Need Help from Vintage S&W Gurus

[Webleymkv]

A local shop has an older S&W that intrigues me and I was hoping perhaps someone might be able to help me better identify it and perhaps give an estimate of value.

What the gun appears to be is a S&W Second Model Hand Ejector in .45 Long Colt. The barrel has been shortened to approximately 3 1/2 inches and the gun's nickel finish appears to be a fairly good refinishing job (some of the markings are a bit faint). I don't believe that the gun has been a U.S. or British military specimen because the butt does not appear to have ever been drilled for a lanyard and I did not see any of the proof marks that the Brits usually stamped all over their guns. The serial number, IIRC, was in the 7,000 range.

I say that the gun appears to be chambered for .45 Long Colt because there are no caliber markings that I could see but .45 LC cartridges fit well in the chambers and the cylinder will close and rotate fine without the cartridges rubbing against the recoil shield. I also tried .44 Special and .44-40 ammunition but both cartridges seemed to fit very loosely. The space between the rear face of the cylinder and recoil shield didn't appear large enough to accommodate .45 ACP in moonclips or .45 AR ammo so I did not try that. The only other reasonably common cartridge that I could think of for a revolver of this sort to be chambered in is .455 Webley, but I did not have access to cartridges of that type to try and I'd think that if the gun were so-chambered, .45 LC cartridges wouldn't fit due to the much shorter length and thinner rim of the .455 Webley cartridge.

Now, I know that this gun has very little collector value due to being so heavily modified, my main interest in it lies in the neat Indiana Jones vibe that it gives. My main concern is that it's some sort of cobbled together Franken-gun composed of parts from different specimens. Given this, what would you all estimate such a gun would be worth as a shooter and conversation piece. My gut tells me that $250-300 max would be reasonable considering the risk of getting a Franken-gun, but I really don't know.

[PetahW]

.

I've found that true worth/value has little to do with a price tag, nor what a S&W N-frame will actually change hands for these days - since they seem to drive both sellers & buyers insane.

I think you'd better re-adjust your gut higher, by at least $100 or more.



.

[Sleuth]

Really hard to say - do you want to buy it, and then find that it uses some 'now out of production' round? Will you be happy with it as a wall hanger you can never fire? These both influence what I would pay for a gun.

I have my own "frankensmith", a clearly marked Highway Patrolman in...... .44 Spl. It was built for me, a M1917 frame (already butchered....err, modified), a .44 Spl cylinder, and a Highway Patrolman barrel reamed out to .44.
My gunsmith had the barrel, and saw me looking at the frame at a gun show. He told me to buy the frame, for $200 he made up the cylinder and fitted the gun.
The marking on the barrel looks original - except no Highway Patrolman was ever made in .44 Spl.
Now, what would someone pay for that?

[Bob Wright]

Slug the bore and make a cast of the chamber. Best to have your gunsmith do this. It may well be a .45 Colt someone cobbled up years ago.

From your description, it sounds a lot like a .44 Special I owned breifly many years ago. This was a 3 1/2" nickel plated S&W with Franzite(?)stag finish grips. I was told it was owned by a deputy sheriff in Arkansas.

Seems as if the 3 1/2" barrel was popular then, my guess is that was about the time the FBI issued the 3 1/2" .357 Magnum of the day.

Also, the .45 Colt cartridge, in the Colt New Service, was popular with sheriff departments and state troopers of the day.

Bob Wright

[Webleymkv]

OK, there's a couple more pieces of info that I probably should have included in my original post. The shop hadn't set a price on the gun yet because they weren't sure what exactly they had. I was told that the gun is on consignment from the family of a gentleman who recently passed away and the family is basically wanting to get whatever they can for it.

I asked the gentleman at the shop what sort of price they'd need for the gun and he said that he wasn't really sure. He told me that he'd informed the owners that, in his rough estimation, the gun would be worth $300-400 at most. The gun also wears a set of S&W Magna stocks which I'm pretty sure are not original to a gun of that vintage.

