H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619
-
Posts
8,830 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619
-
-
1 hour ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:
This is what you asked. You said replicas. That would be Uberti!
But I was specifically talking about "models" which would indicate who made up the design.
-
2 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:
While I’m a big Colt fan I’ve had a few Uberti’s and Creeker is right. No one has made more than Uberti!
Yeah, but they are someone else's design. They are selling copies of various Colt, Remington, and S&W models.
-
Bring back the Great Nor'Easter.
Actually, it'll never happen. Some of reasons why it went away are no longer reality, but others are.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:
Actually, atz a fairly "goofy foot" question. But a really interesting question. Because of the qualifier "over time." You would actually be going back to that manufacturers "beginning." Interesting. Meaningless, but none the less interesting.
It's as goofy as all get out!
But it popped into my head, so I had to get it out. Your comment about going back the beginning made me suddenly think of how Smith & Wesson started out with the Volcanic pistol, but they would not be main match legal.
-
Okay, here's an odd bit of ponderance. Or if you prefer, a hot stove topic that proves that winter is lasting too long!
Either guns made by the original manufacturer or replicas made by others, which "Gun Company" has over time marketed the largest number of revolvers that would be main match legal? Well, the obvious answer is Colt, right? I mean, in addition to the SAA, there are all the different cap and ball guns they made and a few other things.
But... Is that all? If you actually stop and think about it, and if you remember that a 5 shot revolver is main match legal if it can use a "safety notch" to keep the hammer between cylinders or be loaded with 4 and the 5th added on the clock, there are suddenly a lot of different guns that carry the Colt, Smith & Wesson, Remington, Ruger and other pistol makers besides the obvious ones that come generically to mind when you mention the maker. Granted, some of these models are rather obscure, and you might never see them at a match, but they are legal according to the rules. I still think Colt made more models than anyone else, but many of the other gun makers made a fair number of options that we could consider if we had a mind to do so.
For example, Smith & Wesson has the following obvious options...
1. American2. Russian
3. Schofield
4. New Model 3
But some of their less obvious options that would be legal according the rules (even if they create a severe handicap for the user) would include
5. Model 1-1/2
6. Model 1891
7. Baby RussianAnd that's just what I could think of off the top of my head.
For Remington I thought of the following...
1. 1858 (Not it's real designation, but people know what is meant by it.
2. 18753. 1890.
Less obvious examples include
4. 1863
5. The Smoot revolver
Ruger (I am not even close to an expert on these, but from what I recall reading here on the Wire, there was/is...
1. Vaquero
2. New Vaquero
3. Blackhawk
4. Old Army
5. Super Blackhawk.
6. The Single Six (.32 Caliber)There may be others.
Merwin & Hulbert had at least 4 different qualifying models.
And of course for Colt...1. Patterson
2. Walker
3. Dragoon
4. 1860
5. SAA (I won't list the New Frontier, Bisley, Sheriff's Model or Buntline separately. Some people might)6. 1851
7. 1862
8. 1861
9. 1849
10. Baby Dragoon
11. New Line
12. New House13. Cowboy
14. Open Top
And who knows what else?Not really sure what the point of all this is. Other than it's interesting to remember that the old time "Big" gun makers made a lot more stuff than is commonly thought about. As to what can all be done with, well, I guess collection thoughts or unusual shooters can be worth considering.
Any other obscure models from these "major makers" that I may have overlooked?
I deliberately left off companies like Iver Johnson that only made 1 model that would be main match legal.
-
I have noticed that even used real Colts are getting more and more expensive. Including the Commemoratives, which were usually less expensive than generic ones for some reason. But anyway, there is something nice about owning and shooting real ones. Here's a look at a few of mine...
I'll sort 'em by caliber. Here's my .22's
The top is a fairly generic "in the white" Frontier Scout, and it was the first real Colt I bought. The bottom is a California Bicentennial commemorative. This is the first pistol I got that allowed me to call myself, "A man with a golden gun."
This one is an oddity...
It's been recalibered to .22 Hornet. Very fun to shoot. It also apparently started life as a Bisley model. Waiting for a letter to tell me what caliber it originally way.
.32-20s
The 7.5" is a genuine 1st Gen antique. It letters as .44-40 The 5.5" in a fairly generic 3rd Gen. The two Bisley's were unexpected finds, and I have shot a clean mini match with them.
These are .44 Specials...
I enjoy pairing the Buntline with one of the Sheriff's from time to time. Both of them came with dual cylinders. Not pictured is a .44-40 cylinder I found for it. Nothing special about the New Frontier, but when I found one in this caliber, I snagged it. I don't know why, but my mind associates the New Frontier with .44 Special for some reason.
