Custom Fitz Revolver

[Long Barrel]

I was recently retired (from fulltime work, anyway), and am thinking about a special gun to commemorate the event. I’ve done this a couple of times for different reasons, the last being an engraved 66-2 done when I had open heart surgery 5 years ago.

What I’m thinking about now is a gent’s carry 45 ACP revolver, in the manner of the old Fitz Specials. This would involve either a 1917 or a 625 as a starting point, then shortning the butt and cutting the barrel to 2-1/2” or so, then thinning the trigger guard, bobbing the hammer spur, checkering the top of the hammer, and a heck of an action job. Finished off with some light engraving and custom grips, it could be a lot of fun.

For the concerned folks out there, I wouldn’t chop up a nice 1917 or 625, but try to find a beater to start from.

My real question involves frame sizes. All my S&W’s are either K’s or J’s. Which is smaller or lighter, the 1917 or the N?

 

[one eye joe]

From my recollection, I would think the 1917 would be smaller and lighter.

 

[Dale53]

I would NEVER spend the money on an original 1917 for customizing. The cylinders were not heat treated and there have been some failures over the years (no doubt from trying to hot rod the great .45 ACP cartridge).

However, Smith has produced some 3" barreled 625's and that would be my personal choice for a Fitz Special. When you get finished, you will have something. Regardless of customizing, you will NEVER have more than the original platform can give you.

I have two 625's (a 625-6 Model of 1989 with 5" barrel and a 625-8 JM Special with 4" barrel). These are two of the most satisfying revolvers I have ever owned (and that has been a BUNCH over the years).

The advantage of the 625-6's and later is that the cylinder throat dimensions are near perfect for accurate shooting both with jacketed as well as cast (nearly everything that I shoot are my own cast bullets). Whether you prefer 185-200 gr hollow points or 250 gr Keith bullets, these revolvers will do the job. You can hardly do better.

Good luck on your project...

Dale53

 

[David Sinko]

My gunsmith has just informed me that he was able to fit a 2" barrel from a 625-10 to the frame of my old 625-4. The 2" barrel is as short as you will be able to go and Numrich might still have some available. You will need to shorten the ejector rod and install a ball lock on the crane, plus modify the forcing cone area somewhat, since this barrel was made for a short cylinder. I have not seen or handled my "new" gun yet, since my 'smith is still trying to find an appropriately tall enough front sight to make it work with the adjustable rear. But soon I will have an all-steel 625 with 2" barrel.

You could have the top strap welded up and converted to fixed sight configuration. This is very tricky work and few gunsmiths are capable of doing it properly. Bowen Classic Arms is a good place to start if you are interested.

I guess you could shorten the grip frame, if you really want. Obviously you'd have to shorten the mainspring and re-locate the strain screw, and you'd likely have to ensure that the serial number is still on the bottom of the grip frame. That will entail more welding and many more dollars. I'm not so sure it would be worth the effort.

I'm not too keen on cutting away the front of a trigger guard, but if you gotta have a Fitz, then it must be done.

I think short .45 ACP revolvers have great potential, especially if you're a handloader. I agree that an old Model 1917 would not be a good choice. I would choose either a Model 25 or 625.

Dave Sinko

 

[senecaap]

The '17 will not have the ejector shroud. Another option would be one of the contract (is it Brazilian) .45ACP '17s that came in. If you want a trim and slim Fitz I would say '17 all the way.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I'm surprised that no one answered your real question. The 1917 IS an N.

I agree with your choice of thinning the trigger guard, rather than cutting it away like a real Fitz. A real Fitz can be put out of commission more easily than I would like, for little to no gain. I would not bother checkering the hammer, because it is a little harder and potentially unsafer to manually decock a bobbed hammer, and I see no value in having both SA and DA capability, particularly without a hammer spur, since I can shoot just as accurately DA as SA. Others may arrive at a different right answer.

For a really special gun of that type, I might prefer blue to stainless, although the stainless is more practical, particularly if engraved.

Have fun with your project!

P.S. Maybe what you were getting at was the fact that a 1917 has fixed sights, whereas many of the other N-frames have adjustable sights. I can certainly understand a desire for fixed sights, and would choose them myself. The 1917 is not the only place to get such a frame.

 

[Dave T]

Model520Fan answered the question I was getting ready to answer (smile).

Here's a 1917 that is about half way to what you have in mind.

Missing from your planed revolver are the bobbed hammer, narrowed trigger guard and even shorter barrel...this one is right at 3-1/4".

As stated the '17 is an N-frame, which I never considered a "pocket-gun" of any persuasion. Even if I had pockets that big, it just too heavy. Everyone who saw you would ask, or wonder what you have in your pocket. (LOL)

Dave