H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

Because I have multiple pistols chambered for the .32S&W Long and the .32 S&W, but only one in .32 H&R Magnum. Plus, I am not set up to reload the H&R round. So, I run S&Ws in that pistol. Or .32-20s with its other cylinder.

Some rifles are easier to reload, and can be done multiple ways. 1. Colt Lightning: With the bolt open, stuff a round in through the loading gate and cycle the action to chamber it. OR stuff the round directly into the chamber. Directly into chamber is quicker. 2. Henry: With the action open, push down the carrier and stuff a round into the chamber. Reloading from the front is not really an option. 3. Winchester 66/73: As with they Henry, OR close the bolt and put one in through the gate. Cycle and fire. Personally, I find the second option eaiier. 4. Winchester 92: With bolt open stuff round into chamber, OR close the bolt and go through the gate. I find into the chamber easier. 5. Marlin 88. With the bolt open, stuff into chamber. OR close the bolt and go through the gate. As you saw in the video, I found the going into the chamber to be somewhat awkward. This may be due to the fact that it's a .32-20, and not much room to fiddle around with. 6. Marlin 92. Reloading from the front is not a good idea. But that .32 Colt round is small, and there's not a lot of room to stuff it into the chamber. Still, this really the only way to do it. I'd be more tempted to take the miss if using this rifle than any other of the clean match was gone. 7. Marling 89/94. (Essentially the same gun) I find going in from the side on these guns to be awkward. Not as bad as with the 92, but more of hassle than a top loader, so I'd say close the bolt and go through the gate. 8. Winchester 94 in .44 Magnum (Pre 83) Same as the 92, in my experience. And, this gun gets a bad rap. It actually works rather well, if you can find one. Maybe the far more common post 83s with angle eject are so inferior that this is where the bad reputation comes from? 9. Marlin 336 in .44 Magnum. I don't have one of these yet, but I have a feeling that going in through the side will be easier than the 94. Pure speculation. 10. Spencer. Loading through the top for a jacked out round, or just the last 3 is FAR superior to trying to reload through the butt. And that's my assessment.

Okay, so you are saying that the shorter rounds won't work? The S&W Long has an OAL of 1.280" according to Wiki, and the S&W is just .920"

Unless I have already lost the clean match, I will take as long as is needed to reload that jacked out shot. Using a marlin 88, but it didn't matter...

For the record .32 S&W < .32 S&W Long < .32 H&R Magnum < .327 Federal. Akin to .38 Short Colt < .38 Long Colt < .38 Special <.357 Magnum < .357 Maximum Akin to (but separate from) .32 Short Colt < .32 Long Colt Akin to (but separate from) .38 S&W < .38-44 Target Okay, that's what I was more or less hoping to hear. Glad to know at least the Long will work.

I have a very specific question for anyone out here who happens to own one of those very rare Marlin 94's chambered for .32 H&R Magnum. You know, the one that looks a heck of a lot more like a recreation of the Marlin 92 than the 94. There is something that I wonder about, that can only be answered by someone who owns one. Original 92s, when chambered for ".32 Centerfire" could cycle .32 Long Colt, or .32 Short Colt. Can the modern 94's chambered for .32 H&R Magnum, cycle .32 S&W Long and/or .32 S&W? Seems like an obvious question to ask, and I am wondering what the answer is for various reasons.

Heh heh. In New England, we grill outside all year round! No matter how cold and snowy it gets!

On Everybody Loves Raymond, Patricia Heaton (Deborah) was pregnant I think twice. Both times they hid it it with bulky clothes, blankets and camera angles. But you can still tell that she was with child. They even did at least one episode where the "flashed back" to when she was pregnant with her in show kids so they didn't have to hide it. On The Big Bang Theory, Melissa Rauch, who played Bernadette, was "pregnant" via the use of a pillow. After they finished that story line, the actress got pregnant in real life. If I recall correctly, it was a surprise. Anyway, they then wrote her real life pregnancy into the show as her characters second one. The writing in/hiding of pregnancies has been happening on TV shows since almost the beginning of television. And on a completely unrelated topic... Alpo! Are you pondering what I'm pondering? (If you know, you know)

I find the differences between similar sized Colts and S&W DA revolvers to be of the 6 of one, half a dozen of the other variety. That said, I'd go with the S&W in your case because you are familiar with it. That being said, rather than take a friend's gun, I would do the following... 1. Tell the police of the threat and that you fear for your life. 2. Assuming that you are not for some reason not now prohibited, go and buy another pistol.

