H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619
-
Posts
8,574 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619
-
-
Limit 2, so it may last. I placed an order, and it was not flagged, we'll see what happens. Never bought powder online before.
-
7 hours ago, DeaconKC said:
I wonder if you could silver solder a front base on it so that you could then later un-solder it?
Possibly, but I don't wanna go down that road. Switching it back should entail nothing more than loosening some screws to remove things and sliding the rear sight back off.
Oh, and thank you to whoever moved this to the Saloon. I meant post it here, and went on the Wire by mistake.-
2
-
-
Since I love .32-20, and am, I think, well known for being a "Lightning guy," I have long been intrigued by this Marlin. It has been said that they are SASS Legal, but it is also true that they only hold 7 rounds in the magazine, so like a Spencer, you'd need to reload 3.
That being said, I have often wondered if a magazine from a Marlin Model 92 would fit. Probably not.
I am probably gonna get one of these someday. In the meantime, good luck with both of yours.
Oh, I have a friend with a Winchester 92 in .25-20. He makes brass by running .32-20 through a .25-20 resizing die since proper brass is so hard to find.
-
Looks to be between 1-2/16th and 1-3/16th inches. I can't find my caliper, so I had to use a tape measure across the muzzle.
-
5 hours ago, Crazy Gun Barney, SASS #2428 said:
Dont have any idea.... but would love to see a pic! Was it converted in the 1800's or much more recently?
It looks like a period conversion to me.
It's currently on loan to a friend who is using for a prop in a home made movie. Once I get it back, I'll post a pic.
-
2
-
-
Well, as I mentioned before, I got my Mann Accuracy Device in .30 Carbine, and I have started my "no permanent alterations" project to make it a more "practical" shooter.
First, here's what it looked like when I got it.
A pretty typical Device. But where to go from here? Well, I guess it needs sights. Lessee, this it, technically, a Remington 03-A3 so...
I found a genuine GI rear sight and installed it where it belongs. I actually think it looks kinda cool there.
So what's next? Well, I found on e-bay, of all places, a guy selling 3 03-A3 stocks for $100 bucks. All have been sporterized to an extent, so I won't feel bad about cutting them to fit this. I will of course leave the buttstock on. If it'll fit, I'll cut the stock to go out to where the barrel gets fatter.
After that? Well, I will not dovetail a front sight into the barrel. What ever changes I make, must make no unreversable alterations. So, what will I do for a front sight? I honestly am not sure. The only idea I have at the moment is maybe some kind of a ring that can clamp to the barrel that I can mount a sight on?
And who knows, since I'll have two more stocks to work with gathering dust, maybe if this comes out as good as I hope it will, I will someday get a second Device in .30-'06 so the magazine will work. As it is, this one in .30 Carbine is just a really fancy single shot. (As far as I can tell!)
Any suggestions on a front sight solution? -
I have an 1849 Colt Pocket Revolver converted to .32 Centerfire in rather rough shape. I am *considering* having it restored. I want to at least have the gun made functional again, and depending how much that costs, have the appearance restored as well. I figure if I am gonna do it, I'll do it right and go to Turnbull. I know they are not cheap, but I am wondering if anyone has ever had something like this done, and what it cost you.
I realized recently, "what am I waiting for?" and may as well consider this. As it is, I don't think the gun has any collector value to begin with. -
I have a feeling that this is similar to .38-55 that was chambered in various Winchesters and Marlins, and the .38-56 that was chambered in the Large Frame Colt Lightning. They are not the same, nor are they interchangeable. Similar to things like the .222 and .223, or .38-44 and .38-44, or .32 S&W and .32 Short Colt. Or .38 Short Colt and .38 S&W, or more than a few other pairs of cartridges that are very similar to each other, but are not interchangeable.
Which get's all the more confusing when you how .38 S&W and .38 Colt New Police ARE the same cartridge. Or how .45-85-285 (A Colt cartridge) uses the exact same case as the .45-70.It's a thing as old as cartridges, and it continues to this day. .223 Remington and 5.56 NATO and 7.62 NATO and .308 Winchester. They really like the same, but aren't You can run .223 in a 5.56 gun, but not the other way around. Or how you can run 7.62 in a .308, but not the other way around.
