New Century Hand Ejector

[StrawHat]

Thought I had posted before, could not find a thread.go figure!

Have you ever dreamt about hitting the lottery? Or participated in a thread about “What would you buy if you hit the mega thing?”

I posted on such a thread. As many know, I enjoy S&W 45 ACP revolvers and have a few. But the revolver that has recently got me thinking is one of the New Century revolvers submitted by S&W to the Army Trials of 1907. These particular revolvers were entirely new and chambered for a new cartridge. S&W hoped to get the Government contract and sell a bunch to the citizenry also. The revolver was the New Century Hand Ejector and the cartridge was the 45 S&W Special. Yes, the Forty FIVE S&W Special. (S&W later introduced the New Century Hand Ejector, aka Triplelock, to the public in 1908 chambered for the 44 S&W Special.)

The Army chose a different handgun and the rest is history.

But, the 45 Special Triplelock intrigues me and what I posted was to the effect, …I would love to own one of the Trial revolvers but since only two are known, it probably would not happen. But, I could be just as happy with a replica. So if anyone has a better TL, let me know…

Well, don’t you know, a fellow member of that forum reached out to me and he had such a beater, a 455 New Century. The action was nearly frozen and the cylinder was equally reluctant to swing out. It could be mine for a song. As I read the pm I thought to myself, too bad - we just bought a house. Apparently, I thought out loud for my wife wanted to know what prompted the comment. I explained, she said , “oh”. 15 minutes later she asked if I was aware of the current price of the 455 Triple Lock. Not really says I so she quotes from the completed auctions of maybe 1/2 dozen and then says “Tell him you’ll take it!” I about fall out of my chair! Fast forward several weeks and the New Century arrives in my hands. Not nearly as bad as described but not pristine either.

287655
287654




The action was so stiff, my ffl bathed it in Ballistol to get it to move at all. I got it home and did a swift plunge in acetone and then attacked it with a brass bristle tooth brush. The bore looks good but it has been altered to 45 long Colt but that was disclosed.

The lanyard stud and ring were missing and there was a chunk of the recoil shield missing.

287656

287657



I wanted to see if the conversion to 45 Colt was done properly so I dropped a 45 long Colt cartridge into the chamber. It dropped in nicely. I did the same with a 45 ACP round and yelped in surprise when the cartridge bounced of my toe! The chambers had been bored clear through. Not sure if this is proper but I don’t think the cylinder left Springfield this way!


https://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=287659&d=1629425437



Speaking of leaving the factory, this was in a shipment of many that left on 14 September and were delivered to the Remington Arms Corp, procurement agents for the British was effort.

I found a stud and ring

https://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=287660&d=1629425587


I have also found a NOS cylinder for a 38 HD which I will have reworked to handle the the 45 Special cartridge.

287661





I will keep posting as things change.



Kevin

[Nueces]

Oh, man, this is a project that quickens me own little heart! I love stuff like this. I'm quite interested in how well the converted 38 cylinder works in the triple lock.

[cwtebay]

That's pretty amazing! I'm looking forward to hearing about this journey.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[358429]

That's a cool pistol with a very interesting story. I like the pictures.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[StrawHat]

Oh, man, this is a project that quickens me own little heart! I love stuff like this. I'm quite interested in how well the converted 38 cylinder works in the triple lock.

That cylinder is from an N frame 38 S&W Special. The tricky part is finding one with the correct thread direction for the TL extractor rod. I chose that cylinder because I did not want recessed rims. I believe the magnum cylinders would also work.



That's pretty amazing! I'm looking forward to hearing about this journey.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

As it unfolds, I will post.


That's a cool pistol with a very interesting story. I like the pictures.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Thank you. Some of the photos have turned out well. I am learning each day.

Kevin

[Bigslug]

NEEEEEEEEEAT!

Given the bored-out chambers, you might consider trying some hollow-base .455 MKII bullets, though their noses might be too long to fit if using un-cut .45 Colt cases.

[StrawHat]

NEEEEEEEEEAT!

Given the bored-out chambers, you might consider trying some hollow-base .455 MKII bullets, though their noses might be too long to fit if using un-cut .45 Colt cases.

I got this revolver fully intending to use it to replicate the Army Trials New Century. Once I discovered the cylinder situation, I immediately considered the 480 Achilles.

Kevin

[cwtebay]

I'm going to show my ignorance here - is the 45 S&W Special between the 45 Schofield and 45 Colt?
I'm not seeing anything about that cartridge.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[StrawHat]

I'm going to show my ignorance here - is the 45 S&W Special between the 45 Schofield and 45 Colt?
I'm not seeing anything about that cartridge.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

The 45 S&W Special was also known as the 45 Frankford and produced only for the 1906 trials. The bar has from Frankford had numerous problems and made the revolvers look bad so S&W sought permission to have the cartridge built in a commercial ammunition plant. That batch was very good.

Without checking my notes, the Special was shorter than the 45 S&W but I do not recall by how much. Ballistics were impressive, a 230 grain bullet approaching 1000 FPS.

Kevin

[Bigslug]

Short of taking her back to the original .455 (may not be possible with the rim thickness your .38 cylinder is set for), I think you're on a very cool track.