As to the caliber, I'm about 90% sure that it's .45 Long Colt because, even if the gun had been rechambered, I cannot think of any other even relatively common .45-ish cartridge that it would have been rechambered to (AFAIK, the original options for the second model hand ejector were .44 Spl, .44-40, .38-40, .45 LC, and .455 Webley). Because I'm almost positive that .45 ACP in moonclips wouldn't have enough clearance between the cylinder and recoil shield, the only other cartridge I can think of for the revolver to be chambered for is .455 Webley but because the OD of both the .455 Webley and .45LC is .480" and the .45LC case is .515" longer than .455 Webley, I wouldn't think that a .45 LC should fit in a .455 Webley chamber due to the shoulders and cylinder throats. Honestly, unavailability of factory ammo wouldn't be that huge an issue because I'd likely be handloading light loads for this gun anyway (something along the lines of a Cowboy Action level .45 LC load is what I had in mind to begin with).

[Webleymkv]

Slug the bore and make a cast of the chamber. Best to have your gunsmith do this.

While a good idea, I'd have to buy the gun first, hence my reluctance to pay very much for it.

Seems as if the 3 1/2" barrel was popular then, my guess is that was about the time the FBI issued the 3 1/2" .357 Magnum of the day.

I figured it was probably because 3 1/2" was about as short as you could go without having to modify the ejector rod assembly.

[James K]

Until about 1953, S&W never made a revolver in .45 Colt. But some S&W Model 1917's, originally made in .45 ACP, were modified by gunsmiths to take the .45 Colt by replacing the cylinder with one from a .44 or .38-44 that had been reamed to .45 Colt. Also, revolvers made in .455 Webley could be converted to .45 Colt simply by reaming the chambers and trimming some off the rear of the cylinder. Also, 3 1/2" was not a standard barrel length for the large frame S&W's, the .357 Magnum being the exception.

Without seeing the gun, my guess would be that the gun is a gunsmith conversion, with the barrel cut down. It is also a pretty fair bet that the nickel finish was added at the same time. On value, and being sure the gun is not original, I would go with the $250 estimate as tops.

Jim

[Webleymkv]

Until about 1953, S&W never made a revolver in .45 Colt. But some S&W Model 1917's, originally made in .45 ACP, were modified by gunsmiths to take the .45 Colt by replacing the cylinder with one from a .44 or .38-44 that had been reamed to .45 Colt. Also, revolvers made in .455 Webley could be converted to .45 Colt simply by reaming the chambers and trimming some off the rear of the cylinder. Also, 3 1/2" was not a standard barrel length for the large frame S&W's, the .357 Magnum being the exception.

According to my research, both First and Second Model hand ejectors were made in .45 Long Colt, .44-40, and .38-40 albeit in extremely small numbers (the vast majority were in either .44 Special or .455 Webley).

http://www.sixguns.com/BookOfThe44/bot44c11.htm

From the link:

Remove the third lock and the enclosed ejector rod from the .44 Special Triple-Lock First Model Hand Ejector and it becomes a .44 duplicate of the .38 Military & Police known as the Second Model Hand Ejector. This .44 Special would be produced from 1915 to 1940 with approximately 17,500 being produced. They were offered in both blue and nickel, mostly with 6 1/2” barrels and fixed sights, with some 4” and 5” lengths also made as well though very rare, as well as a few made in .45 Colt, .44-40, and .38-40, also rare.

Also, I'm pretty sure that the cylinder was not originally in .455 Webley because the serial number is clearly visible stamped on the rear face of the cylinder. If, as you noted, the rear of the cylinder were relieved to accommodate the .45 LC case (which makes sense due to the Webley's thin rims), I would think that this stamping would have been machined away.

Without seeing the gun, my guess would be that the gun is a gunsmith conversion, with the barrel cut down. It is also a pretty fair bet that the nickel finish was added at the same time.

Of this I have no doubt. I was pretty sure that neither the 3 1/2" barrel nor nickel finish were original to a Second Model Hand Ejector and some of the markings, while still visible, seem a bit faint likely due to buffing before the refinish. Similarly, the front sight appears to be aftermarket and I would suspect that it was added at the same time that the barrel was shortened.

On value, and being sure the gun is not original, I would go with the $250 estimate as tops.

That's kind of what I'm leaning towards. It's a neat gun, but I've never been much on gambling so I'm not really willing to spend more than I'd be likely to easily get back out of it should I decide to sell it later.

[Winchester_73]

What the gun appears to be is a S&W Second Model Hand Ejector in .45 Long Colt. The barrel has been shortened to approximately 3 1/2 inches and the gun's nickel finish appears to be a fairly good refinishing job (some of the markings are a bit faint). I don't believe that the gun has been a U.S. or British military specimen because the butt does not appear to have ever been drilled for a lanyard and I did not see any of the proof marks that the Brits usually stamped all over their guns. The serial number, IIRC, was in the 7,000 range.

Of this I have no doubt. I was pretty sure that neither the 3 1/2" barrel nor nickel finish were original to a Second Model Hand Ejector and some of the markings, while still visible, seem a bit faint likely due to buffing before the refinish. Similarly, the front sight appears to be aftermarket and I would suspect that it was added at the same time that the barrel was shortened.

If the SN is 7000, it basically has to be a rechambered .455. I say this because, you have described the differences between a 1st model 44 hand ejector and a 2nd model hand ejector, which means to me you know the obvious differences. If the barrel serials to the gun (on flat, below barrel) with a non-lug barrel would mean it is a 2nd model. However, if the barrel has a shroud, and the SN in the shroud matches the gun, then its actually a 1st model 44 hand ejector aka triple lock (3rd models also have a shroud, but their SN is much higher, over 30XXX). If its a true 1st model (based on what you said, its not) then its not likely to be an original .455, however, if it has the non-shroud barrel, it was almost surely a .455.

The reason I say all of this is because the whole "7000 SN range" up to about 15000 is the SN range for triple locks (1 to about 15000). When S&W started the contract for the MKII hand ejectors in .455, they restarted the SN range with 1, so there is some overlap. The actual "44 second model" SN range begins AFTER 15000 (approx end of 1st model SNs). The interesting tid bit here is that some civilian triple locks were rechambered by the factory and sent to England. Everyone is looking for those now, but they are rarely seen.

Since you suspect the gun is refinished, my explaination is that the markings which denoted Canadian or British contract were obliterated. My guess is that its a British gun, because I think they had less proof marks than Canadians. Either way, you would have to look in the exact spot they were at, to really say they are completely gone.

As far as nickel finish on "second models" that was an option. If you are talking about the MKII hand ejectors made in .455 for Britain and Canada, then yes, those should be blue. "44 hand ejector second model" refers to the civilian design change of the first model hand ejector (triple lock). I believe, in an effort partly to reduce costs, the MKII .455 second model hand ejectors were made were made as contract guns without the third lock and barrel shroud. As for the 3.5in barrel, in a civilian gun, esp on a second model (without the shroud) that could have been ordered, but that would be a RARE specimen today. Odds are there that the barrel was cut from its original 6.5in length, as previously mentioned.

Until about 1953, S&W never made a revolver in .45 Colt.

As Webley MKV has already said, S&W made many 45 colt revolvers before 1953. There was a Canadian contract for second model 44 hand ejectors/MKII hand ejector 2nd models in 45 colt, and I think 1st, 2nd and even 3rd model 44 hand ejectors (pre war) were all available in 45 colt. While of course this was not a common cal, you could have ordered it. It was not popular because the 44 special was similiar, and was effective itself. I think Jimmy-K, you meant they didn't have model soley made in 45 colt until the 1950 targets came about. I believe the 1950 targets in 45 colt were around before 1953, but I could be wrong. The 1950 light weight barrel targets later became the model 26, and the 1955 heavy barrel targets later became the model 25.

But some S&W Model 1917's, originally made in .45 ACP, were modified by gunsmiths to take the .45 Colt by replacing the cylinder with one from a .44 or .38-44 that had been reamed to .45 Colt. Also, revolvers made in .455 Webley could be converted to .45 Colt simply by reaming the chambers and trimming some off the rear of the cylinder. Also, 3 1/2" was not a standard barrel length for the large frame S&W's, the .357 Magnum being the exception.

There was another way a .455 S&W revolver could have been re-chambered to 45 colt: counter sinking the chambers in the cylinder, so the 45 colt sinks in, to allow for clearance of the ctg and cylinder and frame. Basically, its like a gunsmith made "recessing" (the trait that post war magnum and rimfire cylinders had) Ask me how I know a ,455 could be made into 45 colt this way

Also, I'm pretty sure that the cylinder was not originally in .455 Webley because the serial number is clearly visible stamped on the rear face of the cylinder. If, as you noted, the rear of the cylinder were relieved to accommodate the .45 LC case (which makes sense due to the Webley's thin rims), I would think that this stamping would have been machined away.

See above. Based on how you have described the gun, the gun was in my opinion rechambered from a .455. First of all, that is by far the likliest reason for the gun being 45 colt today, when 45 colt in a N frame S&W at that time was scarce. Secondly, the rear chamber face did not need shaved to accomodate 45 colt. As stated above, countersinking the cyinder holes would do the trick. IMO, that is how a good gunsmith achieved the rechambering at that time. No reason to shave the rear of the cylinder, unless you have to IE converting a .455 to accept 45 acp with moon clips.

