Smith And Wesson Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I saw a listing for an S&W S/A Model 2 Top Break revolver (ser. # 1082XX). The seller states that model was made from c. 1877-91 but could not pinpoint the date any closer than that. I asked if that was a black powder gun bcuz of its age and he said no, it was smokeless. I looked it up in my trusty S&W Standard Catalog, but not only could I not nail down the date any further, but I could not definitely determine it was meant for black powder only.
The only thing I found was on page 84 that had a blurb on using smokeless powder in a gun designed for black powder. Unless I overlooked something, I could not find a concrete answer on this particular gun, but I'm guessing it is black powder just cuz of its age. Anyone who is reading this prolly knows more than me about this. Any help on the powder issue and serial # date? Thanx.


Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,599 Posts
Welcome to the forums from the Wiregrass! I think you're talking about a model 1 and 1/2 second model and not a model 2. The Model 2 was a tip up. Yes it was a black powder gun chambered for 38 S&W. When 38 S&W cartridges we're converted to smokeless, the manufacturers made sure they were compatible with the old black powder guns. If your gun is in good workable condition, there's no reason you can't shoot smokeless 38 Smith & Wesson. The dates that he gave you or approximately correct. The only way to know the exact date is to get a letter from the S&W historian and they cost $100.

Guy
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5150

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I'm not that new, but thanx anyway. This listing is on gunbroker. (#877557263).
Now I'm confuzzled. I'm not interested in buying the thing, I was just browsing.


Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95

479508
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,599 Posts
Sorry I'm viewing the Forum on a Radio Shack model 1 with the Netscape browser and it doesn't show how many posts you've made.

So what are you confused about?

Guy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
I asked if that was a black powder gun bcuz of its age and he said no, it was smokeless.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
What an idiot if he thinks a gun made '77-'91 could be for smokeless. But as Wiregrass said, all modern ammo made for the old BP pistols is safe to fire, UNLESS it's called "High-Velocity, High-Performance," or something similar. I've fired thousands of smokeless rounds in BP pistols & rifles.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Sorry I'm viewing the Forum on a Radio Shack model 1 with the Netscape browser and it doesn't show how many posts you've made.


So what are you confused about?

Guy
I remember Netscape. And I still use the Flying Toasters as my screensaver. I also heard Windoze 98 (Second Edition) is pretty good so maybe I'll try that someday.
I thought a gun that old should not be shot with smokeless. Maybe there are exceptions. My oldest is a .38 S&W Iver Johnson 3rd Model Safety Hammerless (1910) so I'm not too much up on the pre-1900 stuff.


Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
I thought a gun that old should not be shot with smokeless. Maybe there are exceptions.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
You're wrong. No exceptions, unless the gun is defective in some way, or maybe one of the super-cheap Saturday Night Specials from that time--but not a S&W.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,599 Posts
In 1907, Smith & Wesson published a statement that all of its guns were good and warranted for smokeless ammunition.

Guy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Asking sellers questions with no intentions of buying is the reason after a while that they quit answering questions all together or give bogus answers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
Asking sellers questions with no intentions of buying is the reason after a while that they quit answering questions all together or give bogus answers.
When they provide answers as far off base as this one did, questions are a waste of time anyway; but it's par for the course on GB, where the ignorance runs both ways.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
When they provide answers as far off base as this one did, questions are a waste of time anyway; but it's par for the course on GB, where the ignorance runs both ways.
I agree with you Adirondacker that I was prolly wasting my time with that. I was ONLY asking the seller that question from a safety POV. And the post about asking a question w/o the intention of buying it is, well, never mind. (I don't wanna get flagged for language.) I just hope whoever ends up with it realizes that it is too old for smokeless.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
I just hope whoever ends up with it realizes that it is too old for smokeless.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
Not correct--Wiregrass & I have both told you it IS safe for standard smokeless loads. However, I don't know who'd want to be a shooting this or any spur-trigger revolver with such crude sights--not much good for anything but across the bar-room or back-alley shooting.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Not correct--Wiregrass & I have both told you it IS safe for standard smokeless loads. However, I don't know who'd want to be a shooting this or any spur-trigger revolver with such crude sights--not much good for anything but across the bar-room or back-alley shooting.
Thanx for your reply. I read what Wiregrassguy wrote, but how far back does it go that S&W guns can use smokeless? I have read in the past that only guns made in the late 1890s or newer can use smokeless safely. Page 84 of the S&W catalog has a safety tip on this issue. Is there somewhere to get a definitive answer on that? I appreciate this feedback.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,599 Posts
I have read in the past that only guns made in the late 1890s or newer can use smokeless safely. Page 84 of the S&W catalog has a safety tip on this issue. Is there somewhere to get a definitive answer on that? I appreciate this feedback.
No you don't or you wouldn't have insulted Adirondacker and me. Why don't you go to the Blue Forum and ask. You'll get the "only BP forever" fanatics who will support your position and you'll get reasonable people like us who say it's okay...from experience...and backed up with S&W's own statement. But you've already formed your opinion and are just seeking validation.

1907: Smokeless powder guarantee was issued by Smith & Wesson stating that factory loaded smokeless powder was safe for use in their guns.

(SCSW, 4th Ed. Page 493).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
Why don't you go to the Blue Forum and ask. You'll get the "only BP forever" fanatics who will support your position...
Now that I didn't know...that there was any significant body of shooters who could be so abysmally ignorant. Almost EVERYBODY who collects & shoots BP guns does so with smokeless! I've been doing it for 50 yrs! The ones who DO use BP are doing it not out of safety considerations, but because they ENJOY the challenge & rigamarole of BP loading & shooting, & because with some cartridges better accuracy is obtainable with BP--so long as you don't mind wiping the bore after every shot & various other aggravations. Some competitive events require it of course.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
122 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
OMG, I don't have a "position," and I don't shoot black powder. I just thought I was reading something that didn't make sense to me, that's all. Just thought I would ask and now I'm sorry I did. I'm also gonna unfollow this thread. Have a nice day.

Sent from my Commodore 64 running Windoze 95
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top