[montanajoe]

Yes, I would politely correct them. If they are receptive we could discuss the differences, similarities. If they insist it's a yadda yadda, I'll just drop it and let them go.

 

[StrawHat2]

If you’re worried about hurting someone’s feelings or embarrassing them by correcting them they will never learn, I would appreciate someone correcting me if I was wrong, after all this is how we learn.

I’ve got a Smith & Wesson model 22-4 that someone thought was a model 1917. I just explained, it was more or less a remake of the model 1917 with a couple modification changes.

The 5.5” barreled Model 22-4 is a modern rendition of the Model 1950 Army. The Model 22-4 incorporates the short action of the Model 1950 and the better sights. The lanyard ring is a carryover from the 45 Hand Ejector Model 1917.


Top left, Model 22-4, bottom left, Model 1950 Army (with modified front sight), top right, 45bHand Ejector Model 1917 Commercial, bottom right, 45 HE Model 1917 Army.

Yes, a lot of similarities but some very subtle, and important, differences.

Now, if you were talking about the 4“ barreled Model 22-4…

Kevin

 

[jimdeere]

As I get older, I try to refrain from correcting people. It only makes them angry at me and I get enough of that.

 

[Waltermoe]

Upper left that’s the one I have, model 22-4. I didn’t know they made a 4 inch barrel.

 

[Headspace]

Yes, I would correct the mistake and explain the differences. A Second Model Hand Ejector is different from a 45 ACP H E Model of 1917. A Python is different from an L frame, etc.

Why not correct them? Is it acceptable to allow the ignorance to continue and spread? I think not.

Kevin

I agree, and there's nice ways of doing it. Someone miss-call one of mine, I might look at it cockeyed and say "yeah, it does look a little like (whatever he called it), but it's not. It's a (whatever it actually is)" and then explain the similarities that make it look like what he thought it was, and then the differences. I might also say something like "I'd sure like to have one of (whatever he thought it was), but never found one in decent condition".

The casual gun nut sees similarities like a full underlug or a half-moon front sight or no extractor rod shroud and calls it the only model he knows that has that feature. One of my pet peeves is someone seeing a Patridge front sight and calling it a Partridge. I laugh and tell them there's no bird sitting on my gun barrel and then tell them why it's called a Patridge, just like the Baughman ramp has a history behind it too.

I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to the pre-war guns or their modern classic versions, like the ones in your post above. My knowledge, what there is of it, starts about 1947 and ends around 1982-85, as those are the ones I like best, but I appreciate learning the older ones. Unfortunately, my mental hard drive is full, needs defragging and runs too slow to retain much new info these days.

 

[marlinguy]

Yes, I'd correct them. But I'd do so simply by telling them what my gun really is. Then if they asked what the difference was I'd go further to explain why.

 

[Alpo]

Upper left that’s the one I have, model 22-4. I didn’t know they made a 4 inch barrel.

I didn't know they made a five and a half.

I also thought they had an ejector shroud. My 22-4 does. But none of those four have one.

 

[StrawHat2]

Upper left that’s the one I have, model 22-4. I didn’t know they made a 4 inch barrel.

Similar to a 3rd Model 44 S&W Special (Wolf and Klar) but chambered for the 45 ACP cartridge. The older Model 22 S&W did not have the ejector reinforce and was available only in the 5 1/2” barrel, the Model 1950 Army.

The new S&W Company is playing fast and loose with Model numbers.

Kevin

 

[Waltermoe]

View attachment 324664

Similar to a 3rd Model 44 S&W Special (Wolf and Klar) but chambered for the 45 ACP cartridge. The older Model 22 S&W did not have the ejector reinforce and was available only in the 5 1/2” barrel, the Model 1950 Army.

The new S&W Company is playing fast and loose with Model numbers.

Kevin

You have an out standing collection going there, and you are very knowledgeable and I appreciated you taking the time and explaining the details to me.
I have collected some Colts revolvers over time and try and find as much information as I can on each model.
Thank you for sharing your collection.

 

[CapnSlow]

At the range yesterday I paused to change out what I was shooting and a guy next to me asked "what was that big caliber you were shooting in your revolver?" I told him it was 45 Colt and showed him the difference between a 38 special round and a 45 Colt round. He'd never seen them side by side and was surprised at the difference.

