OP
Bill_in_fl
Member
Cyrogenic treating of the N frame metal? Anyone?
.
.
A .44 magnum S&W 1917?
- Thread starter Bill_in_fl
- Start date
keith44spl
Member
Bill,
Heat treating is science unto it's self.
Re: cryogenictreatment
As to building a 44 mag. with the astics of an older model,
would require a pretty good toolroom set-up...
A model 29 could be re-worked to the configeration your looking for.
But would cost more than finding a good M58 to start with as a flatform.
If I were going to undertake such a project...I'd start with a M58, re-chamber to 44 mag.
or install a counter bored 44 mag. cylinder. (Other model frames might not take the preasures involved,
as frame stretch will increase head space, cylinder barrel gap and just plain ol end shake.)
Next I'd take a 6" 44 magnum barrel and machine it to the desired length, remove rib (leaving a sight base), ejector rod housing, etc...
You'll need to work around the the ejector rod locking pin housing or dovetail/solder a replacement on.
Mill the flat for clearance to the ejector rod and knob.
I've install the larger pre-war style knob on newer left-hand threaded rods, works and looks ok.
Like anyother custom project, it jest takes time and money.
Su Amigo,
Dave
Heat treating is science unto it's self.
Re: cryogenictreatment
As to building a 44 mag. with the astics of an older model,
would require a pretty good toolroom set-up...
A model 29 could be re-worked to the configeration your looking for.
But would cost more than finding a good M58 to start with as a flatform.
If I were going to undertake such a project...I'd start with a M58, re-chamber to 44 mag.
or install a counter bored 44 mag. cylinder. (Other model frames might not take the preasures involved,
as frame stretch will increase head space, cylinder barrel gap and just plain ol end shake.)
Next I'd take a 6" 44 magnum barrel and machine it to the desired length, remove rib (leaving a sight base), ejector rod housing, etc...
You'll need to work around the the ejector rod locking pin housing or dovetail/solder a replacement on.
Mill the flat for clearance to the ejector rod and knob.
I've install the larger pre-war style knob on newer left-hand threaded rods, works and looks ok.
Like anyother custom project, it jest takes time and money.
Su Amigo,
Dave
Staggolee
Member
This sounds like a very interesting project. There is a company called FAMCO ( Florida Arms Manufacturer of Pistol, Revolver and Rifle Parts ) that makes revolver cylinders and frames to order at what I hear are reasonable prices, but I don't know if they do retail.
if you intend to take a model 58 frame and build this gun off of it, might I suggest buying a new 58 classic? Since you would be modifying the thing anyway, it wouldn't take much to remove and plug the lock, plus you can just order one instead of waiting for an original model 58 to turn up.
if you intend to take a model 58 frame and build this gun off of it, might I suggest buying a new 58 classic? Since you would be modifying the thing anyway, it wouldn't take much to remove and plug the lock, plus you can just order one instead of waiting for an original model 58 to turn up.
OP
Bill_in_fl
Member
Thanks for all the responses and advice on a project to build a fixed sighted .44 magnum that looks like a 1917 fellas.
Various different option here have been discussed. Staggolee, thanks for that link to Florida Arms manufacturing company which is also MVB industries. Their website does show that they can manufacture revolver frames. So I called them and they said their minimum volume is 100 units. So that's out.
Keith44special, thanks for that link on the article on cryogenic treatment of metal. I read the whole thing and it was very informative in letting me know that cryogenic treatment is not a substitute for heat treating, but is an add on and extension that augments heat treatment. The article informed me that I can't just get a 1917 frame cryogenically treated to enable it to withstand .44 magnum pressures without first having the frame heat treated.
I have taken into account all the advice and suggestions given by everyone here. I have tried to buy a model 58, a 38/44 model heavy duty and am still bidding on a chance to get a model 520, all N frames that I could use to convert to a .44 magnum that looks like a 1917 only with four instead of five screws. But here's the problem with that. Model 58's have become collector pieces that are not only too expensive to use for this project, but would (unless in bad shape already) would be a shame to mess them up from their original configuration to turn into a .44 magnum that looks like a 1917. If I could find a rusty bulged barrel model 58, or the same in a model 38/44 or 520 frame (the frame being all I need), then that would be different. But so far I haven't been able to find anything like that. The same story is true for a .357 model 520 which is the only .357 N frame made with fixed sights, and it also is too expensive and there were only three thousand of them made for the New York state police which cancelled the order and S&W sold them to a vendor who then resold them. They too are now an expensive collector's item and would be a shame to mess up from their collector configuration. Same is true of the heavy duty 38/44's. So any N frame S&W that is fixed sighted is getting so expensive and not to mention scarce to find, and I haven't been able to find any in bad shape (but with a good frame) at a reasonable price, that it is becoming not an option to go that way.
I could probably find a dogged out model 28 but I don't want to have to have the rear sight cutout welded in and the groove in the top strap created for a fixed sight. So that option is out.
Which leads me to my next question (if anyone knows).
If I could find a reasonably priced fixed sighted N frame, that everything else was messed up on, (bulged barrel, etc), that would be great and of course I would use that, but it would still be a four screw setup instead of the five screw of the 1917. Plus it would have a shorter hammer throw than the 1917 has. I could live with either or both of those if I could find a decently priced frame only, but I can't find one that isn't a collector's item. So....here's my question.
Since I'd really like it to be as much like a 1917 as possible, and since I have found out that cryogenic treatment is simply an augment to heat treating and not a replacement for it, and since the 1917 already has the longer hammer throw and already is a five screw frame, would it be possible for me to send a 1917 frame to Smith and Wesson and have them heat treat it for me to .44 magnum specs? Then if I wanted to strengthen it further, I could have it cryongnically treated also, or not.
I had read scuttlebutt somewhere that Smith and Wesson no longer would refinish or repair 1917's. Is that true? But I don't want one repaired or refinished, I just want its frame heat treated to .44 magnum specs and perhaps a .44 special barrel heat treated to .44 mag specs too.
Also, even though the 1917 is an N frame, is there any extra metal thickness in the frame itself in a .44 magnum that the 1917 does not have? I know the front of the top strap contour is different on the 1917 frame because of the tapered barrel, but that isn't what I mean. What I mean is,...if a 1917 frame were to be heat treated to properly withstand .44 magnum specs, is there any less metal in critical areas of the frame of a 1917 that a model 29 frame would have more of, that would make using a 1917 frame that had been re-heat treated to .44 mag specs unsafe to use?
I'd really like to do this project, but I fear that unless I could get a 1917 frame heat treated to .44 mag specs, it wouldn't be impossible to do, but it would certainly be improbable that I would find a fixed sighted N frame that would hold .44 mag pressures without it being cost prohibitive and or messing up a model that is already a collector's item.
So, anyone know if S&W would heat treat a 1917 frame for me to .44 mag specs? Is what I'm asking even possible to do and is the almost century old metal of the 1917 frame even the same type of steel that would be capable of being re-heat treated to .44 mag specs?
This seems like my best option (if even possible and if S&W would do it) given the things I've discussed above, unless I just get incredibly lucky and find a fixed sighted N frame (frames alone simply aren't around) or one that has a bulged barrel for a reasonable price and is rusty so I wouldn't be messing up a collector's item.
.
Various different option here have been discussed. Staggolee, thanks for that link to Florida Arms manufacturing company which is also MVB industries. Their website does show that they can manufacture revolver frames. So I called them and they said their minimum volume is 100 units. So that's out.
Keith44special, thanks for that link on the article on cryogenic treatment of metal. I read the whole thing and it was very informative in letting me know that cryogenic treatment is not a substitute for heat treating, but is an add on and extension that augments heat treatment. The article informed me that I can't just get a 1917 frame cryogenically treated to enable it to withstand .44 magnum pressures without first having the frame heat treated.
I have taken into account all the advice and suggestions given by everyone here. I have tried to buy a model 58, a 38/44 model heavy duty and am still bidding on a chance to get a model 520, all N frames that I could use to convert to a .44 magnum that looks like a 1917 only with four instead of five screws. But here's the problem with that. Model 58's have become collector pieces that are not only too expensive to use for this project, but would (unless in bad shape already) would be a shame to mess them up from their original configuration to turn into a .44 magnum that looks like a 1917. If I could find a rusty bulged barrel model 58, or the same in a model 38/44 or 520 frame (the frame being all I need), then that would be different. But so far I haven't been able to find anything like that. The same story is true for a .357 model 520 which is the only .357 N frame made with fixed sights, and it also is too expensive and there were only three thousand of them made for the New York state police which cancelled the order and S&W sold them to a vendor who then resold them. They too are now an expensive collector's item and would be a shame to mess up from their collector configuration. Same is true of the heavy duty 38/44's. So any N frame S&W that is fixed sighted is getting so expensive and not to mention scarce to find, and I haven't been able to find any in bad shape (but with a good frame) at a reasonable price, that it is becoming not an option to go that way.
