need help dating an H&R Defender 38 revolver please

[Soundguy]

Found this at a local gun show the other day, price was right, included plenty of ammo.

I like break top revolvers, have some enfields and webleys, so I already shoot 38 S&W, so the extra ammo I got was a nice addition.

it is 38 S & w, 5 shot, looks like a 4" bbl.

sn has no letter prefix, and is 100XX

Any ideas?

Thanks

212407212408212409

[9.3X62AL]

Do a Google search--"H&R date codes". Look closely all over that sweet little roller, and see if you can find that 1- or 2-letter code somewhere stamped upon it. HTH. I would have snagged that revolver in a New York minute--like you, I am already deeply entrenched in 38 S&W arcana and componentry.

[Texas by God]

Based on the one piece grip I'd guess 1960s. What a cool gun.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Soundguy]

The sn is on the inside grip strap, very legible, just no letter prefix. Made me think, maybee pre 1940. It looks too good to be too much older though. Owner did say he replaced the grips, but ws under the impression they were similar but worn.

Stampings and marks look good, doesn't look like a polished / refinished piece.

I guess my only REAL need for a date would be to 100% verify it wasn't an older black powder frame.. Which it simply looks too good to be that old.

[dubber123]

Adjustable rear sight, and just the general configuration, 1970's is my guess. And I bet I'm not far off.

[Soundguy]

70's is fine with me, wonder why no letter prefixes?

[Love Life]

I really like the front sight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Soundguy]

I really like the front sight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

screw adjustable at that.

[Love Life]

Very neat!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LUBEDUDE]

I have a 2” model that I got after my Dad died. I have no idea when he bought it. The serial number is 88xx just above the trigger guard.

You are right about not being refined. They sure didn’t believe in rounding off edges. It’s a very solid gun and I’m positive that it is Not a black powder frame. If it is, then this would be the Ruger Redhawk of it's day! :)

Also, as enemic as the 38 SW cartridge is, I am not worried about the integrity of this revolver at all.

[Soundguy]

Sounds great, can't wait to get it to the range.

[dubber123]

I've argued the point with others before, but in my opinion, pressure is pressure. If whatever you feed it doesn't exceed a safe pressure, the gun wont care if its a black powder era gun or not. I have had in the past, and still do have a few BP era revolvers. Mine have gotten appropriate pressure level smokeless loads, and seem none the worse for wear. That said, I'm quite sure yours is not a BP era gun. The throats are likely to be large, and getting a boolit that fits really helps them to shoot better. Have fun. :)

[9.3X62AL]

The throats are likely to be large, and getting a boolit that fits really helps them to shoot better. Have fun. :)

Roger that. My 4 examples in 38 S&W run .359"--.361"--and 2 with .363" throats.

[Thin Man]

I looked through the Fjestad Blue Book and found that H&R used the Defender name as early as 1935. They had multiple issues of the Defender series, usually renumbered or renamed with a change of caliber, or barrel length, or cylinder release, or change to a transfer bar ignition, etc. etc. Your firearm most closely matches the description listed as the "Model 925 Defender Second Model Top Break." Production years for this variant were 1964-1972. However, the 4 inch barrel was offered only in 1968-1969. Hope this detail helps with your information search.

[Harry O]

From reading my books after reading this thread, it looks that it has to be earlier than 1976. That is when they went to letter prefixes on the serial number. Before that there was a one or two letter code for the year stamped somewhere on the gun, but not it was not attached to the serial number. If is is in the 1964-1972 era, that would be a two letter ID.

[Soundguy]

Thanks for the help guys. I really have no need for a concrete date, other than to know that it wasn't a Bp frame. It seems clear it is a nitro frame the your help...im going to enjoy shooting this beauty.

I have a few other 38sw's in enfields and webleys.

Thanks agin guys, I greatly appreciate it. After shooting when I go to clean it, I'll lift the cyl out, and look under the grips if the screw cooperates, and yr to find some letters. I'm unfamiliar with H&R's and was unaware there might be letters that weren't right with the SN.

Again, thanks for the help gentlemen. I'll update after shooting, cleaning and searching.

[rond]

I have a twin to yours from 1968. A lot of fun to shoot.

[Soundguy]

Awesome. I've been working doubles all week. Hope to get some time off soon for a range trip.

[FergusonTO35]

As neat as these guns are, I wonder why H&R was so married to top breaks and the .38 S&W cartridge? Surely they realized that even before WWII they were on the decline? I always thought one of their solid frame revolvers in .38 Special would have been a good seller.

[Thumbcocker]

Let us know how she shoots.

[smkummer]

As neat as these guns are, I wonder why H&R was so married to top breaks and the .38 S&W cartridge? Surely they realized that even before WWII they were on the decline? I always thought one of their solid frame revolvers in .38 Special would have been a good seller.

It appears H&R would have had to retool to make a frame long enough for 38 special. Solid frame 38 special revolvers were already covered with products from Colt, S&W and later Ruger and Charter Arms. There must have been a market for a low cost, low recoil 38 even though the cartridge was dated.

[FergusonTO35]

I can see that, although surely it wouldn't have been too hard to stretch their .32 caliber solid frame guns enough for the .38 Special? I used to have one, and the cylinder looked like it would be big enough in diameter for the cartridge.

[Soundguy]

I'll definitely do a range report as soon as I can. I welcome any commentary, tips, fond memories, etc.

[9.3X62AL]

Lower-order calibers stayed popular for a long time because they were often housed in relatively affordable platforms that worked well for their chosen venue--self protection in an uncertain world.

In this day of 18-round magazine capacities and 357 Magnum chambering in small-frame revolvers, gunfolk look upon the 32 S&W Long or the 38 S&W as quaint little calibers suitable for small game or other recreational shooting. In the 1880-1920 era, these calibers were viewed differently--they were viable defensive tools.

This is not because people of that time were somehow "less evolved" than modern man, nor were folks of that age significantly smaller or less durable than modern man. What changed over the last 140 years or so?

MEDICINE. Medicine changed. People of 100-140 years ago knew as common knowledge that infection and disease were rampant in their world, and few counter-measures existed to address disease comprehensively. The casualties of the then-recent Civil War drove home an undeniable fact--that a gunshot wound not immediately fatal in and of itself still had considerable potential to kill you during recovery via infection, and that such a death was a gruesome, slow, and agonizing process. So--a crook contemplating an alleyway mugging could be more successfully thwarted just by the presence of a sidearm in the hands of his prospective victim.

An added boost for these weaker/smaller calibers was the gunfight dynamic of this era--in the Old Days, society generally accepted the view that a suspected felon fleeing from apprehension or identification as perpetrator of higher-order crimes could properly be brought to justice via gunfire--that is, shooting of fleeing suspected felons was proper public policy, the bullets serving as a sort of semi-lethal marking pellet in hopes that its recipient would seek medical attention for the wound or for the infection that was likely to set in soon afterward.

Given the above circumstances, the 32 S&W Long and 38 S&W performed adequately, if not exactly decisively. But public perceptions and policy began to change soon after WWII--it became less and less acceptable to dispense justice via gunfire to fleeing suspected felons, and about this same time antibiotics were being refined and improved that largely managed a lot of the subsequent infections a wound recipient received. By the time I entered law enforcement in 1977, it was against policy to fire upon fleeing unarmed suspected felons, and that trend has continued and expanded pretty much nation-wide, for both law officers and citizen self-defenders.

The upshot of all this.......the people that cops and citizens are obliged to engage now are in our face and coming at us with lethal force. This is very likely an EXCHANGE OF FINALITY. It is no accident that as the gunfight dynamics changed so drastically that police very quickly adopted sidearms (and long arms) of greater striking energy, ammo capacity, and hopefully more decisive stopping ability. Citizens looking on noted these trends, and made similar choices in armaments. Cops and citizens face the same adversaries, after all. Hence the decline of the smaller-intensity calibers as defensive tools and their relegation to recreational status.

[LUBEDUDE]

I agree with you 100% 9.3X 62L on the Medical aspect. That is the first thing that came to mind as far the changes in defensive calibers over the past 75 ish years.

The thought about rules of engagement is a great point too, I never thought of that.