Need opinions about effect of factory reblue to a 1917 revolver disirability

[rambob1]

I collect WW1 and WW2 pistols and I like to collect them stock, original and unmessed with. I do not collect multiples and only buy one of the best condition examples I can find for a particular model I need for my collection. So in short, condition and originality are of the highest importance for me.

About 30 years ago the father of a friend was liquidating his gun collection and I had first ‘shot’ at the pieces I wanted from the collection. This M1917 S&W revolver was in the collection and since it looked virtually mint and original, plus I needed one for my collection, I ended up buying it for around $200. This price was what the father had paid for it and he thought it was a fair selling price. Unfortunately since information can be dangerous, I have since found that the reason it is so nice is that it was sent back to the factory in April of 1971 (471 stamped on frame under grip) for a reblue/refurbishing. I never realized until then that the extra S&W logo and extra 3 lines of address info stamped into the side plate and frame had been added during the factory visit. To say the least my bubble was burst. Now I don’t think of this gun as worthy for my collection because of this defilement. I have even been debating taking it to the range as a shooter while looking for another more original example. I guess I need a little stroking/opinions here from you experts about the continued desirability, value, etc. of this gun after the reblue and extra stampings were done at the factory. I honestly feel they ruined it, but I am open for opinions. FYI. The revolver is serial 131870 and is all matching and correct. Also, with all original markings, proofs and stamps still strong and in the correct places. Finish is a minimum of 99% and the case hardening on hammer and trigger is still strong.

 

[DocB]

Looks like a nice one to me. Factory reconditioning/refinishing has never bothered me much at all. . .the new extra stampings kind of do. Anyone looking at the gun can tell that it hasn't been through two wars and survived in that condition. I have one that looks like it has been through five wars. It kind of looks like the factory turned it into a new commercial model back in 1971. I'd be happy with it for what it is. You can find and old beat up one pretty easy. Yeah, I would shoot it. I don't think you can undo what was done in 1971. I should mention that I would put a really nice pair of grips on it too. Maybe a pair of diamond post-war magnas. Maybe a pair of pre-war grips with the gold or silver medallion. That would dress it up a lot. I've never liked the smooth military style grips.

 

[Jack Flash]

It looks like a very nice revolver. Being refinished usually does lower or eliminate collector interest, but when done by S&W, maybe not as much. If you really want a collector's piece, you should be prepared to pay upwards of $2k for a really nice one.

Thirty years ago would take us back to roughly 1986, when $200 would have been a very good deal for one in the condition yours is in. It shouldn't be hard to sell it for 3 or 4 times that much now. It shouldn't hurt it to shoot it, assuming reasonable handling and cleaning.

 

[Wiregrassguy]

Welcome to the forums from the Wiregrass! I agree, it has been totally defiled. I would be happy to give you your money back and for your troubles, add an extra $50. Let me know if you'd like to have that exchange completed by this weekend.

Guy

 

[VaTom]

Beautiful piece. In my opinion the fact that the re-blue and stampings were done and documented by S&W make this a unique revolver.

Original finish is desirable however I think this revolver would bring a nice price in an auction (not on-line). Maybe as much as an original with worn finish especially if you have a S&W letter documenting the work. There are a fair number of the Military and Brazilian 1917's at the gun shows I attend and I would be more likely to buy yours if given a choice. The Commercial 1917's are the rarer of the the 1917's (according to SCSW -4th edition) and bring a higher price.

I have a Commercial 1917 (circa 1929) that has a professional refinish. That kept the price down at the auction where I bought it. I knew it was refinished but had some buyers remorse after I bought it. Later I discovered that Commercial models are rarer than the military ones and it has some rarer large gold medallion stocks so now I have a unique piece that I am proud to have in my collection.

 

[DocB]

Here's one I got a month ago. Just to show that Smith did do stuff to their guns. It was manufactured in 1917. Never sold to the government and never went to WWI. In the 1920's it was restamped and turned into a commercial gun. Still it never sold and never left the factory. In 1938, when Brazil was sent those 24200 guns, it still didn't make the cut. That means that when Brazil sent 25000 troops to help us fight in Italy, it didn't get to go. So, it missed WWII too. Finally, in 1946, it was selected to be sent to Brazil to complete the last 800ish guns we owed them from the 1937/1938 contract. Nearly 30 years before it left the factory as a sold gun. It came back to this country around 1990 when Brazil sold off the 1917 guns that had survived. I put the gold medallion grips on it because they look good and because they are appropriate to the date the gun was manufactured (1917). This picture shows the grips that came on it which are now on an N frame from the 1950's.

 

[Jack Flash]

I forgot to add this (thought you might be interested):
"The year of manufacture for serial number 131870 is 1918, November"

 

[jebstuart]

Welcome to the forums from the Wiregrass! I agree, it has been totally defiled. I would be happy to give you your money back and for your troubles, add an extra $50. Let me know if you'd like to have that exchange completed by this weekend.

Guy

You beat me to it.

 

[rambob1]

Thanks everyone for your input!! I appreciate all of the info and opinions. Extra thanks to Jack Flash for dating my revolvers month/year of manufacture.

Bob

 

[Hondo44]

I don't think you'll ever be happy with it for your purpose of collecting it. Factory re-finishes are desirable to after market re-blues, but that's a hybrid with the post war stamping. I would look for another in original finish. In the meantime, shoot, enjoy, and care for this one then sell it when you acquire it's replacement. It'll make a beautiful shooter for someone and fund a good chunk of its replacement.

The inspector stamp on the upper left rear side of frame appears to have been polished off.

