Something that is being ignored is the metallurgy of the period. World War one steels should be better than 1870 steels, but there will still be a lot of slag, residuals, and inclusions in the low alloy steels of the period.
The best on line source of antique steel compositions have been a few papers on antique bridges. These date around 1890, and were still standing. The metal assays were done because local Governments wanted to know if the bridges could be repaired. In every metallurgical examination, while the author more or less said the steels were the "best for the time", period steel properties were shown to be inferior to modern steels. And it was due to all the crud that period processes left in the steel. Steels from WW1 are low grade, and low strength, even compared to what was on the market during WW2. Alloy steels of today are better in every respect than the plain carbon steels of 1915. It is possible that crucible steel was used for Smith and Wesson cylinders during the WW1 period.
A low fatigue life is to be expected for early steels, and a buyer of an antique firearm has no idea if a previous owner was shooting "Elmer Keith" level loads. It is therefore wise to treat old firearms gingerly. A cylinder will fatigue fracture without warning.
Perhaps the most interesting page to me on historical steels is the vast collection of material complied by Helmut Foll on his Iron, Steel and Swords web page.
Iron, Steel and Swords
Professor Foll is primarily interested in swords, but the steel technology from the 1870's and on ward applies to guns as well as swords. If you are interested, you can spend hours on Professor Foll's web site, but I think this helps understand late 19th century steel
10.5.3 Making Steel after 1870
This one has a discussion of crucible steel:
10.5.2 Making Steel up to 1870
The best on line source of antique steel compositions have been a few papers on antique bridges. These date around 1890, and were still standing. The metal assays were done because local Governments wanted to know if the bridges could be repaired. In every metallurgical examination, while the author more or less said the steels were the "best for the time", period steel properties were shown to be inferior to modern steels. And it was due to all the crud that period processes left in the steel. Steels from WW1 are low grade, and low strength, even compared to what was on the market during WW2. Alloy steels of today are better in every respect than the plain carbon steels of 1915. It is possible that crucible steel was used for Smith and Wesson cylinders during the WW1 period.
A low fatigue life is to be expected for early steels, and a buyer of an antique firearm has no idea if a previous owner was shooting "Elmer Keith" level loads. It is therefore wise to treat old firearms gingerly. A cylinder will fatigue fracture without warning.
Perhaps the most interesting page to me on historical steels is the vast collection of material complied by Helmut Foll on his Iron, Steel and Swords web page.
Iron, Steel and Swords
Professor Foll is primarily interested in swords, but the steel technology from the 1870's and on ward applies to guns as well as swords. If you are interested, you can spend hours on Professor Foll's web site, but I think this helps understand late 19th century steel
10.5.3 Making Steel after 1870
This one has a discussion of crucible steel:
10.5.2 Making Steel up to 1870