Now, I know that this gun has very little collector value due to being so heavily modified, my main interest in it lies in the neat Indiana Jones vibe that it gives. My main concern is that it's some sort of cobbled together Franken-gun composed of parts from different specimens. Given this, what would you all estimate such a gun would be worth as a shooter and conversation piece. My gut tells me that $250-300 max would be reasonable considering the risk of getting a Franken-gun, but I really don't know.

My advice here is simple - pass on the gun, unless its $200 or so. The reason being is that if you bought something more original, for a little more money, your money would be safer than it would to pay $350 for this, and if you ever have to sell, you would have to find that one guy that also thinks its cool. I know many people don't care about price vs value, but in the long run, if you make wise $$$ gun decisions, you end up with more $$$ and more guns. The gun is a complete custom job, and I bet its not attractive looking due to the refinish. Its basically a cut down, rechambered re-nickeled gun, which is neat in a way, but IMO not worthy of strong consideration. I view my vintage guns as an investment more than some I guess, so if you don't think of it that way, then have at it. I have no problem with someone wanting a unique shooter. Remember though, you could still shoot and enjor a more original specimen. Who knows if the gun was customized internally as well....

[Mike Irwin]

"Until about 1953, S&W never made a revolver in .45 Colt."

Yes, they did.

A VERY few, most likely fewer than 100, or even fewer than 50.

VERY VERY valuable.



Here's the kicker, though, and I'm going off memory...

I seem to recall that S&W made a few hundred or so of these early New Centuries chambered for the .45 Smith & Wesson cartridge, which was still kicking along at the time.

It's possible that this was one of those, and at some point in its life the cylinder was simply reamed a bit to allow it to chamber the .45 Colt.

[Mike Irwin]

"If the SN is 7000, it basically has to be a rechambered .455."

Not necessarily.

While they were fulfilling the British orders, S&W was still producing guns for commercial consumption, as well.

[RickB]

I have a 2nd Hand Ejector converted, half-converted, to .45 ACP via a cylinder swap. It still retains the way-oversized bore, so G.I. hardball shoots more of a pattern than a group. Handloads utilizing .454" bullets are good for minute of paper plate accuracy at 25 yards.
The old factory .45 Colt rounds, with the plain lead or copper washed, pointed bullets, also had hollow bases that were supposed to expand when encountering the wide variations seen in .45 Colt cylinders and bores, so they might shoot just fine in a .455 converted to .45 Colt.

[James K]

I stand corrected on the .45 Colt chambering of the .44 HE.

But it was an uncommon chambering and I would advise anyone offered an "original" S&W in any odd caliber at a high price to be very cautious. The Canadian contract was for .455 caliber, not .45 Colt.

Jim

[Webleymkv]

OK, so I went back to the shop and took a closer look at the gun today. First and foremost, I misspoke about the serial number: it's not in the 7,000 range but rather in the 72xxx range (number on both the bottom of the grip and rear face of the cylinder). The number on the bottom of the barrel is, however, in the 7,000 range which makes me suspect that it may be a replacement (it does not match the assembly numbers stamped under the crane).

Also, Winchester 73 seems to have hit the nail on the head because, upon closer inspection, the chambers are indeed counterbored consistent with what he described for a .455 Webley to .45 LC conversion. I also noticed a stamping that looks vaguely like crossed swords on the rear face of the cylinder next to the serial number which may be some sort of proof mark.

So, based on everything, what it seems I've found here is a heavily customized Second Model Hand Ejector originally chambered for .455 Webley for either a British or Canadian contract. The price seems to be pretty firm at no less than $300 so, considering the amount of modification this revolver has undergone, I think I'll probably pass on it. My thanks to everyone who contributed as I don't think I'd have been able to identify the gun without the information that's been provided.

[Winchester_73]

If the SN is 7000, it basically has to be a rechambered .455

Not necessarily.

While they were fulfilling the British orders, S&W was still producing guns for commercial consumption, as well.

