Category Archives: Uncategorized

Old Dog, New Tricks

I love old guns; I don’t think that’s much of a secret. I’m particularly fond of old Smith & Wesson top-breaks, not the least because they are still relatively inexpensive. They have other advantages though; they were the highest-quality guns of their type made in America, they have lovely, smooth double action triggers and a high level of detail and finish. They were also, most of them, ‘Drawer guns-‘ shot very little and consigned to a drawer so they tend to be in good mechanical condition. Unfortunately this ‘benign neglect’ means that finishes, particularly nickel, suffer.

32da1

One problem- the stock grip is so small the gun is basically un-shootable in my big mitt.

This Smith & Wesson .32 Double Action (4th Model) had a nickel finish that was pretty far gone and a semi-competantly shortened barrel. After shortening the barrel further and re-crowning it, a new front sight and custom grips it needed refinishing. I stripped the gun and ‘slicked’ the frame (ground all the pins flush) then went to work.

The bulk of the stripping was done with 800 grit sandpaper and a hand-held electric sander. I’m sure that fine gunsmiths the world over are turning over in their graves, but this cleared off the old nickel in record time. Then I went after it with needle-files and more sandpaper to get at the nooks and creases. This is a bit problematic because bare metal looks a lot like nickel. A touch of cold-blue here and there quickly reveals any spots that need more work.

The next step was a sisal buffing wheel with Stainless Steel Black rouge. Sisal is super-aggressive, so never buff across a crease or ridge or it will be gone- buff with the direction of the ridge or crease. Just kiss the parts with he wheel and let the speed and rouge do the work- too much pressure will erode the parts. Don’t be skimpy with the rouge either, or be tempted to substitute pressure for time.

A tip- buff the frame with the side-plate in place; one of the tell-tales of a badly refinished guns is rounding the edges on this plate. By buffing it flush with the frame you avoid this.

Parts were then cleaned and degreased and immersed in Van’s Instant Blue for several minutes, then soaked with WD40. You can see the results in the photos-

The end result is a gun not much bigger than a .22 or .25 ACP pocket-gun. .32 ACP is pretty anemic, but out of this short a gun it’s at least the equal of most such guns, and a whole lot more fun and interesting.

.22 Magnum Pistol Finished!

With my back on the fritz I’m stuck doing light-work so I decided to finish this project today. Didn’t get pictures of the process this time unfortunately.

First step- the raised block at the front of the barrel has become ‘ears’ for the front-sight. I mounted the barrel in the milling-vise on the drill-press. Using a 3/8-inch end-mill I carefully removed the material from the center to a depth of about .100 inches. Since the drill-press is a seriously crappy milling machine I carefully filed it to finish. I used a .062″ drill to make a hole centered between the ears and mounted a piece of .062-inch music-wire for a front-sight and trimmed it to height.

That finished I attacked the rear sight. First I milled and filed a groove at the top-rear of the barrel with a 3/16-inch end-mill. Again this was sloppy as hell, so I squared it up with files, then undercut it with a cutting-wheel in the flex-shaft tool, then filed it to shape with a triangular file.

I grabbed a piece of 1/2-inch mild steel, measured the sight-slot and sliced off an appropriately-sized piece. I carefully ground it to match the slot. Since the slot is very slightly tapered I tapped the sight into place with a drift until it is roughly centered. This is a serious force-fit; pretty sure it’s not going anywhere. Mounting the barrel on the drill-press again I mounted the 3/8-inch end-mill and undercut the back of the sight to produce a vertical surface, then used a cutting-wheel and files to cut the rear-sight aperture.

I refinished the gun by the simple expedient of immersing all of the external parts in Van’s Instant Blue for 3-4 minutes, then thoroughly hosing everything down with WD40 and rubbing off excess oxidation with paper towels. The reassembled gun has a lovely charcoal-gray finish that is rather darker than the pictures show.

