Date of Manufacture of Colt D.A. 38 Model 1889

Attrike · April 22, 2016, 12:17 AM

I found a Colt revolver including holster in a drawer belonging to my wife's recently deceased parents. It shows Colt D.A. 38 on the side of the barrel, and the butt shows it is one of the 5000 Model 1889 Colts built for the Navy: "USN, 38D/A, No, 4694, P, W.W.K., 1889". The top of the barrel shows "Patented Aug 5, 1884 Nov 6 88 Mar 5 95". The serial number on the cylinder and locking pin is 4725 as opposed to the 4694 on the butt. This sounds like this Colt cylinder was modified sometime after 1895. What's also strange is the grip is wood rather that the hard rubber issued for the Navy Colts. Anyone have any idea when this gun could have been manufactured?

I believe the gun belonged to my wife's grandfather, Adm. Arthur Dewey Struble, who was Gen. McArthur's naval commander when he freed the Phillipines from the Japanese at the end of WW2 and for the Inchon invasion in Korea. The gun could be extremely valuable if I can link it to him. Unfortunately, the timing seems off. He was born in 1894, so wouldn't have been issued this Colt until at least 1912. Could it have been manufactured or modified that late?

Scorch · April 22, 2016, 02:16 AM

proofhouse.com shows first year production was 5,000 units, so yours would be first year of production, i.e. 1889.

The Colt Navy model 1889 was replaced in service by the model 1905, IIRC, which was later replaced by the 1911, so it seems unlikely it would have been issued in 1912, and unlikely to have been in service at the end of WW2. Not all service revolvers you find were issued to the person who owns them. You would need official records to substantiate.

Jim Watson · April 22, 2016, 10:21 AM

The Navy only got 5000 of the 31000 1889 Navy models manufactured.
Most of the service revolvers were returned to Colt to be upgraded to 1895 specifications between 1896 and 1899.

Yours is an actual Navy issue - wood grips were standard on military contract revolvers - and did get the upgrade, hence the patent date and cylinder locking notches.

The holster is as issued at the time of the Spanish American War.
The belt is a later type, WWII perhaps.

I don't know any certain way to tie it to the Admiral.
A Colt factory letter will only show when it was delivered to the Navy.
Coolgunsite shows SN 3001-4000 shipped to the New York Navy Yard on Nov. 8, 1889, for example.
Small arms issue records were seldom kept permanently.
The Springfield Research Service has dug up "over 100,000" serial numbers but that is only a small fraction of the weapons used over several wars.
http://springfieldresearchservice.com/

kilimanjaro · April 22, 2016, 10:35 AM

It may have never been issued to the Admiral, but it was certainly his possession.

James K · April 22, 2016, 10:48 AM

Remember that "the gun belonged to a war hero" is NOT THE SAME as "the war hero carried this gun in service." Many service members were also gun enthusiasts and collectors and acquired their guns the same way I did - they bought them.

It is true that the Navy (aside from the Marines) never placed much emphasis on small arms; their weapons were the big guns and torpedoes and aircraft their ships carried. So, the Navy might well have scraped the bottom of the barrel, or the dark shelves of supply depots to issue any obsolete arms they could find in an emergency, but I am more inclined to think that that revolver was a personal possession, not an issue weapon.

Jim

**Mike Irwin** · April 22, 2016, 11:15 AM

I've heard that the 1889 Navy revolvers were reissued into active service to Navy personnel during World War I.

The Navy needed handguns, but their priority ranking was far lower than either the Army or Marine Corps units that were intended to see combat, so the 1889s were pulled out of reserve.

Frankford Arsenal manufactured several million rounds of .38 Long Colt during the war (and in fact was manufacturing the round before that, as can be seen here: http://www.gunauction.com/buy/13725531 )

Winchester also loaded .38 Long Colt for military (primarily Navy) service during the war.

It's possible that he was issued one of the Colt Navy revolvers during the war. After the war the Colts were withdrawn from service, with most being slowly bled out of stores through the Depression years.

It's very unlikely that he would have been issued one of these guns during World War II as by then they were obsolete and few, if any, remained in Navy stores.

He could have gotten it in any number of ways over the years.