.44-40's
The top is a rather generic 3rd Gen. The grips are aftermarket "Ivory Laminate" grips. They looks like a thin layer of ivory over wood. They were new in the packaging old stock I found at Sarco when I had a chance to go to their store. I have no idea if the ivory is real or not. I tend to think no, but it does look pretty good. The pic does not do them justice. The bottom pistol is another antique First Generation. The grips are broken, the finish is a lousy chrome one, but it's mechanically perfect. The trigger, hammer and ejector housing are gold plated. (Which is a feature I like) It may be ugly, but it was only 500 bucks, and shoots like a dream.
Another .44-40 that I obtained more recently.
Third Generation, with real ivory grips and what appears to be a VERY nice finish from the Custom Shop. Waiting for a letter to confirm all of this.
And these are my .45's
The .4-3/4" was my Dad's and remains my favorite. The 7.5" beneath it a second gen. The Upper RIght is an NRA Centennial model that went "KABOOM" on me. (More on that later) The lower right is an "Old Fort Des Moines Restoration" commemorative. It's gold plated, and I replaced the factory pearl grips with wooly mammoth ivory ones. Fun gun to shoot.
Now, about the NRA one...
Too much Win231 did this to it.
But, a gunsmith name Sergey of Rustblue Gunsmithing in Natick Mass, this this to it...
I am happy to say that I have shot a match with it since being repaired.
And I paired it with this...
Before I got the original one fixed, I actually found another NRA Centennial for a reasonable price, so now I have a matched pair of them.
And finally, one more .45...
The Ned Buntline commemorative. Why Colt made it a New Frontier, I do not know, but it's still kinda cool,
But wait, there's more!
Since we are talking about "real Colts," there are also these...
A .32-20. Nicely "restored" which is why I got it for a song.
A .44-40. Yes, that's a bayonet lug. This is one of those rare Costa Rican army surplus ones. I wish I could find the bayonet. As you can see, it has no finish left.
I also have a .22 and and .45-85, but I don't have pics of them at the moment.
But those are all my "real Colts" that are SASS Main Match legal.
-
3
-
-
19 hours ago, Driftwood Johnson, SASS #38283 said:
Thanks to H.K. for including my old post about cylinder bushings on original S&W revolvers and how they allow an antique revolver to be fired all day long with Black Powder without needing cleaning.
Hey, Driftwood! Nice to see you making a post. Welcome back.
And you are very welcome. I have always found your technical posts to be most informative, and that one in specific even more so.-
2
-
-
I have an varied collection of both real Colts and various clones. All were obtained because the price was quite reasonable for what they were. Even the one very expensive one with factory ivory grips. That was rather pricey, but given its features, it was still worth the price.
Clones of course are much less expensive, and that's why I've picked them up. When all is said and done, I tend to find myself shooting the real Colts more often than the clones, but am not adverse to, for example, paring a Colt with an Uberti so I can shoot .44 Special in both revolvers.
Unless of course I wanna shoot the Big Iron, which as built using an Armi San Marco gun. -
36 minutes ago, Stump Water said:
I know Ayoob started the wagon rolling and everyone has jumped on, but...
Has there EVER been a circumstance where "handloads" used in self defense have had any bearing on the outcome of the aftermath?
No, there never has been.
But let that go...
I think people are overlooking the main point I was trying to bring up. Now yes, there are things that are "better suited" for use as a CCW gun than an old time revolver design. But that's not what I am talking about.
My point is that for many of us, not only do we know HOW TO USE these older designs, they might also be the only guns that many of us know how to properly operate. I have met many a Cowboy Shooter who has never fired any kind of an auto loading pistol. Trying to use something that you are unfamiliar with when everything is on the line is not exactly a good idea. On the other hand, given how familiar with our cowboy guns, I simply consider that some of us could be served by them quite well in the role that they were originally designed for.-
1
-
-
`Pictures would be nice.
You said it shoots and functions well. If that's the case, leave it alone and use it as is. UNLESS the barrel is at the point where it's gonna break or fall off or something.
In that case, I'd look into tying to find a replacement barrel. -
I know it's probably been talked about before, but in general, I think that many of us would be well served by using our cowboy type guns, not just for general self defense use, but specifically for CCW use. While many will poo poo the idea, I think it has some merit. First of all, we are comfortable with, and know how to USE our old fashioned pistols quite effectively. We have live fired them far more than we have any kind of an auto loading pistol, for example.
But let's look at it from a more theoretical/practical point of view. If calibers like .32 ACP or .380 ACP are "acceptable" for CCW use in guns like a Walther PPK or a Colt Mustang or some other similarly sized pistol, many of which have only a 6 shot magazine, then surely a small revolver in anything from .32 S&W to .38 Long Colt would be just as acceptable. Or, if you want something more akin to a Colt Officer's model or some other "larger small" gun that can handle thing like 9mm to .45 ACP, then you could use a Colt Sheriff's Model in .45 Colt. Or even the Cimarron Lightning, basically a 3/4 scale SAA in calibers like .32-30, .32 H&R Magnum and .38 Special.
