Exellent. I was heart broken when mine turned out to be a plug. I wanted one for years. Of course now they've all dried up. Like I say, the 625 works like magic.
Exellent. I was heart broken when mine turned out to be a plug. I wanted one for years. Of course now they've all dried up. Like I say, the 625 works like magic.
Heh, 625s have been the misfiring champions for me. Have had two that just wouldn't do right- both frame mounted firing pin variants. Upped spring tension, added Ron Powers shim bearings, made a longer firing pin, all to no avail. Too bad too, because they cost valuable time and points in matches after I thought they were sorted. Now that I don't shoot competition, I have a "Jerry Miculek" 625 that works fine. Still, the old M1917s and such are good gear. I particularly like the .455s. But why do the M1917s recoil so much "harder"?
Because they are so much lighter in the front end.
I mean harder than .455s or 44spl in revolvers of the same vintage. Maybe it's the smooth grips? Or possibly the fact that I tend to shoot them fast and DA? I just know that my hand and eyes tell me that it takes more work to get back on target. Muscle memory- It 's a weird thing sometimes (and altogether subjective)!
I've never shot a 1917 in 455 or 44 spl. Maybe the grips don't help. No grip there. I shoot revolver DA always too, that's how they were meant to be shot.
Technically, the 1917s (U.S. Military issued .45 ACP revolvers) are a variant of the pre-WWII large frame hand ejectors, of which there are quite a few calibers- .38 Spl. (AKA 38-44), .44 Spl., .45ACP/AR, .455, .45 Colt, plus a few really odd ducks, and later, the .357 Magnum. Not as wide a range of calibers as the Colt New Service, which also has a "M1917" variant, but enough to be entertaining for collectors.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Although the Brazilian contract revolvers are often thrown into the same bucket as M1917s, they have their own production quirks, esp, those later on in the run.
THe pre-WWII revolvers are generally quite smooth in operation, but I can't seem to get them to work when the trigger pulls are lowered to what is common now. The internal geometry seems to have changed just after the end of WWII, but finding good late 1930's examples is more difficult than examples made earlier or later, so just exactly when the major internal changes started I don't know (aside from the evolution of the internal safeties, which is well documented). My favorite "vintage" Smiths from an "action" standpoint seem to be those built from about 1947 through 1955. The high point being roughly 1949-50.
Example: Wouldn't I love to get a model 1950 four inch...
I was told on the S&W forum that the year 1948 was the change over to the newer internals on all of the S&W line. The 1937 is kind of an odd duck so to speak in that S&W made new frames for the first half of the Brazilian contact and delivered these. But with the war coming S&W did not finish the contract and placed it on hold. The second half was completed in 1946 and the frames used were from US government or S&W storage and were stamped with the US acceptance marks. These frames have the rounded area of the rear sight like the 1917, while the first ones have a square shape.
Some Bubba hacksawed the end off a .45 acp converted .455. Cut it crooked to boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
So, after 5-6 years of having it lie about, I went and cut it "square" about a week ago. Now about 3 3/8". Having evil thoughts of making a round butt out of it and trying a titanium cylinder that's also spare- it seems unlikely to work w/o a boatload of tinkering though.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff005-4.jpg
Now to find the ruptured M1917 barrel, as I think the sight is salvagable.
I'd round butt that in a heart beat. I'm sure you can organize a round-ish front sight and a set of N frame Hogue grips to finish it off. Maybe a bead blast and blue. New carry gun. What a handful with Glazer safety slugs and full moon clips.