Maybe you misunderstood me. The issue here is that if the gun is a 7000 SN, it is most likely a MKII hand ejector, second model which was only in .455. The MKII .455 second model hand ejectors are simply the British and Canadian .455s, which were not triple locks. When that gun rolled out, approx 1915 or so, the civilian models were mostly 44 special. If the SN is 7000, its either a 45 colt triple lock (very rare), a .455 triple lock (Webley says the gun is a second model) or its a .455 second model MKII. The other key here is that WebleyMKV identified it as a second model already, probably due to lack of barrel shroud. When you add that to the fact that its a 7000 SN range, there is no other possibility than .455. Basically, for you to be right that it "could be" some other cal, it would have to actually be a triple lock, or one of the 45 colt MKII second models ordered by the Canadians. Low odds there.

The thing that you are missing here IMO is that there were two separate SN ranges. The MKII hand ejector range was separate, and the civilian range was much higher at that same time (over 15k). SN 7000 could either be a triple lock, or a MKII .455 hand ejector second model. In other words, the SN bars it from being some other cal from the factory.

The Canadian contract was for .455 caliber, not .45 Colt.

In the SCSW 3rd, p 167, there is mention of "724 reported manufactured in 45 Colt for the Canadian government." That is what I was referring to. I don't know why they ordered them, or any other info. I did hear about where two of them are, in the grapevine. Of course, the Canadian guns were mostly .455s though.

I also noticed a stamping that looks vaguely like crossed swords on the rear face of the cylinder next to the serial number which may be some sort of proof mark.

Those are the Canadian "crossed pennants". I should have went with my instinct, that it was Canadian but instead I guessed English. I couldn't remember which had more markings, and I thought the English ones had less, but with "NOT ENGLISH MADE" and all of their other crap, they must have more stampings on their guns.

The reason I knew so well about this gun was that I have one, although on mine the rechambering was the only modification. I found mine from a guy in TX, and I was crossing my fingers it was one of the 724 45 Colt Canadian guns. The gun turned out to be a gunsmith conversion, and so I lost with the "scratch off" ticket. On the other hand, the condition is wonderful, so I kept it.




Here are the crossed pennants that you mention on the rear cylinder face, and with the pic below that, on the frame.




Here are some other markings it has.



Here is the letter I got from Roy Jinks on the gun. A lot of good info. I didn't know that they were shipped to Remington. The other neat thing is that it is a "birthday gun" for me (a weird thing with S&W collectors where we sometimes look for guns that shipped near our birthdays). In case anyone is wondering, the year in the letter is also correct for my birthday.

[Webleymkv]

The other key here is that WebleyMKV identified it as a second model already, probably due to lack of barrel shroud. When you add that to the fact that its a 7000 SN range, there is no other possibility than .455.

I'm absolutely positive that it's not a triple lock due to both the lack of a barrel shroud and the lack of the third locking point on the yoke. As far as I know, the Second Model Hand Ejector were the only pre-WWII N-Frames made without barrel shrouds hence my identification as such. However, it is important to know that my initial post that the gun was in the 7000 SN range was incorrect. Upon inspecting it again today, it is actually in the 72000 SN range.

Quote:
The Canadian contract was for .455 caliber, not .45 Colt.

In the SCSW 3rd, p 167, there is mention of "724 reported manufactured in 45 Colt for the Canadian government." That is what I was referring to. I don't know why they ordered them, or any other info. I did hear about where two of them are, in the grapevine. Of course, the Canadian guns were mostly .455s though.

Perhaps they were meant not for the Canadian military, but rather the RCMP as, IIRC, the RCMP bought a fair number of Colt New Service revolvers in .45 LC.

Quote:
I also noticed a stamping that looks vaguely like crossed swords on the rear face of the cylinder next to the serial number which may be some sort of proof mark.

Those are the Canadian "crossed pennants". I should have went with my instinct, that it was Canadian but instead I guessed English. I couldn't remember which had more markings, and I thought the English ones had less, but with "NOT ENGLISH MADE" and all of their other crap, they must have more stampings on their guns.

Again you're spot on: the marking on the rear of the gun's cylinder is exactly the same as the "crossed pennants" that you show in your pictures. Oddly, I could not find any of the other Canadian markings from your pictures but I'm guessing they were probably buffed away in the refinishing process. The only markings I've been able to find on the gun are the serial number stamped on the bottom of the grip and rear of cylinder, aforementioned "crossed pennants" on the rear of the cylinder, assembly numbers on the frame and yoke, "Smith & Wesson" on the left side of the barrel, S&W logo on the right side of the frame (it's a bit faint likely due to the refinish), and a serial/assembly number in the 7,000 range on the underside of the barrel (under the ejector rod when the cylinder is closed).