Personally, I think it would be very practical for many of us. If you are worried about being able to reload, perhaps some of the top break pocket pistols would work with a speed loader. But to be honest, when I do carry my Mustang, for example, I don't carry a spare magazine.
Maybe I'm thinking about something that doesn't really require all that much thought, but the idea was bugging me, so I thought I'd bring it up.-
2
-
-
I wanna see the Silver Spur in .44 Magnum.
-
1
-
-
People in the Carolinas are rooting for the Pats. That's where Drake Maye is from.
That, and they don't have a baseball team to root for either. Unless the Braves count for most of the South except Florida?And for what it's worth, I won't be bothering to watch the Halftime Show. I have watched the Superbowl 12 times over the course of my life, and I have never bothered to watch it. That's when I go to the bathroom, call my relatives who live west of the Hudson, fix up some more food, or otherwise don't bother with whatever the show happens to be. Until they get someone good enough to be on the Opry, I'm just not interested in the typical acts they have.
-
Good grief...
Those bullies should be charged with attempted murder.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Diego Kid #4631 said:
H. K. Uriah, SASS That is a Full size Third Model Pocket Army six shot, with the bottom of the grip ground off. That has the loading gate. Rough shape. .44-40.
Correct on all counts.
It doesn't look all that nice, the "skull crusher" has indeed been ground off, but it still shoots nice.
Got it real cheap. It'll never have any collector value in the investment sense, but I may consider having it done up nice someday.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Diego Kid #4631 said:
Yes. This is a First model. No loading gate. The second model has one. Slides downward.
Oh yeah, like this...
But it's not a spur.
-
3 hours ago, Diego Kid #4631 said:
Merwins were a medium size .38 s&w centerfire five shot.
Like this one?
They are great little guns. But not exactly what I am wondering about, as they are only 5 shot cylinders. -
Pretty simple question. Every single vintage revolver I've ever seen with a spur trigger is a "small" one. I was wondering if anyone ever made a full size spur trigger revolver.
I am going to define "full size" in a very broad way: six chambers in the cylinder, firing a centerfire round. No other qualifications.
I ask because I do own a couple of pistols by S&W that I'll call small to medium sized with the only major difference being one has a trigger guard and a trigger, and the other has a spur. So it is, at least, theoretically possible. I wonder if anyone actually did it. -
You mean one of these?
I find it to be a nice shooter, and it gets a lot of, "Wait, what is that? It's not a Colt" type comments.
They do feel a little different in the hand when just holding it, but when shooting, the differences quickly vanish. An odd thing about this is that the cylinder is a little shorter than a Colt, so you gotta make sure your cartridges are not too long. I have found that a .45 Colt with 200 grain bullets fits just fine, but 240s were just a BIT too long.
Is the "Outlaw" a specific variant, or just what Uberti is calling these days?-
2
-
-
I have a China Camp USFA in the white.
Here's a closeup.
It is indeed "in the white" with no finish. I am seriously considering sending it to Turnbull to be done up nice. Time and perhaps a refund check on my income tax will tell.
-
You are correct, Creeker. The Lightning Bolt and the 92 Mare's leg were made as pistols.
The 87 has ab 18+ inch barrel and and an overall length well over the minimum, so it's just an impractical shotgun.
the 73 has a 16" barrel, and all i did was cut the stock. It's also well over the minimum length, so its just a rifle with a very shot length of pull. IF the one big beautiful lawsuit throws out the nfa restrictions on sbrs, I'll consider cutting the barrel to 14" Maybe. Time will tell. -
13 minutes ago, Boggus Deal #64218 said:
For me right now, it’s pre-1911 .45 ACPs. Can’t afford them. But I can dream.
In 1987, I spent $400 for a 1911 made in 1913. First handgun I ever bought. Still have it. In 2013, I used it to shoot Wild Bunch at End of the Trail.
I recently learned how much a 1911 made in 1913 in condition comparable to mine is going for. It's a scary thought!
One gun of that era that intrigues me is the 1903 Pocket Hammer pistol in .38 ACP. -
Another thread got me wondering about this. When it comes to "collecting" Colts there are a LOT of variations to consider, even if you limit yourself to just the single action army.
Just for starters, there are the three Generations, the three standard barrel lengths, the Sheriff and Buntline variants, nickeled, blued, Bisley Model, New Frontier, the myriad of caliber options, (even if you limit it to widely produced calibers and don't take super rare ones into account) engraved examples, what the grips are made of, and those are just the "regular" variations. Adding in various custom barrel lengths, calibers finishes and who knows whatever other options existed would make collecting an example of every possible variation all but impossible, even if you HAD the money to do it.