I got a bit of a chuckle out of how the little quirks of history can give us a beast of a revolver like the Triple Lock chambered in something as mild as the British service round. Kind of a "Grandma only drives her Ferrari at 40 mph for the 12 block loop between home, the pharmacy, and the grocery store" situation.:mrgreen:

[Beerd]

287781

so how's that gonna werk? :Fire:
..

[StrawHat]

287781

so how's that gonna werk? :Fire:
..

I believe you sight it with a mirror and shoot stuff behind you!

Kevin

[murf205]

Kevin, are those the original stocks in the first pics you posted? If they are, are they numbered to the gun? Elmer said that was the finest revolver ever made and he shot more than a few. I am drooling over this project, good luck.

[Battis]

Just curious - is the serial number stamped on the butt by the lanyard ring?

[StrawHat]

Kevin, are those the original stocks in the first pics you posted? If they are, are they numbered to the gun? Elmer said that was the finest revolver ever made and he shot more than a few. I am drooling over this project, good luck.

No, those stocks are not original to the New Century revolver. I believe they are from the Classic series of revolvers like this Model 22-4 with a 5 1/2” barrel.

[StrawHat]

Just curious - is the serial number stamped on the butt by the lanyard ring?

Yes, in post one the serial number is shown.

288106

Edited to add better photo.

Kevin

[Nueces]

I think those grips are aftermarket, not S&W. The escutcheons look like federal eagles, not the S&W logo. I forget which company used those.

[StrawHat]

I think those grips are aftermarket, not S&W. The escutcheons look like federal eagles, not the S&W logo. I forget which company used those.

You made me go and take a second look at the grips. Good eyes, I would have used them for years and not noticed that.

[Nueces]

Ah, with that closer look, I can see the 'Sile' mark below the eagle.

[ddixie884]

The 45 S&W Special was also known as the 45 Frankford and produced only for the 1906 trials. The bar has from Frankford had numerous problems and made the revolvers look bad so S&W sought permission to have the cartridge built in a commercial ammunition plant. That batch was very good.

Without checking my notes, the Special was shorter than the 45 S&W but I do not recall by how much. Ballistics were impressive, a 230 grain bullet approaching 1000 FPS.

Kevin

Case length was .918 to .923 and the COAL was1.30 and the rim was thinner than .45 S&W, more like the .455 Eley............

[StrawHat]

Case length was .918 to .923 and the COAL was1.30 and the rim was thinner than .45 S&W, more like the .455 Eley............

Thank you. I was not aware of the thinner rim. I will not be counterboring the cylinder but it is still good information to have so I can set the cylinder in correctly.

Kevin

[ddixie884]

If you use the .45 Cowboy spl or the .45 AR you will be close to the same ctg except the cases will have less capacity as they are solid head. A .45 S&W trimmed to .920 would be close also. Finding a cylinder with less than .065 or so headspace would be hard to find.

[StrawHat]

I had planned to ship the cylinder to a fellow on another forum. My business got in the way and he will be hunting until November! A bit envious of that last but not much. So this project is back on hold for a while.

I am rather excited though. A New Century in what is easily the least common cartridge for which it was chambered! Yes, a replica, but given the scarcity of originals, at least a partial fulfillment of my dream.

Kevin

[9.3X62AL]

Gotta make yourself happy in this life. Go for it!

The closest I got to anything like this was a Colt New Service in decent shape chambered in 455 Eley. This was circa 2002 IIRC, and toward the end of my Weird Caliber Preferences Period. Price was fair, but ANOTHER "project" to create ammo for did not appeal, with the concurrent adaptation of the 9.3 x 62 Mauser to American componentry keeping the dull times to a minimum. I might feel differently today, retired and less distracted by kids and bills.

[Green Frog]

I had planned to ship the cylinder to a fellow on another forum. My business got in the way and he will be hunting until November! A bit envious of that last but not much. So this project is back on hold for a while.

I am rather excited though. A New Century in what is easily the least common cartridge for which it was chambered! Yes, a replica, but given the scarcity of originals, at least a partial fulfillment of my dream.

Kevin

Kevin,

A gun can only be original once, and that train left the station long ago. That TL is a perfect candidate for “creative recreation” of the historic gun of your choice. I’m enjoying following your progress.

Froggie

[dangt]

I found this thread a little late to comment. I'm pretty certain that the triple lock revolvers, the New Century's, had a different dimension of bore center to cylinder axis center than later N-framed revolvers. I cannot remember if that was true of the .455 chambered guns sent to the British. That dimension needs to be measured on your gun's original cylinder when someone re-chambers the 38 Special cylinder that you intend to use.

Maybe some Smith & Wesson collector/gunsmith can chime in here to confirm what I'm remembering about Triple Lock cylinder dimensions but it will be safest to have chamber centers to axis center measured before cutting your replacement cylinder.

I have a .455 Triple Lock and can measure mine as well as 1917's and Heavy Duties, but that would not be the same as measuring your individual gun.