That's usually how my range conversations go. Folks tend to politely ask questions because they are genuinely interested or curious about something.

 

[Alpo]

The older Model 22 S&W did not have the ejector reinforce and was available only in the 5 1/2” barrel, the Model 1950 Army.

This is my confusion. From the Standard Catalog, 3rd edition.

Engineering and Production Changes
Before 1957, produced as the
.45 HE Model 1950 Military (see previous section).
• 22 (1957): Stamping of model number.
• 22-1 (1960): Change extractor rod, right hand to left hand thread.
• 22-2 (1961): Cylinder stop changed, eliminate trigger guard screw.
• 1966: Model 22 discontinued.
• 22-3: This model not reported.

Model 22-4 Reintroduction:

"Thunder Ranch Special" (that's what mine is, by the way - a Thunder Ranch)
Caliber: .45 ACP. In October of 2005 S&W introduced the Model 22-4 as the “Thunder Ranch Special” on a true square butt N frame with the internal lock system. Made with the newest CNC frame with the following features: 4” barrel with pinned half-moon service front sight (which is quite wide) with square notch rear sight; 6-shot fluted cylinder, .400” checked hammer, .312” trigger, shrouded extractor rod. Blue finish, checked wood grips with Thunder Ranch logo and a large diamond around the screw escutcheon. Four-screw frame with older style thumbpiece. The barrel is marked “45 cal Model 1950” on the left side. Supplied with full-moon clips. Shipped with a green gun rug with the Thunder Ranch trademark in a plain white box with end label. Special serial prefix of “TRR.” Serial number TRR0114 was our example (JD5300). Product code 161239, 2005.


So looking at the gun in the upper left in the picture, with the five and a half inch barrel and the unshrouded ejector, I could easily see it being a pre-model 1950 Army. Or a Model 22. Or a 22-1 or even a 22-2. Although the book says that those are quite scarce.

"Exact quantity unknown, but possibly fewer than 200 model marked guns were made c. 1958 - 1963."

But it does not seem to fit the description of a 22-4.

 

[StrawHat2]

You have an out standing collection going there, and you are very knowledgeable and I appreciated you taking the time and explaining the details to me.
I have collected some Colts revolvers over time and try and find as much information as I can on each model.
Thank you for sharing your collection.

Thank you. The S&W 45 ACP revolver is my focus. I am slo selling everything that is NOT a 45 ACP. While I have concentrated on the blued versions, I am looking at the stainless series and the other alloys.

Kevin

This is my confusion. From the Standard Catalog, 3rd edition.

…

Written by humans and not totally correct. On the S&W forum there is a whole section of ‘corrections” for the next edition! There are some collectors who have a vast knowledge of the entire range of S&W products and others who specialize. I collectors and research the S&W ACP revolver. I have the 3rd or maybe the 4th edition of the SCoS&W and have read the parts that pertain to what I know. I honestly have not read much, if any, of the rest of the book. The authors have done a superlative job with all the editions but, each one is an improvement over the previous.


Kevin

 

[Grizzley1]

So far I've not had anybody misidentify any of my guns, but I have had a couple of guys misidentify the builder when they saw my name on the barrel and ask me what I had to pay for it.

 

[Alpo]

The authors have done a superlative job with all the editions but, each one is an improvement over the previous.

So the fifth (I believe) is out, and I need to buy a new one? 🤔😋

 

[LIKTOSHOOT]

Life`s to short. If I corrected folks just through the day that`s all I would time for.
You wanna call my 10/22 a .50BMG, fine by me.

 

[StrawHat2]

So the fifth (I believe) is out, and I need to buy a new one? 🤔😋

Yes, the 5th edition is out. Do you need to buy it? Only if you need a hard copy. My online library has three copies, 1st 4th and 5th editions. Are they available for instant borrow? No, there is a line of folks waiting to borrow it. But, that is an option.

Archive.org has the 1st, 3rd and 4th editions available for loan. I am sure there are others.

I use the online editions. If I can not get a copy promptly, I make a list of what I need to check.
Kevin

 

[Garandoodle]

This is my confusion. From the Standard Catalog, 3rd edition.

