Guys - looking for some help/advice/contacts (or anything else I can get for that matter). I came across a K-22 pre-war 1st model at a show. Gun was extremely worn but couldn't resist. Everything checked mechanically (albeit cylinder was very loose), but had some bad pitting/plum colored cylinder, etc. Thought I'd try it out for a shooter and keep in original condition, but it was all over the target at 15 yards (4"+) with several types of .22. Ran a history on it with S&W, and it was shipped in Feb. 1932 to a hardware in Philadelphia. Question comes down to this - I'm thinking to make this thing right I need to have it worked on in two steps; action job/tightening by a 'smith, then send out for refinish? Does S&W still do work on old-timers like this, or better to look elsewhere? Sounds like Ford's is THE place for refinishing based on other comments here? I know I'll probably end up putting more into it than it will ever be worth, but I really hate to see an old warhorse go to waste after all these years - I'd rather have a decent looking shooter with some history to it.

Guys - looking for some help/advice/contacts (or anything else I can get for that matter). I came across a K-22 pre-war 1st model at a show. Gun was extremely worn but couldn't resist. Everything checked mechanically (albeit cylinder was very loose), but had some bad pitting/plum colored cylinder, etc. Thought I'd try it out for a shooter and keep in original condition, but it was all over the target at 15 yards (4"+) with several types of .22. Ran a history on it with S&W, and it was shipped in Feb. 1932 to a hardware in Philadelphia. Question comes down to this - I'm thinking to make this thing right I need to have it worked on in two steps; action job/tightening by a 'smith, then send out for refinish? Does S&W still do work on old-timers like this, or better to look elsewhere? Sounds like Ford's is THE place for refinishing based on other comments here? I know I'll probably end up putting more into it than it will ever be worth, but I really hate to see an old warhorse go to waste after all these years - I'd rather have a decent looking shooter with some history to it.

G

As a conclusion, I'd recommend selling the gun, and looking for a better one.
There is nothing in the bible that says that you have been appointed the caretaker
for worn-out guns.

Several things concern me here. One - a K-22 should not be as worn as you
describe this one to be. I have one of McGiverns .22's that he put over 200,000 rounds
through, and its is still as tight as the day it was shipped. This gun sounds as
though someone shot some very hot loads through it. Whatever happened to it, to
loosen it up so much, may not be easily repairable. If the charge holes in the cylinder
are worn out of spec, then it will need a new cylinder. If the rifling in the bore is
badly shot out, then you need a new barrel.

Secondly, a plum-colored cylinder suggests that the gun has already been refinished,
at least once. In 1932, all the major parts of the gun were blued together. Later
in the 50's or so, they started bluing them separately, in different batches, and that
is partially why the colors came out different.

I don't see the point of spending a lot on something that is not a family heirloom.

Later, Mike Priwer

Gaston, Mike is correct. You are going to spend a lot more on trying to bring this gun back to shooter condition than you can buy a better for. S&W won't work on it and a refinish cost at Ford's will be more than a newer K22 would cost.

If you are determined to refinish your Outdoorsman, you may want to check with Gene Williams in Texas. He has done some great work for me in the past, and I recommend him highly. Another thought would be to save your money and purchase a nice original Outdoorsman in 95% or better condition. They are great revolvers, but can still be found at reasonable prices.

__________________
Guy E. Stone

Well, I'm seeing some pretty good advice flowing out here. I'm not doubting Mike in any way, but his estimate of 200,000 rounds and no evidence of wear is a little higher than I would expect to see. That doesn't mean that things weren't done we're not aware of.

The usual benchmark for a K frame is 100,000 rounds before a major tuneup. With a double action shooter like McGivern, I would just guess that its had a few minor parts put into it over the years. That means to me maybe a new hand and cylinder stop, and most certainly springs. Note those aren't major parts and most people don't even disclose them when selling.

As for not bothering, I'd sell it to somebody and buy a better one. You can still find a very nice K22 first model in the $600-700 range. Not an investment grade gun, but one very capable of putting the 100,000 rounds down range. And it would still be worth what you paid for it, and better than the one you've got.

