The L.C. Smith Collectors Association

The L.C. Smith Collectors Association
[ The L.C. Smith Collectors Association ]

Odd LC Smith

Posted by Rich Goss on March 13, 2021, 1:49 pm

Greetings,

New to the group and in possession of several LC Smith SXS guns. Lucky me! I am having difficulty identifying one gun and am hoping for help from anyone with the time & inclination...

The gun is probably a model #2 from 1893-1913. I have 2 sets of barrels and the serial #369XX. There is a faint stamp of a D on what appears to be Damascus barrels. The other set is stamped with a 2 and with Hunter Arms. The crown stamp is partially visible. A D and the #2 are also stamped on this set of barrels.

What is confusing is that there are no identifying marks other than the serial # on the stock, etc. The engraving is a very simple nautilus style. LC Smith appears to be hand engraved... Photos to follow... Thanks in advance, R

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Rich Goss on March 13, 2021, 2:03 pm, in reply to "Odd LC Smith"

Here are some photos...

upload image

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Drew Hause on March 13, 2021, 2:31 pm, in reply to "Odd LC Smith"

The gun dates to about 1893 Rich and has the early No. 2 engraving pattern. Crown steel was not available for the No. 2 until about 1898, but could possibly have been special order prior to then.
A Research Letter would confirm the DOM and might include the date when the 2nd barrel set was finished
https://lcsca.clubexpress.com/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=43784&module_id=245742

two barrels not at all the same

Posted by Jent P Mitchell III on March 13, 2021, 7:08 pm, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Something is very very very wrong with this 2 barrel set L C Smith...... One of the barrel sets is a ROLLER JOINT CHECK set of barrels and the other is not ???? I cannot see how that would work..... Please post more pictures of the breech ends of the barrels and the inside of the frame of this LCS ...... posted by Jent on March 13th of 2021.

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Tom Archer on March 13, 2021, 11:49 pm, in reply to "Odd LC Smith"

If Mr. Goss were to order a research letter, and I encourage him to do so, he will find that this gun was originally shipped as a Grade 2 manual extractor gun with one barrel. At some point after Crown Steel became an option for a Grade 2 gun and the roll check had been dropped from production, the gun was returned to Hunter and a second set of barrels were fitted; and that set appropriately Grade stamped to the gun. The roll check was not installed on the second barrel set because it was not necessary; the fore iron was all that was required to stop forward rotation of the barrels.

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Rich Goss on March 16, 2021, 12:46 pm, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Thank you to all who assisted! I gathered that the second set of barrels would probably have been an addition to the gun and not original. I was not certain that it would have been possible to get an additional barrel with a matching serial number. will get on the request for a letter. What I found particularly interesting is that the fore grips for the barrels were not the same shape, size or design. They also have a different method of operation. Now, if I could only recall how this gun came to be in my possession! I believe it was purchased from an estate in CA back in the late 1970's or early 1980's.... I am looking for a receipt... Thank you, again to all who assisted!

Re: two barrels not at all the same

Posted by Rich Goss on March 16, 2021, 12:51 pm, in reply to "two barrels not at all the same"

Greetings,

I cannot explain this disparity. Both barrels appear to function perfectly with the gun. Naturally, I have not fired the gun in years as it is exceptionally difficult to find an appropriate load in CA. I have some very old lead shells, but am prohibited from shooting them in most places, so the gun sits idle! I have a feeling that one set is a replacement for the original barrel, but the fore grips are very different and function differently! The serial numbers are the same... I will post mire photos shortly...

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Tom Archer on March 16, 2021, 5:51 pm, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Without seeing comparison pics of the forearms, this is what I believe will account for the differences. The original Damascus barrels were fitted with Hunter's Type I auto-ejector mechanism; and the later replacement steel barrel set with Hunter's Type II auto-ejector mechanism. Forearms from Type I and Type II auto ejector guns are mechanically different, but post comparison pics and we can advise you if my theory is indeed correct. In the interim, consider coming to the Southern Side x Side/LC Smith vs. Parker Challenge; there you can shoot lead loaded shot shells till your body can't take any more. This is a great event and the best fun you'll ever experience at a vintage shooting event.

