S&W heat treatments on Hand Ejectors

E

Elerius

New member
One of the guns on my list had been a non-Thunder Ranch Model 21, but I think my collection should have at least two "Pre" models (the other being a K-38 Combat Masterpiece). I'd really like to have a 44 Hand Ejector especially since those have a square butt. I don't necessarily need to go as far as trying to acquire the fabled Triple Lock, but in reading other threads about them, some were warning about not shooting anything but mild 44 Special because Triple Lock cylinders were never heat treated.

According to Chuck Hawks website, S&W began heat treating in 1919. However I have read many contradictory statements, one that I remember about the Model 12 being not recommended for 38+P until sometime in the 70's because those cylinders had not been heat treated until after that. I'm not sure what to believe in this regard. If I were to get a Triple Lock, I wouldn't be firing hot Specials in it but I don't want to be severely limited either. I dont know how much I'd need to worry about untreated cylinders.

Any info is appreciated, although strict info on the 44 Hand Ejector specifically is all I would need. I have zero interest in the Second Model, but can I assume the 3rd Models were treated?
 
S&W, like other companies, changed its heat treating methods to match developments both in metallurgy and in cartridge development.

Remember, it wasn't until the 1970s that +P and +P+ ammo for .38 Special came about in any signfiicant way.
 
I'm the guy accused of trying blow up everybody's guns by publishing that +P is a joke and nothing to worry about in older guns. However, based on what little I of metallurgy, the technology of tempering steel was imprecise until the late 1920s. The Titanic likely went down because improperly tempered steel in the hull gave way upon impact with the ice berg. So my personal policy is to take it easy on revolvers made before 1930 out of deference to the questionable quality of heat treating before then. Anything made before 1920 gets babied.

I have owned numerous Colt and S&W revolvers made in the teens (and earlier) I always limited them to low pressure ammo. If made in the mid 1920s I feel confident with standard factory ammo. No hot loads. By the 1930s I think they had the metal tempering down good enough to calm any of my fears.

So by my standard, a Triple Lock should not get anything above target grade loads. The late Elmer Keith wrote of blowing up several TLs trying to hot rod the 44 Special. We should learn from that. If want a gun that will handle warm loads, you have get something newer than a TL. Sorry. How about a nice 3rd Model 44 made in the 1930s?
 
I'd say that all the info answers all those questions, thanks.
If want a gun that will handle warm loads, you have get something newer than a TL. Sorry. How about a nice 3rd Model 44 made in the 1930s?
Click to expand...

While the prestige of having a TL would be great, I don't really want to pony up the cash for one just because of the triple lock feature especially if I have to worry about ammo. I would definitely like a 3rd model with its heavy underlug, but I'm also looking for a 4 inch barrel version and the only times I've seen one for sale have been from the late 20's NIB and the asking price was about $5k. Even if I wanted to spend that kind of money I don't think I could bring myself to fire a NIB from that long ago. Unless you have one you want to part with I think I'm in for a bit of a wait :)
 
A 4" 1926 is a rare bird and will be pricey. The 5" is the common one and while not cheap they can be found. Can't live with an extra inch?
 
Most steel plate (including the Titanic steel) was and is not "tempered"; the steel used in the Titanic was little better than iron, but the main cause of the Titanic's problem was popped rivets and bent plates, not broken plates.

Back to the topic on hand, Those old guns were made to handle the pressures generated by the ammunition of the time, and the so-called "standard" factory loads in .38 Special and .44 Special today are made to the same pressure levels. Keith, of course, was "pushing the envelope", making up loads that he knew far exceeded standard pressures, and that he knew would blow up guns. He wanted to see how much the guns would take, and he found out.

I don't recommend shooting the old timers in .38 Special and .44 Special because if anything does break, it probably cannot be replaced. But I have fired .38 Special standard loads in an 1899 S&W and a 1903 Colt New Army with no qualms and no adverse results.

JIm
 
A 4" 1926 is a rare bird and will be pricey. The 5" is the common oNE and while not cheap they can be found. Can't live with an extra inch?
Click to expand...

When I wrote that I went and looked through as many pictures as I could find of the 5 inch barrel. I really don't mind the length and it might be nice to.have one revolver with that thin tapering effect which none of my others would.have. The effect is lost on the 4 inch, in addition to the rarity. If one were to be available that was nice, I would take a 5 inch.

I don't recommend shooting the old timers in .38 Special and .44 Special because if anything does break, it probably cannot be replaced. But I have fired .38 Special standard loads in an 1899 S&W and a 1903 Colt New Army with no qualms and no adverse results.
Click to expand...

Would most of the parts from a Model 21-4 be interchangeable with a 1926 Hand Ejector?
 
Heat treatment of steel has been around for a couple of hundred years and was certainly no secret! If there is no need for heat treatment, why do it?
:rolleyes:
 
I have not checked all those parts but I doubt that many internal parts of a Model numbered gun would directly interchange with those of a gun made in 1926. In spite of keeping the external feel and appearance, S&W made a fair number of changes internally in those years, notably in the stud spacing and the safety system.

Jim
 
'Would most of the parts from a Model 21-4 be interchangeable with a 1926 Hand Ejector?'

As far as I've been able to determine, virtually none. Just after WW II S&W reconfigured the action on their revolvers to the modern "short throw," and as Jim noted, that was done by changing stud locations, which required changes to the associated parts.
 
That is a pity... I'm sure I'd be easy on it when I get one and out more rounds through the other specials. Is there really no way to have them repaired without having a spare hand ejector? I recall hearing that S&W won't touch guns beyond a certain year, is that true also?
 
"Is there really no way to have them repaired without having a spare hand ejector?"

No, there are still a lot of parts out there. It just takes searching for them. One of the better sources is probably through the Smith & Wesson Collector's Association.

Fortunately, parts for old S&Ws seem to be a lot more available than parts for old Colts, and more so with S&Ws the parts are often drop in, while the Colts can require quite a bit of hand fitting.



"I recall hearing that S&W won't touch guns beyond a certain year, is that true also?"

That is true. I'm not sure what the cut off date is, though, but back in the early 1990s I tried to get them to reblue a Regulation Police .32 from the late 1920s, and they wouldn't touch it.
 
That is true. I'm not sure what the cut off date is, though, but back in the early 1990s I tried to get them to reblue a Regulation Police .32 from the late 1920s, and they wouldn't touch it.
Click to expand...

I contacted them recently about a possible reblue of a 1955 K-38. Same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top