Just a side issue here.. My guess is that McGivern's gun was cleaned and well cared for. Thats probably how it survived in such good condition. For those that preach 22s don't need cleaning, show them the one you've got thats loose.

I'm not sure anybody burns up that much ammo in one single handgun if they're paying for the ammo!

__________________
Dick Burg

Dick

Just for fun - if you have McGiverns book, check out page 166. Suppossedly
its represents his study of how well a gun holds up. The targets are clearly
marked "Before any factory tuneup - etc " . This is the gun I am referring to.

The thing about the gun in this thread is that a K-22 is one of the most
rugged guns around. .22 caliber on a K-frame is a piece of cake, as far as
the frame and cylinder being able to take the pounding. The gun in question
seems really beat up - so that is primarily why I suspect something bad was
done with it, and why I would not bother with it.

And, I don't think McGivern paid for his ammo - he had a sponsor !

Regards, Mike Priwer

Gaston,

You are pretty new here so let me first say welcome to you.

There is a lot of information on this Forum about Smiths and the info that you have received from Mike, opoefc, RBurg, and bdGreen is the best that is available. Those four guys have probably handled, owned or currently own more important .22's than any other four guys ever have. They are all in agreement, so you can take that to the bank.

The original .22 Outdoorsmen are beautiful pieces and you owe it to yourself to find a good one. They are out there and when you find a good one, it will last you several lifetimes. (Remember that 100,000 rounds of .22 is 2000 bricks...that's a lot of "plinking" in anybodies book.)

Bob

I'm guessing we've pretty well settled the original issue, so allow me some thread drift (like I ever needed an excuse.)

If you take Bob's example of 2000 bricks and guess at a cost of $10 each, you'll come up with a $20,000 figure for ammo. Thats what prompted my earlier statement about almost no one putting that kind of ammo thru a gun if its on their nickel. Just saving all the brass you eject and taking that 55 gallon drum of scrap brass to the recycler will probably pay a good bit toward the next K22! (hint, you use a pine 4x4 to hammer the soft brass down so you can put more in the barrel.)

Back when we took a lot of photos, one of my benchmarks of getting my money's worth out of a camera was when I'd spent more on film than the camera cost. It was hard to gauge developing cost because that was my wifes hobby and she did alot of that at home. But the same test works for a gun. When you've spent more for ammo or components than the gun originally cost you, you're using it enough.

We used to go shooting twice a week, and our standard of a good day was burning up a brick. By the time we'd fired 500 rounds each, we were tired enough to give it up for the day. My experience was that our shooting quality was dropping off. We proved that many times by comparing our targets near the end. Besides, even on sale, the ammo was pretty expensive. Today its higher and getting worse.

I've not seen K22s that you can't recover your investment if you want to sell it. That normally assumes normal care and lubrication. If you keep a K22 for more than just a year or two (and some of us have had them for decades), you generally come out with a paper profit if you were to sell. That isn't true for all guns.

__________________
Dick Burg

Gene Williams in McKinney is the guy you need to contact... he does wonderful work at a reasonable price.

While you won't recover your investment if you have your Outdoorsman restored, you will have the pleasure of knowing you rescued an old soldier who is still able to give you and your children years and years of loyal service.

I have done this with several guns... and I have never failed to be delighted with the result.

Just my view...

V/r

Chuck

Amen to that

WHICH Bank??? If I could get a dollar a paragraph for Dick's posts, and then settle and cash out for a nickel on the dollar, I could quit peddlin' guns and take Gauguin's place in Tahiti!

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

Lee, you're alive! Good to hear from you. We missed you at the weekends gunshow. What happened? The old folks home have you in solitary? Or did you just forget this was a gunshow weekend?

__________________
Dick Burg

Dick
You are sure throwing that term <alive>
around loosely when talking about
the person you were talking about!!!

dick44

"(Remember that 100,000 rounds of .22 is 2000 bricks...that's a lot of "plinking" in anybodies book.)"

Not to be a spoiler, but 2000 bricks = 1 million

200 bricks = 100k

assuming 500 in a brick.

Now 2000 boxes = 100k

(50 p/box)

__________________
John

200 x 70 eguals 14000 dollar alot of 22 shooting !!!!

Plus end shake is a problem sooner like 5-10k imho