1894 Iver Johnson, first model.

[Gunfreak25]

Do we have have any fellow IJ enthusiasts here? I've always had a soft spot for these old break tops. After doing extensive research on them I sought out to find that "right one".

I paid $90 for this 1894 Model 1, Variation 1 Safety Automatic Revolver. Excellent condition through and through and even came with a holster. The serial denotes it being the 2932nd one made in the year of 1894. Note the spring loaded cylinder latch, this was only used for 6 months before IJ changed to a threaded cylinder bushing since the old type was prone to gumming up if not kept clean.

There are no wallhangers in my house. It will be shot using the proper BP loads.

[helice]

Over the years I'v picked up a few of these top-breaker types. Like you I find them most interesting. A neighbor put a bunch of cheap guns in a shadow box last year so I loaned them all to him. Now he's got two picture boxes and a big grin. You should see 'em. I wish I'd a thunk that picture box up. You got a nice old piece. Keep us informed of the progress.
Karl

[I'll Make Mine]

A top break in reasonable condition at a reasonable price would be one of the few revolvers that might tempt me into a layaway and making payments for a couple months -- anything modern I'd probably just find a poor replacement (for my uses) for my existing Dan Wesson (.357 Magnum), but a top break, even if I had to load BP rounds for it, would really make my day every time I took it out.

[Gunfreak25]

This one will actually serve as my daily pocket piece. The flat leaf springs are being replaced by the later coil springs for reliability, i'm also polishing all the trigger surfaces. Plinking ammo will be a steady diet of "0" buckshot round balls hand pressed into the case mouths over 5 grains of blackpowder. Carry loads will be 90 grain wad cutters over 9 grains of FFg blackpowder. Should fly right at 700fps.

My next IJ will be another break top, but one designed for smokeless. IJ didn't start heat treating their pistols and using higher quality steel until around 1906. The blackpowder only models can be identified by the owl facing the triggerguard and their flat leaf springs. The later smokeless pistols can be identified by the owl facing you and modern coil springs.

The local shop has a beautiful blued smokeless model but he wants $160. I may wave a hundred dollar bill in his face some day.

[Terryrm1-03]

I have one givin to me from my inlaws. Was told uncle kept it on his shelf by the cash register at the drug store in St Elmo IL. Population a handful or so HEE! HEE!. Anyway mine is 32 auto serial no is 58451. Can I shoot smokeless? I've always wanted to shoot this nice lil pistol. Thanks for your help, glad you started this thread. Made me get the ole girl out and study it.
I have the owls on the grips, not sure what your saying about how they face you. Just wanna make sure what I have.
Terry

[Terryrm1-03]

I have one givin to me from my inlaws. Was told uncle kept it on his shelf by the cash register at the drug store in St Elmo IL. Population a handful or so HEE! HEE!. Anyway mine is 32 auto serial no is 58451. Can I shoot smokeless? I've always wanted to shoot this nice lil pistol. Thanks for your help, glad you started this thread. Made me get the ole girl out and study it.
I have the owls on the grips, not sure what your saying about how they face you. Just wanna make sure what I have.
Terry
DUH! I just looked at your pics! My OWL faces me. Not looking at the trigger guard like you said. I'm OK with smokeless???
Anyone have a decent load for this LIL OLE THING! Can't wait to hear it fire!
Thanks Terry

[I'll Make Mine]

Terry, if that's really chambered for .32 ACP, you should look for 85-90 grain .311-.312 bullets and the lighter end of published loads -- and you may have to find or have made some moon clips to get correct ejection, assuming there's room for 'em, since the .32 ACP hasn't got enough rim to eject reliably (in my opinion). Seems more likely it's chambered for .32 Colt (heeled bullet round, hard to load for short of getting a custom mold and possibly hard to get brass) or .32 S&W Short (same bullets as modern .32 S&W Long or .32 H&R Magnum, shorter case and smaller powder charges).

[Terryrm1-03]

The box says 32 automatic. I don't know why the gun isn't stamped what caliber as there are many to choose from. I'm really confused as I was given some bullets with it. They are 32 S&W. Stamped US on the primers. So I took it out after being on this thread. I got a 20" group at 20'. Lots of keyholes. So I slugged the barrel and I get .316-.317 Bore. Does this sound right???
Also the brass has some weird looking primer on the inside of the shell. Kinda reminds me of the back side of a rivet.
As I looked in my Lymans book, there's quite a difference from 32 Auto and 32 S&W.
Once again the original box I have says 32 Automatic.
Thanks for your help here.
Terry

[Terryrm1-03]

The box says 32 automatic. I don't know why the gun isn't stamped what caliber as there are many to choose from. I'm really confused as I was given some bullets with it. They are 32 S&W. Stamped US on the primers. So I took it out after being on this thread. I got a 20" group at 20'. Lots of keyholes. So I slugged the barrel and I get .316-.317 Bore. Does this sound right???
Also the brass has some weird looking primer on the inside of the shell. Kinda reminds me of the back side of a rivet.
As I looked in my Lymans book, there's quite a difference from 32 Auto and 32 S&W.
Once again the original box I have says 32 Automatic.
Thanks for your help here.
Terry
I just took apart one of these 32 S&W boolits. It is a 90 gr RN. with 8 grs of BP. And measures .309. So that explains the keyholing for sure.
Now I'm looking for a .317+ boolit 90 gr?.
According to Lyman theses pistols very alot in bore size. And to slug the barrel. Its also very hard to measure as the rifling grooves aren't 180 degrees of each other.
Terry

[Terryrm1-03]

Sorry for all the wrong facts here guys. I got the box back out. It says Iver Johnson Automatic. Then where its says 32 I can faintly read S&W. So it is a 32 S&W!
Is brass hard to find, and a boolit mold for it?
Lyman book has .315 diminsion on their schematic of the boolit.
But they say to size .310-.311.
Terry

[dubber123]

I would size to the dimensions of the cylinder throats, unless they are grossly oversized to the bore, some IJ's are. I had one in .38 S&W, and found best accuracy with a hollow base wadcutter. You might try some of those if the bore is on the "generous" side.

[I'll Make Mine]

The "Automatic" on Iver Johnson revolvers from that period refers to an automatic ejector -- which we're used to as the standard for top break revolvers, going back to the Schofield and early Webley models.

The bore size on that sounds as if they used the same barrel for .32 S&W and .32 Short Colt; the latter used a heeled bullet (like on .22 LR) the same diameter as the cartridge, while the S&W rounds use a modern type inside bullet -- which will be undersize if the throats and grooves are cartridge diameter. It's also possible you have a .32 Short Colt revolver in a .32 S&W box.

You might see if a Lee TL-314-90SWC (which, in my mold, drops at .317) will chamber when loaded in your .32 S&W cases; if so, you're in like Flynn, but if those chambers don't have a shoulder in them, it's likely that boolit won't go and you'll have to try hollow base wadcutters to see if they'll blow out to fill the throats and grooves.

Oh, and you can still get .32 H&R Mag brass, which you can trim, if you can't find .32 S&W cases, but I think .32 S&W ammunition is still sold, implying availability of cases.

[Terryrm1-03]

Thanks so much for the info "I'll make mine". Thats very nice to know. A buddy of mine is sending a 90 gr mold that throws .316-.317. Just rounded up 100 pcs of brass. So dies are next and we'll give her a try. I hope the chambers will accept the larger boolit. There is a shoulder in the chamber as far Ias I can see. So hopefully she'll work.
As soon as I get my reload stuff I'll post back with results.
Thanks Terry
PS Gunfreak sorry I stole your post here. I should've started my own.