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Rich Goss on March 16, 2021, 9:50 pm, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Thank you for the info... Here are some photos. Please advise if they are insufficient. I'm happy to try to take better photos. As for the shoot, can I bring my Parker, too? ;-) Sounds like a ton of fun. I am not able to shoot for a couple of months, but I'll keep my eyes open for dates. Thanks again, Rich

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Tom Archer on March 16, 2021, 11:26 pm, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Well Rich, I guessed wrongly as your gun is not an auto-ejector gun as surmised; but with the pix I can now correctly answer your question. When your manual extractor gun was originally shipped in 1898(?), extractor model guns were fitted with a snap on/off fore end fastener and is easily identified as a manual extractor gun by the bakelite dogs head fore arm insert; whereas auto-ejector guns from the same period featured a metal fore end escutcheon with a fore end roll release. When grade designations changed in 1913 all graded Smith guns featured a fore end with a metal escutcheon and roll release; it was a more secure fore end fastener. Based on the shape of your fore arm escutcheon, that second set of barrels would have been fitted at the factory during the 1930's, as it was during that period that the shape of the metal escutcheon was changed from what is termed the "banjo" escutcheon to a much simpler oval shape. Those barrels and fore arm, because the work was done by Hunter Arms, were serial numbered to the original frame; and the "2" stamp seen on the fore iron and the fore iron hanger lug on the barrels denote that barrel set as being the secondary set. The "2" stamp on the secondary barrel set at the serial number denotes gun grade, or Grade 2 as that is the correct pre-13 grade designation of your gun. The reason your secondary barrel set is fitted with the reinforced fore iron fastener and escutcheon is because a Grade 2 gun is considered a higher grade gun, and that feature had become standard on all Smith guns Graded Ideal and higher with the 1913 grade designation changes.
And yes you can certainly bring your Parker along with your Smith; but your Parker, unless altered, will have chambers shorter than 2 3/4". Your Smith came standard with 2 3/4" chambers and will be perfectly safe to shoot using your Crown Steel barrels. The event will be held April 23-25, but many attendees come early because the shooting and fellowship will begin on the 22nd. Hope to see you there!

the firing pin bushings need to be trued up

Posted by Jent P Mitchell III on March 16, 2021, 11:37 pm, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Hello Rich, That is a great old L C Smith. The firing pin bushings need to be trued up on the face of your frame. There are only a few gunsmiths that I would trust to do that work. You most likely will need new firing pins and new bushings if you want to actually shoot this L C Smith. I still cannot understand how the newer barrels without the roller check joint could work. posted by Jent on March 17 of 2021.

Re: the firing pin bushings need to be trued up

Posted by Tom Archer on March 17, 2021, 8:36 am, in reply to "the firing pin bushings need to be trued up"

Rich: Whether Jent understands how the newer barrels can work on an early frame without those barrels having the roller check joint is immaterial; the fact is that they do, otherwise the repair shop at the Hunter Arms factory would not have installed them as they did. It's my understanding, based on personal research, that the roller joint check feature was eliminated as unnecessary after it was determined the fore iron was sufficient to stop forward rotation of the barrels. In the 2021 summer issue of the DGJ there will be a story featuring a set of early roller joint check barrels whereby Hunter's repair shop removed the roller device, plugged the hole, then reconfigured those barrels to auto ejector; so it's not like this operation hadn't already been perfected. As to your firing pin bushings, they've been turned/removed and were not aligned flush with the breech face when re-installed. Only a gun smith inspection can say whether your firing pins need replacement; but they don't appear to be flattened or broken, so they are likely OK. You can take a couple of primed empty cases and "test fire" your gun. Doing so will tell you 1) whether the gun will close properly with the bushings protruding above the breech face, and 2) if firing pins are correctly denting shell primers. If so, your gun would shoot; but you do need to correct the bushing issues, as the metal composing those bushings is sometimes very brittle and will crack; and once cracked become much more difficult to remove and replace. By the way, the purpose of those bushings was to allow removal of firing pins without having to disassemble the gun; so it was a good feature. Yours is a very interesting gun, and we wish you the best.

OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand

Posted by Jent P Mitchell III on March 17, 2021, 10:49 am, in reply to "Re: the firing pin bushings need to be trued up"

The second set of LCS barrels added to this older LCS Roller Check Joint gun work like this. I never would have thought of this myself. The cocking rods that cock the hammers when the gun is opened ALSO stop the downward rotation of the barrels. Inside the metal work of the second set of barrels forend is the figure 8 looking cut out where the cocking rods are actuated. After you fire this type of LCS the tips of the cocking rods are in the down position. When you open the gun the tips of the cocking rods are raised up which cocks the hammers. The cocking rods and hammers and leaf springs have a little room for over travel after the hammers are cocked. Now the tips of the cocking rods are in the top or up position against the metal of the forend and those tips, inside the forend, stop the rotation of the barrels. I am sure glad that I know some smart gunsmiths that can explain these things to me. By the way my gunsmith friend commented that the original RCJ was and is a much much better system for two big reasons. I will not get into those here and now. Good Shooting To You All, Jent ...... posted on March 17th of 2021.

Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand

Posted by Rich Goss on March 17, 2021, 12:35 pm, in reply to "OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand"

Thank you all for the great information! It has been extraordinarily helpful. For the moment, I will have to delay the search for a good gunsmith, but I truly appreciate all your help. I will fire both of my shotguns and a 28 gauge my father owned soon! As I am in California, I might not make the shoot in SC this ear, but it sounds like a ton of fun. How great to be able to put these guns through their paces. I think the Damascus barrels will stay home!

Thank you again for all your help. If I learn anything more, I'll post directly, Rich

Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand

Posted by Tom Archer on March 17, 2021, 3:16 pm, in reply to "OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand"

Some of this stuff is probably confusing to the novice, so in an effort to assist understanding this "never to be a gunsmith" grabbed a couple of Smiths from my menagerie and made a few pics. The fore arm on the left is from a late vintage pre-1913 frame which had been modified to accept a very early vintage set of barrels with the roll joint check; and the second forearm is from a 1925 vintage Ideal Grade with the roll-release forearm fastener. The first pic shows the checkered side of the fore arm. The later vintage forearm features the banjo style roll release; and even though this is a manual extractor gun, it features the roll release device because it is a GRADED gun. The forearm on the left is also from a manual extractor gun (a Grade 1) but is a gun crafted in Hunter's repair shop around a very early barrel set equipped with the roll joint check; and which roll check feature was retained. Note that this forearm has no escutcheon, nor does is feature the decorative dogs head insert standard on all pre-1913 graded manual extractor guns of Grade 2 and higher.

The second photo is of the underside of each forearm. Note that the later vintage forearm on the right has an extractor protruding above the base of the iron. This device raises the shell extractor when the gun is opened so shells can be removed. The forearm on the left does not have this feature because one of the two functions of the joint roll check is to raise the extractor for shell removal.

The last photo is a comparison of the inside knuckle area of the two fore irons. The later fore iron shows the hollowed out area Jent referred to as a "figure eight"; this milled area allows for rotational movement of the cocking rods. You will also see a pin just below dead center of the iron. This pin is depressed by the knuckle of the frame upon opening and activates the previously noted shell extractor. The fore iron on the left is void of this machining as it is not necessary given that the joint roll check raises the shell extractor.

I'm not sure of any reasons why the roll check joint was an advantage over the later cocking design; but if the joint roll gets out of position, barrels can be very aggravating to reattach. Also, should someone slam the barrels open and break the "ears" off the roll, the shooter is presented with a major problem. I suspect the roll joint check feature was eliminated 1) as a cost saving feature, and 2) it didn't allow for the installation of auto ejectors. Col Brophy had this to say about the joint check "Although a patented feature of the LC Smith shotgun, it is my personal observation that the rotational movement of the barrels on early Smith guns is first stopped by the cocking rods and forend iron"; and further "If the patent claim was valid, the feature would surely have been retained". Hope this helps some.

Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand

Posted by Tom Archer on March 17, 2021, 3:18 pm, in reply to "Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand"

Somehow I failed to post the third photo

Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand

Posted by David Williamson on March 17, 2021, 3:54 pm, in reply to "Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand"

That's all true but the joint check guns open so nicely and is much easier to extract shells as they open farther.

notice how much smaller the bearing surface is

Posted by Jent P Mitchell III on March 18, 2021, 12:42 pm, in reply to "Re: OK so I found a smart friend of mine who helped me understand"

Thank You Tom Archer for posting these pictures of the older RCJ forend and the newer type of LCS forend...... This picture clearly shows one of the disadvantages of the newer type LCS forend...... Notice how little bearing surface there is on the newer forend iron compared to the older forend iron.... I do not know about cost savings being a reason for LCS to change the design...... LCS got rid of milling the frame for the RCJ but now has to mill out the figure 8 in the forend iron ...... but LCS got rid of the actual roller too so that most likely saved money overall ..... I prefer RCJ guns but I like them all ..... Good Shooting To You All, Jent .... posted March 18 of 2021.

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Steve Arnett on March 19, 2021, 9:31 am, in reply to "Odd LC Smith"

Lots of interesting comments about the 2nd set of barrels. A couple of things I noticed from the original photos. The wood at the head of the stock looks like it needs attention. I suggest a thorough examination by a qualified double gun 'smith BEFORE shooting this gun with either set of barrels.
Another item I noticed is that the #2 barrels have the reinforced forend lug. This feature is often associated with Long Range and Wildfowl models, but I understand it was an available option on any grade after it was introduced. Th Not sure when that was, but I expect it was well into the 1920's.
As to the extractor function, I like the joint check guns, too. They open farther, as David Williamson noted. I didn't see anyone comment on cocking function for the joint check barrels on hammerless guns. Don't they have the "figure 8" cutout in the forend iron, too? The joint check doesn't have a cocking function, does it? The joint check forend photo posted by Tom Archer appears to be from a Hammer gun. At any rate, the later style barrels/extractors can evidently be fitted as long as the corresponding forend is used with the spur to operate the extractor pushrod.

Re: Odd LC Smith

Posted by Tom Archer on March 19, 2021, 11:05 am, in reply to "Re: Odd LC Smith"

Steve - Based on "playing" around with my old 10-bore (and I double checked prior to my earlier posts), the roll type joint check serves two functions. The first is to stop forward movement (or drop) of the barrels on opening; and the second is to raise the shell extractor. It has nothing to do with cocking hammers. The fore end pics I posted above are from a hammerless 10-bore. The barrels from this gun were salvaged form an 1888-89 vintage Syracuse era Quality 2 hammerless gun, then used to create a Grade 1 hammerless gun sometime after Hunter Arms purchased the company. In this instance the repair shop elected to retain the roll type joint check and modified the new Grade 1 frame to accommodate same. As to why it wasn't necessary to mill the "figure eight" in the fore iron on this conversion I've no idea; I assume it was because it wasn't necessary, but maybe David can answer that question. By the way this unique gun was recently featured in the LC Journal if you wish to review that article; but this is not the only repair shop conversion of which I'm aware. In the summer issue of the DGJ they'll be a story of a unique Grade 2E single trigger 10-bore gun that began life as a Syracuse era C Grade hammer gun, and which barrel set originally featured the roll joint check. In the conversion that device was removed from those barrels, the hole plugged, and the lug modified to accept split ejector stems. Readers should find that gun and its story very interesting. Bottom line; Hunter's repair shop was capable of performing unique and amazing work, as we've seen with our subject gun above, and I suspect there are many more amazing discoveries yet to be made.

« Back to index

1677

[ The L.C. Smith Collectors Association ]