Recently got two S&W 1905 4th change revolvers.

[Bill Akins]

I recently picked up these two "K" frame, S&W, .38 special, 6 inch barrel, model 1905 4th change revolvers on gunbroker. Got the blue one first several months ago and picked up the nickel one a few weeks ago. Got em both for about $250.00 each.

The blue one appears to have either original or at least period grips and the nickel one appears to have very old Jay Scott wide laminated wood to plastic faux stag grips that the faux stag is cracked on both sides, but is still adhered to the wood lamination so they stay in place and I'll keep them until or if I can find another old set of Jay Scott's just like them to replace them with.

No problems or issues of any kind. Sweet actions, excellent lockup and balance. I was very impressed with the condition of the finish on the blue one. And even though it appears to be a very old after factory nickel job on the nickel one, there is no flaking and it is also in very good shape finish wise.

I checked the serial numbers on both with some of the fellas at the S&W forum who are experts and have the books on these, and was told both of them were manufactured in 1917.

Of the S&W 1905's on gunbroker some of them have good finishes, so so finishes and some have atrocious finishes. Some are listed at ridiculous prices and some like the two I got are at very good prices. Any time you can get an antique 1905 S&W revolver in the shape mine are in for $250.00 or under $300.00, that is a good deal. Actually that is a SMOKIN deal.

I think the 1905 S&W and its various changes, (1st change, 2nd change, 3rd and 4th changes) are very good sleeper deals that will only go up in value as time passes. They are overlooked by the tacticool and plastic gun crowd who don't realize that fixed sighted antique revolvers are and will become much more valuable as time goes by. Plus they are excellent plinkers and shooters and make a good home defense gun too. Also the .38 special with its larger case capacity is more powerful than a 9x19mm para. Although I wouldn't advise shooting +P's in these older revolvers.

Here's the pics.

.

 

[Sevens]

Great finds! I just picked up one right in that ballpark with a 272xxx serial number. What are the first three digits of your pair?

Also, do you have the "dish" out of the underside of the top strap, right in the flash gap as mine does?
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=529609
Sorry I don't have a picture -- and lack the searching skills to find one on the 'net.

I think the 1905 S&W and its various changes, (1st change, 2nd change, 3rd and 4th changes) are very good sleeper deals that will only go up in value as time passes. They are overlooked by the tacticool and plastic gun crowd who don't realize that fixed sighted antique revolvers are and will become much more valuable as time goes by.

I will agree, but only to a point. "Collectible", "valuable" and "investment" are not (at all!) my area of expertise, I'm just a shooter who loves handguns, but it's been my experience that when the subject is produced in tremendous volume as the Fourth Change revolvers have been (750k, according to Roy Jinks!) that a climbing or noteworthy "collectible dollar value" is going to apply to only the finest examples or the rarest of variations. The First, Second and Third changes are likely a different story... but the Fourth Change produced a staggering volume of handguns.

I feel similarly about the two Woodsman-family pistols that I have. Incredible handguns, and I could rant about them all day but they made SO MANY of them that only the rarest variations and the finest in condition have noteworthy dollar values attached.

In my opinion -- this is not at all a bad thing. Quite the opposite. From my point of view, it means that those of us who absolutely love to shoot can find extremely affordable examples that we can own, shoot and love with little care of how it's collectible value is affected with use and cleaning.

There's a reason they have made so many of the great ones. They were fantastic and everyone wanted to own one. That makes it easily within reach of guys like me who simply love to shoot 'em.

The grips on my 272xxx are a bit different from those on your blued revolver -- they have the S&W badge at the very top of the grip on either side. Yours doesn't seem to have them.

 

[James K]

The S&W grip medallions were left off at several points in production. Without taking a lot of time, I will say that the grips on Bill's blued gun are correct for the period, but (sorry, Bill) the nickel plating on the other one is not original.

Jim

 

[Sevens]

Are the bright hammer & trigger the easiest visual clues?

 

[crazycrave]

The nickel one is refinshed but looks like a nice job as the S&W logo made it out ok and a refinsh would cost more then you payed.

