Original No.3 Schofield? *Pic Heavy* **UPDATE Pg1** **Update with Group**

Hive,

I have inherited what I think may be an original S&W New Model No.3 Schofield pistol. I know this pistol has been in my family at least 3 generations. Somewhere along the way, I think someone had it converted to .22LR. I've looked online for several hours and at my local Books a Million for information on the history of this piece.

It is numbered 19202 (with an upside down 5 for the number "9") on the handle and under the latch. 21303 on the cylinder face and number 2 under the ejector. The top of the barrel is stamped :

Smith & Wesson Springfield Mass. U.S.A. PAT'D Jan. 17 &24. 65. July 11. 65
Aug. 24. 69. Apr 20. 75. Feb. 20 & Dec. 18. 1887. Reissue July 25. 1871

The grips seem to be aftermarket and are falling apart. The cylinder also spins freely when the hammer is down. The hammer doesn't appear to have a half-cock.

Any help with the history, value (pure curiosity), and repair options would be greatly appreciated.














Eta: Spelling correction.

BTW, the spelling is Schofield.

A pity is was converted to .22.

I would think a nice boiling whole clean it up

I hear ya. It's a damn shame. But, at one point it was just an old pistol that someone probably couldn't find ammo for. It seems to be a tragedy today, though.

Any idea about the date of manufacture?

That's really cool even if the collectors cry over it.

Interesting.

A good example why old original guns command such high prices,somewhere along the line somebody "improves"
many of them leaveing few originals.

Ironic thing is I find it hard to believe that the considerable amount of work done to this firearm didn't cost more than a decent new rimfire .

I would contact S&W and see if that type of conversion might have been done at the factory . S&W was known for doing all sorts of odd stuff for customers

New Model No 3 and the Schofield were different guns. Barrel latch is the chief difference, the Schofield was mount on the frame similar to the Webley. The serial number on the frame, cylinder and barrel assembly should match, It appears the cylinder came from a different gun. The grips have a 1960's look to them. Original caliber was probably 44 S & W. Possibly 44 Russian. Or even more unlikely 44 rimfire. The lanyard ring was added later, hence the need for restamping the serial number. From the sounds of it the lock work needs some attention.

Interesting old oddity. Someone put a lot of work into converting it, tho just why is anybody's guess. The No.3 models were widely used as target guns in the day, perhaps someone wanted a cheaper practice gun.

+1 to convert the pistol was an effort and it looks like a good one at that.

I agree contacting S&W would be the way to go. Who knows, it might have been a factory conversion.

Thanks,

Don

**UPDATE**


Well I decided to take the side plate off and see what was going on in the lock. It appears the half-cock shelf on the tumbler has been worn away, so the sear floats between the fired position and half-cock when the hammer is down. This is causing the cylinder to rotate freely. The cylinder locks up when the trigger is manipulated into it's proper position. There is very little rust on the gun. The finish appears to be a nickel plating or similar that is rubbed away where the user holds the pistol to manipulate and load.

Did Smith and Wesson nickel plate around the turn of the century? (20th?)

Obligatory pics, since we love pictures:

Trigger guard with leaf spring for cylinder locking detent






Note the 50-100 year old powder fouling that spilled out

If the revolver could only speak. The tales it could tell!!!!!!Thanks for sharing.

What are your plans for this beauty?

I recently came across a S&W revolver from a buddy. Sitting in a leather holster in a cardboard box, dusty and rusting away. Been cleaning it up over the past few days.

Thanks,

Don-S1

Looked up the serial number last night. Around 1890.

Yes, Smith nickel plated stuff back then. Nickel was actually pretty common in that era.

And now we know why it was converted to .22" LR. A custom or low-production .44" rimfire that no one could get ammo for, conversion to centerfire expensive, followed by expensive .44" Russian or S&W, so the 2nd owner chose to convert to a widely available rimfire. Er. Looking @ the firing pin, it was never a .44" rimfire. Expensive .44" Russian or S&W ammo, prompted 2nd owner to have it nicely converted to much cheaper plinking ammo. Perhaps the grandfather of Jonathan Ciener? Nice pistol, OP. Tape those grips on, post some groups!

Gig 'em,

backbencher

I fired about 100 rounds of Federal bulk .22LR this afternoon. Although it won't win any awards, I am quite pleased with the accuracy. Hits on steel were easy.

5 rounds at 20 yards

That's awesome. I'm always amazed when people take me seriously on the internet. Beautiful pistol, beautiful conversion, family history, & and it shoots welll! All you need now is some rails to mount a red dot & a flashlight! ; )

Gig 'em,

backbencher

Not bad at all!!

Thanks,

Don-S1

Copyright © 1996 - 2013 :: AR15.Com LLC :: All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.