I could probably find a dogged out model 28 but I don't want to have to have the rear sight cutout welded in and the groove in the top strap created for a fixed sight. So that option is out.
Which leads me to my next question (if anyone knows).
If I could find a reasonably priced fixed sighted N frame, that everything else was messed up on, (bulged barrel, etc), that would be great and of course I would use that, but it would still be a four screw setup instead of the five screw of the 1917. Plus it would have a shorter hammer throw than the 1917 has. I could live with either or both of those if I could find a decently priced frame only, but I can't find one that isn't a collector's item. So....here's my question.
Since I'd really like it to be as much like a 1917 as possible, and since I have found out that cryogenic treatment is simply an augment to heat treating and not a replacement for it, and since the 1917 already has the longer hammer throw and already is a five screw frame, would it be possible for me to send a 1917 frame to Smith and Wesson and have them heat treat it for me to .44 magnum specs? Then if I wanted to strengthen it further, I could have it cryongnically treated also, or not.
I had read scuttlebutt somewhere that Smith and Wesson no longer would refinish or repair 1917's. Is that true? But I don't want one repaired or refinished, I just want its frame heat treated to .44 magnum specs and perhaps a .44 special barrel heat treated to .44 mag specs too.
Also, even though the 1917 is an N frame, is there any extra metal thickness in the frame itself in a .44 magnum that the 1917 does not have? I know the front of the top strap contour is different on the 1917 frame because of the tapered barrel, but that isn't what I mean. What I mean is,...if a 1917 frame were to be heat treated to properly withstand .44 magnum specs, is there any less metal in critical areas of the frame of a 1917 that a model 29 frame would have more of, that would make using a 1917 frame that had been re-heat treated to .44 mag specs unsafe to use?
I'd really like to do this project, but I fear that unless I could get a 1917 frame heat treated to .44 mag specs, it wouldn't be impossible to do, but it would certainly be improbable that I would find a fixed sighted N frame that would hold .44 mag pressures without it being cost prohibitive and or messing up a model that is already a collector's item.
So, anyone know if S&W would heat treat a 1917 frame for me to .44 mag specs? Is what I'm asking even possible to do and is the almost century old metal of the 1917 frame even the same type of steel that would be capable of being re-heat treated to .44 mag specs?
This seems like my best option (if even possible and if S&W would do it) given the things I've discussed above, unless I just get incredibly lucky and find a fixed sighted N frame (frames alone simply aren't around) or one that has a bulged barrel for a reasonable price and is rusty so I wouldn't be messing up a collector's item.
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,669
- Reaction score
- 21,356
I suspect not, as the factory will not even refinish a pre-model stamped gun due to lack of parts for such guns in case they find something wrong. However, it couldn't hurt to give the Performance Center a call and ask.
OP
Bill_in_fl
Member
One last question that I hadn't earlier considered, is this.
I had planned to buy a .44 mag cylinder separately and no problem with finding that. So my earlier only concern was to acquire a fixed sight N frame only that would hold .44 mag pressure specs. I had planned to get a 6 inch .44 special barrel and cut it down to the 5 & 1/2 inches of the 1917, and then weld the front sight back on. But what I hadn't earlier considered was whether or not the .44 special barrel would have to be re-heat treated to withstand .44 mag pressures too. Would it? Or would I be okay with just a .44 special barrel without any re-heat treating to .44 mag specs on the barrel?
.
I had planned to buy a .44 mag cylinder separately and no problem with finding that. So my earlier only concern was to acquire a fixed sight N frame only that would hold .44 mag pressure specs. I had planned to get a 6 inch .44 special barrel and cut it down to the 5 & 1/2 inches of the 1917, and then weld the front sight back on. But what I hadn't earlier considered was whether or not the .44 special barrel would have to be re-heat treated to withstand .44 mag pressures too. Would it? Or would I be okay with just a .44 special barrel without any re-heat treating to .44 mag specs on the barrel?
.
Also after you call, let us know either how long it takes for them to stop laughing, or how long the stony silence is.
I'm sure a modern .44 Special barrel would be fine in a .44 Magnum conversion.
I would try some of the custom gunsmiths on the heat treat question. Personally, we are talking about 90 year old steel. I'd feel much better using a M58 frame. You can sell the barrel and cylinder to recoop some of the expense.
As to the five screw "look", a bung screw (the one at the top of the sideplate) could be added and a fake front of the trigger guard screw could be added as well.
While you're throwing all of this money around, I could use a decent used riding mower to replace my push mower.
Hamilton Bowen at one time offered a 1917 style conversion for the Ruger Redhawk. Part of this conversion included welding up the topstrap and changing the gun over to fixed sights. There are pics on the internet of such converted guns. If he could do it with a Redhawk, he could certainly do it on a Smith. The factory parts available would make the project easier on an N frame.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 7,772
- Reaction score
- 7,184
About all this welding on the top strap......welding destroys whatever heat treat is present prior to welding. This would require re-heat treating of the frame to return it to original condition. It also introduces substantial opportunity for warping of the frame, both in the welding and in the heat treat process.
The work Mr. Bowen did on the Redhawk frame is interesting but.... that frame has a whole lot more material in the topstrap (and elsewhere) than a S&W N frame. Despite that, the operation still poses substantial opportunity for warping and would require re-heat treatment.
Obviously, it may be possible to accomplish the welding, re-heat treatment and machining without warping the frame to the point where it's no longer usable. However, it ain't gonna be cheap.
Yes, if you weld on the barrel, you have to re-heat treat the barrel. You also have the same potential warpage issues. If the .44 Spl barrel is of proper steel specification, heat treat and thickness, you might get away with it at .44 Magnum pressures. What's having your face in it's current condition worth to you?
Now then, about heat treating a 1917 frame to .44 Mag specs. Can't be done. The steels are completely different to begin with. Secondly, there's no way S&W is going to be party to any such operation. There are commerical heat treat facilities that might be willing to attempt to produce the correct hardness if you had the Rockwell hardness specifications for a modern N frame (S&W isn't going to give you those either). I expect they could determine the practicality if you had a model 29 for them to hardness test. Again, this ain't gonna be cheap. Have you priced prosthetic hands lately if there should be errors? Assuming you survive.
Your best bet is a replacement rear sight that is essentially a fixed sight that bolts into the place of the S&W adjustable. This would allow you to use a modern adjustable sight frame. The exact appearance wouldn't be that of a fixed sight revolver but it won't cost bushels of money and stands a good chance of not becoming a hand grenade at some future time.
The work Mr. Bowen did on the Redhawk frame is interesting but.... that frame has a whole lot more material in the topstrap (and elsewhere) than a S&W N frame. Despite that, the operation still poses substantial opportunity for warping and would require re-heat treatment.
Obviously, it may be possible to accomplish the welding, re-heat treatment and machining without warping the frame to the point where it's no longer usable. However, it ain't gonna be cheap.
Yes, if you weld on the barrel, you have to re-heat treat the barrel. You also have the same potential warpage issues. If the .44 Spl barrel is of proper steel specification, heat treat and thickness, you might get away with it at .44 Magnum pressures. What's having your face in it's current condition worth to you?
Now then, about heat treating a 1917 frame to .44 Mag specs. Can't be done. The steels are completely different to begin with. Secondly, there's no way S&W is going to be party to any such operation. There are commerical heat treat facilities that might be willing to attempt to produce the correct hardness if you had the Rockwell hardness specifications for a modern N frame (S&W isn't going to give you those either). I expect they could determine the practicality if you had a model 29 for them to hardness test. Again, this ain't gonna be cheap. Have you priced prosthetic hands lately if there should be errors? Assuming you survive.
Your best bet is a replacement rear sight that is essentially a fixed sight that bolts into the place of the S&W adjustable. This would allow you to use a modern adjustable sight frame. The exact appearance wouldn't be that of a fixed sight revolver but it won't cost bushels of money and stands a good chance of not becoming a hand grenade at some future time.
Last edited:
OP
Bill_in_fl
Member
After searching for years to no avail, I've about given up on finding a model 58 frame, or bulged barrel model 58 to use to turn into a 1917 "looking" .44 magnum. Several factors created my problem in finding a model 58 frame to use. Model 58's in good shape are too expensive, somewhat rare, and try as I might, no frames only are to be found. Soooo......
Saturday, I acquired online at Pacific auctions company, a stainless S&W model 629-3 for $475.00
Total was $555.75 after the 17% auction premium fee and will probably be another $25.00 added to my credit card for Pacific auctions to ship and insure it to my local FFL dealer, who charges $30.00 for the transfer and phone call, so I will probably have about $610.75 in it all total when I take it home.
