[Bill Akins]

I don't understand why you are accusing me of being condescending NewFrontier45. I don't believe I have written anything to be so. You do indeed want to pee in my cereal or you wouldn't be so tritely criticizing me about about what I paid for my revolver, calling me "condescending" and then rudely telling me things like "Yes, I'm sure you know better than the finest revolversmith extant ", ....when I never claimed to know more than that person does.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
Sorry Bill, I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. No, I didn't undersell mine.

Yet you wrote this below....

NewFrontier45 wrote:
Makes me wish I had posted an ad in the classifieds for my completely worn out .38-44 a couple years ago instead of selling it at a gun show for $150.

When you wrote you "wish" you had sold it in the "classifieds" for more money, a reasonable person would assume that shows you regretting underselling it and not selling it for more money. Maybe that wasn't what you meant, but that's what you wrote.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
By the time I paid to fix it, I would've easily had more invested in it than I could've bought a nice one for.

"By the time I paid to fix it....".
That's the difference here. I didn't pay someone to fix mine. I fixed it myself. I don't learn anything having someone else fix my guns.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
No sir, only a sucker would've paid me double for it. I was lucky to get $150 for it. Just like the guy you bought yours from was lucky.

I guess you'd think there would be a lot of "suckers" at the Smith and Wesson forum then, where a lot of knowledgeable people regarding Smith and Wessons are, because they are always looking for antique 38-44's in any condition and willing to pay good money for them. It may not be what you meant, but from what you wrote, clearly you think I was a "sucker" too for my buying mine for the price I paid from the "lucky" seller. That's kind of rude isn't it? Yet you accuse me of being condescending.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
I'm not trying to pee in your cornflakes but you did post this whole project on the internet.

Yet that is exactly what you are doing. Along with being rude and wanting to argue about something that isn't worth arguing over. What do you care what I paid for it? That should be irrelevant to you. This thread is chiefly about its restoration, not what I paid for it.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
You're gonna get opinions from all directions. Mine, after 25yrs of buying and selling guns as my primary interest and passion, is that you paid too much for it.

You're entitled to your opinion. Just as I am entitled to my opinion from buying, selling and working on guns for the past 40 years also as my primary interest and passion. If you want to think I was a "sucker" who paid too much for it. Okay. You can think that if you want. I'm satisfied with what I paid for it and unlike yourself who mentioned you would have to pay someone to fix yours, I fixed it myself and am satisfied with what I paid for it and how what I fixed and the whole project has turned out thus far. So if I am very satisfied and happy and it's no skin off your nose, why give me grief?
Unless you just want to argue and indeed pee in my corn flakes.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
As has been stated, the going prices of whole examples is irrelevant.

Because something "has been stated" doesn't make it accurate nor true. That's just one person's opinion. I believe the going prices for "whole examples" does have an impact on examples that aren't completely "whole" as well as has an impact on the cost of parts for those guns. Except for my barrel being cut shorter, mine was a "whole example". But you're entitled to believe what you want.

NewFrontier45 wrote:
If I walked into a shop and saw that sixgun sitting there, rusted and locked up, with a price tag of $350, I would shake my head and walk away. Was only six months ago that I paid as much for a mechanically perfect, uncut, unmodified, slightly freckled model 27.

That's your prerogative. Leave it for someone like me who can fix it theirself and who would be happy with it. As long as you aren't paying for it and fixing it, if someone restores a firearm back to beauty and perfect operating condition, a reasonable person would think it was neat that someone did that. Rather than find fault with their decision to buy it and restore it.

My earlier quote below...

Bill Akins wrote:
I have to respectfully disagree with you...

Your below quote....

NewFrontier45 wrote:
A respectful disagreement wouldn't be so riddled with condescension.

But your words you wrote alluding to me that I am a "sucker" for paying what I paid....that isn't condescending. Okay.

Instead of being happy for me when I am quite satisfied with what I paid and how my project is turning out, instead of just reading and enjoying the project playing out to its fruition, instead of finding interest in my helpful posting of how I am doing it and the different scotchbrite wheels and methods I've used to do the project that I've posted to be helpful to others who might want to do a similar project, instead you can only criticize what I paid for the revolver and then accuse me of being condescending and then further on being very rude.

My earlier quote that was to be helpful to you in replacing your front sight on your triple lock.....

Bill Akins wrote:
I know how you can replace your front sight on your 3.5 inch barrel triple lock so it looks just like it did before only on a shorter barrel.

Your rude and CONDESCENDING response NewFrontier45....