Trying to keep track of what is an is not interchangeable, especially with some of our Old West guns can give you a headache. And potentially cause a KABOOM! You don't want that.
Now, with your specific cartridge, I don't know enough about them. Even if they will both chamber, there may be other differences that would be dangerous. On the other hand, maybe the brass for one can be fashioned from the other. Kinda like .30-30 and .32 Winchester Special.
In other words, more research is needed. If you can find reloading data, that would go a long way to comparing the two.
-
Won't ship to Massachusetts...
-
On 9/1/2025 at 1:04 PM, Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770 said:
Here's a still from the 1958 movie "The Sheriff of Fractured Jaw". This is Jayne Mansfield being shown how to shoot. The gun, (YES there is a gun in the pic) is clearly a Colt DA, and you can see the fake ejector housing on it.
"Well that's just silly." -- Daffy Duck.
Granted, I was being a little silly myself when I posted the pics of the 77 and 78 Colts, the "Double Action Peacemakers" as I sometimes refer to them, but wow... This gun just looks weird. Given how SAAs were so "abundant" in Westers at the time, why did they feel the need to create this Frankengun?
That being asked, is a strange sorta way, I want one for the cool looking factor. Just like you can take the stock off a Winchester 92 and call it a "Hollyweird Henry" this is clearly a "Hollyweird Colt!"
To this day, I often wonder why none of the makers of the reproduction 92's have "brassed" the receiver, taken off the forestock and actually marketed the thing.
Darn... I did a quick check. This movie does not have an entry in the Internet Movie Firearms Database, Aw, utsnay. -
.32 S&W and .32 S&W Long will both fit in a gun chambered for .32 H&R Magnum.
If you really wanna get creative, find a Marlin 92 with the Centerfire firing pin. (You can get these pins easy enough if all they have is the rimfire pin. I did)
Now, the .32 CF in this rifle is .32 Short Colt/Long Colt. But I have read that without too much effort, they can be converted to the S&W rounds.
Your call, I guess, but I am sure your baby would appreciate you getting a rifle to go wit the pistols...-
1
-
-
For what it is worth, an Armi San Marco 92 will sorta run .45 Schofields, but you might need to be a little careful about it. On the other hand a Uberti 66 (and probably an 73 and a Henry, and an AWA Lightning will run .45 Schofield flawlessly. An AWA Lightning Bolt pistol (Think pump action Mare's Leg) with a 12" barrel will hold 6 Schofields. Loaded with a 200 grain bullet, they are 1.5" long as I load them, so that means a 15" barrel will hold 8 Schofields, with no problem. Maybe 9. I can get 9 .44-40's in my 16" 73, and they have the same OAL length as my Colt .45's. So, the 16" barrel will probably hold 10 Schofields, if it were a .45 Colt.
So, if you do the math, the C45S in a 12" barrel will probably take 7, 13" will likely take 8, 14" 9 and 15" 10. That assumes that the dimensions of the spring an other innards of the mag tube on the lever guns is nearly the same as the pump gun.
But the other thing to keep in mind is that these guns WILL run the Schofields with NO modifications being needed for the guns in question.
So, while there is no existing cartridge that'll put ten rounds into a theoretical 14" barrel, there is one that'll get that many into a 15" one. Someone more knowledgeable than I will have to see how .44 Russians run in a .44 Special chambered gun. I do know that Specials will sorta work in a 92 chambered for a Magnum, but not well. I'd assume Russians will not work. I can say that .38 Long Colts will double feed in a Rossi 92 chambered for .357 Magnum. Don't know if they'll work in one chambered for a .38 Special. -
The difference between .428" and .429" is 1/1000th of an inch. That is an almost microscopic difference. Yes, the same size for jacketed, .001 over for cast rule exists for a reason, but being .001 under is not so small that it'll rattle down the barrel and the rifling will still spin the bullet. It might not be enough for super precise long range shooting, but for SASS distances, and probably out to 100 yards, it'll be enough for hitting, say, a deer sized target at a hundred yards or so.
