Talk:Smith & Wesson Model 10

S&W Victory
I'ved added information on the S&W Victory Revolver, arguably the best-known version of the S&W M&P series. --Commander Zulu 09:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

My father was one of the first 20 or so Air Corps officers (a Col.) who travelled to England at the outset of US involvement in WWII and formed the 8th Air Force. I inherited the pistol he carried from that time until the mid-1950s. It is a Victory model, 5" bbl., with plain walnut grip and lanyard ring, clearly marked "38 S&W CTG". The cylinder only accepts that round.  It may be that early air crews sent to England were issued the Victory model in 38S&W so that the ammunition was interchangeable with the English Victory model.72.21.74.190 (talk) 10:23, 17 August 2015 (UTC)C. Kirk 17 Aug 2015

Template overload
Does anyone know of a standard or guideline on the number of templates at the bottom of an article, these 3 seem a little too much? Perhaps if a weapon was used by one army in WWII then fine, but now we have two armies and ".38" weapons... perhaps for starters we can lose the ".38" as it doesn't add mouch does it (maybe replace with a link in "See also"?) --Deon Steyn 13:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Consider the ".38" template hustled into a car with dark windows and Ministry of The Interior licence plates ;) --Commander Zulu 14:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool, that looks much better! Now, if only they can make those templates the same width, some sort of an "at least X wide" setting.

10-6 in .357 magnum?
I own a Model 10-6 chambered in .357 Magnum. Is there anybody who knows more about these? Would this be a modification, and would it be a common one? It'd make an interesting sidenote for the article if such a thing is common.


 * Isn't the 10-6 a .38 Special? You can fire .38s in a .357, but not the other way around.  Sounds like a mod to me.  I'm not extremely familiar with Smith revolvers though.   Thernlund (Talk 22:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep, the 10-6 is normally a .38 Special. Kinda sucks; it's got too light a frame for firing full-load .357 Magnum rounds for my grip. I've found a couple non-sourceworthy refs stating that a "very limited quantity" of these were made in .357 Magnum, including one order from the New York State Police in 1972. Maaaybe I shouldn't take it to the range so often anymore. At any rate, I'm hoping that somebody in the know would know where to find properly-sourceable info for this. Mendaliv (talk) 01:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Some blog post pointed me to a book called America's Right Arm. Unfortunately, closest library that has it (according to WorldCat) is the Library of Congress. It's supposed to be entirely on the Model 10. Mendaliv (talk) 17:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

See article update 5/12/08--Mcumpston (talk) 19:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

38 round
it says the 38 was popular with troops. i herd that the army adopted the 45.acp because of the weakness of the round, please explain this to me (Esskater11 18:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC))


 * Nowhere in the article does it state that it was popular with U.S. troops. It mentions that the cartridge was popular and at another point that it was popular with civilian shooters. Also, the revolver in question was supplied mostly to Commonwealth countries. Furthermore US military forces didn't adopt the .45 ACP to replace the .38 Special specifically. Many cartridges were used at the time, including the .38 Long Colt which you might be thinking of. And finally, popularity is a subjective term and what is popular with troops of civilians or even does not determine military acquisitions. --Deon Steyn 07:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The oft-repeated saw in the gun literature is that the 38 Long Colt proved ineffective at stopping Moro warriors during the Phillipines Campaign. Allegedly, old 45 Colt Single actions were un-mothballed and issued. Supposedly, the 45s did a lot better but there is some anecdotal material that says that even the 30 USA (Krag) wouldn't stop a Moro who had gone juramentado. The genral opinion was that the 38 Special was another stab at upgrading power and that the Phillipine campaign was what inspired the Thompson-LeGard tests of 1905 (date?) Most loading manuals and early books such as Smith's Book of Pistols and Revolvers call the special one of the most accurate handgun cartridges ever developed but by the 1930s, Elmer Keith was saying that the special with its round nosed bullet had "cost a lot of good men their lives (sic)" because of its inadequate ballistics. Nevertheless, the 38 was standard with police departments through the 1960s.--Mcumpston (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting Owners?
The "Interesting Owners" section bothers me a bit, largely because I've never heard of the two Chinese personages mentioned in the section (I see one of them was 2nd President of China, he might just qualify as notable and worthy of inclusion.) Perhaps its worthwhile trimming the section back? --Commander Zulu 09:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Ed McGivern- He did write that the pre war smith and wesson mid frame revolvers with the long action were the best thing going for fast and fancy shooting. This torqued S&W because they had just come out with the Short Action. I don't have a citation for this. --Mcumpston (talk) 16:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

