1917

[milltownhunter]

I been looking for a 1917 S&W but most are in the $1000 + price I found a colt 1917 chromed for $269 are the any good the last colt I bought in 38 s&w was out of timing was not worth fixing are the 1917 any stronger the colt I have seen to be weak in the lock up s&w seem to be stronger

[Der Gebirgsjager]

So, I guess what you're asking is if the 1917 Colt is a strong gun? Well, yes, for it's time it was an excellent gun. But you want to remember that almost all of this model were made in 1917 and 1918 during World War I, and if you do the math 2015 - 1917 you'll get 98, which makes it pretty old. It's not really comparable to a modern Colt or S&W revolver, as improvements in design and metallurgy were bound to happen over 98 years.
But, as I own two as-issued Colt 1917s and one S&W 1917, and have fired them many times over the years I can assure you that used to fire standard pressure factory or hand loads they work very well. For feel, balance and point I prefer the S&W, but my S&W model seems to shoot rather poorly with anything other than the 230 gr. FMJ military hardball that was issued with it, whereas the Colt is not so particular and shoots other bullet designs and weights well. If you have big hands you'll like the Colt. If not abused, the timing and lock up on Colts will last for a long, long time without attention, and all things being equal I believe they will outlast the Smith before requiring a tune up. Abuse would include firing hot ammo and flipping the cylinder shut with one hand like Jimmy Cagney in some of the old time movies. The guns were made for military use, and properly handled and cared for will last for......98 years! And there are still a lot of them around, which speaks to their durability. If you compare a 1917 Colt and a 1917 Smith you will note that the cylinder on the Colt has a little more side-to-side wiggle when the hammer is down. That is normal, and not to be worried about. When you cock the hammer you'll feel less wiggle, and if you drop the hammer to the fired position while continuing to hold the trigger back you will find almost no wiggle. That is because the Colt completes the final lockup during that last firing stage of the trigger pull. The Smith works differently, and will usually display less wiggle to begin with, but about the same amount in the fired position. I think you can find a fairly good example of either for much less than $1,000, which is about what I'd expect to pay for a pristine collector quality specimen. Check out the on-line auctions.

[Grapeshot]

I have had both the Colt M1917, a.k.a. New Service, and the Smith & Wesson M1917. I preferred the S&W over the Colt only because the Colt's Barrel started to unscrew itself from the frame after 100 rounds of .45 Auto. A few years ago I picked up a Colt New Service in .45 Colt, M1909. I really like shooting both .45 Colt w/250 grain RN as well as .45 S&W Schofield w/230 grain RN. I use Trail Boss in them and it works well. None the Less. Getting the Colt will be a Plus.

[Scharfschuetze]

I have both the Colt and the S&W models of 1917. I guess I prefer the Smith over the Colt, but that's a personal opinion. Either way, they are fun to shoot and surprisingly accurate with good cast boolits.

Regarding your observation of timing issues with Colts, I had that problem too, so most of my revolvers end up being S&Ws.

[MtGun44]

Colts do go out of time much easier than S&Ws and require a more skilled
gunsmith to work on, sad to say. Have Colts and S&Ws, work on both.

[snglstack]

I have both. The Colt has a busted main spring. I have a replacement spring fro Numrich, but jeez I'm leery of opening up an old double action. The only other one I ever worked on was putting some Wolf springs in a M34 kit gun. Probably some stuck screws, too. Ach. What to do what to do...

[rintinglen]

I've had both, and I think that the Colt is metallurgically stronger, the S&W action is much more forgiving. The Colt I had was very accurate with the Keith 452-423, the Smith was pretty lame no matter what you ran through it. For 269, you can't go too far wrong, if it shoots at all.

[StrawHat]

Before you buy an old Colt revolver, find yourself a gunsmith that can actually work on them. Many say they can but there are very few remaining gunsmiths who can actually do the work. Lots of hand fitting the parts and parts are not easily found. My brother has a Colt 1917. Lot's of fun until the hand broke.

Kevin

[Jtarm]

Hard to believe they were once sold for $16 apiece by the USPS:

http://i1289.photobucket.com/albums/b511/jtcarm/Mobile%20Uploads/A49CC383-1CA1-4CA8-94D6-92860F298231_zpse3vjqj40.jpg (http://s1289.photobucket.com/user/jtcarm/media/Mobile%20Uploads/A49CC383-1CA1-4CA8-94D6-92860F298231_zpse3vjqj40.jpg.html)

[dragonrider]

I had a S & W 1917 , paid $150 for it 20-25 years ago. It was my favorite revolver. One day I was having a weak moment and a friend talked me into selling it. BIG MISTAKE. Been searching for another ever since but I won't spend $1000 for it. I might pay $750 but it would have to in very good to excellent condition.

[Frank46]

Try looking for the 1937 Brazilian contract N frame 45acp. I've got one that has been refinished and fun to shoot. These were new made for that contract while the later ones were made up on WWI frames. In any event for what you are quoting for a 1917 N frame 45acp that is a very good price. 1917 barrels are still available in almost new condition. Frank

[BCRider]

The "chromed" in the first post would make me sit up and inspect the gun rather closely.

If it's factory nickel plating that's one thing. If it's really chrome plating that suggests a re-finish job and possible buildup issues in the action in various spots if the work was not done with a good degree of care.

