What do I have here?

[RANGER94]

Hello Everyone,
A buddy of mine inherited this revolver from his father. It has been in his family for a very long time. The barrel states: .38 Cal S&W CTGF. There is very light surface rust, he is considering getting it reblued, but I told him to hold off until we figure out what we have here.

Can anyone tell me what exactly it is?



Thanks!

Ranger94

 

[Herr Walther]

Iver Johnson hammerless.

They made a bazillion of them.

 

[Jim Watson]

It doesn't look bad in the pictures, assuming the top latch will engage properly and not hang up as shown.
A good reblue would cost more than the gun is worth, a cheap reblue would make it look worse than rusty. I would just rub it hard with an oily cloth and call it good. .38 S&W ammo is still being made, although rather expensive because they don't make a lot and it does not get the economy of scale that .38 Special does.

The marking is CTGE which is simply an abbreviation for Cartridge. Which seems to mystify a lot of people.
(If it were a Smith & Wesson, it would be CTG.)

 

[Tidewater_Kid]

Depending when it was made it made be suitable for black powder rounds only. I have one that looks just like it and it was made before 1898.

The serial number usually found under the grips will tell you when it was made. If you post it I will look it up in my book.

TK

 

[VeritasVincit]

I believe this is a Harrington Richardson .38 hammerless (not an Iver Johnson). I would guess second model but not positive without closer examination and a look at the top strap markings and patent dates.
As previously stated, not worth the reblue and why destroy the history and character of this old piece?
The good news is, if it locks up tight and functions properly, you can shoot regular smokeless .38 S&W in it, not to be confused with .38 special. H&R did not stamp cartridge markings on the old black powder frames.
Value is fairly low. Since condition can't be determined from these photos, I would guess it at $150, a bit more if its completely functional and has a fair amount of finish left.

 

[Tidewater_Kid]

VertiasVincit,

I believe you are correct. I had a hard time making out the grips and I don't see the Iver owl.

The lines are the same as the Iver, but without closeup pictures, it's hard to tell.


TK

 

[Gunplummer]

I would go with the H&R guess. The grips (What I can see) don't look right and if it was an Iver Hammerless it probably would have the auto eject (Maybe broken?).

 

[James K]

FWIW, I don't think it is either an H&R or an I.J. The grips appear to be H&R, but the shape of the trigger and the cylinder notches are not H&R. It could be a Hopkins and Allen.

Are there NO other markings at all on the gun?

Jim

 

[Mike Irwin]

I'm betting serious money it's an H&R. It very much looks like the H&R hammerless I have in my gunsafe, right down to the shape of the trigger and the design inside the roundel at the top of the grips.

It should be marked as to the manufacturer on top of the barrel rib.

 

[Winchester_73]

If its not an H&R, its probably a store brand made by H&R. But how do I know?

Well, here is a photo the OP gave of his gun:

And here is one I just sold recently, a H&R 38 hammerless, SN 126XXX :

 

[Winchester_73]

The lines are the same as the Iver, but without closeup pictures, it's hard to tell.

Not really. The trigger is different, and the humback is pointed on a IJ. They do have subtle differences.

if it was an Iver Hammerless it probably would have the auto eject (Maybe broken?)

Many revolvers from that time had the auto eject. S&W had it in 1877 and I think they originated it. The H&R of this thread is most likely post 1900, when everyone and their mother had auto eject.