Welcome back, folks! Over the past three installments, we’ve explored Smith & Wesson’s first semi-automatic pistol from every angle – its fascinating history as a commercial disaster, the confusing world of eight different variations, and the challenges of dating these rare pistols. Today, we’re wrapping up our deep dive with some actual range time and my final thoughts on what makes the Model 1913 special despite its marketplace failure.
Curious Relics Coverage on AllOutdoor
Welcome to our recurring series of “Curious Relics.” Here, we want to share all of our experiences, knowledge, misadventures, and passion for older firearms that one might categorize as a Curio & Relic – any firearm that is at least 50 years old according to the ATF. Hopefully along the way you can garner a greater appreciation for older firearms like we do, and simultaneously you can teach us things as well through sharing your own expertise and thoughts in the Comments. Understanding the firearms of old, their importance, and their development which lead to many of the arms we now cherish today is incredibly fascinating and we hope you enjoy what we have to share, too!
Range Time: Smith & Wesson Model 1913
After all the research and writing about the Model 1913’s commercial failure and unusual design features, I was genuinely curious how it would perform at the range. Given the proprietary .35 S&W Auto ammunition is both expensive and scarce these days, I decided to test the often-mentioned compatibility with .32 ACP. I loaded up some old Federal 71-grain .32 Auto and headed to the range with about 25 rounds.
The first surprise came during loading. The manual of arms is definitely different from modern handguns, but once you understand the system, it’s actually quite clever. Loading your first round takes some getting used to, especially if you’re accustomed to conventional slide-operated pistols. The crossbolt lock on the left side of the receiver is the key; press it in, and it disconnects the breech block from that famously heavy recoil spring. This allows you to easily pull the breech block back and chamber a round without fighting the spring tension. Once you release the crossbolt, the system is ready to fire.
I found that with decent hand strength, you can also operate the breech block without using the crossbolt lock, grabbing the exposed sides and working it like you would a slide on a modern handgun. It’s stiff, but it works. The slingshot method of releasing the breech block works just fine once you get the feel for it.
The grip safety is completely intuitive; you don’t need to think about it at all, just like other grip safeties from this era. It engages naturally when you hold the pistol properly. The manual safety on the backstrap is obviously intentional to operate, which is exactly what you want from a safety, but its location is definitely unusual. I was curious whether recoil would cause that small knurled wheel to dig into my palm, but I didn’t feel it at all during shooting.
Once I got used to the controls, the Model 1913 really surprised me. Out of all the small pocket guns or .32-caliber pistols from this era that I’ve shot, this was genuinely one of the most comfortable. The shooting experience was remarkably pleasant, with soft recoil that I have to attribute to that heavy recoil spring mechanism. If I were comparing it to something like the FN 1900, I’d take the Smith & Wesson just for shooting comfort alone.
The gun cycled perfectly with the .32 ACP ammunition. Zero malfunctions, zero feeding issues, it just worked. I was honestly shocked at how smoothly it functioned, especially given all the dire warnings I’d read about using .32 ACP in these pistols. The only thing I noticed was that the .32 cases showed some powder burn at the mouth, but that’s laughable compared to the alleged catastrophic issues some sources mention. The extraction and ejection were flawless.
Accuracy-wise, the Model 1913 performed admirably. At 15 yards, I was consistently getting 2 to 2.5-inch groups, which is quite respectable for a pocket pistol from 1913. The sights are basic but functional – a simple blade front and “U” channel rear – and they’re actually better than the pathetic excuses for sights you find on many pocket pistols from this era. Looking at you, FN 1910. Below are 7 shots (one in the same hole as another) at 15 yards.
Everything feels solid and well-engineered. Ergonomically, it’s a very comfortable small gun despite the unusual controls. The grip angle works well, the gun points naturally, and the overall balance is excellent. You can tell this was a serious attempt at creating a quality firearm, not some cheaply-made pocket gun.
What struck me most was how pleasant the entire shooting experience was. This isn’t some rough, difficult-to-manage pocket pistol that you’d only shoot out of curiosity. It’s actually enjoyable to shoot, with good ergonomics, decent accuracy, and reliable function. It made me wonder even more why it failed so spectacularly in the marketplace.
The .32 ACP compatibility is clearly viable for shooting, despite the theoretical concerns. While I’m sure the original .35 S&W Auto would perform even better, the .32 ACP worked flawlessly in my experience. Given the cost and scarcity of .35 S&W Auto ammunition today, being able to shoot readily available .32 ACP makes these pistols much more practical for range use.
Final Thoughts: Smith & Wesson Model 1913
After spending considerable time researching, handling, and shooting the Model 1913, I’m convinced that its commercial failure had nothing to do with the quality of the gun itself. This is a well-made, pleasant-shooting pistol that functions reliably and offers some genuinely clever design features. So why did it fail so spectacularly?
The answer lies in Smith & Wesson’s fundamental misunderstanding of the market. The .35 S&W Auto cartridge was supposed to be bigger and better than the .32 ACP, but it really wasn’t bigger at all – and even if the size and performance claims were true (they weren’t), the difference was negligible. By 1913, the blueprint for modern handgun design was being written by people like John Moses Browning. Basic design principles like slide operation, safety locations, and magazine release placement were becoming standardized. The Model 1913, with its unusual controls and proprietary ammunition, was swimming against the tide of industry evolution.
Smith & Wesson would have had a hard time making this design work long-term, even if they’d persisted. The Clement-derived system, while functional, was simply too different from where the industry was heading. The company was wise to eventually abandon semi-automatics until they could develop something more conventional with the Model 39 in 1954.
But that doesn’t diminish what the Model 1913 represents. It’s a beautiful work of blued art, an excellent collector’s piece, and apparently a real treat at the range. It showcases Smith & Wesson’s willingness to take risks and try new approaches, even if they didn’t always pay off. The innovative field-stripping system, the thoughtful safety mechanisms, and the overall build quality demonstrate the company’s commitment to producing quality firearms.
For collectors and firearms enthusiasts, the Model 1913 offers a fascinating glimpse into a road not taken in American firearms development. It’s a reminder that not every good idea succeeds in the marketplace, and that sometimes the most interesting firearms are the ones that failed commercially. These pistols deserve recognition not for what they achieved in sales, but for what they represent in the evolution of American firearms design.
In closing, I hope our Curious Relics segment informed as well as entertained. This all was written in hopes of continued firearm appreciation and preservation. We did not just realize how guns were supposed to look and function. It was a long and tedious process that has shaped the world we live in. So, I put it to you! Is there a firearm out there that you feel does not get much notoriety? What should our next Curious Relics topic cover? As always, let us know all of your thoughts in the Comments below! We always appreciate your feedback.
Trending Products
