I do not know how many Forum members have one or how many are shooting theirs, but I got a 3-inch Model R-100 just after they came out in the 1950s. (The retail was $34.95 as I recall, and I got mine wholesale through my folks connections.) I chose it because I could not afford the more expensive Smith & Wesson 2-inch Kit Gun on my meager wages and allowance. (False economy in hindsight!) Still have it. Still a great gun. Loved and still love the nine shot capacity. It took Smith & Wesson decades to finally make a revolver with over six-shot capacity!
I suspect that more members have the later versions (R-104 and up as I remember) with the spring-loaded ejectors. The effect of the lack of a spring-loaded ejector often can be seen by the scars behind the recoil shield! I do not know how much money High Standard saved by eliminated a spring-loaded ejector, but those who forget that the ejector does not retract automatically and try to close the cylinder with the ejector extended probably would have been willing to pay a few more bucks for the feature.
The last Mark III and Mark IV all-steel versions were completely different designs from the earlier alloy R-100 through about R-109 series (I am not sure how high the "R" numbers went), but all are underrated revolvers.
I suspect that more members have the later versions (R-104 and up as I remember) with the spring-loaded ejectors. The effect of the lack of a spring-loaded ejector often can be seen by the scars behind the recoil shield! I do not know how much money High Standard saved by eliminated a spring-loaded ejector, but those who forget that the ejector does not retract automatically and try to close the cylinder with the ejector extended probably would have been willing to pay a few more bucks for the feature.
The last Mark III and Mark IV all-steel versions were completely different designs from the earlier alloy R-100 through about R-109 series (I am not sure how high the "R" numbers went), but all are underrated revolvers.
