A BKH41B arrived

[radicalrod]

Heck I just bought it from STREET when I saw the S :lol: :lol: :lol:

He was selling out and I think I bought 4 cased SUPERS and the S LW on Sunday afternoon....

That was a few years ago.....I can't remember what I had for breakfast today either :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: RR

 

[street]

Aw! RR!!!! I didn't sell them to you I just about gave them to you. Hope you enjoyed them. :wink: :wink:

 

[radicalrod]

Aw! RR!!!! I didn't sell them to you I just about gave them to you. Hope you enjoyed them. :wink: :wink:

Well David, I think the LW was the last one I have/had....

I am always willing to share my toys with others :lol: :lol: :lol:

And THANK YOU....it was a very fair deal for both....RR

PS I still have the early pair of BKH36 FLAT TOPS......

Got those when I rode along with the POTATO MAN :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

 

[BlackEagle]

jussbad,

Every picture (LWSC but looks like tricolor) I've ever seen showing the reason for being a second is a white/gray discoloration similar to paint runs on the cylinder frame on. This was true for the two I had seen
for sale, 30 years ago.

This gun 200492S has no such marks, in fact the cylinder frame only has vague swirls on the recoil shield, but so does my none S LWACs (2). I was going to ask RR what he thought the defect was.

Aside from the stamped suffix and being on Mr. Dougan's list, I have no idea why this gun was below normal quality back in 1956. Sorry but thats all I have.

RR,

Can you answer or add to discussion? Anybody?

SATCOM

All I can say is maybe the S is for 'silly little caliber' And there are a lot of fun things to do in AK other than go to the post office

 

[mr.deerstalker]

Keep me and the post office out of this mess.....LOL

 

[chet15]

jussbad,

Every picture (LWSC but looks like tricolor) I've ever seen showing the reason for being a second is a white/gray discoloration similar to paint runs on the cylinder frame on. This was true for the two I had seen
for sale, 30 years ago.

This gun 200492S has no such marks, in fact the cylinder frame only has vague swirls on the recoil shield, but so does my none S LWACs (2). I was going to ask RR what he thought the defect was.

Aside from the stamped suffix and being on Mr. Dougan's list, I have no idea why this gun was below normal quality back in 1956. Sorry but thats all I have.

RR,

Can you answer or add to discussion? Anybody?

SATCOM

I know of one "S" Lightweight that was probably an "S" because there was no set screw on the bottom of the topstrap to hold the rear sight. Then there's another one that has a color case like appearance on the side of the front sight blade, probably because the cutting wheel spent too long on that side when chopping that blade from extruded stock.
I know of others with casting pits in the cylinder frame.
Chet15