[Mike Irwin]

I've got to stop trying to answer these questions at work when I have to keep blanking the screen to dodge the boss...

[Winchester_73]

I've got to stop trying to answer these questions at work when I have to keep blanking the screen to dodge the boss...

Wow Mike, you must have a cushy job. I should know, as I am in the same position

The tradeoff for me is that I am without all of my reference books while at work, so many times I'm posting using "AFAIK" or "IIRC" because I'm not able to verify something before posting as I often do at home. Of course, none of the books are always right either.

[Sevens]

The other neat thing is that it is a "birthday gun" for me (a weird thing with S&W collectors where we sometimes look for guns that shipped near our birthdays). In case anyone is wondering, the year in the letter is also correct for my birthday.

I wasn't actually wondering...until you said this.

I know it's late and I'm lousy at math. Are you telling us that you are nearly 98 years of age?

[clang]

Does it looks anything like this:


This is my .455 Hand Ejector modified to shoot .45 Colt and the barrel was nipped to 3.5".

It may not be original and it may be ugly, but you would be hard pressed to find a better big bore carry piece, and I doubt I would let mine go for less than $500.

[Mike Irwin]

I keep looking for another Brazilian copy M1917 so I can do exactly that with it....

[James K]

With all the expertise around, perhaps I should not even comment. But those crossed pennants are the British military proof mark, and the broad arrow is the British military property mark. The other mark is the British military inspection stamp. Canada did not use a proof mark and its property mark is a broad arrow inside a "C". Do not confuse the British military markings with British commercial proof marks which were put on when a gun was sold out of military stores and released on the commercial market or for export.

I know that SCSW says that guns in .45 Colt are "reported" but as usual doesn't say by whom or on what information the statement is based. Neal & Jinks do not mention any guns in .45 Colt in the Canadian shipment, and it seems very unlikely, since those guns were for the Canadian Army, which was dependent on the British Army for its ammunition supply.

Jim

[Winchester_73]

With all the expertise around, perhaps I should not even comment.

I will pretend here that you were not being sarcastic

But those crossed pennants are the British military proof mark, and the broad arrow is the British military property mark. The other mark is the British military inspection stamp. Canada did not use a proof mark and its property mark is a broad arrow inside a "C". Do not confuse the British military markings with British commercial proof marks which were put on when a gun was sold out of military stores and released on the commercial market or for export.

Jimmy K is right on here. Unfortunately I do not know much about such subjects, and I quoted the SCSW 3rd ed. See below. Just goes to show, that the book has many errors. It is actually known to have several errors, so be careful. Of course however, it has a lot of good information.

Here is the info I was quoting, which I trusted to be correct, when I made mention.

I know that SCSW says that guns in .45 Colt are "reported" but as usual doesn't say by whom or on what information the statement is based. Neal & Jinks do not mention any guns in .45 Colt in the Canadian shipment, and it seems very unlikely, since those guns were for the Canadian Army, which was dependent on the British Army for its ammunition supply.

That all makes sense, but I have a friend who saw one which lettered, and he knows of another collector who has one which lettered. I see no reason he would make up such a thing. Perhaps the 45 Colt guns were intended to be a replacement for the Colt New Service guns that Webleymkv mentions? The Neal and Jinks book is quite a bit older than the SCSW 3rd ed, so its possible that there was not info known at that time of the Neal and Jinks book about these 45 colt guns.

My assumption about this 45 colt contract is that some agency within their government at one time had Colt SAAs in that caliber, then upgraded to the New Colt New Service DA 45s, and replaced those with the S&W N frame 45 colt guns. Its not like the .455 webley does anything better than the 45 colt. Of course supplying ammo could have been an issue, but if they were sidearms for a government agency (say their national police force or something) how much ammo would they really need? The fact that Canada borders the US would mean acquisition of 45 colt ammo would not have been particularly difficult.

Here is the book citation, for what its worth:

[James K]

That is from SCSW, so it can't really be used as proof of itself.

FWIW, the "deaccession" broad arrow mentioned is the practice, when a British military property gun was sold, of stamping a second broad arrow point-to-point with the first, often resulting in what looks like an asterisk.

Back to those 724 revolvers. There are several reasons for my skepticism.