From the auction pics that I include here, it looks pretty good but could use a good buffing by me to make the matte and scratched stainless look like nickel plate. It is missing the rear sight base completely. Here's' the pics from the auction.
I figured not too many people bid on it because of the missing rear sight base. But that's good for me since I want it to be a fixed sighted rear anyway to look like a model 1917.
Now here's what I need some help in finding. I have heard that there are fixed sight base inserts that will fit right into my frame's adjustable rear sight cutout and that they can be silver soldered in place. With my 629-3 frame being stainless, a bit of buffing around that area and you couldn't even tell it wasn't originally made that way.
1. Does anyone know where I can find that fixed sight insert for an N frame that totally replaces the adjustable rear sight base? That once silver soldered in place, would completely fill in my old adjustable rear sight base cutout? I'd prefer stainless if possible.
2. Where can I find the clamshell type jig for holding the S&W N frame to remove various barrels? I need that so I can remove my 6 inch barrel to lathe it to be a 5&1/2 inch tapered barrel while keeping a small portion of the top rib to attach/pin a half moon front sight on. I'll also be removing the ejector shroud except for the portion that holds the pin and spring as well as notching the bottom of the barrel to accept the large knob of a 1917 ejector rod I'll be adapting to use on the 629-3. I'd also like to have that barrel removing jig so I can change out barrels on my other 1917's if necessary.
If I can get those two items, this project is do'able. Any info on questions 1 and 2 would be greatly appreciated.
.
Saturday, I acquired online at Pacific auctions company, a stainless S&W model 629-3 for $475.00
Total was $555.75 after the 17% auction premium fee and will probably be another $25.00 added to my credit card for Pacific auctions to ship and insure it to my local FFL dealer, who charges $30.00 for the transfer and phone call, so I will probably have about $610.75 in it all total when I take it home.
From the auction pics that I include here, it looks pretty good but could use a good buffing by me to make the matte and scratched stainless look like nickel plate. It is missing the rear sight base completely. Here's' the pics from the auction.
I figured not too many people bid on it because of the missing rear sight base. But that's good for me since I want it to be a fixed sighted rear anyway to look like a model 1917.
Now here's what I need some help in finding. I have heard that there are fixed sight base inserts that will fit right into my frame's adjustable rear sight cutout and that they can be silver soldered in place. With my 629-3 frame being stainless, a bit of buffing around that area and you couldn't even tell it wasn't originally made that way.
1. Does anyone know where I can find that fixed sight insert for an N frame that totally replaces the adjustable rear sight base? That once silver soldered in place, would completely fill in my old adjustable rear sight base cutout? I'd prefer stainless if possible.
2. Where can I find the clamshell type jig for holding the S&W N frame to remove various barrels? I need that so I can remove my 6 inch barrel to lathe it to be a 5&1/2 inch tapered barrel while keeping a small portion of the top rib to attach/pin a half moon front sight on. I'll also be removing the ejector shroud except for the portion that holds the pin and spring as well as notching the bottom of the barrel to accept the large knob of a 1917 ejector rod I'll be adapting to use on the 629-3. I'd also like to have that barrel removing jig so I can change out barrels on my other 1917's if necessary.
If I can get those two items, this project is do'able. Any info on questions 1 and 2 would be greatly appreciated.
.
Last edited:
Cylinder & Slide offers a fixed sight that replaces the later style adjustable sights. The trouble is, they won't fit your revolver unless you machine your frame. You bought a -3 gun, it has the old style rear sight that was squared at the front. The aftermarket sights are for the later guns. I'm not aware of any rear sight that would do what you want, and look original. BTW, your gun was built in the pre- "endurance package" era. I had one, and it really seemed to age quickly with full power loads. Hopefully your experiences will be more positive than mine were. I did notice a couple of M28s & M58s on Gunbroker for about the same money. Regardless, it looks like you have an interesting project ahead of you. Please keep us posted as to how it works out.
Best wishes...
Best wishes...
http://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-tools-supplies/index.htm?k=revolver+frame+wrench&ksubm
I'm curious how you will machine around the front locking lug. Other wise good luck with your project and show us the end result.
The endurance package was introduced with the 629-2E. I'm not certain that some of the endurance features were not added until later but I've read that all were in place in the 629-3.
muddocktor
Member
358156hp, while you are right about the top strap being cut for the old style square rear sight, you are wrong about not having the endurance package. This is a 629-3, not a 29-3 and it does have the endurance package. The elongated stop cut in the cylinder is a dead giveaway for the endurance package.
