Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Dismissive Gunsmith - Now What?

505markf
Thanks to help from forum members earlier this week, I identified a hand-me-down revolver as an Iver Johnson, .38 S&W, top-break revolver manufactured in 1913. The gun is in excellent condition - at least in terms of appearance. I'm an experienced gun owner but wanted the firearms checked out before I attempted to fire it.

I took the gun to a gunsmith in today to have the gun checked out. I unwrapped it and showed it to him and told him I wanted to have the gun checked out to determine if it was safe to fire. He took one glance at it, while it was still in my hands, and said, "No. Never shoot it. The metal is too weak. Just consider it a pretty wall hanger." When I tried to get more info regarding this, he got even more dismissive and treated me like I was a moron.

Does anyone have any idea what was up? Do people just look at an old firearm and say it's unsafe? I own several Mauser rifles (German and Swedish) older than the revolver and I have personally shot several handguns about as old (a British Webley and a US .45 ACP revolver).

Is he right to blankely state it's unsafe based upon manufacturer and age of the piece? Frankly, at this point I don't know what to do. I certainly don't want to have a gun blow up in my hand. I will probably try to find another gunsmith, but the guy I took it too was supposed to be the best in town.

Thoughts and opinion are welcome - I'm not asking anyone to say the gun is safe, so no worries there - I'm just wondering if this is an "age" bias kind of thing. I have had similar opinions (not very well informed) from people regarding my Swedish Mauser, who see the date and on the receiver and promptly tell me it is not a safe rifle to fire.

Your input and experience most welcome. Thanks!

Mark
0

Comments

10 comments

Date Votes
  • calrugerfan
    I'm guessing that the liability of saying anything other than "Don't shoot it" is more risk that they're willing to take.
    0
  • beantownshootah
    Obviously the gun was OK to shoot SOMETHING once upon a time.

    It probably still is, but there is absolutely ZERO upside to this gunsmith telling that its OK to shoot this 100 year old gun of uncertain provenance.

    At best, why would he want to tell you its OK then have it blow up and get sued by you? How unhappy would you be if the gun were to blow up while he was test firing it? Why should he take THAT chance?

    Ultimately, the only way to know if its safe to fire is to test fire it. (And even then there are no guarantees).

    So you have two choices:

    a. Don't shoot the gun.
    b. Locate or produce some low-velocity .38SW loads and test fire it yourself. Vise and long string is a poor mans' way to do it.

    Your call.
    0
  • perry shooter
    we have a member here that I would TRUST He probably knows more about these guns then anyone alive has written books about H&R and Iver Johnson he has good information and advice his name is b.goforth go to the members list and send him an email or open another topic here on forum With subject "HELP b.goforth."
    0
  • Hawk Carse
    Kind of a catch-22.

    Internet Expert: You should take that old/second hand/surplus gun to a gunsmith to be sure it is safe to fire.

    Gunsmith: (I don't even know what that thing is.) No, that gun is not usable.


    My friends and I were young and poor and depended heavily on the secondary market. I don't know anybody who got blown up by an obsolete gun. But that was 30+ years ago. We are more cautious now.
    0
  • bama55
    He probably didn't want to check it. "Waste" of his time to him.
    I know a few like that.
    0
  • ruger41
    He's possibly like some auto mechanics out there today who won't work on cars that they can't plug a line into with a scanner. I've come across tons of these gunsmiths who will not work on anything unless it has the name S&W, Glock, SIG, Colt etc. If it's a low buck gun or one they are unsure of how to work on they will just tell you to put it in the safe. Having said that it is an older gun and metal can fatigue. Many of the older revolvers didn't get heat treated cylinders until the very late teen's & 1920's so just be cautious not to hot rod it. The .38 S&W is loaded on the light side anyways. Like bean said put the gun in some sort of vise(doubt a Ransom Rest has inserts for this gun but ya never know) wrap it up in something so you don't mar it--tie a long string and get behind a tree--pull the trigger and you will know if it's safe to shoot.
    0
  • 45er
    505markf,
    A dilemma, to be sure, but interesting-- got me to wondering just how does a competent, (and willing), 'smith go about determing the shootability safety of a firearm before live firing? Your top-break especially, since it is your post here.
    Is there a standard check list, perhaps?
    Any experienced & knowledgable 'smiths out there care to give answer?

    45er
    0
  • tsr1965
    There is a difference between a "GUNSMITH", and a gun seller/trader. The gunsmith has actual training, and/or hands on experience.

    I suspect that the gunsmith who you took this too, has no acxtual experience, other than cleaning, or mounting a scope, and most likely does not excell at that.

    I would look and ask around for a notable, and reputable gunsmith.

    Hawk Carse,

    Just to let you in on a little secret, thise Iver Johnson, and H&R revolver's were not second rate, or surplus in their day. They were just as Good as S&W, and were basically the only main stream competition S&W had at the time, as Ruger was not around yet.

    Best
    0
  • sandwarrior
    505markf,

    What the gunsmith probably doesn't want to do is get into a whole intense big deal with the gun and still have a liability problem. Having a bit of metalurgy background in my field, I can tell you that two pieces of steel that look pretty much the same can be very different in strength. Meaning you can't just look at something and know if it's good or bad no matter how much training you had. It would take something that can look into the metal to 'see' what defect may lie in in it. Such as eddy-current or magna-fluxing. Even possibly an x-ray. But those get expensive. A dye/pen test may show something on the surface that may be a weakness but won't help with stresses.

    Having been made in 1913, and it being an Iver Johnson, I would say it's probably a good gun. Not something I would load hot though like a 1960's made Colt or S&W. The only way to tell is to shoot it from a vise with a load you would normally use in it. If it doesn't show any distress after running your loads through it I would say it's safe. Pretty much like your Mausers. They were built tough as nails to fight wars with. And for the most part the vast majority are all strong. But there are a few out there made at critical times in a country's bid to win or lose a fight that the quality may have slipped. As mentioned in my first paragraph, unless the gunsmith knows of a time frame or specific lot or model that these were a problem then I would assume it was good. Just try it from a safe distance then shoot it or not depending on how you trust it.
    0
  • Hawk Carse
    I didn't say H&R and IJ were second rate.
    They may have been BETTER than the contemporary S&Ws in some ways.
    A collector once told me that he classed the S&W DA .38 and .32 hammer guns in with the Colt Lightning, complicated and delicate.
    I know a friend has a DA .38 in bits in a cigar box with a broken part that cannot be replaced because so many others like it broke that all the spares and parted out guns have been used up.
    The hammerless S&Ws seem to be a different matter, they hold up better.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity