doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com L C Smith. Field Grade.

James, I didn't say that Dave's comments toward Stan (or Ted) were appropriate. I even chided him for not taking long to get down to rolling in the dirt with the rest of us heathens. I see a lot of silly statements here. Sometimes I comment, and more often, I just roll my eyes.

But I still think Dave's excessive pride in his L.C. Smith guns is small potatoes compared to the Leftist Liberal Socialist anti-gun rhetoric that comes from guys like King Brown or Ed Good. Some minor insults to Stan or Ted isn't going to hurt either of them. They obviously both know how to hit back, and most everyone here knows they both know their shit. And both are humble enough to know that none of us knows all there is to know about doubles. Lord knows Ted has sparred with the best of them and survived.

But maybe Dave should tone it down just a bit. The guys he's knocking, including yourself, are pretty knowledgeable when it comes to doubles. I posted my own comments about the well known engineering problems with L.C. Smith's, and even Bill Brophy recognized they weren't perfect. I don't feel very hurt if Dave rejects what I know and see. I've also encouraged him to take a good look at the incredible work of Dewey Vicknair before passing judgement on him. And if he sings the praises of L.C. Smith's too much, he may end up increasing demand for them and pricing himself out of the market.

I think I'll reserve my energies and anger toward those who do actual damage to "our fraternity" by undermining our Constitutional Right to own firearms, via their support for anti-gunners, and those who engage in serial dishonesty by tarring Conservatives as racists, haters, greedy, misogynists, etc. Myself, I can't believe that Dave's comments get more of a rise from some here than the crap and outright lies that comes from some of our F.A.G.'s, FUDD's, and anti-gun Trolls.

They (the F.A.G.'s, FUDD's, and anti-gun Trolls) are beneath contempt, as are wormy little spineless a$$holes who would post something like this:

I was wondering who this guy was and now that I see that dressed up Lefever now I know. Haha. He went by Pine Creek Dave on the old Lefever Forum when he was trying to convince everyone that thing was a $1,000 grade Ithaca, or something like that.
Or that the gun was some result of a connection between LC smith and Lefever. ????? Looney.

Take all that this guy says with the smallest grain of salt. And dont bother to educate him, you won�t get anywhere.

RGD, too bad you haven't actually read what I wrote. Not much in there that is insulting. Just an honest appraisal of the perceived tone of your posts to date and an opinion that you won't win any friends or converts that way. If you find that insulting perhaps you should take a good look in the mirror and reconsider your approach.

While at the same time, you've insulted both Ted and Stan for not knowing enough. Read that again Dave....the person doing the insulting has not been Stan or me...it's been you.

Now, as Keith rightly points out, neither Stan nor Ted need me to come to their defense....they are both well able to should they choose to. I just choose to because I like them both and because what you have said is silly.

Now, you may not be a silly man....I have no idea....but your comments here touting the superiority of Elsies to all other guns and your chosen smiths over all other smiths and while doing so denigrating those who disagree with you....well those are silly comments.

Agreed, silly. But consistent with his repertoire over the last couple decades. I repeat ........hardheaded.

SRH

Beans has been a straight up online goof for 20+ years now. I remember years ago on the ssmbbs when he was trying to �educate� everyone about how the new Italian made LC Smith was an absolute engineering marvel Haha. Listen Beans, the verdict has been out for YEARS....sweet Elsie�s just aren�t the engineering marvel you wish they were. I personally know a couple of world renown gunmakers, they won�t let an Elsie in the shop. I will say something about Freddie Bruner though.....he is/was a fantastic gunsmith, good on him for taking care of Elsie�s for so many years. He did a good job with them and he kept a lot of them running right. He repaired my Elsie�s like a true pro. I�ll say the same for Walt Schissel, he was a fun guy to talk with and learn from. They were Elsie guys and we�re also infinitely more enjoyable to talk guns with than you have ever been. Let�s talk about dog training now. Just kidding.

Just for the record the Lefever Arms Co guns are box locks. If you search my posts from the day I came on board here you will not find be saying otherwise. As to their compensations the Doll's head has no adjustments or built in wear compensation at all. Reason, it is un-needed.

The one thing the Lefever & L C Smith has in common is they are both Top Bolted only.

On the Lefever the hold down bolt is wedge shaped so self compensating with the lever moving left as it wears. This on guns built from around 1890 on to the end. Wear in the hinge can be compensated by turning in the ball hinge pin which fits a socket in the barrel lug. This should only be done to the extent of hinge wear & "Should Not" be used to compensate for bolt wear to bring the lever back to center. As it wears to the Left it should remain to the left until such time as a new bolt needs to be fitted.

