S&W 1917 project, Quasi Fits special?

[mountaindrew]

I went in to my local gun store ant I saw in the "historical case" as larger frame Smith that looked beautiful (from a distance), for a remarkably low price ($350) so I asked (even though I am not usually into big guns)
It is a 1917 .45acp that has been "improved" by
1. polishing off all the sharp edges and refinishing with a deep glossy blue
2. addition of a tall, ugly front target sight,
3. addition of an ugly (and slightly crooked0 rear target sight
4. non- original hammer in a bright finish.

I was wanting a compact big bore anyway, so my question is this:
Why no chop the barrel, bob the hammer, round the butt, and make a semi- fitz special, to salvage this already modified gun? (semi Fitz because I will leave the trigger guard)

How reliable are these guns? will they handle modern high performance .45acp ammo? (not crazy, .45super stuff, just good defense ammo)

How does .45 acp compare with .44 special in a revolver? I was considering a small .44 before I saw this?

Any thoughts?

 

[NORTEXED]

After I bought my Colt 1917, my brother bought one in poor finish condition, but otherwise sound. I kinda razzed him for buying an ugly one, and he said that was allright, he had a plan. He had a gunsmith acquaintance of ours chop the barrel back to 3", put a no-snag front sight on it, rounded the butt and grips, and had it satin nickeled. That made one of the sweetest carry pieces ever (could still kick him for trading it without letting me know). Shot great, and balanced real nice in the hand, was quick to reload with moon clips, and left a lasting impression from the muzzle end. The only reason I haven't done mine is that it's in pretty good condition, so I'm waiting for a beater to use.

 

[NORTEXED]

PS: I found a pic (NOT MINE) of one done like you're talking about:




As far as what these guns will take, I wouldn't hesitate to put anything in them that you would run through an automatic, and factory is gonna beat .44 Spec.

 

[rcmodel]

Keep in mind that S&W did not add the hammer block safety to the N-frame guns until after WWII. On the model 1917, it was added at serial #185000.
The WWI military guns have a serial number range of approxamately 1 - 169959.

While the early 1917's rebound slide hammer block was supposed to prevent a hammer impact from firing the gun, such was not always the case.

They were also not as strong as more modern S&W's because of the steels used then, lack of heat treating the frame & cylinder, and being just plain smaller and lighter in some critical areas. They are fine with standard pressure .45 ACP, but I would not recommend a steady diet of +P ammo.


rcmodel

 

[esq_stu]

I have a 1937 version. It shoots great. I don't like the front (half-a-nickel) sight. But the action is smooth as butter and the gun is accurate. Once you start hacking and whacking at it, forget about it's value. All I did was paint some day-glow orange on the front sight and put on some rubber grips. (I kept the lanyard ring and wood grips in my parts box just in case I want to sell it.)

 

[mountaindrew]

if I buy it it will be as a carry gun. I don't care about looks or collector value on my carry guns, just that they work, and how they feel in hand. Anyway, all collector value is done away with by the previous mods.

 

[Moonclip]

I got a Colt 1917 done up similar to the gun in the first post for $225 recently. I didn't Fitz it but I'm happy with it.

 

[44and45]

I wish Fitz never came up with that mutilation idea on model 1917's.

If you like big ugly guns, by a Ruger or S&W in .460 and 500 caliber, they are available in the shorter barrels.

The 1917 is a classic firearm in any condition.

However, its your gun, do with it as you wish.


Jim

 

[snorko]

Mountaindew, there is honor in your quest. When I see one of those much maligned, otherwise classics in the used case, it is like seeing a stray puppy in the rain.

 

[mountaindrew]

The difference between a 1917 and a Ruger or Smith in .500, is what, about 3 pounds extra weight, two dollars extra per shot , and $400. extra purchase price, so it is not really a comparison at all is it? Also, if as you say, they are a historic piece in any condition, even in the already partly bubba'd condition I described this one, than I guess nothing I do will damage the classic nature, even if I modify it further, right?

P.S. I would never do such a thing if the gun's original condition hadn't already been ruined. I agree that good condition historic artifacts need to be preserved.

