The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 5, 2012, 08:44 PM   #1
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,854
Remember these?

I was on another forum and these "hybrids" came up.

First was the "Smython" a Smith & Wesson Model 19 fitted with a 4" or 6" Colt Python barrel. These were made up early in action pistol shooting matches to get the smooth and consistant double action of the Model 19 with the weight and accuracy of the Python's barrel.

The other was the "Smolt" a S&W 22/32 Target mated with a barrel feom a Colt Officers Model Match. Again to get the small frame and smooth single action let-off of the Smith combined with the weight of the Colt's barrel. This was especiall popular with the ladies of that era.

And Herrett's and Cloyce's Stocks, both loosely based on Walter Roper's designs. Some were so convoluted that the shooter almost put them on like putting on a glove. These led to stricter stock dimensions, and revolver modifications. The sights were to be open, contain no glass, and the front sight could not extend past the muzzle, and the rear sight had to be in front of the hammer.

It was the "Smython" that led to the Smith L-Frame revolvers.

Ah, what an era!

Bob Wright

Last edited by Bob Wright; October 5, 2012 at 08:49 PM.
Bob Wright is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 02:03 AM   #2
Winchester_73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,859
Quote:
The other was the "Smolt" a S&W 22/32 Target mated with a barrel feom a Colt Officers Model Match. Again to get the small frame and smooth single action let-off of the Smith combined with the weight of the Colt's barrel. This was especiall popular with the ladies of that era.
I've seen Smolt and Smython used interchaneably and I thought they were the same thing. Your version of a "smolt" seems improbable, a "S&W 22/32 target" is a J frame model 35, matted with a Colt E frame (medium) barrel? So a small frame S&W with a medium frame Colt barrel?!?! I never heard or saw of that before. It would be a shame to butcher a S&W model 35 like that because they are scarce guns. If you meant a plain "kit gun", thats a model 34, which had adjustable sights BUT 2in or 4 and a baughman aka ramp front whereas the model 35 was 6in with a patridge front sight. If someone took a Colt OMM barrel to mate to a S&W, I would have to assume they would put it on a S&W 17/18, not a J frame.

Ever see one of the "cougars" or maybe "COuger" which was a security six with a Python barrel? They are around too. I call them "Pythgers" because I see them as a more silly concept than even a Smython.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west
Winchester_73 is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 08:48 AM   #3
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,854
Call me a liar if you wish. The gun was featured on the cover and in an article in the June (I believe) 1954 issue of The American Rifleman). The Colt barrel had been milled flat in the area of the extractor rod, and a front lock had been dovetailed in place.

As to model number, this was prior to the practice of identifying S&W revovlers by model number. And 22/32 target revovlers wers not so scarce at that time.

As to J-Frames, these were considered suited to the ladies, who found the K-38 too large for their hands, and too heavy.

Improbable? If you say so.

Bob Wright
Bob Wright is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 08:53 AM   #4
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,854
Silly concept though you deem them to be, Smythons were at one time popular with action shooters, who wanted the extra heft out front for their matches.

I didn't this up.

Bob Wright
Bob Wright is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 09:13 AM   #5
CajunBass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2005
Location: North Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 3,422
And the Ruger Security-Six with a Python barrel, was a "Couger."
__________________
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 (NKJV)
CajunBass is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 09:51 AM   #6
Winchester_73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,859
Quote:
As to model number, this was prior to the practice of identifying S&W revovlers by model number. And 22/32 target revovlers wers not so scarce at that time.
Well it depends on which one you mean. I didn't think you meant a 22/32 pre war gun, but thats the only one thats not scarce. It still in my mind doesn't make much sense (not saying you're lying) to take that medium frame barrel and put it on what is actually a I frame, vs a K frame 22. Interesting...

Quote:
Silly concept though you deem them to be, Smythons were at one time popular with action shooters, who wanted the extra heft out front for their matches.
I know you didn't make this up and I understand why it was done, but I think it was a lot of effort for a small advantage. This concept wasn't very popular and there doesn't seem to be many around today. While some shooters did this, many just worked around the limitations of a K frame 357.

