The L.C. Smith Collectors Association

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

L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by LCSCA on July 25, 2023, 6:20 pm

L.C. Smith, Maker, Syracuse guns
https://lcsca.clubexpress.com/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=43784&module_id=246333

1886 Magazine Ad

1886 John Lovell Arms Co. Catalog

About 1888 Lyman Cornelius Smith agreed to sell L.C. Smith, Maker of the Baker Gun company to John Hunter, Sr., who then began construction of a new factory in Fulton, New York. The "New L.C. Smith Double Cross-Bolted Hammerless Gun" using Alexander Brown's rotary locking bolt, lock mechanism, and safety had been introduced in 1886; the Hammer Gun in 1884.
Production of the Baker double and three-barrel guns ceased in 1888, while the L.C. Smith guns continued to be manufactured in Syracuse until completion of the Hunter Arms Co. factory.

Wyoming County Times, November 28, 1889
Syracuse, Nov. 20 – Lyman C. Smith has sold a controlling in the L.C. Smith gun works, of this city, manufacturers of hammerless guns, to John Hunter and his five sons, and Harry Comstock of Fulton, and the works will be moved to Fulton immediately. The new firm will be known as the Hunter & Comstock Arms company and will have the largest gun manufacturing plant in the United States.

Sandy Creek News, January 2, 1890
The Hunter & Comstock Arms company of Fulton, will hereafter be known as the Hunter Arms Company, the Hunters having bought Comstock’s interest. Comstock retains his rights in all patents taken out by him. The Hunters will make the L.C. Smith gun at their factory.

"Syracuse style" unfinished guns and parts were then shipped to the new factory in Fulton for completion, and were available until about 1892. These "transition guns" have the large convex ribs on the bottom of the receiver, squared lug, and compared to Fulton guns, finer checkering and a wider forend with a duck bill and vase shaped ebony tip.
https://members.boardhost.com/lcsmith/msg/1548110211.html

They usually had no markings on the top of the barrels, and could have Syracuse or Fulton engraving patterns.

The Hunter Arms Co. Makers, Fulton, N.Y. Quality No. 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 grades were continuations of the L.C. Smith Maker, Syracuse guns and they were first sold as such in 1890; the A2 & A1 in 1891; one Monogram was made in 1892; the first Pigeon in 1893; and the A3 and Quality No. O in 1894.

David Williamson's SYRACUSE AND FULTON COMPARISONS and archived threads
https://members.boardhost.com/lcsmith/msg/archive/1247858395.html
https://members.boardhost.com/lcsmith/msg/archive/1260285243.html
https://members.boardhost.com/lcsmith/msg/archive/1273323191.html
https://members.boardhost.com/lcsmith/msg/archive/1437678174.html
https://members.boardhost.com/lcsmith/msg/archive/1219365218.html
(New posts can not be added to the threads)

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on July 25, 2023, 7:11 pm, in reply to "L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Thankyou for that. How did the extractors work for the Syracuse guns? This late 1891 gun has a rotary shaped devise in the barrel lug to operate them, with matching cuts in the water table (the first one I've ever observed closely).

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on July 25, 2023, 7:26 pm, in reply to "L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

The bottom is clearly all Fulton...

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on July 25, 2023, 7:33 pm, in reply to "L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Do the balls on this gun seem more rounded than later contemporaries...

and..the screw (pin?) securing the lockplates is rounded, not flat.

roller joint check system is the best

Posted by Jent P Mitchell III on July 31, 2023, 7:32 pm, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

This is the best shell extractor system that L C Smith guns ever used ..... after removing the fired shells you push the fresh shells all the way into the chambers ..... ALL THE WAY ! ..... so that the shells do not hang or catch on the firing pins .... posted by Jent.

Re: roller joint check system is the best

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on August 1, 2023, 8:47 am, in reply to "roller joint check system is the best"

I noticed that when using it at the range the other day. I was concerned that it might be a problem of some sort. Now I know better, thankyou for that!

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on August 1, 2023, 8:50 am, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Better picture.

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on August 1, 2023, 8:54 am, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Is this Fulton or Syracuse?

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Drew Hause on August 1, 2023, 10:26 am, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Stephen Sipprell on August 1, 2023, 2:31 pm, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Hi Drew,
I have several (4) LC Smith’s with that buttplate, and all are from January 1890 thru January1894, and all are believed to be original buttplates based on their condition, and the condition of the buttstock underneath them.

SN30036 (DOM January 1890)
SN33200 (DOM May 1891)
SN873 (DOM 19 Dec 1893)
SN37382 (DOM January1894)

It’s my hypothesis, along with others on this forum, that the Hunter Brothers purchased these buttplates from a supplier in support of standing up the new factory in Fulton around 1890, as the prior Syracuse NY buttplates were no longer appropriate for guns made in Fulton. (I also believe that the standard ribbed buttplate didn’t come into common use until late 1894, early 1895.)

I would suggest that we study more original examples from the 1890 to 1894 time period to build a larger body of evidence to support a hypothesis.

Lloyd, there is a VERY high probability the buttplate is original to your gun. So I would never recommend replacing it.

Thanks,
Stephen

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd Mckissick on August 1, 2023, 7:32 pm, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Mr. Sipprell:

Thankyou so-much for that remarkable bit of information. Your assertion makes perfect sense to me. I'll consider it an "original" piece now until I hear otherwise (I wasn't planning on changing it anyway).

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on August 2, 2023, 4:11 pm, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

1891 Quality 1

1890 Quality 1

I've done this before elsewhere, but this version is a bit more representative (better photo-angle on the '91). The '90 photo was shamelessly snipped from a current William Larkin Moore advert. The frame is badly cracked & the forend is a replacement on the '90 gun (& it doesn't fit very well) the gun is also advertised as an "O" grade). Big difference here is the square barrel lug on the '90 versus the rounded one on the '91. I'd also thought the action was wider and that the breech-balls were different on the '91 but...don't think so now. Clearly a different bar-shape on the bottom of the action (rounder & fuller) and of-course, the different tubes (laminated steel versus twist). Identical perimeter-line engraving though.

Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison

Posted by Lloyd McKissick on August 2, 2023, 4:18 pm, in reply to "Re: L.C. Smith, Syracuse & Hunter Arms, Fulton Comparison"

Just noticed that the trigger-guard sits much further back on the '91 gun, so...clearly different frame geometry as well. Things evolved quickly in Fulton, eh?

« Back to index

887

[ The L.C. Smith Collectors Association ]