That being said, I think it may be fair to say that for many of us, there might be a specific variation of the SAA that we don't own, but would like to have. It could be something super elaborate, or run of the mill ordinary. Something off the shelf standard, or something that would have to be custom configured.
Thinking about my own collection of both real Colts and clones, I do have a lot of interesting variations on the theme. And I included the clones for a reason; affordability. Sometimes an interesting variation might be impossibly expensive if it was a real Colt, but doable with a clone. And I use "collecting" in the widest possible definition; acquiring a bunch of things because you find them interesting. "Investment collecting" is not something that I concern myself with.
So with all of that said, what kind of a Colt would I like to have, but don't? To be honest, I'm at the point where I have all of the "standard" variations that interest me. For example, I do have a couple of Bisley revolvers, but don't see much of a reason to get more of them with different barrel lengths, calibers, etc.
On the other hand, some rather rare examples would be something I'd be willing to save up for. I have long wanted an otherwise "normal" SAA in .38 S&W. Very few were made, and when they do show up, they tend to be uber expensive.
So I have taken a lot of space to talk about something in general terms and coming to the surprising conclusion that there's nothing calling out to me saying, "Find one like this!"
I am strangely surprised by that realization. -
Handsome gun that I can't afford.
Spin Cock Modification.
in SASS Wire Saloon
Posted · Edited by H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619
I hope the title of this thread caught your attention. Now that it has, let me state for the record that I have NO intention whatsoever to, even for fun at the practice range, spin cock my large loop Winchester 92, my Chiappa 92 Mare's Leg, or my Uberti customized 73 Mare's Leg, Doing so is just a bad idea on so many levels, I don't even want to discuss the mechanics of theoretically doing it.
What I am far more interested in, is HOW the modification works. Based on what I have read hear on the Wire, a major piece of the mod (I am speaking specifically for how it works with a 92 based action) is essentially some kind of plunger that latches onto a new round as it comes out of the magazine and holds it as it guides the round into the chamber. Sounds pretty straightforward, IF that is indeed how it is done. I am sure there are people here who have such a modification on their guns. I'd be shocked if no one does. If you do, can you confirm that this is how it works? If you don't want to say so publicly for whatever reason, feel free to send me a PM.
Now, since I have no interest in spin cocking, why am I curious about how the modification is done? Well, because even though I don't want to spin cock, I do want to have the modification done to one of my guns for reasons that I shall now explain.
First, keep in mind that in many ways, the 92 is a miniaturized model 1886. I therefore assume (dangerous, I know) that it could be done to an 86, just using bigger parts. But why?
Well, let me start by showing you these...
The left cartridge is a .45 Colt. The right is a .45-70. The middle is a .45-70 trimmed back to the same length as a .45 Colt. (I call it the .45-45) I made it up to use as a low power plinking round in single shot rifles chambered for .45-70. Something like running .38 Long Colts in a .357 Magnum. It works quite well. You use the same bullets used for the .45-70. The first few rounds I loaded were with a 300 grain bullet because, well, load date for the .45 Colt with a 300 grain bullet exists. Then, when Trailboss came back, I worked out a load with 405 grain bullets using the "formula." These all worked very well. It essentially gets you a round with higher end .45 Colt pressures in a gun chambered for something MUCH more powerful. It's fun.
Anyway, after doing that, on a whim, I tried the round in this...
That's a real Winchester 86, and to my happiness, the shorter round worked! Not flawlessly, you've got to run a little slow, but it did work. I thought that was cool, but of limited usefulness.
But then, I started this project...
THIS is a Chiappa 86, that I am in the process of turning into what the original Mares Leg should have been, a gun chambered in .45-70! I have a new forstock being installed by my gunsmith as I type that is not the overly fat one on this. At the moment, it still has the factory 16.5" barrel, and it's overall length is just over the minimum for it to not be an SBR. IF the One Big Beautiful Lawsuit deregulates SBRs, the barrel will be chopped to the same length as the takedown lever, about 14 inches. If the lawsuit fails, I will consider SBRing it anyway. The only thing that'll hold me back is how you need to get permission to cross state lines with an SBR. But let all that go.
Beneath the gun, you see a .45-45 and an .45-70. It of course runs the longer round no problem, and it does cycle the short one, but not as well as the original Winchester. Not only do you need to slow down, you've got to be careful to keep the cartridge from jumping around too much as the action is cycled, causing a misfeed.
And now we come back to the subject of this post. I am wondering if the "spin cock plunger" or however it's actually done, could be done to a gun like this, not for spin cocking, but just to grab the cartridge and more smoothly/reliably get it to chamber with not so much of a fuss.
I am doing this just for the sheer unadulterated fun of it all. I doubt anyone will ever market a pistol in this configuration, so I'd have something rather nifty and unique.
Anyone who has any knowledge of this, and is willing to share, please let me know, either here or via PM as you see fit.
And in the meantime, what do you all think of my "86 Mare's Leg?"