Quote:
As to J-Frames, these were considered suited to the ladies, who found the K-38 too large for their hands, and too heavy.
Well there was no J frame target gun in 38. The model 35 was actually a target gun (but in 22) with a 6 in barrel and patridge front. J frames were moreso for concealment because if you look at the J frame models, all of the best selling models were for concealment purposes. S&W didn't really have the J and before that the I for women. Perhaps the model 35 was more geared toward a target ladies gun, but many women shoot K-22s just fine which were first anyways. Maybe you could say they made the tiny M frame ladysmith 22 long revolvers for women, but not really the I frame. Interestingly enough, the first 22 DA target guns S&W made were in fact I frame 22/32 "bekearts" - and they were made for everyone. The K frame 22 target did not debut until 1931 and S&W made basically no regular production 22 N frame guns. If you wanted those 22/32s to feel different you could try the different grip types.

These had the I frame target extension stocks. The modern wrap around target stock wasn't around yet. SN 163XXX probably shipped 1915/16. The first 3000 had a separate number on the bottom of the grip, 1 to 3000 which mine has. Even though its been there done that, I keep it because its early and I don't have another.





__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west

Last edited by Winchester_73; October 6, 2012 at 09:57 AM.
Winchester_73 is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 09:55 AM   #7
Winchester_73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,859
Quote:
It was the "Smython" that led to the Smith L-Frame revolvers.
Well the K frame magnums had failures which resulted in a redesign of the K frame magnum line. I don't think S&W cared about Smythons really. The forcing cone cracks and complaints about the K frame mags 13/65 and 19/66 being too light, therefor amplifying recoil and possibly being shot loose were what caused the L frame change. Some people theorize it was because of the Colt Python, but that design was nearing the end of production when L frames came out. S&W simply found out that they needed to make a full forcing cone medium frame magnum with more heft. Also, regarding how they added weight by making the lug full instead of half, if you want to keep a frame size the same, but add weight at the same time, there are not many ways to do it.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west
Winchester_73 is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 02:12 PM   #8
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,854
Winchester_73 said:
Quote:
I know you didn't make this up and I understand why it was done, but I think it was a lot of effort for a small advantage. This concept wasn't very popular......
First of all my mistake in typing, I should have written K-22, not K-38. Again, as I said, this did find favor with some lady bullseye shooters of the day. They did find the K-Frame a trifle heavy and large for their hands. The gun shown is the one used, I believe. Imagine it with a heavy barrel, notched and relieved for the ejector rod, and a front latch dovetailed under the barrel. The gun shown on the cover had Cloyce's stocks, I believe, which were laminated alternating maple and walnut.

And it was the lady featured in the article credited with coining the term "Smolt."

Bob Wright

Incidentally, the revolver shown appears to have a Paine front sight, not a Patridge.

O.K. I went to a Smith & Wesson forum and the revovler shown they refer to as a pre-Model 35, with Patridge sights and sort of Magna stocks, referred to as a 22/32 Target.

Last edited by Bob Wright; October 6, 2012 at 02:27 PM.
Bob Wright is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 02:33 PM   #9
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,854
Again, I refer to the days when combat action shooters were using K-Framed Smiths of various models, in .38 Special or .357 Magnum, some sporting barrels of 1" in diameter, using target sighted Smiths or fixed sighted with outlandish full ribs mounting both front and rear sights.

You say a lot of effort for small gain, but apparently the shooters and 'smiths of the day didn't think so. As to popularity, both Smythons and Smolts did a fair amount of exposure on the firing lines.

And what about those short cylindered .45 ACP Colt M1917s? Again a lot of effort, but done non the less.

Bob Wright
Bob Wright is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 02:41 PM   #10
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 7,088
Well Bob, I remember.
__________________
Bill DeShivs
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 09:07 PM   #11
Bob Wright
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 10, 2012
Location: Memphis, Tennessee
Posts: 1,854
On Revolverforums.com aimtrue wrote:

Quote:
Bob, you are correct.

For those who are unfamiliar with this creation, an outgrowth of the Practical Police Course (PPC) matches of the early 1970's was the Smython.

Bill Davis of Sacramento was a renowned pistol smith of that period building custom guns for PPC shooters. Favorites of the time were the S&W Model 19 for its trigger action and the Colt Python's for its barrel weight and high accuracy.