[Char-Gar]

Regardless of the make, a good Colt or Smith and Wesson are good revolvers and bad ones are bad revolvers. If you can't tell the difference , then learn how, before you buy any more revolvers. The price you gave is very low even for a Colt that has lost it's collectors value due to being plated. That alone raises a red flag.

I have both a Colt 1917 and a Smith and Wesson Brazilian and they are both fine pistols. I don't want to get into which is better for that is apples and oranges kind of thing.

[Outpost75]

Don't know about your part of the country, but around here a real USGI M1917 .45 DA in original, unaltered VG condition with light salt&pepper bore with strong rifling, either Colt or S&W runs $1000-1200. The Brazilians aren't much less, but are often in better condition.

[dragonrider]

That's about what I have seen around here also.

[MtGun44]

snglestack,
Don't worry about putting in the mainspring, that is easy, just pull the grips and
you just may be able to worry it in. If not, (I never tried without pulling the side plate)
pull the side plate and just don't disturb the parts, take a few good clear photos and
then put in the spring. Nothing particularly tricking about putting in the mainspring
that I remember.

If you pop out a part accidentally, refer to the pics. No magic on disassembly and
reassembly, but resetting the timing is fairly tricky if certain parts are worn.

Both S&W and Colts are good, sound guns, just that certain parts in the Colts have critical
function at sharp points on the end of the parts, putting a lot of local wear on a point. If you
want to replace that part, the different part will have a very slightly different dimension to
the point, so the timing is off. Have to adjust the next part up the chain to get it
back in time. If you go to far on that one, back to the other and stone it a touch to
get back in time. Several parts working in concert..... no magic but the design just
requires some hand fitting where the S&W really does not require much of that.

If one is way off of spec internally, it does take a good and patient worker to put it
back in proper working order, not just a parts changer. The Kuhnhausen book on
Colts is a huge help if you are handy.

Bill

[TXGunNut]

Saw what looked like a S&W 1917 in the used gun case today, if so it was mis-marked. Was in a bit of a rush and my Visa card needs several weeks off so I didn't fondle it. ;-)

[ddixie884]

I have owned several 1917s over the years both Colts and smiths. I like them and they are good guns, if in good shape. I wish I had kept some of the better ones. I only have 4 Colts at this time and one has a smith adj rear and one is of the snub types sold as surplus with the tubing cutter front sights. I like to load them with 255 swc commercial swcbb over 6 grs Power pistol. This is a mild load but hits hard. I like that you can buy cheap ammo from WM or mom and pop type places. The .45acp is probably the most available big bore ammo. I also like that Star-Line sells .45AR brass with free freight. This allows for boutique ammo. I also own 3 625's and a snub that may be a Jovino, so I guess I would be a .45acp wheelgun fan.

[cainttype]

A few decades back I picked up a .455 Eley version of the S&W 1917 that had been a Canadian arsenal rechamber to 45 Colt (not ACP). It's a little unusual, but a very nice shooter... Might need to dig her out and blow the dust off, now that more bearable temps are back.

[Dale53]

When I was growing up we had several versions of Colts and Smiths 1917's. We were most always cast bullet people (I started casting my own when I was 14 or so) and neither were all that accurate. Fun plinkers but not for serious match work. Much later I learned it was because the cylinder throats were over sized - sometimes as much as .457 or .458". When using .452" bullets, that does NOT lead to accurate shooting.

I always did admire the utility value of them, tho'. A few years ago, I bought a couple of 625's (a 5" 625-6 and a 4" 625-8 JM Special). Those two wonderful revolvers are only WONDERFUL! They have become my favorite revolvers of all time.

Either of them will shoot well under 1" at 25 yards with good quality home cast bullets. Further, that is whether light target loads with a 200 gr. SWC (#68 H&G or #130 H&G) or 250 gr. Keith (NOE version of Lyman's 452424) that will safely give 900+ fps, they are just flat dependably accurate.

They also will allow you to use full moon clips or Auto rim cases (at your pleasure) just like the originals.

They can be had for about the same price as a whipped 1917 and you KNOW which one I would choose - the modern 625, in a FLASH! But-t-t, that's just me...

fwiw
Dale53

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I have to completely agree with Dale53. When I originally answered the O.P.'s question I tried to address his stated interest in a 1917 S&W or Colt, with S&W seeming his first choice. But unless you're a collector or have some nostalgic reason for specifically wanting a 1917 the improvements of the last 98 years make a modern production revolver much more desirable. Although, as stated, I have examples of both 1917 revolvers I also own two S&W Stainless 625 Mountain Guns with 4" barrels, and wouldn't trade either of them for a 1917. There is just no comparison in the actions or accuracy. Since you (the O.P.) were considering a purchase in the $300 range, unless you get very lucky it's unlikely that you'll find something really worth having in that price range. I seldom see used 625s for sale at all....although there must be some. Have you considered a used Ruger Blackhawk? If double action is important, then you'll probably have to save your pennies for awhile longer, and when you can do it I'd suggest that you go for a modern revolver.

[Char-Gar]

You can count me in agreement also with Dale53. The 1917s have lots of history and panache but won't come up to scratch in the accuracy department when compared to post-war Smiths. I have a chopped 4" Model 25-2 and a 625 and either will shoot rings around any 1917 ever made by either Colt or Smith and Wesson. The 625 is tops.

I would also agree that the Ruger BH in 45 Colt/45ACP is a far better value than any double action revolvers in either caliber.