I have a 1905 HE 3rd change in 32-20 with correct stocks made around 1911 with a 504xx sn that i payed $100 buxs for it looks alot better after cleaning and some oil.

 

[Bill Akins]

Sevens wrote:
What are the first three digits of your pair?

268xxx on the blue one and 272xxx on the nickel one.

Sevens wrote:
"Also, do you have the "dish" out of the underside of the top strap, right in the flash gap as mine does?"

Yes both of mine have that too.

Sevens wrote:
"The grips on my 272xxx are a bit different from those on your blued revolver -- they have the S&W badge at the very top of the grip on either side. Yours doesn't seem to have them. "

James K wrote:
"I will say that the grips on Bill's blued gun are correct for the period".

According to several of the experts at the S&W forum, although my grips are correct for the "period/era", some of the experts said they should be the checkered with diamond, with gold S&W medallions on both my 1905's, according to their 1917 date of manufacture. However, there is some debate concerning that, because although S&W manufactured both these revolvers in 1917, it may be that because of all the returning surplus pistols following WW1, that these two of mine may have been in storage for some time until later in the 1920's and might have been fitted with these non gold medallions grips before they were finally shipped out years after their manufacture.

The experts told me things like that happened sometimes at S&W. They also said there is evidence to suggest that at some points in production, the medallions were not installed (As James K also mentioned). I do know I see a lot of 1905 4th changes with these exact same grips I have on my blue one. So to be technically correct for their 1917 year of manufacture they SUPPOSEDLY SHOULD have the checkered with diamond and gold medallions according to S&W records (which are not complete), but as a result of what I wrote above, it may be that the grips on my blue one MAY be original to the gun as it was originally shipped. But we can't know for sure. However on my nickel one, it is obvious that the Jay Scott grips are not original, but still appear to be pretty old, maybe '50's or '60's.

James K wrote:
"(sorry, Bill) the nickel plating on the other one is not original."

Yes I know James, and you are correct. That's why in my first post I wrote:
"And even though it appears to be a very old after factory nickel job on the nickel one, there is no flaking and it is also in very good shape finish wise."

Plus as Sevens mentioned, a dead giveaway the nickel plate is not factory, is that the trigger and hammer are nickel plated. S&W didn't nickel plate their triggers nor hammers on any of their revolvers until just a few models recently. Since mine is a 1905 made in 1917, and since it's trigger and hammer are nickel plated, then it HAS to be an after factory nickel plated job. But it appears to be a pretty old one and very well done.


CrazyCrave, for my next 1905 I pick up, it will be nickel (hopefully) and definitely in 32-20. Just like yours. I've heard good things about the ballistics of the 32-20 round and want to give it a try.


.


.

 

[RickB]

Factory nickel '05 Fourth Change, with casehardened hammer and trigger. Checkered grips w/o medallions.

 

[Sevens]

Rick, what's your first three digits of the serial number?
I pm'd Bill and my recent purchase and his nickel 6" are a mere 130 numbers apart... which means nothing other than: that's pretty neat when you consider they were produced in 1917.

That is an awfully cool picture you captured.

 

[Slopemeno]

Yeah- I like that pic!

 

[Bill Akins]

Ditto on the coolness of that pic. I like the smoke wafting from the barrel.
Sevens, I agree, our being only 130 guns apart serial number wise on my nickel one, is pretty cool considering yours and mine were both made in 1917. I really love my N frame S&W model 1917's in .45 acp, but I have to admit I like my K frame .38 special 1905's almost as much. And they sure are a lot lighter and easier to twirl. They are so perfectly balanced for twirling with their 6 inch barrel. It just doesn't get any better than that. I'm going to pick me up another 1905 in 32-20 one of these days since I've heard good things about their ballistics and would like to try that.



.

 

[RickB]

The pic was shot at a local IDPA match. Normally, barrel length is limited to no more than 4", but because revolver barrels in Canada must be more than 4", and we're about an hour from the border, we'll do the occasional "International IDPA Challenge", and allow longer barrels to encourage people to shoot their wheelguns.
Our club photographer will shoot hundreds of pics at a match, then delete those that don't show muzzle flash, flying brass, etc.