What is the parts availabiliy on these old N-frames? What if the gunsmith has mucked up any of the internal works? can I get replacements?

 

[rcmodel]

Yes & no.

The 1917 uses the old "long" double-action lockwork. That went away about 1950.
All current S&W parts made in the last 60 years will not fit or work.

There are still some parts to be found from Numrich and others, but they may or may not be any better then the ones you already have.


rcmodel

 

[clang]

"3. addition of an ugly (and slightly crooked0 rear target sight"
- You may be inheriting someone else's mistakes. If the added sight is crooked, what other hack jobs did they do to this gun?

Converting to round butt may also be a problem if it includes removing some of the serial number. A definite no-no for obvious legal reasons.

If done right, the convrsion you wind up with can be an excellent gun. Just make sure what you start with is worthy of the investment.

 

[Mike 56]

So what did you decide i have a S&W 1917 the only thing i did to it was put some Hoge rubber grips on it. These are very nice revolvers. I would like to restore mine but i can't bring myself to do it. I like the modded 1917 in the pic in fact i would not mind having one.

Mike

 

[Joe the Redneck]

The Fitz is a thing of the past. As much as I love them, I wouldn't make one now.
If you are hellbent on doing this, I would state with a Chater Arms 44. Get good with it. This way, if it doesn't work out, all you have done is mangle a sheapie. No big loss.

How accurate do you think you are really going to be with a full bore revolver with a two inch barrel fired double action? Can you afford that much ammo for practice?

My fear is all that is going to happen is you are poing to chop up a wonderful revolver into a Fitz that you are going to show off to all your friends, take to the range once, and lock away in the safe becasue it is too hard to shoot and too expensive to practice with.

Just my thoughts, worth what you paid for them.

 

[Old Fuff]

I fully agree that older guns that are in their original configuration (or close to it) and can be salvaged and restored... should be.

But when previous owners have made extensive (and sometimes unwise) alterations I become more flexable because the damage has been done and presumeably cannot be reversed. In such cases I consider what might be done to improve the situation.

The revolver in the opening post is an example of what I described in my second paragraph. If mountaindrew proposes to do no more then round the bottom corners of the butt (similar to that of a Colt Detective Special), bob the hammer spur, and shorten the barrel to about 3 1/4 to 3 1/2 inches (which is as short as you can go on this revolver), I would have no objection, although I might leave the hammer spur as it is until I was absolutely sure I wanted it bobbed.

And for its intended purpose the Fitz Special is not obsolete. It was well thought out, including the modified trigger guard. If one should plan to make a true and complete Fitz ( something that mountaindrew apparently has no intention of doing) a better platform would be a current Taurus because of the way the cylinder stop spring & plunger are located inside the yoke.

How accurate do you think you are really going to be with a full bore revolver with a two inch barrel fired double action?

As I pointed out the barrel will have to be at least 3-inches, plus. For years S&W made an N-frame .357 Magnum with a 3 1/2 inch barrel, and while it wasn't my personal cup of tea, a lot of others did quite well.

 

[mountaindrew]

Yes Old Fuff, you are correct about the barrel length. I will cut it to the end of the ejector rod lug, which is about 3 inches, and I do not intend to cut the trigger guard.

I do not quite understand any of Joe's objections.

1. A Charter Bulldog is already shorter, lighter, and just generally smaller than the end result of my project, not to mention ugly and of questionable quality, so I do not think it is comparable. Also, .44 special is more expensive to practice with than .45acp, so that does not make sense.

2. The N-frame is a relatively heavy gun, so I don't anticipate recoil with the "lowly" .45acp to be uncontrollable at all. There are many .44 magnums around much lighter. This will not even be in the same ballpark.

3. A full size, 3inch revolver has plenty of accuracy potential. I don't understand why it would be difficult to shoot.

4. This gun has already lost its status as a "great old gun"

By the way, if anyone made a all steel, short barreled, 6-shot .45acp revolver for a reasonable price, I would consider it. As I see it, there is really no commercially offered alternative, short of some semi custom Performance Center pieces that are 3 to four times too expensive for me to afford on my blue collar income.

Plus, I have always wanted to make a "Custom" gun http://thehighroad.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
Wink