smithsgrove
Bearcat
I have a ruger mk 1 that has a serial number #2 called and confirmed with ruger what might be the value of this.
Low serial number 1949 mk1
- Thread starter smithsgrove
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
Pictures if possible
smithsgrove
Bearcat
OK, i was typing as you posted your pictures, after looking at them. The pistol is NOT serial number 2, it has the wrong rear sight, rounded ejection port, should be square….and it looks like it has been completely polished and rounded….not original at all IMHO.
I also think i see the faint remains of a serial number, whomever did the work should have left the serial number intact!!
this gun was not manufactured in 1949 based on the configuration that i see…
I also think i see the faint remains of a serial number, whomever did the work should have left the serial number intact!!
this gun was not manufactured in 1949 based on the configuration that i see…
It also appears to have been pretty heavily buffed and reblued, from what I can see on my phone screen.
Welcome to the forum! It's a great place to learn a lot about Rugers (and other things) - 'ask me how I know!'
Welcome to the Forum, yessir definitely not a Mark I, its a standard auto and much later than 1949 as noted above in the configuration of the rear sight and ejector port , muzzle, completely buffed and polished out , looks like they removed ALL the roll markings and restamped it..........hhhhmmm Salvage job??.........
chet15
Hawkeye
Nope, definitely not #2.
In fact, the real #2 did not have a serial number stamped on the outside at all. The major parts were handstamped 2 only on the inside of the pistol (1 through 8 were all like this, probably made without external numbers as I suppose Ruger figured several of those would be pictured in major magazine articles, probably also used for Ruger's earliest advertising.
I saw number "46" probably 30 years ago at a Des Moines gun show... Looked like it was factory, had factory polishing, except the serial numbers were large post '64 style with all components after 1964 and it was an RST6.
Chet15
In fact, the real #2 did not have a serial number stamped on the outside at all. The major parts were handstamped 2 only on the inside of the pistol (1 through 8 were all like this, probably made without external numbers as I suppose Ruger figured several of those would be pictured in major magazine articles, probably also used for Ruger's earliest advertising.
I saw number "46" probably 30 years ago at a Des Moines gun show... Looked like it was factory, had factory polishing, except the serial numbers were large post '64 style with all components after 1964 and it was an RST6.
Chet15
contender
Ruger Guru
Excellent info above. Nothing I can add except; "Welcome to the Forum! "
At first glance I thought I read the title of this thread as "low SN MKI". Not as "No SN MKI"! Great info above.
OP: Just being the nervous Nancy that I am....there are some serious laws regarding the possession of firearms that have had the SN removed or obliterated. I would dispose of it 2 days before you started this thread
Then, get a nice Ruger MK of any flavor and move on. Just my .02!
OP: Just being the nervous Nancy that I am....there are some serious laws regarding the possession of firearms that have had the SN removed or obliterated. I would dispose of it 2 days before you started this thread
Then, get a nice Ruger MK of any flavor and move on. Just my .02!
I'd go so far as to delete this thread. JMHOOP: Just being the nervous Nancy that I am....there are some serious laws regarding the possession of firearms that have had the SN removed or obliterated. I would dispose of it 2 days before you started this thread
It's a P. T. Barnum Special!
OP, a lot of the folks who work at Ruger really don't know anything about the history and configuration of older Ruger products. Many aren't even gun people. That's probably why you're getting conflicting information from the factory and from people here on the forum.
eveled
Hawkeye
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Messages
- 5,610
Whats this gun worth?
About 20 years.
About 20 years.
chet15
Hawkeye
Shooter value.
Imagine a gun that comes from the factory and sometime in its history has been completely buffed (heavily buffed!), I assume the original serial number was destroyed, and then reblued... which is not even close to a factory reblue since the bolt was never polished like original.
From the pic, it was produced sometime between 1952 and 1971, excluding the years 1953 to 1954 since that was the year Ruger used the the tapered ear bolt.
I believe the real serial number 2 is actually pictured in the August 1977 issue of GUNS magazine... and that gun looks absolutely mint... quite unlike the gun that is the subject of this thread.
Chet15
Imagine a gun that comes from the factory and sometime in its history has been completely buffed (heavily buffed!), I assume the original serial number was destroyed, and then reblued... which is not even close to a factory reblue since the bolt was never polished like original.
From the pic, it was produced sometime between 1952 and 1971, excluding the years 1953 to 1954 since that was the year Ruger used the the tapered ear bolt.
I believe the real serial number 2 is actually pictured in the August 1977 issue of GUNS magazine... and that gun looks absolutely mint... quite unlike the gun that is the subject of this thread.
Chet15
