New addition

[1pointofview]

So my uncle passed last month.  He told my aunt before he died to make sure I get a certain revolver that was my grandfather’s. He already gave me my grandfather’s .SW 38 special which SW dated back to 1964.  So I was surprised to hear about this one. I never saw it growing up and had no idea he owned it. 

My father said he owned this one first but it was just to big to carry everyday.  He worked as a constable and at parchman prison in MS. 

I contacted SW with the serial number and they dated it 1926-27. Very well take care of.  Looking forward to taking her out.  Going to get the holster repaired as well. proud to have it  looks good to be 90years old  

 

[A.J. Holst]

What an awesome heirloom!

[-boatman-]

Very nice!

[bersaguy]

Since I am not an old gun person I have often thought about 1 thing that has always concerned me. You said the gun is dated back to 1926=27. And I think you mentioned taking it out. I am assuming that to mean to shoot. With the age of that gun. Do you feel safe about shooting it with the modern ammo made today verses the ammo made back in that guns time period. I know that I passed down two Rabbit Ear double barrel shot guns back several years ago to my son and I told him not to ever shoot them because they both had the damascus twist barrels and I ahd read some where that the barrels would not withstand shooting modern 12 gauge shells in them. Not even the lowest brass trap loads. So I am wondering if pistols from back then might have the same issues with modern ammo..............Just curious about it............ 

[1pointofview]

This thing is real solid. It does not ratttle or feels loose. It probably has not been fired in 50+ years. Does not have any pitting or any rust.   

I have several .44 rounds that came with it. Probably 50 years old as well.   I feel pretty good about it.  But yeah, always a concern with old firearms

Edited December 26, 2018 by 1pointofview

[Ronald_55]

So this is a .44?

 

Good looking gun. Looks like my .38 Model 1905s

[1pointofview]

Yes, .44 special ctg. 

[TripleGGG]

Priceless. What a beautiful gun.

[gregintenn]

Cool! A Smith and Wesson 2nd model 44 Hand Ejector. You don't see those every day. They have quite a following among collectors.

What length is the barrel?

Edited December 26, 2018 by gregintenn

[Grayfox54]

I have a blue one very similar to yours. Barrel appears to be 5". My favorite length for an N-frame revolver. 

And YES! It is perfectly safe to shoot with modern ammunition. Take it out an enjoy!  

[Raoul]

Yet another good reason to reload.

[Garufa]

Definitely  a 5” barrel (the original “perfection”).  That, in combination with the nickel finish, if original, might be quite something according to The Standard Catalog.  

I would get a factory letter for the history, shoot it, and treasure it!

[1pointofview]

1 hour ago, Grayfox54 said:

I have a blue one very similar to yours. Barrel appears to be 5". My favorite length for an N-frame revolver. 

And YES! It is perfectly safe to shoot with modern ammunition. Take it out an enjoy!  

The SW response said this one was probably blued. If someone polished it, it was a good job.  It looks to be just a stainless steel finish.  Trying to figure out if these are real antler handles though.  I saw a lot of examples from pearl grips, to walnut. I have seen many similar handles but they are not the same pattern.  

[Ronald_55]

9 minutes ago, 1pointofview said:

The SW response said this one was probably blued. If someone polished it, it was a good job.  It looks to be just a stainless steel finish.  Trying to figure out if these are real antler handles though.  I saw a lot of examples from pearl grips, to walnut. I have seen many similar handles but they are not the same pattern.  

@Garufa have you seen one polished or nickled second hand that looks this good?  As far as I can see the markings are crisp I would expect them not to be. 

@1pointofview did you get a factory letter from S&W?

 

Just my uneducated guess, the grips look manufactured...

[1pointofview]

They don’t feel like real antler. If they are plastic, they are 40s or 50. But from other examples I have seen online, the other antler like handles are never the same looking. If they were plastic, they used a number of the same casts. They look to have walnut tiles on the back.  

 

I downloaded the form last week. Filled it out, was going to wait till after the new year to file the paperwork 

Edited December 27, 2018 by 1pointofview

[gregintenn]

The grips appear to be Ajax brand faux stag. I expect it has been renickled, but can't tell for sure from the pics. The hammer and trigger should be color case hardened. I never understood why so many people would renickel a revolver, and include the hammer and trigger. In yours, I can't quite tell if the case hardening has faded, or if the hammer and trigger are nickel.

[Grayfox54]

Take the grips off and look on the grip frame near the bottom. . There might be either a "B" for blue or a "N" for Nickle.  Many of the earlier guns were marked this way.  JMHO, but I think that nickle finish is original. 

[1pointofview]

Thanks for the info on the marking. Will check it out when I get back home 

[1pointofview]

Yep, it is indeed a nickel finish based on the information. Thanks all. 

[Esko 270]

Very cool!

[owejia]

The grips look like Jay Scott grips.

[xtriggerman]

Wow, a 5 screw 44spl. What a great pass me down. Make sure nothing in that holster like the snap can get anywhere close to the cylinder. A real gem of an American treasured classic...... You Lucky dog you!

[gregintenn]

That'll bring some $$$ if you ever decide to part with it I happen to have some $$$ set aside for just such an occasion.

[Ramjo]

Damn fine revolver! Recently inherit my great grandfathers colt police detective special with the family initials on it (my initials because I’m JAB the fourth!)