NewFrontier45 wrote:
Yes, I'm sure you know better than the finest revolversmith extant .

Okay let's analyze that NewFrontier45. Here is what you said earlier regarding that.....

NewFrontier45 wrote:
I talked to Hamilton Bowen about "fixing" a Triple Lock that had been cut to 3.5" and he said there was no elegant way to replace the front sight.

Then here is what I wrote trying to help you....

Bill Akins wrote:
"Elegant" is a subjective term in the eye of the beholder. But I know how you can replace your front sight on your 3.5 inch barrel triple lock so it looks just like it did before only on a shorter barrel. Like I am doing, get yourself another shot out barrel of the same vintage and manufacturer and remove the sight off it. You may have to cut the sight off and file its bottom flat. Then mill or file a shallow flat onto the top of your barrel just big enough for where the sight will sit, correctly align the sight and silver solder the sight onto the barrel. It will look just as "elegant" as it did before only on a shorter barrel. Not hard to do. If I can do it, anybody can do it.

Nowhere in that did I say I knew more than Hamilton Bowen. But according to you, you did not say if Mr Bowen gave you any options for replacing the front sight. You just said he said there was no "elegant" way to replace one.
I did not contradict Mr Bowen, I just tried to give you one option of how you could do it. I even said I didn't know how "elegant" it would be because "elegant" is in the subjective eye of the beholder. Yet now you want to accuse me of me saying I know more than Mr Bowen when I never said that, and you even use a sarcastic smilie. It appears you just want to argue and be rude for no reason. If you don't want to avail yourself of the option I suggested to install a front sight on your triple lock, then don't. Leave it without a front sight. It doesn't matter to me. I was just trying to give you a suggestion option of how you could install a front sight that is like the front sight I have removed from another shot out rifling snubby barrel that I am going to use on my snubby revolver. And for my trouble you accused me of me thinking I know more than an accomplished revolver-smith like Hamilton Bowen and used a sarcastic smilie at the end of your accusation.

Next you wrote.....

NewFrontier45 wrote:
that Bill Akins wrote....
I'm happy how it turned out with my restoring it.

Following that you wrote....

NewFrontier45 wrote:
Yes, that is the only important thing but that's not a restoration. Maybe if you don't know the difference, that explains this little disagreement.

If you recognize that I'm happy with it and what I paid for it, then if you recognize that then why do you continue giving me grief and criticizing me for what I paid for it? Do you enjoy doing that? As far as whether or not it qualifies as a "restoration", well I consider it to be a restoration. It was rusty and locked up when I got it, and I RESTORED it to perfect operating condition and polished it out beautifully. I frankly don't care if you consider that not being a "restoration" or not. And you telling me "maybe if you don't know the difference"....isn't being TRULY condescending on your part is it?

This isn't a little disagreement. This is you just wanting to tell me how much of a "sucker" I was for buying the revolver, how I "paid too much", show how if it were YOU that you would have been so much more intelligent and would have walked away from it (even though by your own admission you don't fix your own revolvers while I do), be rude, call me "condescending" accuse me of thinking I know more than Hamilton Bowen, and basically pee on my thread. Well you accomplished that. Happy now?

NewFrontier45 wrote:
I also hope you polished that thing with the sideplate in place.

Yes I did. Because to not do that, the edges of the sideplate and frame edges where the sideplate goes, would have a rounded edge from being not buffed while together and no longer match up as well after buffing unless buffing was done with the sideplate on the frame.

I very much appreciate your concern that I buffed it correctly. I know how much interest and concern you have for my project and that you just want to be helpful. (Is it my turn to use a sarcastic smilie?)

I try to be helpful and friendly with everyone. But sometimes people just want to argue and pick something apart for no valid reason even if they don't have a dog in the race. I don't understand people like that. Tell you what NewFrontier45, if you think I was a "sucker" and paid too much, if you think my project isn't a valid "restoration", if you think I am "condescending", if you think, that I think, that I know more than Hamilton Bowen (when I never said I did), if my revolver is just a hunk of scrap junk to you worthless except for the Sambar stag grips that were on it, then there is a wonderful thing you can do on the internet. You have the wonderful option to just ignore the thread and go read elsewhere. Or you can post, being disruptive, rude, argumentative and pee on that person's thread for no reason. What a person does in that regard shows everyone here their character.

You can continue to be disruptive and rude, but I'm done wasting any more of my time responding to you. I'm just going to continue to update on my project's progress as it progresses and ignore you from now on. If you want to continue in the vein you have, I'm sure the moderator will take care of it.


.