Bill_in_fl, good luck with your project. I hope you keep us updated on your progress as having a 44 Mag chambered, stainless 1917 look-a-like will be and interesting and different project and make a nice one of a kind revolver.
Bill_in_fl, good luck with your project. I hope you keep us updated on your progress as having a 44 Mag chambered, stainless 1917 look-a-like will be and interesting and different project and make a nice one of a kind revolver.
I take a shot. I am not a metallurgist, but I do make custom knives and have studied steel and heat treating quite well.
First lets look at basic tool steel states
Pearlite is a common microstructure occurring in many grades of steels. Normal for many structural and none hardened steels.
Martensite is formed in carbon steels by the rapid cooling (quenching) of austenite at such a high rate that carbon atoms do not have time to diffuse out of the crystal structure in large enough quantities to form cementite (Fe3C). As a result, the face-centered cubic austenite transforms to a highly strained body-centered tetragonal form of ferrite that is supersaturated with carbon. The shear deformations that result produce large numbers of dislocations, which is a primary strengthening mechanism of steels. The highest hardness of a pearlitic steel is 400 Brinell whereas martensite can achieve 700 Brinell.[2]
This is an not a natural state and is used in things like springs, cutting edges, and objects subject to high loads.
austenite. The state that steel goes into when heated above its critical temp and the carbon defuses from the iron. Usually around 1400f depending on alloy.
Steel is not a molecule of carbon and iron, but more of a crystal like bond.
How does all this relate to a S&W frame? I will try to keep it simple but its not.
When the frame is forged the steel must be heated far beyond the temp required to form austenite. When this occurs the crstal like bonds are enlargged. Grain growth. Large grains are not as strong and easier to break down. They need to be reset to achieve more strength and better bonds. This requires normilization. This can be achieved by a couple methods, all evolving taking the steel back to near its critical temp (around 1400) and allowing it to slowly cool. Usually this is repeated several times forming uniform and smaller grains of pearlite. Now the steel is stronger. It can now be hardened to form martensite by heating to its critical temp and quenching. Quenching in effect freezes the carbon/iron matrix in a different state and forming a different type of "crystal". But, this also causes stresses to be induced. These can be relaxed and modified by TEMPERING. Normally the higher the temperature used tto temper produces softer and tougher steel. The same piece of 1095 tool steel tempered to 350f will be hard like a file, but have a low elastic limit like a file. Very hard but easy to snap. The same piece tempered to 850 f will become a spring and be softer yet have a higher elastic limit and flex way farther before it fails. Even higher temps will result in a softer hardness, but give even better elastic limit. (think revolver frame). All the S&W frames I have tested are about the same hardness as mild steel, by the way. Soft, but tough.
There are basically 3 types of steel carbon mixtures leaving alloying out of it. Those with less carbon than the steel can use, those with near the optimum amount (appox. 0.84%) it can use and those with an excess. If I add an alloy like chrome or molybdenum the amount of carbon need to be optimum or over changes. If things like tungsten and vanadium are added and the amount of carbon is higher than the amount optimum for the iron the carbon will bond with the tungsten or vanadium and from carbides which although very hard also induce brittleness as the form in the grain boundaries. This can be good for holding an edge, but,l bad for things like a revolver frame.
Most gun receivers and frames are a type of 4140 chrome moly alloy. I am sure modern S&W frames are a similar alloy. Older frames less likely. Anyway these type alloys DO NOT have excess carbon to for carbides.
Now onto cryogenic treating of steels. When high alloy steels with an abundance of carbon are hardened to form martinsite some of the steel fails to convert from austenite to martensite and remains. This can be converted to martensite by continued cooling past normal temps. At appox -100f the majority will convert. I ofen use dry ice and acetone to achieve this effect in high alloy knife blades. IT WON'T DO ANYTHING TO CORRECTLY HT STEELS WITH OUT AN EXCESS OF CARBON. A furthe effect can be had by going colder like emerging in liquid nitrogen -320f. Long soaks at this temp can cause reduced size in the carbides formed in high alloy steels. This is good for high alloy carbide steels as they become less brittle. , But tool steels like 4140 will not be effected to any measurable amount as they have no carbides. Yo might achieve very very small amounts od=f deminsional stability, but thats about all.
SO, NO cryogenics will have no real effect on a 1917 frame or any other S&W frame for that matter. IMHO such treatments of rifle barrels and other components is mostly for sales hype and very little else.
Similar threads
- Locked
