Mod 17-3, to reblue or not

P

pat_riot

Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
I obtained a retired S&W Mod. 17-3 that my agency used for training recruits many, many years ago. I was able to purchase it as one of my retirement guns. It's a beautiful revolver, but has spots where the bluing has rubbed off of the frame...

The big question is, should I send it in to Smith & Wesson for a rebluing or just leave it as is? I have no intentions of selling it; I desire that it stay in my family and be passed down to my heirs. Thanks ahead of time for your thoughts.
 

Attachments

  • 8F2639FC-CB93-4D8C-A90C-53A68E947395.jpg
    8F2639FC-CB93-4D8C-A90C-53A68E947395.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 241
  • C2EA998E-CF58-4892-B4B1-B2187538A1CC.jpg
    C2EA998E-CF58-4892-B4B1-B2187538A1CC.jpg
    87.2 KB · Views: 226
Register to hide this ad
Seem like your 17 is in decent shape with some reasonable wear I would leave it be. If you send it to somebody like Fords it will look great but there will be no sign that you owned it. Shoot it and enjoy it.
 
You asked for opinions so here goes.

I would leave it alone because:
1. I think it looks pretty good.
2. It won't shoot any better after being refinished and you won't be worried hurting the finish when you take it shooting.
3. You could spend the $220 you would spend on a blue refinish on ammo.

On the other hand if cost is irrelevant and you heart's desire is to have a shiny, new-looking revolver then get it refinished.
 
Quality rebluing isn't cheap and it's cost is never recuperated if you sell it.

My vote would be to shoot the heck out of it. If you determine you love it, and won't ever part with it,THEN (and only then) consider dressing it up.
 
Even if the reblueing was free I'd still say leave it alone.
 
If the imperfections bother you, I see no reason not to send it to S&W for a restoration. Since you intend to keep it for a family heirloom and have no plans to sell it, resale value isn't an issue for you. Battle scars are fine if you see them as a sign of the gun's history. If you don't, you will never be truly happy with it until the "ugly" is removed. I say this from my personal experience. I have a 29-2 that was worn and used hard over the years. I love that old gun and will never part with it. A couple of years ago, I had Ford's do their magic making it look new again. I am so glad that I had this done and I hope that someday my grandchildren will enjoy it as I have.
 
Last edited:
I agree with most. Leave it as is. The wear on the revolver tells part of the story that this revolver was used for training recruits. That gives the revolver some honored history.
 
I say do what ever is going to give YOU the most enjoyment. I used to think to much about resale and what my kids will do or think of them. Trying to just do what makes me happy with my guns. Life is short. Enjoy your guns while you can.
 
Not exactly your situation, but this is my experience. If the finish bothers you now, you will really be disappointed with anything less than a first rate refinish. I'm not advocating for or against, but if you choose to go the refinish route, don't go for a budget refinish. I bought a refinished 27 as a shooter. It didn't disappoint in that regard, and it is one of my daughters favorite guns to shoot. I knew what I was buying and what I was buying it for and didn't think the finish would bother me. I may have been happy if it was just honest wear like yours, but the gloppyness of the refinish just kind of gnawed away at me. One day it will go to my daughter, and I couldn't leave her an ugly gun:), so I had it re-refinished. The roll marks are no worse than they were when I bought it and it is better in every other regard, so no regrets. I've got more money in it than it's worth but the memories shooting it with my daughter are far more valuable than the money I've got in the gun.
 
Here is a 28 from my collection. It is a early mod 28 that my grandfather owned, passed down to my father and then to me. It will go to my grandson next. It was modified by a LEO before my grandfather bought it from him. I was witness to the transaction at the age of 5. That was in 1967. He had the full treatment for the time done. Trigger job, jeweled trigger and hammer, new stocks and a re-blue. The re-blue was not very good. The gun has been a mattress gun for my grandfather, a pig hunter for my dad and a delight to shoot for me. Would not trade it for a NIB of the same. Hope my grandson feels the same way. Guess my point is its a family gun. We have and continue to enjoy it. Most who see it would say it was ruined with all the work done to it. Not us.
rWJ48Z9.jpg
 
Last edited:
I also vote to leave it as is. I have both revolvers that are New in the box and those that have battle scars and by far, the battle scared ones are what I grab when I head to the range because they have seen action before and know what to do {;>))
 
I love guns with honest wear/character. I have 3 of them in such condition. Your 17 is actually in pretty good shape. Leave it alone and enjoy.
 
Spots wouldn't bother me a bit, enjoy and shoot as is.
Steve
 
JM4151 said:
I would use it and enjoy it. It you get it reblued you will be afraid to use it and your grandkids won't use it either. Have fun with it.
Click to expand...

Not to be argumentative but, why would anyone not use a refinished gun? Would they not use a new gun for the same reason? Guess I fail to see the logic.
 
You have what you consider an heirloom. The only question is whether or not you want a pretty heirloom. The fact you've posed your question says you do.

Now the only remaining question is who should do it? Back in "the good old days" I'd say the factory should do it. That's because the preparation work was exactly the same as that for a new gun----performed by the same people with the same equipment (formed leather wheels). The "good old days" are long gone, and with them my knowledge of who does what and how---at the factory. I am left with a certain amount of nervousness and misgiving when it comes to factory work.

That brings us to Fords---and others. My problem with others is I know nothing about them, and have never seen their work. I have seen Fords work---their "Master Blue". I describe it with one word---perfection. Perfection translates to better than factory. It's better than factory because it (the preparation) is done by hand. The result is a higher polish, and a slightly darker color.

You've heard from the naysayers. They've (correctly) told you the gun will never be original after you have it refinished. It seems like your question suggests you already know that---and don't care---you'd rather have pretty than original. They've (correctly) told you you'll never get your money out of it. It seems like your question suggests you already know that too---and don't care about the cost of pretty.

I think I'm through.

Ralph Tremaine
 
Last edited:
From what I can see, it looks better than my shooter revolvers.

Spend the money on rimfire ammo and put more wear on it!

GF
 
I've never seen a bad model 17 or K22. The perfect outdoorsmen's gun IMHO.
Steve
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shotguncoach
HomeSmith What if? : Spot rebluing
Replies
8
Views
690
chief38
chief38
cmansguns
Is this gun a "early" Model 17 ND (No Dash)?
Replies
15
Views
982
Sebago Son
Sebago Son
W
Good things come to those who wait, and wait and wait......
Replies
16
Views
896
'79 Magnum GT
'79 Magnum GT
pmanton
??? for military retirees.
Replies
22
Views
1K
Birdgun
B
JHW
  • Locked
Sold/Withdrawn REDUCED Smith and Wesson Model 63-3 Boxed 1995 Pre-Lock PRE-MIM 4in ROUND BUTT
Replies
4
Views
3K
JHW
JHW

Latest posts

Back
Top