![]() |
|
|||||||
| Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
| Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#26 |
|
Member
Join Date: June 4, 2008
Posts: 64
|
Me either...
Here's my 58 .44 mag.
|
|
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2004
Location: Minden , Nebraska
Posts: 1,189
|
at one time there was a person on the S & W forum website that had a fixed sight M-29 with a 3 inch barrel (may have been a little shorter or longer but no more than a 4 inch barrel). there was something like only 4 or 5 of them made by S & W. I think that if you searched deeply enough there is a picture of it.
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Member
Join Date: June 4, 2008
Posts: 64
|
I've seen that one. The "29-58". It's why you can never say never when it comes to Smiths.
And has been mentioned, there was the 629 fixed sight guns done in a couple special runs as well. I bought one of the Camfour 2" guns with the intention of customizing it, but they went up in value too much for me to do it. S&W could sell fixed sight guns if they made the right ones, but it seems like they think the public isn't interested. Keeps Cylinder and Slide in the business of selling their Extreme Duty fixed sights, even to S&W. |
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Staff
Join Date: April 14, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 33,109
|
Those supposed guns (I don't believe it's ever been confirmed that S&W actually made them) would not have been marked 58, however, unless someone really screwed up at the factory -- multiple times in a row. And sorry, given that factory mismarks are never in production strings (most of the mismarks are caught and remarked, with one getting out here and there) I simply don't buy it.
I stand by my assessment that yes, while you never can say never, you can also say that the odds of S&W actually having made any one of these reported guns is EXCEPTIONALLY slim.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. |
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Member
Join Date: June 4, 2008
Posts: 64
|
Mike, the guns steveno and I referred to aren't mismarks. They are stamped 29, but were marked 29-58 on the box. And yes, they are very much confirmed to exist. One is owned by an extremely accomplished S&W collector and expert on N frames, known as Doc44 on the S&W forum. If you are an SWCA member you can see who that is. His bonafides are above reproach.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-rev...ing-story.html But you are correct, most of the strange guns you see are put together after leaving the factory. But there are also a number of exceedingly rare prototypes, special runs, one offs, and even factory gift guns that are out there. I own a couple of them myself. |
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: June 18, 2004
Location: Minden , Nebraska
Posts: 1,189
|
Doc44 probably knows more about "N" frames better than S & W themselves
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Member
Join Date: June 4, 2008
Posts: 64
|
There's no doubt of that.
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Staff
Join Date: April 14, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 33,109
|
OK, I didn't follow that we had switched over to discussing the few, but known, revolvers that were marked 29-58.
That's not what Mr. Gumm described, or at least he made no reference to it being marked 29-58, which is why I answered as I did. As I said, numerous people over the years have claimed to have revolvers marked 58 that were specifically manufactured by S&W in .44 Mag., but without the 29- marking. I've yet to see one.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. |
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Member
Join Date: June 4, 2008
Posts: 64
|
No, steveno and I were not talking about Mr. Gumm's gun. I agree with you in that I doubt he has what he thinks he has, which is why I responded as I did about it.
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|