Engineering and Production Changes
Before 1957, produced as the
.45 HE Model 1950 Military (see previous section).
• 22 (1957): Stamping of model number.
• 22-1 (1960): Change extractor rod, right hand to left hand thread.
• 22-2 (1961): Cylinder stop changed, eliminate trigger guard screw.
• 1966: Model 22 discontinued.
• 22-3: This model not reported.

Model 22-4 Reintroduction:

"Thunder Ranch Special" (that's what mine is, by the way - a Thunder Ranch)
Caliber: .45 ACP. In October of 2005 S&W introduced the Model 22-4 as the “Thunder Ranch Special” on a true square butt N frame with the internal lock system. Made with the newest CNC frame with the following features: 4” barrel with pinned half-moon service front sight (which is quite wide) with square notch rear sight; 6-shot fluted cylinder, .400” checked hammer, .312” trigger, shrouded extractor rod. Blue finish, checked wood grips with Thunder Ranch logo and a large diamond around the screw escutcheon. Four-screw frame with older style thumbpiece. The barrel is marked “45 cal Model 1950” on the left side. Supplied with full-moon clips. Shipped with a green gun rug with the Thunder Ranch trademark in a plain white box with end label. Special serial prefix of “TRR.” Serial number TRR0114 was our example (JD5300). Product code 161239, 2005.


So looking at the gun in the upper left in the picture, with the five and a half inch barrel and the unshrouded ejector, I could easily see it being a pre-model 1950 Army. Or a Model 22. Or a 22-1 or even a 22-2. Although the book says that those are quite scarce.

"Exact quantity unknown, but possibly fewer than 200 model marked guns were made c. 1958 - 1963."

But it does not seem to fit the description of a 22-4.

Love Thunder Ranch, except have no moon clip tool yet. There are a few Thunder Ranch 45 ACP moon clip tools. Which moon clip tool do you recommend. They are put a little pricey and I want to get this right first time up.😊

 

[Alpo]

I have a Ranch Products demooner. Works great, and is only about five bucks.

But I think Ranch is out of business. At least on a quick search just now I could not find anyone selling that, and Ranch's website just has one page.

Then there is something like this.

That's currently $12 on Amazon with $5 shipping. I made one of those out of a 4"- long half inch pipe nipple. They are not difficult to make.

Now if you are talking about one of those fancy machines that will both click the cartridges into the clip and then take them out again - I've never used one. Like you said - they're expensive. I've always just pushed them in with my hands. I saw a picture of somebody loading a moon clip using a pair of channel lock pliers, but I have not tried that yet.

 

[Rick R]

Like you have a L frame 357 and somebody compliments you on that lovely python.

I was at a cowboy match one day, and I was using a third model Russian. Somebody told me that I had a nice looking Schofield.

It's not a Scofield. It doesn't really even look like a Schofield, except that they're both number 3 Smith top breaks. And I thought about correcting him. But I just thanked him.

Over on the cowboy wire a guy mentions that he is picking up a 44 hand ejector second model tomorrow. Somebody else said PIX!

He posted pictures today of an old N frame Smith & Wesson. Someone commented that it was a very nice looking 1917.

I was thinking that, well, while it did have a lanyard ring and it was a fixed sighted N-frame, it had a six and a half inch barrel not a five and a half. There was no big gap at the back of the cylinder because it's not chambered for 45 ACP on clips. And if you look real close at the side of the barrel it says 44 Smith & Wesson special.

So I'm pretty sure that it's the second Model 44 hand ejector that he mentioned.

But he did not correct the guy that called it a 1917. He just thanked him for the compliment.

I try to differentiate between those looking to show off how much they know from those with genuine curiosity. I'll let the former continue to self identify as arrogant know it all's, and engage with the latter. My New Model 3 S&W is still in counseling after being misidentified as a Schofield. Heck, sometimes I call it a 3rd model when in fact it's technically a New Model 3, I hope I got that right.

 

[Aspeck]

I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken...

Seriously, if I am wrong I WANT to be told what is correct. BUT, I want to be told in a polite and civil manor, not a condescending, "you're an idiot" manner. Please politely tell me what is correct and why. But remember, I probably know some information that you don't know, and you know what they say about paybacks ...