Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Smith & Wesson 1869 revolver

Teddysmith1952
Hi all,


I have had in my pocession for 50 years or so, a Smith and Wesson revolver which is either 44 or 45 caliber. Our research tells us this might be an 1869 schofield. The writting on the top of the barrel says:

Smith & Wesson Springfield Mass U.S.A PAT, JULY 10, 60, JAN 17, FEB 17, JULY 11, 65 & AUG 24, 69.

There appears to be a 4 digit number on the bottom of the handle that we cannot quite make out. We're gussing 1107. The barrel is 8" long. I have a few pictures I have saved on my computer but I don't know how to attach to this thread.

Does this piece have much value?

Thanks very much,

Jim Smith
Layton, Utah
0

Comments

10 comments

Date Votes
  • Hawk Carse
    1. There is a "sticky" post on this board with instructions on posting pictures.

    2. A last patent date of 1869 and a barrel length of 8" indicate you have a Smith & Wesson Model No 3 Single Action, the "First Model American."
    Caliber is probably .44 S&W American, maybe .44 Henry. Serial no 1107 would be for a First Model as made only from 1870-1872.

    Dollar value could be substantial, depending on originality and condition.

    A Schofield would have a last patent date of 1875 and a 7" barrel.
    0
  • rufe-snow
    Not likely to be a Schofield, with the patent dates you describe.

    More likely to be a "No. 3", like the one in this photo. (Click on link)

    A factory original "No. 3" in Very Good condition, could be worth thousands of dollars.


    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/S&W_New_Nodel_3_Frontier_1791.jpg
    0
  • Teddysmith1952
    Thanks all. I have attempted to insert pictures. Hope it works. Note the missing wooden handle/stock. Was missing since at least 1960. I can tell you that I had this looked at perhaps 30 years ago and was not given a value. I was told the handle/stock could be replaced by a pro conversator/restorer for a couple of hundred dollars. This individual was particularly impressed that the gun appears to have never been cleaned or polished which he said was a huge deal. When pulling back the hammer, it needs a little help by turning the cylinder. The when pulling the trigger, the hammer works fine. I can try to take more detailed pics if needed.

    Thanks again for the help. Jim


    http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq54/dylans1999/smithwesson11.jpg

    http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq54/dylans1999/smithwesson12.jpg

    http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq54/dylans1999/smithwesson13.jpg

    http://i433.photobucket.com/albums/qq54/dylans1999/smithwesson1.jpg
    0
  • rufe-snow
    I disagree with the gentleman who did the previous appraisal. The finish doesn't appear original to me at all. IMHO it was originally nickel plated, for some reason in the distant past an attempt was made to remove the nickel. I have seen older firearms this has been done to in the past, they have a very similar mat slate Grey appearance similar to your No.3.

    If it has been denickeled, it would have a negative affect on value.
    0
  • Teddysmith1952
    Thanks, interesting. Any idea of the value? Thanks
    0
  • Teddysmith1952
    One observation. The sight at the end of the barrel still appears somewhat silver with the brown that has engulfed the majority of the piece only partially visable.
    Jim
    0
  • rufe-snow
    Due to the missing grips, lack of finish and pitting. It would at best grade out as fair to good condition. A lot of negatives, most collectors would pass on it. My WAG $500 to $1000, to a guy who would have it professionally restored.
    0
  • Hawk Carse
    First Model American has a nickel silver front sight blade, no surprise it is not the same color as worn or stripped steel.

    I won't guess a dollar value, but heck, except for grips, at least it is all there.

    The sight blade is solid nickel silver, not the same stuff as the gun may have been plated with. No connection in appearance.
    0
  • Teddysmith1952
    Thanks guys. Would the entire piece, including the sight have been originally nickel plated? If so, I'm curious as to why the sight still retains evidence of the silver nickel plating if the piece was stripped at some point. There are also signs of small remnents of silver nickel throughout the piece not visable in the pics. Not much, but evident.

    Appreciate the help!

    Jim
    0
  • glabray
    I agree that it appears that the original finish was nickle. There are still thin traces of it in the usual protected areas. I'd guess that the "original" blue finish was applied by somebody trying to "enhance" the value.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity