Won this rust locked up S&W 1917 snubbie at auction yesterday

[Bill Akins]

Here's my latest progress.

Smith and Wesson forum member "Jack the Toad" (George) was kind enough to send me his old shot out rifling cut snubby S&W 1917 nickel barrel so I could get the front sight off it to use on my 1917. Very nice of George to send that to me. He saved me having to fabricate/mill out a front sight.

Since his barrel had also been cut, in order to reattach the front sight, a flat had been milled on his barrel just barely big enough for the base of the front sight to fit into and be silver soldered. I heated up the front of the barrel and sight and the sight came right off the barrel. Kept some heat on it and wire brushed off the silver solder both from the sight and barrel. Both came out nice and clean. Here's a few pics of his old barrel with the front sight I took off it.

Note the flat milled in the top of his old barrel that the sight fit down into.
(Sorry guys, I've checked, and there is no closeup setting on my cheapo camera. But you can get the idea good enough)




So what I've got to do now is to get to the store soon and get some silver solder since I'm out of it. Then position my revolver and barrel in my mill, align the front sight to the rear sight, then mill the shallow flat on the barrel. Got to make sure the flat is level across the top of the barrel too and carefully mill it so it is just barely big enough for the front sight base to fit down into. Then heat the barrel and sight and let the silver solder flow into the crack where the heat will pull it under and around the base of the sight.

Since I've decided to keep my revolver unfinished, but highly polished "in the white", I'll just keep the nickel plate that's on his old sight and not remove it through reverse electrolysis nickel plating. That will really simplify things. Since my highly polished "in the white" revolver almost looks like it's nickel plated, the actually nickel plated front sight goes perfect with it. I scotch taped the front sight to my barrel just to get a rough idea of what it would look like. It's a little higher than it will be when finished, but I think it will look real good. Here's a couple of pics of the sight scotch taped to my barrel.....





I'll post some more when I get to the store and get some silver solder and get my milling done for the barrel flat and the front sight soldered on.



.

[DFrame]

Thanks for the update. That sight looks good.

[Bill Akins]

Thanks Dframe. I'll post about it again once I mill the flat on top of the barrel and get the front sight soldered on. Then I'll put a #17 Ace trigger shoe on it and since I've already lightened the spring tension on both the hammer mainspring and the trigger return spring, the restoration should be complete at that point. Then it will be fun time and shooting it.



.

[dnsharpshooter]

very cool project, looks very nice

[MLeake]

Forgive the stupid question, but... I thought white steel was very susceptible to corrosion. Are you going to treat it in some way?

If not, maybe nickel plating wouldn't be a bad idea?

[DFrame]

Bill not trying to be contrary here, but A trigger shoe? Aren't they a bit dangerous for this type of gun?

[Bill Akins]

MLeake wrote:
Forgive the stupid question, but... I thought white steel was very susceptible to corrosion. Are you going to treat it in some way?

If not, maybe nickel plating wouldn't be a bad idea?

Often it depends on the quality of the steel and the contents in the steel and how it was manufactured. This is very good quality steel in the 1917. Twice it has been just "in the white" and hasn't exhibited any indication of corrosion either time. The first time it was in the white for several weeks and didn't exhibit any rust before I cold blued it. Not being satisfied with the finish of the cold blue, I buffed all the cold blue off of it and it has been in the white for over a week now and not exhibiting any indication of rusting and I live in Florida where it is hot and humid.

Although it is made of iron and not the steel in my 1917, here's an interesting article about a 1,600 year old Iron oblisk that doesn't rust...
"Mystery of Delhi's Iron Pillar unraveled

New Delhi, July 18: Experts at the Indian Instituteof Technology have resolved the mystery behind the 1,600-year-old iron pillar in Delhi, which has never corroded despite the capital's harsh weather.

Metallurgists at Kanpur IIT have discovered that a thin layer of "misawite", a compound of iron, oxygen and hydrogen, has protected the cast iron pillar from rust.

The protective film took form within three years after erection of the pillar and has been growing ever so slowly since then. After 1,600 years, the film has grown just one-twentieth of a millimeter thick, according to R. Balasubramaniam of the IIT.

In a report published in the journal Current Science Balasubramanian says, the protective film was formed catalytically by the presence of high amounts of phosphorous in the iron—as much as one per cent against less than 0.05 per cent in today's iron.