There is more content here about the M1917 than the M&P. Please create an article for the M1917 and move that there! Lord Bodak 00:47, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Date of Origin
Congratulations to whoever dated the M&P and .38 special cartridge to 1899. A few generations ago, somebody went into print that the whole thing started with the M&P of 1902 and the handloading manuals have been getting it wrong ever since.--Mcumpston (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)--Mcumpston (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome Mike. By the way I like your writing over on gunblast. --Thunderbuster (talk) 02:48, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Move?
S&W calls this the model 10 now (iirc they have been since the 50's). Could we move this to Smith & Wesson Model 10 and add to the article that it was originally called the Smith & Wesson Military & Police model? Likewise, we could move Smith & Wesson M&P (semi-automatic) to this article and add a note like "For the revolver originally called the M&P, see the Model 10 article". --Philip Laurence (talk) 13:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No objections here, as long as we make sure the redirects from "Smith & Wesson Victory Model" etc. keep working.Commander Zulu (talk) 13:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I've put in a page move request. Requested_moves --Philip Laurence (talk) 14:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * In the future, please make sure to put some documentation on the talk pages of all articles involved. I've been monitoring the M&P article and the move came as a rather rude shock.--Lepeu1999 (talk) 16:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Roundup
Earlier in 2008 someone had collected all of the separate GLOCK pages and put them into a single page called "GLOCK pistols". This reduced the need to have an individual page for models that were so incredibly similar in appearance, caliber, and dimensions. Now there are SO many models of S&W, especially going back to the olden days, that a roundup might be impractical or at least very difficult. Can someone maybe attempt this, like grouping them into "S&W J-Frame", "K_Frame", etc. Maybe an set of overview pages for frame types instead of individual pages for each model for which there is limited or redundant info would be better in many ways. --ocn169 December 24, 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC).

I have a S+W model 10-6 i think. It was made by the US for brazil around 1937. Its a S+W D.A 45 and it shoots 45 auto does anyone have any info on this weapon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lutzman (talk • contribs) 16:28, 13 August 2009
 * It's an interesting idea in theory, but it's comparing apples to oranges- the S&W Model 10 is a distinct revolver with a lot of history behind it and really does need its own article. The various Glock handguns are all pretty much the same frame in different calibres, with a couple of compact models and sports models thrown in. They don't have the history of most of the S&W Revolvers, IMHO. Commander Zulu (talk) 02:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Inclusion of other K frame M&P variants
I've taken it upon myself to begin improving Wikipedia's coverage of the S&W K frame series, to include a K frame master article and features table. (Check back soon!) However, before I start adding Wikipedia articles about missing K frame variants, I would like to hear opinions regarding whether the following M&P revolver variants deserve their own articles or should be included in this one. Out of all of these revolvers, I think that the .32-20HE may warrant its own article because it was catalogued as a seperate model, its production run extended for several decades, and well over 10,000 were produced. However, the others seem to be great candidates for inclusion here. Thoughts? Opinions? Carguychris (talk) 16:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * .32-20 Hand Ejector
 * .38 Military & Police Target (special-order adjustable rear sight M&P offered prior to introduction of postwar K-38 series)
 * .32 Military & Police (special-order .32 S&W Long version of basic M&P, sold poorly)
 * Model 11 .38/200 M&P (postwar special-order continuation of .38/200 Victory in .38 S&W, sold poorly)
 * Model 45 .22 Military & Police "Post Office Model" (special-order .22 Long Rifle version of basic M&P)


 * I don't know on your question. I did just copy a statement (with a source from a book) about S&W K-frame .357's from the Model 10 page to the Model 65 page.  You can take a look to see if that will help you. Mvialt (talk) 00:05, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Generally, variants go on the Parent Firearm's page unless the variant is significantly different in some way. For example, the M4 Carbine is different enough from the M-16 rifle to warrant its own article. As such, I'd say that the K-frame variants belong here- or, better yet, at a Smith & Wesson K Frame revolver page. Commander Zulu (talk) 08:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Carguychris. Did you ever work on general improvements to the S&W K frame articles?  If so, would you be kind enough to let me and other editors in on what you did, so we could most effectively take a look at them. Mvialt (talk) 22:13, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Post-World War II models - Late model Model 10s and Special cartridges
The following note, resulting from two AGF edits on 2012 Jun 5 at 13:00 by IP 15.195.201.89, has been reverted from the main article. It needs to be verified and then integrated back into the article in an encyclopedic phrasing. SBaker43 (talk) 17:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * (Reader's note: This last sentence is not entirely truth, I own a M&P Hand Ejector Model of 1905 3rd change, manufactured in 1909 and it has the fith bolt, my revolver, as any other from that time, is NOT suited for current .38 SPCL loads)

new M&P revolvers
on their website, smith and wesson are marketing revolvers under their M&P line. Don't know what frame size they are, or if they're "tactical" variations of established models. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.53.159.220 (talk) 05:39, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

They have M&P models in two different frame sizes. The M&P340 and M&P360 are J-frames, and the M&P R8 is an N-frame. The M&P R8 is based on the scandium-frame Model 327. I know because my wife bought one a couple of months ago! --KySharpshooter (talk) 14:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 10
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 10's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Jones": From Malta:  From M1911 pistol:  From .38 Special:  From MAC-11:  From Glock:  From Pakistan:  

Reference named "Bishop": From M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle: Bishop, Chris: The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II, p. 239. Sterling Publishing, 2002.</li> <li>From Lend-Lease: </li> <li>From M1 Garand: </li> </ul>

Reference named "TG":<ul> <li>From Thompson submachine gun: </li> <li>From Venezuela: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:48, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 10
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 10's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Banana":<ul> <li>From M1903 Springfield: </li> <li>From Thompson submachine gun: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 15:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 10
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 10's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "auto":<ul> <li>From World War I: </li> <li>From M1 carbine: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 06:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Smith & Wesson Model 10
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Smith & Wesson Model 10's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Davis":<ul> <li>From M1911 pistol: Davis and Raynor(1976), Safe Pistols Made Even Safer, American Rifleman, Jan. 1976</li> <li>From Algeria: </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:14, 3 April 2021 (UTC)