Bob Wright
Bob Wright is offline  
Old October 6, 2012, 10:42 PM   #12
RJay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,654
At one time the concept was very popular and all the rage of action shooters. Remember them well.
__________________
Ron James
RJay is online now  
Old October 6, 2012, 11:39 PM   #13
Winchester_73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,859
Quote:
You say a lot of effort for small gain, but apparently the shooters and 'smiths of the day didn't think so. As to popularity, both Smythons and Smolts did a fair amount of exposure on the firing lines.
Quote:
Bob, you are correct.

For those who are unfamiliar with this creation, an outgrowth of the Practical Police Course (PPC) matches of the early 1970's was the Smython.

Bill Davis of Sacramento was a renowned pistol smith of that period building custom guns for PPC shooters. Favorites of the time were the S&W Model 19 for its trigger action and the Colt Python's for its barrel weight and high accuracy.
Quote:
And what about those short cylindered .45 ACP Colt M1917s? Again a lot of effort, but done non the less.
Not the point Bob. I didn't say no one did it, I didn't say they didn't exist, I didn't say that some people didn't think it was a good idea. The point I am making is that they were not "popular" meaning far less than half the shooters used them, AND (or you could say 'because') they didn't offer a real benefit. IMO the people who bought such guns were trying to correct a problem they had, not a problem with their gun. PPC is more about technique than having a frankengun that's meant to be perfect, when a perfect gun doesn't exist. I think most of the "advantage" of these modifications could be over come with more practice but of course, why do that

Some guys preferred the Colt action and other people knew their S&W was fine, with original barrel. If someone was a top PPC shooter, with a plain S&W 66 for example, he (or she) is not going to have trouble beating someone because they have some magic hybrid revolver. The guns that were converted with Colt barrels did not weigh enough more for it to be worth it. Also, the taper barrel thing, for such shooting is not important enough to justify doing this. I think your reasoning of "some people thought it was worth it" is very flawed. Many people also think the Taurus Judge is an excellent home defense option too. Many others think Obama will save this country. Popular ideas aren't always right and right ideas aren't always popular. Have you ever heard someone complain that the BARREL on a S&W isn't accurate? I don't mean the gun, I mean the barrel. I can understand buying a competition barrel such as a Clark for a S&W 41, but a Colt barrel on a S&W because its more accurate? The difference if any would be small enough to where its splitting hairs.

Quote:
Incidentally, the revolver shown appears to have a Paine front sight, not a Patridge.
It is a paine front sight. The pictured gun, as I said, is a pre war I frame 22/32 "bekeart" whereas the gun that I said that did have a patridge was a J frame 22 target: aka 22/32 target (pre model 35) or later the model 35.

Quote:
O.K. I went to a Smith & Wesson forum and the revovler shown they refer to as a pre-Model 35, with Patridge sights and sort of Magna stocks, referred to as a 22/32 Target.
Now that you clarified, as I said already, those are definitely SCARCE (I don't know how many pics I've seen of a pre model 35 and a model 35 is very hard to find) and that modified smolt gun you speak of was a waste of a good S&W. Not many pre model 35s were made at all. I suggested a pre war 22/32 possibility only because you said "well it was a not a scarce gun at the time" which it certainly was, unless it was a pre war 22/32. The interesting thing that you and whichever forum you cross referenced didn't realize is there is no way to know which exact S&W 22 revolver was the frame and action. How is that you say? Well the difference between a 34 and 35 aka 22/32 and 22/32 target is the barrel only. Now of course, later ones were model marked but feature wise, they are the same. It also should have the post war rear sight assembly if their identification was correct. You could have got the 34 in a square frame gun and then of course put on any J frame stocks, all the same frame. So really, there is no way to tell either way.

Even though I still say such guns are a nonsensical waste of time and resources, I would like to have such a gun (like this one of a kind S&W 22 / colt OMM hybrid), with the proper paperwork of course. The concept would be one of a kind, because it became obvious there was a very very small benefit to such a gun. After the myth behind the first creation hybrid gun was disproved, no more needed to be made.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west
Winchester_73 is offline  
Old October 8, 2012, 01:01 PM   #14
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 1,691
Smythons were popular with the PPC crowd.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09827 seconds with 7 queries