rather puzzled.

 

[Doc44]

Unless someone with access to the data took the time to determine the number, the answer to your question does not exist. Given the nearly fifty years of information that may or may not exist, I am not sure a number can be determined.

Bill

 

[murphydog]

Only someone at a higher management level at Smith & Wesson would have access to production numbers. Then model 19-specific data would have to be sorted out from all the other revolvers with K and three-letter prefixes.

Lastly, the company would have to be motivated in some way to reveal this information beyond simple collector curiosity. Doubt this kind of information will ever be forthcoming.

 

[Hondo44]

I agree it's a relatively trivial fact. However it's not trivial to find the number for a certain model that shares the same serial number range with other models. And although a production foreman or other employee may have kept track in their notes for whatever reason, there apparently was no reason to single out that fact to be recorded for easy discovery by collectors over other myriad data that existed at the factory. Very unfortunate. There may have been or still are individuals who know that number but it hasn't made it into the S&W books.

 

[French Grumpy Bear]

I agree it's a relatively trivial fact. However it's not trivial to find the number for a certain model that shares the same serial number range with other models. And although a production foreman or other employee may have kept track in their notes for whatever reason, there apparently was no reason to single out that fact to be recorded for easy discovery by collectors over other myriad data that existed at the factory. Very unfortunate. There may have been or still are individuals who know that number but it hasn't made it into the S&W books.

Thank you very much for your reply.

However, I'm still extremely surprised that a firm like S&W doesn't have a precise record of the number of units produced per model. It's a basic piece of management information that seems to me to be essential for both industrial and management control purposes.

It's likely that the company has this information, perhaps in a somewhat piecemeal fashion from different, unreconciled sources, but that it just doesn't want to communicate it.

Too bad, I (and perhaps many others) will remain frustrated at being kept in the dark.

 

[gmborkovic]

Mr. Baer, quite simple, the factory does not want you or anybody else to know the answer. And remember the factory is not under the old ownership. So why do they care?

 

[Sevens]

It's likely that the company has this information, perhaps in a somewhat piecemeal fashion from different, unreconciled sources, but that it just doesn't want to communicate it.

I think this is accurate. This model debuted in the 1950's, long before the company would have kept records on a computerized database. They themselves don't really even have a need to merge the production records of many decades with even their earliest of electronically organized records.

But I don't think it's nearly as personal as you seem to frame it — I don't think there is a group of upper management at S&W that convenes a quarterly meeting to reaffirm their position that they refuse to release this particular information.

I would suppose it does not even occur to them to dig in to dusty old file cabinets in a dark corner of a dank basement that rarely gets visited.

 

[French Grumpy Bear]

I think this is accurate. This model debuted in the 1950's, long before the company would have kept records on a computerized database. They themselves don't really even have a need to merge the production records of many decades with even their earliest of electronically organized records.

But I don't think it's nearly as personal as you seem to frame it — I don't think there is a group of upper management at S&W that convenes a quarterly meeting to reaffirm their position that they refuse to release this particular information.

I would suppose it does not even occur to them to dig in to dusty old file cabinets in a dark corner of a dank basement that rarely gets visited.

A job for the S&W Historical Foundation?

 

[Doc44]

The daily production log of various models in the 1950s and 1960s (KT-357 for the Combat Magnum) is not in S&W's files. Also, these production records were not kept by serial number, finish, or barrel length.

The best way to find out how many of a particular model was made is to go to the shipping records and determine how many were shipped over a certain period of time. However, this is a very time consuming task and not one that many would consider undertaking.

I have done it for a couple of models, but over a relatively short period of time usually not exceeding eighteen months. Even then, the time it took was long and the task very tedious.

What does knowing the total number of Combat Magnums made over forty plus years add to the collection of the model?

Bill

 

[French Grumpy Bear]

The daily production log of various models in the 1950s and 1960s (KT-357 for the Combat Magnum) is not in S&W's files. Also, these production records were not kept by serial number, finish, or barrel length.

The best way to find out how many of a particular model was made is to go to the shipping records and determine how many were shipped over a certain period of time. However, this is a very time consuming task and not one that many would consider undertaking.

I have done it for a couple of models, but over a relatively short period of time usually not exceeding eighteen months. Even then, the time it took was long and the task very tedious.

What does knowing the total number of Combat Magnums made over forty plus years add to the collection of the model?

Bill

Thank you very much for these interesting details.

This is probably why the production figures for special productions (M-19RS, M-19P, etc.) are known, whereas those for standard production will probably always remain in the shadows.

 

[Walter Rego]

I understand how gargantuan a task it would be to track production numbers for any gun made over a very long period of time that shared serial number ranges with other models and calibers.

But how do we get a definitive production number of a gun like a Model 1950 .45 Target Pre-Model 26 of 2768 revolvers made ? Didn't they share serial numbers with other S prefix N frames made in the 1950's ? Could it be because of the relative small numbers produced made it easy to determine ?

Or how about the Model 1006 ? Again, there is a published quantity of 26,978 produced.
A fairly large number. Didn't they share serial numbers with other 3rd Gen. automatics ?
The production period was short, only 1990-1993. Perhaps detailed production records were readily available ?

Just curious.

 

[Sevens]

Good point. I would argue that the 1006 and all 10xx series are far easier to obtain because of when they were produced — in the age of electronic record keeping.

The guns from earlier decades? Far more difficult.

The part of my brain that wants this to be somewhat simple believes that the changeover took place when box end labels went from hand-written with a ball point pen to computer generated, including a new SKU/product code and for many examples, the SPEC ORDER code that most often hands us a date.

The first computer generated labels came in the very early 1980's. Maybe 1983 or 1984?