The high phosphorous content is a result of the unique iron-making process practiced by ancient Indians, who reduced iron ore into steel in one step by mixing it with charcoal.

Modern blast furnaces, on the other hand, use limestone in place of charcoal yielding molten slag and pig iron that is later converted into steel. In the modern process most phosphorous is carried away by the slag.

The pillar—over seven metres high and weighing more than six tonnes—was erected by Kumara Gupta of Gupta dynasty that ruled northern India in AD 320-540.

Stating that the pillar is "a living testimony to the skill of metallurgists of ancient India", Balasubramaniam said the "kinetic scheme" that his group developed for predicting growth of the protective film may be useful for modeling long-term corrosion behaviour of containers for nuclear storage applications."

Good quality steel that has been highly polished is more resistant to rusting than non polished steel. Rust is much more prone to attack low quality steel and steel that doesn't have a very smooth surface. Plus I handle the revolver a lot and keep it rubbed down and oiled. I can also wax it with bees wax or automotive wax as a further barrier to corrosion. Many antique firearms were left in the white and have survived to this day without significant corrosion. Again, it depends on the quality, contents and manufacturing processes of the steel as well as if it is highly polished or rough. A rough surface holds moisture more than a highly polished surface will.

Of course time will tell. The good thing is if I see any evidence of rust forming, I can always buff it out without having to worry about ruining a finish, because there is no finish on it. So I'm going to keep it that way unless I do see evidence of rusting. If that happens, then I will buff it out to remove any rust and then decide what finish to put on it. But since I can buff any rust off that I see before it becomes a problem, I'm going to keep it in the white for now.

It is worthy of mention that you can't legally have a plating job done on a revolver unless you either do it yourself or have it done by a gunsmith. Because that is considered gunsmithing and it is illegal to practice gunsmithing for profit unless one is a registered gunsmith according the the BATFE. So it cannot legally be done by a standard non gunsmithing plating facility such as a car bumper plating facility. Plus, the gunsmith has to be an FFL and as such you have to ship it to him and then he has to also ship it back to your local FFL unless you have a C&R license and can receive it back from him yourself.

So not only do you have to pay to ship it to him to plate it, pay his fee to sign it in on his records plus for him to plate it, but then you have to pay for him to ship it to your FFL (if you aren't a C&R licensee in the case of a C&R S&W 1917) so then you have to go to your FFL to get it, pay your dealer to sign the revolver into his records, and pay for your dealer to make the phone call to make sure you aren't a criminal (unless you are a concealed carry holder). Much less hassle to leave it in the white or else finish it yourself.
I wouldn't even think about attempting to plate it myself though since I am not a professional at that and no doubt would ruin the revolver. If I did refinish it at some later date, it would be either a blackening, bluing or browning. Something I could do myself without ruining it. You can always buff off a finish like that and start over. You can't do that with plating.

Unless nickel plating is done by a professional gunsmith who is familiar with the nuances of firearms, it can be a disaster. Screw's diameters can be increased by plating and screw hole diameters can be decreased by plating. Thus causing those parts to no longer fit unless carefully done by a professional. Other tolerances in the revolver can be messed up too by the plating increasing their thickness.



.

[Bill Akins]

DFrame wrote:
Bill not trying to be contrary here, but A trigger shoe? Aren't they a bit dangerous for this type of gun?

I don't see how it would be dangerous DFrame. It doesn't interfere with placing my finger on the trigger. The ridges in the shoe keeps my finger pad in the same position throughout the functioning of the trigger and decreases the felt load on my trigger finger because it spreads the load over a larger area of my finger's pad. How do you think it might be dangerous?


.

[Bill Akins]

A post was made asking where I got my information that to engage in the business of refinishing a firearm, someone has to be a FFL dealer. But that post disappeared as I was typing and posting my below response. But I'm leaving my below post because it's still good info to know even though the posted question that was asking for that info disappeared. Just wanted to clairify that in case anyone was wondering why I was posting the below when they may not have seen the post asking for that info before it disappeared.

The key here is if a business "is engaged" in doing it for a profit or not. If a business does it for a profit, the BATFE can charge that they are "engaging in the business". (We all know how the BATFE can INTERPRET things however they please and the courts and congress let them get away with it.)

Also please note that there is a difference between being a manufacturer licensee and a standard FFL licensee dealer. The BATFE holds that anyone who in their business cosmetically changes the finish or appearance of a firearm, doesn't have to be a manufacturer under the law, but still must be a licensed FFL dealer. There are various BATFE documents that show the BATFE's opinion and position on how they INTERPRET this under the law.
I am just showing you a few.

You could phone the BATFE to clairify, but experience has shown that even their own agents often don't know what the BATFE's position is on all these regulations. For more sure clarification, you'd have to send them a letter asking for a written response. Then someone there will take the time to make sure you get the correct OPINION and POSITION of how the BATFE INTREPRETS the law.

Here are several PDF directives direct from the BATFE website that I copied and pasted here. I have highlighted certain sections I felt were pertinent in red.

BATFE ruling 2010-10......

"U.S. Departmenot f Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives
Office of the Director
Washington. DC 20226

18 U.S.C. 921(a): DEFINITIONS
18 U.S.C. 922(a)(I)(A): LICENSES REQUIRED
18 U.S.C. 923(a): LICENSES REQUIRED
27 CFR 478.11: DEFINITIONS
27 CFR 478.41(a): LICENSES REQUIRED

Any person who engages in an activity or process that primarily adds to or changes a firearm's appearance, by camouflaging a firearm by painting, dipping, or applying tape, or by engraving the external surface of a firearm, does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer under the Gun Control Act. Any person who is licensed as a dealer/gunsmith, and who camouflages or engraves firearms as described in this ruling does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer under the Gun Control Act. Any person who is engaged in the business of camouflaging or engraving firearms as described in this ruling must be licensed as a dealer, which includes a gunsmith, under the Gun Control Act.
ATF Rut. 2009-1
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (A TF) has received inquiries from Federally licensed manufacturers and dealers/gunsmiths seeking clarification as to whether camouflaging firearms, or cutting designs into firearms by engraving, constitute manufacturing activities that require a manufacturer's license. Camouflaging refers to a patterned treatment using a variety of different colors that enables a firearm to blend into a particular outdoor environment. This typically involves painting, dipping, or applying a tape over the firearm's wood and/or metal parts. Engraving firearms is a process in which a decorative pattern is placed on the external metal of a firearm primarily for ornamental purposes. The engraving can be cut by hand or machine, or pressed into the metal. There are other engraving techniques that cut designs into firearms, such as checkering or scalloping.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), Title 18, United States Code (V.S.C.), Chapter 44, provides, in part, that no person shall engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms until he has filed an application with and received a license to do so from the Attorney General. A "firearm" is defined by 18 V.S.C. 92 I (a)(3) to include any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted
to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive, and the frame or receiver of any such weapon. The term "manufacturer" is defined by 18 V.S.C. 921(a)(IO) and 27 CFR 478.11 as any person engaged in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition for purposes of sale or distribution. The term "dealer," which includes a gunsmith, is defined by 18 V.S.C. 921(a)(II) and 27 CFR 478.11 to include any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail, or repairing firearms or making or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms. In Revenue Ruling 55-342, ATF's predecessor agency interpreted the meaning of the terms "manufacturer" and "dealer" for the purpose of firearms licensing under the Federal Firearms Act, the precursor statute to the GCA. It was determined that a licensed dealer could assemble firearms from component parts on an individual basis, but could not engage in the business of assembling firearms from component parts in quantity lots for purposes of sale or distribution without a manufacturer's license. Since then, ATF has similarly and consistently interpreted the term "manufacturer" under the GCA to mean any person who engages in the business of making firearms, by casting, assembly, alteration, or otherwise, for the purpose of sale or distribution. Performing a cosmetic process or activity, such as camouflaging, that primarily adds to or changes the appearance or decoration of a firearm is not manufacturing. Unlike manufacturing processes that primarily enhance a firearm's durability, camouflaging is primarily cosmetic. Likewise, external engravings are cosmetic in nature and primarily affect only the appearance of a firearm. Held, any person who engages in an activity or process that primarily adds to or changes a firearm's appearance by camouflaging the firearm by painting, dipping, or applying tape does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer under the Gun Control Act. Held further, any person who engages in an activity or process that primarily adds to or changes a firearm's appearance by engraving the external surface of the firearm does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer under the Gun Control Act.
Held further, any person who is licensed as a dealer, which includes a gunsmith, and who camouflages or engraves firearms as described in this ruling does not need to be licensed as a manufacturer under the Gun Control Act. Held further, any person who is engaged in the business of camouflaging or engraving firearms as described in this ruling must be licensed as a dealer, which includes a gunsmith, under the Gun Control Act."

Here's the link to the above BATFE ruling.....
http://www.atf.gov/regulations-rulin...ing-2009-1.pdf

Here's another taken directly from the BATFE website.....

"Q: Is a license needed to engage in the business of engraving, customizing, refinishing or repairing firearms?

Yes. A person conducting such activities as a business is considered to be a gunsmith within the definition of a dealer. [27 CFR 478.11]

Q: Does a gunsmith need to enter in a permanent “bound book” record every firearm received for adjustment or repair?

If a firearm is brought in for repairs and the owner waits while it is being repaired or if the gunsmith is able to return the firearm to the owner during the same business day, it is not necessary to list the firearm in the “bound book” as an “acquisition.” If the gunsmith has possession of the firearm from one business day to another or longer, the firearm must be recorded as an “acquisition” and a “disposition” in the permanent "bound book" record."


And here's the link to the BATFE website for that above text.....
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/gunsmiths.html


I don't like it either. But there it is straight from the BATFE's website.

Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger .



.

[Mike Irwin]

Bill,

It disappeared because I misread your post and asked you a question based on what I thought you wrote, but not actually what you did write.

And, given that I was typing it with my thumbs, it was easier for me to delete it than to try to edit it.

[Bill Akins]

No problem Mike. Sometimes I get all thumbs too. Still good info for people to know though. An individual can work on their own guns or someone can work on other's guns for them, but according to the BATFE they cannot charge for it or else they are "engaging in the business" of repairing firearms without a FFL license which a gunsmith must have according to the BATFE, even just for re-finishing via printing, painting, taping, bluing or plating. Ridiculous bunch of BATFE rules and regs that continue to infringe upon our 2nd amendment rights.

People can't effectively nor realistically "Bear arms" (As the 2nd amendment says they have a right to) unless those arms are in proper condition and repair to be effective or worthwhile to "bear". In the wording of the 2nd amendment....."A well regulated militia..." would keep their firearms in good repair as a "well regulated militia". Thus the proper repair of those arms should also not be "infringed" else the intent of the 2nd amendment is violated. But the "repair" of those arms to be "beared" is infringed by licensing and registration by a government and courts that no longer seem to care what the 2nd amendment says or intended. And there we have it. It is just one more example of "the death of a thousand cuts" done slowly through ever increasing licensing, registration and regulation, to tyrannically and unconstitutionally gut the meaning and intent of the 2nd amendment and thus disarm the people slowly but surely so they will be easier to control and enslave and can never throw off the yoke of tyranny again as our fore fathers did.




.

[Bill Akins]

dnsharpsshooter wrote:
very cool project, looks very nice

Thanks dns. Glad you like it. Hope my postings are helpful to others with their projects.



.

[Bill Akins]

For attaching the half moon front sight, in addition to milling a flat onto the barrel top (as had been done on the barrel I took the sight off of), another option would be just curving the bottom of the front sight so that its curve matched the curve of the barrel and then soldering it onto the barrel rather than using the option of milling a flat on the barrel as was previously done on JacktheToad's barrel that I got the sight off of. That is an option and I might still do that.

I had also thought about insuring the front sight was the proper height when installed and to take any material off the bottom of the front sight rather than the top.

There are several things I thought about doing to make sure the front sight was properly aligned both for windage and elevation.

One idea I had was to place the revolver in a vice and make sure the rear sight groove and barrel were perfectly level by using a bubble level or laser level on it. Then along with that, I thought about placing a wire suspended also perfectly level and horizontally attached tightly between two screws in wood....over the very top of the rear sight groove where the tip of the front sight should be seen when sighting the revolver.

Then keeping the leveled wire at the top of the also leveled rear sight groove, I would see if the tip of the front sight blade would just barely touch the underside of said leveled wire. I theorize that should give me the correct height.

There are several variables to consider.

1. What if the revolver did not shoot to point of aim to begin with? Since it didn't have sight on it when I received it, I don't know if it originally shot to point of aim. Then my aligning the sights like I described above wouldn't make any difference.

2. If I milled a flat into the barrel for the sight to sit in and be soldered in, would that make my front sight too low? I could check that with leveling the sights and barrel with the level wire, but again...what if it didn't shoot to point of aim to begin with?

3. If I just curved the bottom of the front sight so that it matched the curve of the barrel, (which would give me more height than if I milled a flat into the top of the barrel) with the thought of then measuring its height using the leveled barrel and leveled rear sight groove and leveled wire as I described above, even if I got the sight the perfect height without milling a flat into the barrel, how do I know it would shoot to point of aim without knowing if it did so before?

I think it might be a good idea for me to temporarily tape or attach the sight (or a front sight blade proxy and not the actual sight) and try shooting it to see if it shoots to point of aim. If I temporarily taped/attached/superglued and used a front sight proxy (instead of the actual half moon sight I would install later), then I could bench rest shoot it and cut/file/adjust the height of the proxy sight until I hit to point of aim at the yardage I wanted. Then I could measure the height of the proxy sight once I got it to hitting at point of aim, and that way make sure that if I measured how deep the flat would be that I could mill onto the barrel, that the half moon front sight would have enough height in it to still sit up high enough to replicate the same point of aim that the proxy sight did. If after measuring and taking into account how deep the flat on the barrel would be, if the half moon sight would not be high enough sitting in that flat, then I'd know that instead of milling a flat, I should just curve the bottom of the sight to contour to the barrel's curve. And hopefully that would be high enough.

A bit tricky and a sticky wicket getting this aligned. Anyone have other suggestions that might be another option? I'll get 'er done, but I'm always open to option suggestions for an easier or better way to do things. Otherwise I'll do what I described above.



.

[shep854]

Regarding the trigger shoe question:
Trigger shoes are indeed risky IF the shoe is wider than the trigger guard and IF the gun is to be carried in a holster. It's easy to see how this could lead to a negligent discharge.

[Bill Akins]

Hmmm, now I see what you and DFrame meant Shep. In looking at my commercial model, the set screw attached trigger shoe does stick out about 1/32 of an inch on the left side of the trigger guard and about 1/8th of an inch on the right side of the trigger guard, beyond the width of the trigger guard. I didn't previously think about the shoe possibly coming into contact and grabbing the leather of my holster, as it was holstered and possibly functioning the trigger as the revolver went downward into the holster.

I do see now how that could be dangerous. I just looked at it carefully and it doesn't appear I can mill it down to the width of the trigger guard and still have enough material left for the set screws. Oh well, maybe I can adapt it to fit my M1a's trigger. My M1a's trigger is so skinny it actually starts to bother the pad of my trigger finger when I shoot it rapidly even though my M1a doesn't have a heavy trigger. It's the skinny-ness of my M1a's trigger that just cuts into my finger no matter the load of the trigger pull. Perhaps I can adapt it to fit it. If I can't, I'll sell it on e bay for what I paid for it. Don't want the chance of an accidental discharge as I holster my 1917's. So I guess I won't be buying another two of them after all.

Thanks for explaining that. Something so obvious I should have seen that but I didn't. Sometimes we can't see the forest because we're too busy looking at the trees . Now I see the danger you and DFrame were talking about. That's why it's great to participate in the forums. We can bounce our ideas back and forth and gain knowledge and see things that although obvious, we might have missed. I appreciate you both for bringing that danger to my attention and especially your explanation of what the danger was. Thanks very much.


.

[MLeake]

I'm used to seeing handgun trigger stops in the form of screws, drilled into the back center of the trigger, rather than shoes. I'd never thought about why that might be, but I think that has just been explained to us.

[Jim Watson]

Sights: Leveling the front sight with the rear will not zero for elevation. Look closely at an unaltered 1917 or other large caliber fixed sight revolver. Note that the front sight is geometrically tall, the line of sight is at an angle up from the bore line. That is because recoil really does start as soon as the bullet moves and the gun rocks up to launch the bullet up into the line of sight.

A sight taken off a 5.5" barrel will be effectively taller on a 4" barrel, look at the geometry.