The first is that they were part of a contract for .455 revolvers for the Canadian Army. While the RCMP could have "hitchhiked" on an Army contract, it seems unlikely when the Army needed guns desperately before shipping out for France. (Remember how desperate for handguns the U.S. Army was a bit later?)

The second is that it seems unlikely that the RCMP would want to add yet another revolver, with the attendant logistics trail (parts supply, armorer training, officer training) involved, especially when they already had the Colt New Service and Colt would have been willing to sell them that number of New Service revolvers in .45 Colt "off the shelf".

Since S&W was working to fill a fairly large revolver contract for .455 caliber, changing to .45 Colt for a few guns would seem unlikely, though obviously not impossible.

The "724 guns for Canada in .45 Colt" sounds a bit like one of those stories used to explain why the gun being sold at a high price is not one of the more common .455 guns converted to .45 Colt later on, but is one of the "real, genuine, golly gumdrops special order revolvers for the RCMP and worth $_____ but just for you, I'll let it go for $______" (fill in blanks). (And of course, ignore that dent on the barrel where the second "5" used to be.)

As to the letter, of course, any of those guns will letter; it would be interesting to see if the letter says the gun was originally made in .45 Colt and was part of the British military shipment.

Note that all models of the .44 HE were available on special order in .45 Colt, but the SCSW statement seems to apply specifically to the .455 caliber revolvers produced under the British contract.

Jim

[Winchester_73]

Jim

You raise good points. A friend of mine (fellow S&W collector) personally examined one of the Canadian 45 colts. One of the tell tale ways to counter your assumption of a converted .455 is to see how the gun was made in 45 colt. Factory examples were made in the same way as the 44 special, whereas the large thick case rim issue would have been solved by positioning the cylinder appropriately, so there would be clearance. This would have necessitated most likely a shorter forcing cone, IMO, or perhaps a shorter cylinder. Logistically, the .455 cylinders were probably used, but were reamed and placed in a position where clearance was achieved. Countersinking would not have been done by the factory to achieve this. Aside from all of that, there is little likelihood that between both reaming and countersinking being needed that even a great gunsmith could fool everyone. There would be a difference between the two (factory 45 colt vs conversion) as its unlikely any gunsmith would have converted any .455 in a way that S&W made original 45 colt guns. If they were already tooled up to make .455s, 45 colt would not have been very difficult IMO to make simultaneously.

IMO the Canadian logistics issue(s) in this regard would be minor, since it was only 724 revolvers, when they were getting tens of thousands of .455s. I doubt very much government 45 colt revolvers would have required tons of ammo. Also, in a sense, it makes more sense for the Canadians to purchase 45 Colt guns (assuming there was a need) since S&W got the contract for the .455s over Colt. From a logistic parts perspective, everything would interchange except the cylinder. Everything else would be the same. So in other words, since there would be so many .455 guns and parts, it does make more sense to order 45 Colts from S&W over Colt. As for the ammo, they would have already had some 45 colt on hand due to the New Service contract.

As for the 45 Colt guns being part of the MKII series or not, I was told their SN falls in line with MKII series SN range, and they may have their own range, although I never came across this info.

The "724 guns for Canada in .45 Colt" sounds a bit like one of those stories used to explain why the gun being sold at a high price is not one of the more common .455 guns converted to .45 Colt later on, but is one of the "real, genuine, golly gumdrops special order revolvers for the RCMP and worth $_____ but just for you, I'll let it go for $______" (fill in blanks). (And of course, ignore that dent on the barrel where the second "5" used to be.)

I think the more likely scenario, since it says precisely "724" is that Roy Jinks himself found the actual shipping ledgers with these revolvers and accompanying serial numbers, and he passed on what he discovered to the S&W Collectors association, and then it later was mentioned in the SCSW 3rd. He is of course able to examine the records, and when anomalies or interesting pieces are found, the word gets out. I would give more credit to your theory if there was a vague amount given (rather than an exact number) such as "some known to be in 45 colt" or "a small number shipped in 45 colt to Canadian government."

I will attempt to get a photo from the one collector (and perhaps one other one) who I was told has one. I could then post it here. I agree it will be interesting to see what it says. It is possible that the 45 colt contract guns were different from the .455s perhaps in that they were made first, or that they lacked the lanyard, etc. I never asked, but its possible that they were actually triple locks rather than 2nd models. There was some overlap of SN btw. IIRC triple locks are 1 to 15000 whereas .455 Second models start at approx 5k. There were also triple locks converted to .455 early on.