Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

S&W Quiz, Question #2

Doc
Alright scholars, what is "wrong" with this .357 Magnum serial S138,600?


standard.jpg
0

Comments

8 comments

Date Votes
  • 1911a1-fan
    is that the correct stocks for a registered magnum?, and one that has been very abused

    edit: wrong hammer
    0
  • brier-49
    Looks like it might be a model 66 stainless.the black oxide wears easily. And yes the grips do look wrong for a magnum.
    0
  • Colonel Plink
    **W.A.G.***

    Barrel length?

    Looks like an N-frame with a three-inch BBL.

    (once again)
    **W.A.G.**
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    should be a 5 screw
    0
  • Doc
    This is indeed a post-war N frame .357 Magnum (would become the Model 27 in late 1957 when model numbers were assigned) shipped in march of 1957. That's a bit odd right there as that serial would normally put it in the 1955 production year. The barrel is 3.5" and that's a standard length for this model. The stocks are not original to the gun (I have the originals but they are in poor condition) but they are period correct. This was a Utah Highway Patrol Officer's gun and shows much holster wear.

    PBJloaf has correctly noted that this gun should have the 5-screw frame. The upper side plate screw (clearly not present in the photo) was not deleted from this model until serial S176,000 according to S&W Historian Roy Jinks who has no explanation for why this revolver has a frame that supposedly wasn't introduced until some 38,000 units later.

    Some collectors have speculated that it might have been one of a number of test guns used to try out the new side plate retaining system and after the tests were over it was simply shipped with the other guns. This might make sense in light of the apparent 2 year delay in shipping this revolver. Perhaps the test guns were kept around until somebody ordered that they be sold and shipped. I don't know.
    0
  • Colonel Plink
    Is this going to be on Tuesday's quiz?
    0
  • MVP
    It doesn't look right with new stocks on a beat up gun.
    I would rather have the Stocks match the overall condition.
    0
  • Doc
    They aren't new, but they are better than the gun.

    The original staocks, being on a gun carried in a holster by a cop for many years, are battered with huge chips out of the butt. Can't use them like that.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity