mrm-mole
Bearcat
I found this
in a local gun store marked at $300. It's a S&W M17-4 8 3/8" 6-shot .22 S/L/LR. I asked the owner, a gunsmith, if he new the value of the gun. Three times. I examined it, and I found a mirror-bright bore, everything tight, and a crisp, light trigger. The only visible flaw was the holster wear on the bluing at the muzzle.
I bought it. $200 cash and a S&W 22A with a trigger that, using technical gunsmithy terms, sucked. I couldn't fix it, and two local gunsmiths allowed as how they wouldn't touch it. I had paid $150 for it and was glad to be rid of it, even though, from the outside, it looked quite good. I told the seller the good and the bad of the 22A. That covered the $300 + numerous CA fees and taxes. Whew.
Got it home, eventually (CA, remember), cleaned and lubricated, and shortening this too long story, it would only cleanly eject .22 shorts. Others required light tapping with a tiny mallet. Aha! Back home, hone the cylinder with an Outer's .22 wire brush in a Black and Decker variable speed drill and the eject problem is gone. Obviously this little revolver is much more accurate than the 22A and is quite a pleasure to shoot. It's like a little rifle. Much fun.
Now for my questions, even though it's a S&W, and considering it's to be a shooter:
1. I think I got a good deal, did I?
2. Should I let the seller know what the problem was (extended use of .22 short for target with carbon buildup).
3. Would I be likely to be able to make the muzzle look good with cold blue? Should I try?
Thanks for any input,
Mike
in a local gun store marked at $300. It's a S&W M17-4 8 3/8" 6-shot .22 S/L/LR. I asked the owner, a gunsmith, if he new the value of the gun. Three times. I examined it, and I found a mirror-bright bore, everything tight, and a crisp, light trigger. The only visible flaw was the holster wear on the bluing at the muzzle.
I bought it. $200 cash and a S&W 22A with a trigger that, using technical gunsmithy terms, sucked. I couldn't fix it, and two local gunsmiths allowed as how they wouldn't touch it. I had paid $150 for it and was glad to be rid of it, even though, from the outside, it looked quite good. I told the seller the good and the bad of the 22A. That covered the $300 + numerous CA fees and taxes. Whew.
Got it home, eventually (CA, remember), cleaned and lubricated, and shortening this too long story, it would only cleanly eject .22 shorts. Others required light tapping with a tiny mallet. Aha! Back home, hone the cylinder with an Outer's .22 wire brush in a Black and Decker variable speed drill and the eject problem is gone. Obviously this little revolver is much more accurate than the 22A and is quite a pleasure to shoot. It's like a little rifle. Much fun.
Now for my questions, even though it's a S&W, and considering it's to be a shooter:
1. I think I got a good deal, did I?
2. Should I let the seller know what the problem was (extended use of .22 short for target with carbon buildup).
3. Would I be likely to be able to make the muzzle look good with cold blue? Should I try?
Thanks for any input,
Mike