The Brown rotary bolt is Self Compensating by being on a taper in Two directions. This requires absolute precise fit to two wear planes simultaneously & unless they wear in absolutely the same then they will no longer "Fit" in both directions. As already noted the rotary bolt is well known for being a "Self-Opener" even when you don't move the lever to withdraw the bolt. In short it is simply not all its cracked up to be.

Several years ago right here on this board as a result of comments made concerning the rotary bolt a number of owners of guns with them, Smiths, NID's & Foxes did a smoke test on their fit. Not a Single one of them found the secondary function of the bolt making contact, thus they were only doing ""Half" their intended duty as envisioned by Brown. As such they were no better, or worse, than the simple cross wedge bolt of a Baker or Stevens.

"IF" anyone desires to discuss any of this further we can start a new thread on it. Note I am not an engineer but have dealt with mechanical things for a large portion of my 80 years on this old Earth. 35+ years of that has been as a machinist, culminating as a Machinist Model-Maker.

RGD, I don't Snow as easily as some because if I don't know a bit about whereof I speak I keep my Mouth Shut.

Well that escalated quickly.

Truth be told, Im impressed Dave B. made it this many posts before popping. As was mentioned above, he supernova'd on the Lefever forum after a grand total of 8 posts. Hung up his spikes and walked off the field.

I sorta feel bad for him because he has a common interest and clearly likes to get out and hunt with his dogs.

But he has that lethal cocktail of small facts and large ego that always seems to trip him up.

You just cant make up fake stuff on focused forums. And yet, we've been regalled with stories of 1,000 Grade Lefevers (a porch whittled Ithaca Nitro), not to mention an entire SET of "silver breech" Smiths, as I recall. A gift from John Hunter!

The bottom line is he just would rather SOUND like an expert...than put the time in to get real expertise.

Or at a minimum...to get his facts straight.

DAVE i wish you could just chime in without feeling the need to offer imaginary stuff. Because people know better, and then when they call it out, that's what starts the cycle of name calling again.

Good grief, you tried to tell the entire Lefever forum that they ALL didnt know what they were talking about.

I wonder if you read an article on heart surgery...if you would then attend a heart surgeons convention and start telling everyone they didnt know what they were talking about?

Take a breath. Be nice. Dont assume you are always a leading light of knowledge. Read through thus forum...there is a lot of good info.

Seek first to understand...then to be understood.

- NDG

Well said Nudge, I don't believe it could have been said any better. As I post this time I note this will be the 47th post on this thread. It has however been viewed in excess of 1150 times, so many read who do not post. Very often I post for the benefit of those viewers with the absolute certainty I will not Sway the opinion of the one I am replying to.

In this case I have no idea at all that I will sway RGD's opinion on any thing, but perhaps some lurker out there will be persuaded not to rush out & buy a Smith solely on his bloated opinion of it as the "Best Gun in the World".

My favorite the Lefever is not the Best in the World either, but it is way & above a Smith. From the Top on down all things of a mechanical nature have compromises in their design. One simply has to choose which best fits their ideas & their needs.

I will say that I firmly believe that "Mass Production" was introduced in the US. This applied not only to guns but many other products as well. This had its pluses & minuses but it did make many items affordable to the common people which they could not otherwise have afforded. For this I am thankful.

Parts being "Made to Gauge" was I believe first introduced in the military arsenals for the rifled muskets prior to the War Between the States. It was quickly picked up by other industries as well, an early field to adopt this system was the Sewing Machine industry which began in the 1850's.

PS; while I was making this last post views jumped from 1155 to 1237, as I said many out there who only read.

He likes to talk up his own version of history with absolutely nothing to back it up.

As someone previously said, I tend to read and not post unless I'm comfortable with the subject. In this case i must emphasize that I'm speaking strictly from first-hand experience.
Like RGD, I own several pre-'13 Elsies and all get use in the field and range and in the 20 years I've been collecting them have never had a failure due to the so-called deficiencies in design. In fact I've only had two that required a QUALIFIED 'smiths attention--- a 3E single trigger gun that someone monkeyed with the trigger, and a Pigeon E that the top rib became loose that Gunter Pfrommer has recently properly relaid. My personal preferences for pre-'13 Smiths is twofold--- better quality of wood and nicer engraving. In selecting a gun for potential purchase I pay particular attention to any hint of cracks behind the locks and darkening of the wood at the head of the stock--a sign of oil soaking from improper storage. After all the years I've been collecting pre-'13 Smiths none of my guns show any sign of potential cracks,because of better wood, better storage, and a subtle difference in frame design between pre and post '13 guns.
One must remember that the youngest of my "litter" is 106 years old, and all have served me well, even though they were probably used with improper length and high pressure shells by previous owners--- a testament to the quality of the gun. I have owned several of the other guns mentioned in this thread, and all have their deficiencies but I won't stray from the original subject-- just offering my personal experience.