[dangt]

The source that first brought up the differing dimensions I wrote about above is in _Smith &Wesson, 1857 - 1945_, by Roy Jinks and Robert Neal. There it is stated that the distance from chamber centers to cylinder axis center was increased .010" on the S&W .455 Second Model. I dont think I've read about it anywhere else , including on the Smith-Wesson Forum where I did read the OP's query about this cylinder question.

I have measured various cylinders in the past but today got out my .455 Triple Lock and a 38-44 Heavy Duty to measure again with an instrument that I did not have years ago, a "Center-Mic", that is a non-digital caliper-like instrument that measures center to center distance between two holes. Accuracy for this particular tool is only to the nearest .001". The easiest way to measure chamber hole center to cylinder axis hole center is to measure distance between two opposing chambers and divide by two, assuming the axis center is accurately centered.

On the two revolvers just mentioned I got for the .455 Triple Lock: 0.534" to 0.535"
and for the Heavy Duty: 0.544"

Years ago, after reading in the Neal and Jinks book, I measured chamber center positions on Triple Lock 44 Spec., 1917, .455 Second Model, and 1917 Brazilian. I found the measurements on these guns also agreed with Neal and Jinks in that from the .455 Second Model onward, the N-frames had the increased dimension ( chamber center to axis center).

If the 38 Special cylinder you have and your original .455 cylinder differ in a similar way and amount, the 38 cylinder could be first bored on a milling machine to correct the chamber center placement before being reamed to .45 Special (rather than just reaming the 38 chambers where they are now). A gunsmith who was a real machinist could do this.

[StrawHat]

…

On the two revolvers just mentioned I got for the .455 Triple Lock: 0.534" to 0.535"
and for the Heavy Duty: 0.544"...

Can you measure the OD of the two cylinders?

Thank you.

Kevin

[dangt]

I did measure the O.D. of the TL and the HD cylinders. They were the same.

1.704" measured at the rear.

[Nueces]

The source that first brought up the differing dimensions I wrote about above is in _Smith &Wesson, 1857 - 1945_, by Roy Jinks and Robert Neal. There it is stated that the distance from chamber centers to cylinder axis center was increased .010" on the S&W .455 Second Model. I dont think I've read about it anywhere else , including on the Smith-Wesson Forum where I did read the OP's query about this cylinder question.

Very nice scholarship, a fine contribution to this board.

[StrawHat]

The source that first brought up the differing dimensions I wrote about above is in _Smith &Wesson, 1857 - 1945_, by Roy Jinks and Robert Neal. There it is stated that the distance from chamber centers to cylinder axis center was increased .010" on the S&W .455 Second Model. I dont think I've read about it anywhere else , including on the Smith-Wesson Forum where I did read the OP's query about this cylinder question.

I have measured various cylinders in the past but today got out my .455 Triple Lock and a 38-44 Heavy Duty to measure again with an instrument that I did not have years ago, a "Center-Mic", that is a non-digital caliper-like instrument that measures center to center distance between two holes. Accuracy for this particular tool is only to the nearest .001". The easiest way to measure chamber hole center to cylinder axis hole center is to measure distance between two opposing chambers and divide by two, assuming the axis center is accurately centered.

On the two revolvers just mentioned I got for the .455 Triple Lock: 0.534" to 0.535"
and for the Heavy Duty: 0.544"

Years ago, after reading in the Neal and Jinks book, I measured chamber center positions on Triple Lock 44 Spec., 1917, .455 Second Model, and 1917 Brazilian. I found the measurements on these guns also agreed with Neal and Jinks in that from the .455 Second Model onward, the N-frames had the increased dimension ( chamber center to axis center).

If the 38 Special cylinder you have and your original .455 cylinder differ in a similar way and amount, the 38 cylinder could be first bored on a milling machine to correct the chamber center placement before being reamed to .45 Special (rather than just reaming the 38 chambers where they are now). A gunsmith who was a real machinist could do this.


If I am understanding this, you are suggesting that simply rechambering a 38 S&W Special cylinder from a 38/44 HD may result in an offset situation between the barrel bore and cylinder throat.

I WILL take that under advisement. However, all barrel threads on the N frame revolvers are the same, to the best of my knowledge. Barrels are usually cut with the bore centered in the barrel, shank and muzzle, it is the easiest way to make them. This determines where the chambers need to be in relation to the ejector rod (think axle). To my mind, it would be easiest to cut the chambers centered on the same dimension from the ejector, axle, centerline.

As I said, I will be measuring this. I intend this to be a shooter and I want ALL of the bullet to exit the muzzle, not just most of it!

Kevin

[dangt]

I have never known anyone to use a later N-frame barrel on a Triple Lock, nor use a TL barrel on a later N-frame. I am not sure anyone besides the late Dave Chicoine would be familiar with this dimensional frame and cylinder change, however, there must be some other living gunsmith who has run into it and dealt with it.

Your own .455 TL is earlier than mine ( #4010) but probably by only a few months. It is most likely the dimensions of the two guns are the same. You have the right idea, though, to carefully measure your two cylinders that you have in hand. If you find what I expect you will find, again, a machinist can change the chamber hole positions since you have plenty of material around the .38 chambers. Then you will only have the center pin difference of the TL design to deal with.