doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com LC Smith 4E 20 gauge

I see something here that certainly would concern me if I was buying this to shoot. Notice the gap between the left side plate and the wood in the second picture. There may be an internal crack in the wood where the inletting is done at the head that is not apparent without disassembly or at least removal of the locks.
L. C. Smith stocks are on the delicate side to begin with and with a potential barrel issue I would recommend having the gun professionally examined before purchase.
Jim

Aside from the flat rib/concave standing breech top,,,the lettering doesn't look quite right, style wise.
The duplicated border cut on the flat top rib to match that on the bbl is different, plus it is missing it's outside single line cut.

I'd like to see a better look at the bbl matting itself.
The normally seen very fine, uniform dot matted LCS style isn't there
What you can see of approx 1/4 to 3/8" of it ahead of the gold bar looks hand applied, single point struck dots.
Perhaps an attempt to cover an area of matting struck off or damaged. But I'm only seeing a very small area....
A 'new' bbl from the factory would have had any 'repaired' matting would it?

The colors look too new in the pics,,especially the lock plate.
Any sign the engraving has been polished over,,even with a fine wire wheel to gain some brightness and not effect the feel of the cut.

The tiny main spring positioning screw poking through the rear area of the plate has that polished yesterday look.
The sear screw and the hammer axel both have some blue/grey color on them with a bit rubbed off. The axel has some full rotational strike marks to it's end. Not the type of wear marks that easily end up there once it's assembled. Especially on a gun w/o any wear to begin with.

Is that just a shadow around the upper edge of the lock plate/wood fit? Or is that a bad gap there.

Just some observations...and just from a couple of pics.
As always,,lots of looking and questions when a high dollar item is in play.

David
Not saying you're wrong, only that I've seen nothing yet that would indicate to me the rib area is not correct. As to the gun being re-barreled from a 16 to 20-bore; nothing like that has yet been documented to my knowledge and would only serve to make the gun more collectible if that were the case. But give us the serial number and we'll determine the original bore size quick fast and in a hurry, as pre-1913 16 and 20-bore Smith guns have their own serial number blocks. I would also suggest that ROMAC contact Jim Stubbendieck thru the LC Smith Website and pay the fee for a check of the records; there's not much detail in those shipping records but what is there (gauge and barrel length for instance)is invaluable on a high-dollar gun.

Let ad that, from what little can be gleaned from the above pics; the small portions of the rib matting ahead of the gold bar inlay appear to be original Hunter Arms rib matting. The area between the gold rib inlay and rib extension is hand engraved, as was the custom on all Smith gun grade 2 and up; and included the maker's name and address (same information was roll-stamped on lower grades). And since these inscriptions were hand engraved, all are unique. Sometimes the engraver cut a border around his inscription work, and sometimes he didn't (see the Grade 4 in the Houchins book); and sometimes the maker's name and address was engraved in a straight bordered line in this area of the rib, and the space on either side was either matted or engraved. Outside the Pigeon Grade, on the highest grade Smith guns (Grades 5 and higher), this rib area was nearly always engraved; and the maker's name and address was hand-engraved atop the barrels to include barrel steel type on the highest grades. So again, I'm not seeing anything odd in the rib area; and although there may be a problem there that escapes me, the Grade 4 was always a special order gun and no two are ever identical. In other areas, from what little I can see from the pics showing the opening lever position, it appears the opening lever is in/near the center position; and not well to the right of center as one would expect with a near mint gun. There is a visible gap between the wood and side plate on the left side; and a close examination of pic reveals an old hairline crack behind the lock plate. That crack could be the result of wood shrinkage; but appears to be oil stained, so I would speculate it developed from shooting and that the stock head is in need of repair. Again, absolutely must have more pics to evaluate this gun. Good pics of the stocks and checkering patterns will allow a determination of whether stocks may have been refinished; and I've already requested pics of the barrel flats, water table, etc. But this is an interesting gun, and I wish you the best with whatever decision you may make.

The No. 4 Featherweigh L.C. Smith in Houchins book has a concave rib as does the regular frame No. 4 in Brophy's book. While I certainly wouldn't make so bold as to say flat ribs don't exist, I thumbed through all the pictures of pre-1913 guns in Houchins and they all had concave ribs. In Brophy there were a couple I really couldn't tell.

The serial number is 64XX

and this is a picture of the stock and another of the top. Sorry I do not have more. I'm at work trying to earn a living LOL!

This gun would have shipped in 1911 and it's serial number is found in the 20-gauge serial number block; so the gun was, and apparently still remains as it was bored. The pad appears to be a Hawkins, which would have been an available option on Smith guns; although I don't know if the Hawkins pad was available in 191i. I defer that detail to someone else; Researcher perhaps(?), but it looks too new not to be a replacement or an after-market addition. Stock pics are not good enough for me to make any sort of assessment as to originality. And yes David, I know the 4E in John's book has a concave rib, as the flat rib feature on Smith guns is rare before the introduction Hunter's single sighting plane rib in 1938; but I'm not going to get hung up on the rib. I'll reserve my opinion on that feature pending pics of the entire barrel and barrel flats.

With all due respect,,that really looks like original matting?
Take a close look. At least that small area we can see looks done by hand with a single or double point tool and not too well either. Missed a few spots,,
No were near the uniformity of a die.

The address is hand cut, no arguement. No scroll or borders around it,,no problem w/that either

But one problem with it is that the 'engraver' couldn't decide what letter style, size & slant to choose from as they went along.
I've seen some so-so lettering on LCS bbls of hi-grade guns, but at least the were consistent.

The other is that the engraver cut the border that appears on the bbls,,on the top rib to match,,but forgot to include the single line in front of it. Looks like they measured with a dividers off the bbl to the outside line and never allowed for the single line border in the rib pattern cut.

Plus the look/cut of the bbl border does not match that of the top rib border.
A small issue that line is, but one an engraver doesn't forget if he/she is doing the work,,,all of the work.


Maybe I've seen more fakes than the average person.

Kutter
I'm assuming you are an engraver, and therefore the first to notice such minute details; which details I can't address other than to say that in my study of the L C Smith gun, I've seen my share of miscues and inconsistencies. As to the rib matting, it is impossible to determine exactly what it is we have there until such time as we see a pic of the rib/rib joint area. I've seen a few instances whereby a small area of engraving was placed ahead of the gold bar inlay, then machine matting from that point to the end of the rib; perhaps this is one of those instances? But as Smith gun rib matting is not nearly as pronounced as many other makers, I'll stick with my theory that what little we see is indeed standard machine matting; then, assuming we see good pics, either feast or eat crow afterwards. The Smith gun example we see here is not markedly unique; but allow me one final comment about pre-1913 Smith guns and I'll shut up. Anyone who has ever spent a lot of time studying pre-1913 Smith guns will tell you that it is not uncommon to find significant differences between guns of the same grade, find graded guns with engraving scenes markedly different from cataloged grade depiction; and other guns with no assigned grade, and engraving patterns outside any standard catalog grade format/description. A few such guns have been featured in the DGJ; and it is only the discovery of these unique Smith guns that keeps me interested in the "sport".

I agree with most of what you've posted. Nothing is gained by comparisons to catalog cuts, or even other guns. So many differences, many of them small.

It's just the two different 'hands' that have engraved the small amount that appears on this bbl,,and that matting,,that jumped out at me right off.

You're correct though,,more & better pics are needed.
Until then,,we speculate, question, guess & discuss. Part of the fun of it.
As you say, the 'sport'.