-
1
-
-
Using a Henry to create an ersatz Volcanic is an interesting idea. Assuming you can find one with a 16" barrel, or a replacement 16" barrel, because they do exist, you could of course, "Mares Leg" the stock and go that route. But pistol gripping the stock might run you shorter than the required overall 26" length. (Unless the short act passes.) To go shorter than the 16" barrel, I recognize it would be difficult to shorten a Henry barrel for all the stated reasons. And a 16" barrel Mare's Leg is impossible! Well, is it?
No, it's not. Awkward as all get out to draw it but it is doable. If the Short Act passes, I may have this barrel cut back to 12" or so, but, dang, the custom holster was expensive!
To my mind, if someone were to market a modern replica of the Volcanic, the most logical calibers to use would be .32 S&W and/or .38 S&W.
But I am not holding my breath! -
32 minutes ago, Tom Bullweed said:
How about a 1892-clone chambered in .45 ACP or Cowboy Special?
Make the barrel/mag just long enough for ten, probably 14" or so.
Or .45 Autorim...
-
Hmm.... DA revolver with a fake ejector to make it look like a SA revolver.
Sure it's not one of these?
Or maybe one of these?
-
1 hour ago, Cotton Eye Joe said:
Nice price, I paid 4x that for mine in 2021 lol. Yes the 1889 was the first side-eject gun Marlin brought into production, with the moniker 'Marlin Safety.' None of my three 1889s are stamped with a model number either, and I can only speculate why that is. Maybe they didn't realize it would grow into a myriad of different side-eject guns. The majority of 1889s were made between 1889-1894, so maybe it hadn't caught on yet but yeah. You'd think at some point, they would have done it just to be consistent. My 44-40 is from 1892, and my 32-20 & 38-40 are from 1894.
I also notice my 1889s' actions are smoother than my 1894 counterparts. That might just be specific to mine, but it's noticeable. If you ever want to refinish it, I believe 1889s receivers were blued. Only the lever, buttplate, and hammer were case hardened.
I don't know if I'll have it refinished. While it's not a "nice" as a gun that has had all of it's finish fade away over time, like my 73, I don't know it's worth the effort. The from a monetary standpoint, just from the effort. I will give it some thinking.
This gun has made me consider the following...
When talking about Winchesters, The Henry, 66, 73, and lets throw in the 76 just for fun, are all different models, in spite of all having the same basic action.
That being said, when you look at the 92, I don't think you can really call the 53 and the 65 different models, but are more like a sub variant of the 92 itself. Same for the 86/71. Or for that matter the 94 and the 55 & 64.
Which brings us to this question, in the Marlin, is the 94 a different model from the 89, the say the 66 and 73 are different models, or is the 94 a variant of the 89 like how a 53 is a variant of the 92. To be honest, I am forming the opinion than they are in fact, different models. There are enough differences to say they not just variations. But I'd like to know what Marlin collectors think of this question.
In a more "broad" sense, I believe that the various Square Bolt Marlins are clearly related, as are the various Round Bolt guns, but where do things fall on the model or variation question?-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said:
Somedangbody took sandpaper to all of the metal
I believe you are correct. Not a nickel gun at all. Still, it'll make for a nice shooter. I actually kinda like guns that have been messed up like this, it means I can afford them! It is rather unfortunate though.
-
1
-
-
Well, my Marlin collection is continuing to grow. At a Local Gun Store, a few days ago I saw a used Marlin 94 in .44-40 that looked like it had no original finish left. Asking price was $600.00, but since I did not have the cash, or the time, I did not purchase it. Last night, I called to see if they still had it. They did, so I said I'd like to come by this morning to take a look at it, and possibly buy it. I bought it. But, here's where it gets to be "fun." What I thought was a Marlin 94, turned out to be a Marlin 1889!
Now, it is easy to see why I, someone who has never been all that interested in Marlins, mistook this for a 94. Clearly the two models are related to each other. But, what really surprised me was how similar the gun actually is to the model 1888.
I never realized how similar their side eject models are to the older top eject, but let that go. Also, I have to say that this gun, is remarkably similar to the much smaller 1897. They really were variations on the theme, it seems. I'll be interested to compare it to an old model 95 someday.
With the 89, which is a .44-40, I must say that it is very good shape for its age. And, when I took it outside to photograph it, I found myself thinking that, just maybe, it's not a faded away blue, but that it might actually be a nickeled gun, if in a bit dulled condition. I'll be curious to see what a Cody letter says, if they happen to have records for this particular gun. Although Cody's Marlin records are somewhat limited, this one may be in the range of what they do claim to have. We shall see.Anyway....
Some other interesting things about the 89...
Well, maybe not interesting, but generically, you can see that the markings are still in good shape.
This I find interesting. That it's 44 W. Not .44 WCF or .44-40. Also, I have read that the "MARLIN SAFETY" was the actual name of this gun, not Model 1889. This bears it out, as this is here, but nowhere is there a Model 1889 notation,
Finally, there is this...
I really wonder what these strange markings are!
Anyway, looking at these closeup pics, I do see some "scrubbing" marks, but that doesn't really bother me all that much. I got a nice shooter for a good price.-
2
-
-
With regard to bullet size and bore size. I have several .44-40 guns, vintage and modern. I always run .428" bullets. Now, 2 of my guns, 3rd Generation Colt Sheriff's that came with both .44 Special and .44-40 cylinders with 3" barrels, I know have the larger .44 Special size bore. When running the .44-40 cylinders, I do no load custom larger size bullets. And you know, even with that 3" barrel, I hit the targets. And, I have found that I get decent paper accuracy at "gunfight" distances.
I also have a .44 Special Buntline, that I obtained an after market .44-40 cylinder for. Shoots just fine with good accuracy.
So, my own philosophy has come to be the following;1. Load .44 Special with .429" jacketed or .430" cast bullets.
2. Load .44-40 with .427 jacketed or .428" cast bullets.
3. If you have a dual cylinder revolver, that came that way from the factory, it's got a .429" bore, but the .428" .44-40 bullets work just fine.
4. If I have a .44 Special single action revolver, I will consider getting a .44-40 cylinder for it.
5. If I have a factory .44-40 revolver, I will not get a .44 Special cylinder for it, regardless of what the bore size is.
Others may disagree, but this works for me.
Good luck. -
With regards to the above image on my guns, from top to bottom, the calibers are, .45 Colt, .38-44, 44 Special, .44-40, .45 Colt, .45 Schofield, .44-40.
When I first got into the market for the American, I really wanted it it .44 Special, but the .45 was all I could find. Then, about a year or two later, I was offered the chance to get the one in .44 Special, and even though it was a shorter barrel, I jumped at it. A few months after that, I had a "first refusal" offer on another .44 Special with the longer barrel, but by then, Massachusetts already bad laws got worse, no more frame transfers, so I had to pass on it. BUT, when I realized that I had an American and a Schofield in .45 Colt, and that the replica Russians are available in that caliber, I developed a desire to get a Russian in .45 and to track down a Beretta Laramie in the caliber, so I could have one of each model 3 (except for the DA) in .45 Colt. Too bad I can't get them in this state...
Anyway, the same goes for maybe getting a full set of replicas in .44-40. Or .44 Special. Or, it is an addiction indeed.
BTW, .45 Schofield will run with no problems in an AWA Lighting. So, I used the 2 Schofield revolvers and that rifle to shoot a clean match earlier this year, running Schofield ammo in all three guns.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Blind Squirrel said:
I just gave them a look on gun broker. WOW! they are PROUD of these things! $$$$
If by the fact you mean that they cost about 2x the price of an SAA clone, yeah, that is rather irksome. But, since there is not a "real" one on the market to the keep the cost of the S&W clones down, they get to command a higher price of other things that are "just a copy" that you can still get an authentic one of. -
8 hours ago, Irish Pat said:
you can always just saw your barrel now and pay the $200 tax and be done with it
True. But it's not really the $200 that holds me back. It's all the legal hoops you gotta jump though, and then once it's all done, you need permission from the government to cross state lines. I just don't wanna go down that road. AND, I live in Massachusetts. SBRs are legal here, but there are still hurdles related to their NFA 34 status. I will wait till those rules are gone.
-
The $45 price is not TOO bad, but I bet the hazmat/shipping makes it ridiculous.
Maybe I'll check my local Cabelas tomorrow.
Performance Center Schofield question
in SASS Wire
Posted
I would suggest contacting S&W and see if they offer any service. Then I noticed that you are in Germany...