This is not at all a large gun- the frame is only 1/2-inch thick, and the barrel is just a slosh wider. The fore-grip is the widest part of the pistol at around 7/8-inch wide. The barrel is 4-1/4 inches. If I remember correctly the gun weighs about 19 ounces. The trigger-pull is light and pleasant and the gun points to a sight-picture naturally. The gun balances on my trigger-finger, and the grip fits my hand extremely well. Hardly surprising since I made it for me…

Quite happy with how this has come out. The only thing left is to polish the chamber a bit. I’ll make a field holster for it; it would make a useful companion for hunting or the like.

Livin’ the Puglife.

     I finished this gun last night, a Pietta 1858 Remington ‘Pug-nose’ revolver. Sort of a western ‘Belly-gun’ or ‘Shopkeeper’s Special.’ I posted pictures on some of the gun forums, as I often do. Commentary was positive, though after tendering his complements one fellow commented,  “I just can’t see how you’ve improved over the original here. After a lot of work it seems you’ve created something less accurate and less comfortable to shoot?”
     It’s a fair question, I suppose. The tempting response is, ‘If you don’t get it I can’t explain it.’  That’s a bit of a cop-out though, isn’t it?
     Whether I’ve improved the gun is very subjective; if one wished to carry the gun concealed it’s certainly better for the purpose than if it still had the original 8″ barrel and grip-shape. That leaves aside the fact that you’d have to be a bit daft to do so; there are certainly better options in this day and age.
     This is obviously not intended to be any sort of modern, practical gun. First of all it’s a cap-and-ball gun, which has been obsolete for over 130 years. Even if fitted with a conversion cylinder to fire modern metallic cartridges it’s still quite a bit less efficient than a Ruger Blackhawk or Vaquero. What we have here is an historical ‘what if?’ What if someone living in the 19th C. wanted a full-frame .44 as a concealed carry weapon? Shat would they base it on, what would it look like and be like to shoot? I understand the appeal, obviously; I like ‘cowboy’ guns and I like snub-nosed revolvers. If you are not a fan of either or both you will probably not ‘get’ this gun.
     There’s nothing wrong with that, of course; I only dimly understand the idea of taking a utilitarian service pistol and turning it into and ultra-high tech tactical race-gun. The thing is we’re all in this hobby, this common obsession together. I don’t need to understand something to appreciate the passion and creativity of it’s construction.
     Of course there is often more to it than simply the gun itself; there’s always a story that goes with it, a learning experience that I just don’t get from a standard, stock pistol.
     The story here is that some years back a gun-writer did a similar gun and posted it to YouTube. A friend of mine liked the idea and asked if I would convert one of his guns in a similar fashion. He had a pair of 1858s and offered me one in exchange for the work. It was a fun project. To make a long story short I practiced on ‘my’ gun to work out the details, then made his. For me the work was the point of this project; I got to practice my hobby-twice- with virtually no expense to myself and got a free gun into the bargain. Even after I spend $350 on a cartridge conversion I’ll come out ahead on the deal… I also get the added fun of making a custom holster or two for the gun.
     While there are more practical options I’m a lot more likely to strap this gun on for woods-walks or as a hunting companion than I would be the full 8″ barreled gun, and while harder to shoot accurately it will probably be more than adequate for my purposes.
     As for being unpleasant to shoot I have a pretty good suspicion that this gun in it’s current form is as heavy as a 4-5/8″ Single Action Army, and with standard loads .45 Colt is pretty much a pussycat. I had a 3-1/4″ Cimarron Thunderer that wasn’t at all unpleasant to shoot; even my recoil-averse wife was OK with it.
     I really enjoy working on guns, seeing a concept come to life and overcoming the challenges (like the shortened loading-lever.) Turning a vision into a reality, as it were. It doesn’t hurt that I wind up with a unique, interesting firearm that is the work of my own hands.
     Did I improve the gun? From my perspective and uses I most certainly did; I took a common, inexpensive reproduction gun and turned it into something unique, fun and that I can justifiably take pride in. You may not, and don’t need to, understand that. The important thing is that I do, and since it’s my gun that’s all that really matters, isn’t it?