But, even if he had carried it during the invasion of the Philippines, I think you'd likely be disappointed as to how much that would increase the value (not as much as you'd think).

Admiral Struble had a distinguished Naval career, but he wasn't a household name. Yes, there would be a bump in value to some collectors, but nothing like what you'd see for a sidearm worn/used by a Nimitz, a Lockwood, etc.

James K · April 22, 2016, 02:45 PM

FWIW, WWK is Lt. W.W. Kimball, the Navy inspector at the Colt factory in 1889.

Jim

April 22, 2016, 02:16 AM	#2
Scorch Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2006 Location: Washington state Posts: 15,248	proofhouse.com shows first year production was 5,000 units, so yours would be first year of production, i.e. 1889. The Colt Navy model 1889 was replaced in service by the model 1905, IIRC, which was later replaced by the 1911, so it seems unlikely it would have been issued in 1912, and unlikely to have been in service at the end of WW2. Not all service revolvers you find were issued to the person who owns them. You would need official records to substantiate. __________________ Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs. But what do I know? Summit Arms Services Last edited by Scorch; April 22, 2016 at 02:24 AM.

April 22, 2016, 11:15 AM	#6
Mike Irwin Staff Join Date: April 13, 2000 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 41,389	I've heard that the 1889 Navy revolvers were reissued into active service to Navy personnel during World War I. The Navy needed handguns, but their priority ranking was far lower than either the Army or Marine Corps units that were intended to see combat, so the 1889s were pulled out of reserve. Frankford Arsenal manufactured several million rounds of .38 Long Colt during the war (and in fact was manufacturing the round before that, as can be seen here: http://www.gunauction.com/buy/13725531 ) Winchester also loaded .38 Long Colt for military (primarily Navy) service during the war. It's possible that he was issued one of the Colt Navy revolvers during the war. After the war the Colts were withdrawn from service, with most being slowly bled out of stores through the Depression years. It's very unlikely that he would have been issued one of these guns during World War II as by then they were obsolete and few, if any, remained in Navy stores. He could have gotten it in any number of ways over the years. But, even if he had carried it during the invasion of the Philippines, I think you'd likely be disappointed as to how much that would increase the value (not as much as you'd think). Admiral Struble had a distinguished Naval career, but he wasn't a household name. Yes, there would be a bump in value to some collectors, but nothing like what you'd see for a sidearm worn/used by a Nimitz, a Lockwood, etc. __________________ "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.

April 22, 2016, 10:21 AM	#3
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,541	The Navy only got 5000 of the 31000 1889 Navy models manufactured. Most of the service revolvers were returned to Colt to be upgraded to 1895 specifications between 1896 and 1899. Yours is an actual Navy issue - wood grips were standard on military contract revolvers - and did get the upgrade, hence the patent date and cylinder locking notches. The holster is as issued at the time of the Spanish American War. The belt is a later type, WWII perhaps. I don't know any certain way to tie it to the Admiral. A Colt factory letter will only show when it was delivered to the Navy. Coolgunsite shows SN 3001-4000 shipped to the New York Navy Yard on Nov. 8, 1889, for example. Small arms issue records were seldom kept permanently. The Springfield Research Service has dug up "over 100,000" serial numbers but that is only a small fraction of the weapons used over several wars. http://springfieldresearchservice.com/

April 22, 2016, 10:35 AM	#4
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	It may have never been issued to the Admiral, but it was certainly his possession.

April 22, 2016, 10:48 AM	#5
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Remember that "the gun belonged to a war hero" is NOT THE SAME as "the war hero carried this gun in service." Many service members were also gun enthusiasts and collectors and acquired their guns the same way I did - they bought them. It is true that the Navy (aside from the Marines) never placed much emphasis on small arms; their weapons were the big guns and torpedoes and aircraft their ships carried. So, the Navy might well have scraped the bottom of the barrel, or the dark shelves of supply depots to issue any obsolete arms they could find in an emergency, but I am more inclined to think that that revolver was a personal possession, not an issue weapon. Jim

April 22, 2016, 02:45 PM	#7
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	FWIW, WWK is Lt. W.W. Kimball, the Navy inspector at the Colt factory in 1889. Jim