I think an improvised front sight for testfiring would be a good idea. That would let you figure how much to cut before sticking the takeoff blade down permanently. Note that there are a lot of old revolvers out there with the front sight blade filed to zero.

Good luck on the windage. A lateral zero is not automatic with the sight vertical. There are a lot of CAS sixguns out there with the barrels "tweaked" in the threads to get them on target. I have one that is visibly out of plumb... but it shoots where it looks.

[DFrame]

Was away for a while, just got back. The width was indeed what I was referring to when I mentioned the trigger shoe. I probably should have been more clear in this. It is in fact possible for the shoe to catch on a holster and discharge the gun if the shoe is appreciably wider than the trigger guard. Most people I know don't use them for a self defense type of gun. They perform exactly as you described for target guns.

[Mike Irwin]

One of the old gunsmith tricks when shortening a barrel was to run a thread from the rear notch to the top of the front sight and measure the distance between the string and the top of the barrel where the new sight would go.

It wouldn't be perfect, but it would put them in the ball park.

[DrBundy]

Perhaps warranty work is different than refinishing work, but when I sent off my Rock Island to have some feed issues worked out, they sent it back to my house. Same with one of my Springfields when I had a clocking issue. Worth noting, both of them sent it back to my house - and ONLY my house - as "adult signature required". This was somewhat problematic as no one is home during the day. Springfield would not send it to my office because I am not the business owner. My point, though, is that I did not have to use a FFL on this end. Maybe the difference is that both RIA and SA are considered "manufacturers" even though both firearms were imported to the USA? I don't know.

A quick phone call to CCR Refinishing (a FFL holder) confirmed that I can - as an individual - send them my complete pistol without using an FFL. It will have to go back to me directly, and not anywhere else. I can also ship through an FFL on this end, but it will have to go through an FFL upon return. Also worth noting, at least with CCR Refinishing, that there are no additional fees to receive the firearm in their logs. That is built into the cost of refinishing. Other refinishers may have different rules, but at least from what I can tell the costs and burdens you mentioned a few posts ago aren't as insurmountable as you'd think. Good luck!

[Bill Akins]

I measured the height of my front sight on my full length barrel 1917 and then compared that height to the height of the front sight I'm installing on my snubby barrel 1917. I saw that I could lower the front sight on the snubby. But instead of doing that, so that it would be easier to mount the front sight, I milled a very shallow flat onto the top of the barrel, then J&B weld epoxied it to the barrel. I fired it yesterday to see how it hit at point of aim. It hit at the bottom of a plastic liter bottle low and a few inches to the left of the bottle, tearing a line in the ground where it hit. The blast also blew my sight right off the barrel but I picked it up. For some reason the J&B weld epoxy did not stick very well. That's okay though because it was just temporary to see how it would hit in that position.

But at least it showed me with that one shot where the sight would cause it to hit on point of aim. Since it hit low, I know I need to lower the front sight. But I don't want to file off metal from the bottom of the sight. So I am going to mill a leeetle bit deeper on the barrel flat the sight sits on. That will get it a little bit lower, then I'll stick it back on with J&B weld and see where it hits then. Might have to do this a few times til I get it hitting right at point of aim. But eventually I'll get it hitting to point of aim. No hurry. It's about the last thing I need to do to finish the restoration along with permanently mounting the front sight after I get it hitting where I want.


.

[zxcvbob]

For a macro photo using a cheapo digital camera, hold a cheapo eye loupe (like a 4x from Harbor Freight) over the lens. It works surprisingly well. You may have to zoom in or out just a little to get a full frame picture. HTH

[Bill Akins]

Thanks for that tip zxcvbob.

I think my wife might have a jeweler's loop. I'll ask her.


.

[Bill Akins]

I filed the bottom of the front sight a little more to raise my bullet strike. J&B weld epoxied it on the barrel again. Haven't had a chance to shoot it yet. Last time I must not have gotten a good enough bond with the J&B weld epoxy and the sight flew off when I fired it. Hopefully this time it will stick a bit better. Might put some thin tape around it to help it stay on and not fly away like it did last time. Once I get it to hitting where I want, I'll heat the J&B epoxy and remove it and then silver solder the sight on permanently. Will post more with final finished project pics when I get that done.


.

[silvermane_1]

wow, Bill Akins, your are true craftsmen sir, you put a lot of love into that 1917.