Originally they're stamped "GHS" in a circle, (Gilbert H. Stewart), Gov’t inspector, serial number range 1-42000. Middle range guns are marked with a flaming bomb, beginning c. #42000, April 1918.

 

[deyomatic]

Between the refinish, and the fact that the war was likely over before it could make it to Europe, I'd keep and shoot that one, and find a nicer example when it comes around. For what you have in it, it's up to you. I'd shoot it...actually, once I found the replacement in original condition, I'd probably have that one customized.

 

[rambob1]

Hondo44, You are absolutely correct that the Flaming Bomb Inspector Stamp be gone from the frame. Thanks for noticing that.

 

[Texas Star]

I think your gun is collectable as what it is: a factory refinished and remarked one, reflecting S&W's new frame stamp.


You have a brightly finished M-1917 and that's a good gun to own.


Carry it and use it, if you want. Get a "proper" one for your collection, but don't sell this one.


And I think you got a really good price, even back then.


Thanks for posting. I loved seeing that nice gun. I bet it's a good shooter, too.

 

[Hondo44]

Not collectible to a collector but certainly accumutible to a shooter.

 

[GerSan69]

I've been watching the "debate" over refinishing since I joined this forum and I must say, it is confusing.
What I've seen is a lot of folks say a collectible has to be in original condition. Sounds good to me. But then, there are outfits like Turnbull that "restore" firearms to better than original, and they sure aren't shy about charging for it. So it seems like there's original condition and restored to original, or something like that... and the prices don't seem to suffer.
Then there's the folks who confuse me the most: they will swear up and down that a gun should be kept original even with significant finish flaws. But then someone they know posts a refinish, and then same guys say it's wonderful. Like I said, confusing.
So, seriously: what is the real story?

 

[Hondo44]

Good question and the devil is in the details:

1. "Restoration" and "Re-finishing" are two entirely different things; best described as like the difference between tailgating and sodomy.

2. Re-finishes run the gamut from ruining a gun and devaluing it below it's value before the re-finish, even if it had no original finish left at all!

This is due to removing original markings, incorrect and poor polishing, wrong grit size final prep, wrong type of bluing/improperly done, or all of the above plus more!

And all the way up to a factory re-finish, sometimes (but not always) equal and indistinguishable quality from the original finish. This then borders on a "true" restoration: "indistinguishable quality from the original".

3. There are also excellent restorations vs. those bordering on frauds.

4. Restored guns, even the best will not compete in value with original condition guns (even if not 100% condition). The cost to excellently restore a gun is almost never recoverable, if ever.

5. Restored gun values, even the best, are not like professionally restored cars, not yet anyway. I suppose it has to do with how much easier it is to find very high condition original guns vs. finding very high condition original cars, and the differences in volumes produced. Someday that may change. Lately unrestored original car prices are skyrocketing.

6. Top quality refinished or restored guns still have a market, just not by most serious collectors with the bucks to buy the good original guns. But others like shooters will buy them because they look as good as original for a lot less bucks! Or the same bucks as for an original gun in only say, 70% original condition that doesn't look near as nice, or create the same show-ability or pride of ownership by the owner.

7. And lastly, even though some will only buy original guns, doesn't mean they don't appreciate or congratulate another forum member for acquiring a nicely re-finished or properly restored gun.

I hope this helps explain,

 

[Jst1mr]

The OP uses the term "desirability" - which needs to be defined as to exactly what that means to him. The refinish does indeed make for a very desirable looking gun...in that context the refinish has increased the desirability.

For the collector, looking for an original example of the gun, the desirability has been dashed by the refinish. There are degrees of being devalued - it may help that the rework was done at the S&W factory, but it has been done too recently (a factory refinish done 40 years earlier would be somewhat less damaging). But with the loss of original stampings and the addition of more modern stampings, collector value is circling the drain. Desirability, in this context, close to zero. Some particular parts may hold some value - the style of hammer for instance. (Or maybe that spring that flies off when the unwary remove the cylinder!).

Someone looking for a great shooting revolver, in a fun and effective caliber, should be thrilled to have a gun that might stand out from the crowd because of having some history,that looks great yet doesn't need to be treated with kid gloves.

The gun's originality may be gone, but it is still a nice gun representative of a different era and the quality and craftsmanship that accompany that status. As a shooter, be ready to try some different grips - that original style grip is (to me)like something purposely designed to be horrible, uncomfortable, and detrimental to accuracy.

 

[AlHunt]

For $200 there was no bubble bursting. You got a great deal. I'll happily get you out of it for what you paid and cover shipping.

 

[raljr1]

Sound like based on the OP's collection criteria that this one is not desirable to him. I agree that there are lots of guys out there who would pay enough for that one to get him well on the way to one that would more closely fit his criteria....advice given here seems good, shoot it and enjoy it till the right one comes along.

 

[JSR III]

Welcome to the forum.

Not sure what these were going for in 1986 but at some point not much before that they could be had for $50 by the barrel full. One would need to go look through some old American Rifleman magazine ads to see for certain. (Normally found at the back of the magazine)

As for the offers to give you your money back, with just inflation alone, the $200 that you paid in 1986 would be worth $432 in today's dollars, so you would need at least $500 to make any profit.

As you can see from the above posts, the responses run the gamut from the refinish ruins the gun to it makes it unique. This is why they make ice cream in 28 flavors because typically no two people have the same opinion about anything.

If I were collecting the 1917's, I might add this example to my collection merely to show what the factory would do to guns sent back for a refinish before Roy Jinks halted the practice in the 70's. As stated above, many folks can live with a factory refinish but fewer appreciate the original markings being altered.

So there you have it, another perhaps worthless opinion to add to the pile.