I was undecided whether to start the discussion here or the Gun Leather & Carry Gear section, but I think here we are talking about the correct historical equipment of the revolver.

Dear forum members, i'm looking for the right holster for my S&W 1917 DA 45 ARMY revolver, i have foud this nice and well used R.I.A. holster for a reasonable price ($170) but the rear mark says 1910, so i ask to your knowledge if i can consider it right for my revolver or not. Although at first glance it seems like a holster made for a revolver with a 6.5 barrel

Attached Images

	bb6ace6f-9fc7-41c2-a39a-b0fb02dda713.jpg (168.2 KB, 167 views)
	e549faca-5ded-441a-abf7-d6d6e2c8ecf9.jpg (50.0 KB, 142 views)
	4235996.jpg (125.4 KB, 158 views)
	4235997.jpg (121.4 KB, 134 views)
	4235998.jpg (119.2 KB, 131 views)

__________________
Marcello

I think its a Colt New Army DA38 holster. It may be too narrow for your Model 1917.

Here is the correct rig I had with the 1917 Army DA .45 ACP I previously owned. The holster is marked “G. & K. 1917 A.G”…..

__________________
Terry Lester

Sorry, but I cannot help you. As a new owner of a M1917 S&W myself, I decided to stop short at a box of clipped ammo, a 3 pocket ammo holder, and a very nice Lanyard. I would imagine any holster would be dated 1917 or later. Big Larry

This was the second option, given the high asking price of $370.

Attached Images

	1917.jpg (165.8 KB, 106 views)
	1917A.jpg (35.0 KB, 69 views)
	1917B.jpg (30.0 KB, 72 views)
	1917D.jpg (158.9 KB, 80 views)
	1917C.jpg (170.5 KB, 53 views)

__________________
Marcello

Here are a few additional pictures of some 1917 Army DA accoutrements…..

__________________
Terry Lester

That holster is correct for your 1917 Army.

__________________
Terry Lester

What do you think of the asking price 350 euros, about $370, the holster seems in very good condition to me and is here in Italy, so no custom tax and postage cost, is it worth buying it or is it better to wait to find something cheaper still in the same conditions?

__________________
Marcello

OP, the holster in your first post is a Rock Island Arsenal fifth type holster for a double action 38 revolver. It is the final pattern used with the Colt and S&W U.S. 38 DA revolvers. It is not correct for a model 1917 revolver.

The second option holster is a Model 1909 U.S. 45 revolver holster made by Graton & Knight during WW1. It looks to be in pretty good condition. $370 would be pretty much top dollar in the US, but in Italy that may be a good price, depending on how hard they are to find there. HTH

What do you think, for the asking price is it still worth buying it? I own a Military and Police from those years.

Attached Images

	M&P RB !.jpg (34.9 KB, 40 views)
	M&P RB.jpg (32.7 KB, 34 views)

__________________
Marcello

It would fit that revolver pretty well if that barrel is not over 6 1/2 inches in length. It is not a bad price but be aware the holster seems to be missing the bottom lanyard ring judging from the pictures. Does not really hurt the function of the holster, but it is not 100% complete. HTH

fair observation, being an addition it is better to find it complete

__________________
Marcello

Military material from the First and Second World Wars is quite common here in Europe and there are many exhibitions of militaria collectors, everything that is not Nazi and fascist can also be found at affordable prices

__________________
Marcello

I never really noticed that the cross draw holster was so prevalent in WW I. It seems strong side carry was the thing in WW II, unless you were using an old 1909 pattern.

I purchased a repo from El Paso Saddlery Co.

I'll join those with the opinion that the second holster with the G&K maker stamp is the correct holster for your M1917.

It is actually not a cross-draw. It is strong-side, "cavalry" carry, butt forward.

__________________
Pisgah

Don’t shoot that ammo, it is highly corrosive. Nearly wrecked a Colt 1917 using it.

Thanks for that explanation Notice the confused emoji in my post. I'll refrain from comment on that method of carry.

The reason for the cavalry holster is always given as the right hand is used to handle the saber the cavalry troops were equipped with when these holsters were issued. So it was a "cross draw design.
The Model 1917 was a stop-gap necessary because production of the 1911 Auto was deemed inadequate to meet the need.

__________________
Kind regards, Heinz

The correct way to handle things during a charge is to have the sword in the right hand, the revolver in the left hand and the reins in the other.

...and, if you DO fire some of that ammo, know that cleaning the gun right away with WATER will prevent damage from the corrosive salts that cause problems.

__________________
Pisgah

Not quite that simple...

Cavalry draw - Wikipedia

__________________
Pisgah

No, no, no! The reins are in your teeth ala Rooster Cogburn!

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

"Fill your hand!!"......Ben

__________________
Cogito, ergo BOOM!...

Every time that I try doing that my dentures fall out.

The Model 17? How about the Model 1917, two very different revolvers.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

Straw Hat, you are correct, that was mental lapse on my part and I have edited it. Thank you

Pisgah, you should check your sources. Wikipedia states "The pistol was in a covered holster carried high on the cavalryman's right side, but was placed butt-forward for crossdrawing by the left hand. " and notes reliable references are needed. The current wiki article relies on the movies as its source for the "cavalry draw" But it is just semantics, if you want to say it is not a cross draw go ahead. But please consider the safety hazards in that particular cavalry draw style.

__________________
Kind regards, Heinz