Club Obi Wan

Which S&W 1917 conversion do you prefer?

Cast your vote in the Poll.

Stembridge.

If you can get the right grips I'd do the STEMBRIDGE since they used the 1917. The TOD is a good option too if it can be proven that they used an unaltered 1917.

Hey All,

I too, once would have said "Stembridge". But the "Bapty" has growed on me.

Dan S

Stembridge all the way. It has very rough and tough look i like in guns.

I might buy an M-1917 that has already been converted, but I could never ruin a historic fire arm!

I believe there is a special place in the underworld for those who "sporterize" and otherwise destroy historic arms.

Hey alphared6,

Agreed! To do a "Bapty", I'd have to spring for the new S&W "1917".

Dan S

Daunting ... when one considers the expense involved.

Stembridge followed closely by the TOD

alphared6 wrote:I might buy an M-1917 that has already been converted, but I could never ruin a historic fire arm!

I believe there is a special place in the underworld for those who "sporterize" and otherwise destroy historic arms.

I don't see a much difference between sporterizing a gun/rifle and not doing it, but buying one from someone who already has done the work.

Imahomer wrote:

alphared6 wrote:I might buy an M-1917 that has already been converted, but I could never ruin a historic fire arm!

I believe there is a special place in the underworld for those who "sporterize" and otherwise destroy historic arms.

I don't see a much difference between sporterizing a gun/rifle and not doing it, but buying one from someone who already has done the work.

You don't? Really?

In essence, if you wouldn't do it yourself, but have no problem buying a gun that someone else has converted as such, doesn't that mean you ultimately do support the practice? Just a thought.

I prefer to keep original vintage firearms as they are, but I think it's fine to get a replacement barrel to cut down and modify while keeping the original barrel intact.

binkmeisterRick wrote:In essence, if you wouldn't do it yourself, but have no problem buying a gun that someone else has converted as such, doesn't that mean you ultimately do support the practice? Just a thought.

No. Absolutely not. Were none to adopt the practice then the historic pieces would survive. My not supporting the practice in no way restricts my purchase options. And I have purchased bastardized historic pieces and restored them.

A historic weapon should be given its due - it's come a long way, and should be appreciated for its age and character. Especially when a new version, in this case, the Model 22, of recent vintage can be purchased new/used. A pistol out of the box often needs some basic work to improve its performance. An action job will make the trigger pull smoother, and help to alleviate the downward movement of the hand, sometimes generated by the simple act of squeezing. Several things can be done to improve sighting and accuracy. This is not to dismiss the work put in by the individual shooter to master an out of the box weapon. But, as in cars, some of us just enjoy working on our instruments. And you can expand this to loads.

Now here's a conversion to ponder:

Work done by BOWEN:

http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/NEW/1917_r1_c1.htm

(Gunsmithing site)

I went with the TOD. I don't know alot about guns but I likethe look of the longer barrel. The gun I really like is the one used in KOTCS.

THE BAPTY. It dropped the swordsman in the streets of Cairo, the defining moment of the entire Indy series. Period. End of story. Nuff said.

RaiderZee

I've always been a fan of the Stembridge. Between the checked grip, chipped corner, blade sight, and banding on the end of the barrel, I've always thought it had a bit more character than the Bapty. I'm hoping beyond hope that someday Rook will do a reproduction of this piece.

Mike