[1saxman]

They had to develop hardened slides because the failure rate on the earlier ones was a maintenance headache. I don't know where you might find that on official paper but it's so obvious that it may be one of those things that nobody bothered to record. I mean they had been struggling with the problem for nearly 40 years before the improved science resulting from WWII allowed them to finally develop the hard slide.
What we know is, slides prior to the hard slide tend to crack, which is why we advise not to shoot valuable pistols. All those many thousands of U.S. pistols with replacement slides is the proof.

 

[1saxman]

Until today, the best information on my 1947 Government Model was that the slide was not hardened.

It's nice to know that it is. I want to be able to shoot it maybe once a year.

Thanks for the info.

What DSK said, plus I don't think the hard slide was seen on a Gov Model until about 1950. This is the roll mark on the first ones, and this one is a 1953. I know the hard slide was used earlier than that. There are some beautiful '47s and '48s in this forum and you can find them with a search, then you can compare slides and see what you think.

 

[1saxman]

Your slide looks as-expected for a '47. I agree it might be a hard slide but I think the key is to determine for sure if it has a hardened plug in the breech face which the hard slide did not need. As far as shooting, one short session a year is not going to hurt it, but if you do not know for sure the strength or round count on the existing recoil spring, you should replace it with a new 16 lb spring.

 

[1saxman]

The pictures aren't good enough to tell much. Certain aspects look like a refinish that didn't go well. Based on what I can see I'd expect to pay $950 for it.

 

[1saxman]

'it was determined to be due to the hardened slide'

It was suggested that it could be the hard slide that accounted for weak markings on the post-war Colts - not 'determined'. I just can't tell about the pistol. It looks strange to me regarding the polish and bluing, but by all means don't take that to the bank.

 

[1saxman]

When I bought it in May, everybody on this site said it was.

Don't forget -- as a 1947 it is blued with polished flats. The finish changed in the 1946 war-to-civilian transition.

It is, it ain't, It is, it ain't!!
One poster quotes Clawson, and the next says that's wrong.
I'm starting to wonder if I'm asking in the right place.

Well, at least the 'pony' and the roll mark are nice and crisp! Not weak at all. I have an original MK IV Series '70 with very low miles and the pony and roll mark are almost polished off! But the thing is a pinpoint shooter and is my favorite.

 

[1saxman]

Quality was spotty in those years. Everything else on my pistol is top notch, and I guess the rollmark is why I was able to get it so cheap - that, plus the auction page was terrible - little info and poor pictures. But, it was sold by a guy who ran a gun shop that had been started by his father and this was one of the father's pistols. I think it had about one box of ammo through it and no real finish flaws. Now its had three boxes of ammo and still looks the same!

 

[1saxman]

"In 1947 COLT introduced hard slids so called because they were heat treated all over to provide a uniform hardness and to eliminate the necessity for recoil plates. REMINGTON RAND first experimented with hard slides in 1943; COLT and ITHACA eventually followed at government request, but the process was not perfect until after the war." (Charles Clawson)

Hey, what the heck is a 'recoil plate'? That would not have anything to do with the hardened firing pin hole insert by the description.