The Hawkeye looks interesting. The Colt looks like a single shot version of a DA revolver, so it's a bit "out of the era" but it is still cool. Reminds me of the single shot version of the S&W of their final top break design. Thinking about it, .22's aside, I am not surprised that there are not a lot of larger caliber single shot pistols. I guess that unless I can find another S&W 1891 in .38 S&W, the only other real option is a Rolling Block, either an original or a reproduction is fine by me. In fact, if I see that .38 Special Rolling Block that has been at the last 3 gunshows I went to again, it'll probably come home with me. There probably are other things out there, but I have a feeling that they are exceedingly rare. Although, the Bond Cyclops is intriguing to me. I just wish they had a more traditional finish! Maybe I'll customize one someday.

The more I research, the more it seems to me that centerfire single shot pistols, other than the Rolling Block and the S&W, did not seem to exist all that much back in the day. I find that curious.

Okay.... From Luke chapter 22. 35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. 36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Now, I'm semi-taking it out of context, but I don't think it is an error to do so. The larger passage is making more points than this, but I feel it is legitimate to say that this part of it is tell us that, even when we are out working as missionaries, we need to take proper precautions out in the wide an dangerous world. We have a general responsibility to make sure we provide for ourselves as we go, and we need to be prepared to defend ourselves if necessary. And lest I fall into the trap of writing an entire sermon at this point, I shall leave it at that.

This preacher packs a pistol.

Part of the reason I bring this up is because I think that a single shot pistol side match would be a lot of fun. Either by itself or as one gun in a battery of guns that you'd take a couple of shots with each. There are a plethora of single shot rifles in both rifle and pistol calibers, 22 rifles and shotguns out there, but the options for pistols, in any caliber from .22 Short to .50-70 (I've seen one!) seem to be much more limited. There is the Rolling Block, the S&W 1891, and a Trapdoor Springfield pistol. This one might not even count. As far as I know Springfield Armory may 1 prototype, fired it once, and said, "Bad idea," and that was the end of it. It's on display at the Armory, which is where i saw it. More numerous are some Trapdoor rifles that were "converted" to pistols in Hollywood for use in pirate movies, but I have no idea how many still exist. There would also be NFA 34 concerns, I think. Then there are plethora of small derringer type guns that were made back in the day, all of which seem to have only been .22's Bond Arms does make what amounts to a single barrel version of their derringer called the Cyclops, and that seems to be it. I am not including things like the Thompson Contender or bolt action .223s as they would not be something that fits in our game. So what it comes down to, for a single shot pistol to be used in a theoretical side match, there don't seem to be a lot of options to choose from, and most of them are .22s. As far as I can determine. I have seen single shot conversion of the Webley revolver, now that I think of it, but if memory serves, again, they are a .22. Curious. BTW, potential single shot side match battery.... From top to bottom; 12 gauge shotgun, .45-70 rifle, .32 S&W rifle, .22 rifle, 22 pistol.

.22 Hornet. For some reason, I've been seeing a lot about this cartridge ever since I got this pistol in that caliber... It's not a single shot, but it is a single action.

Well, it's March the first! That means that the "winter months" are behind us. That means that Spring will soon be upon us, and with it trips to the range and the banging and clanging of a fun Cowboy shoot. I look forward to this with eager anticipation. Unless you think it's too premature for me to think this...

I question the need for stock cutting. I recall being allowed to practice with my Dad's rifles and shotguns as a kid. If I could lift them, I was allowed to do so. Among them were an M1 and a Winchester 101. Not exactly small guns, and I could shoulder them properly long before I was big enough to fire them. The first longgun I shot was a Mossberg 320KA single shot bolt action .22. Yes, as I grew, the guns came to "fit" me better, but even when I was small I could hold them properly.

It was my father's. It has clearly been modified over the years, giving it some character. The rear sight is obviously not original, for example. The original forestock was half gone, and Dad always said he was gonna replace it, but he never did. This one was made by Sergey at Rustblue Gunsmithing in Natick, Mass, and it sure looks original to me. I kept the remains of the original for posterity, which he used as a template for creating this one. Dad also said he was gonna convert it to .22 Winmag, and I'm glad he never did. This one is a .22LR, and as near as I can determine, it's a Model 1901, which means it was made before 1910. Here's a pic of the broken stock. And a correction. the pic in the original post is the other side of this. Here's a view of the repair.

Even with .22's, I'd use the same thinking that I'd get for "full size" guns. Don't go cheap. Get good quality guns that can be enjoyed for a lifetime. Even if, from a CAS perspective, he "outgrows" the guns and has to "graduate" to normal main match ones with time, having good .22s that will become cherished childhood treasures and that can perhaps be used for side matches when older, or even just as for fun plinkers, will be worth spending the money. If I was starting out a kid of my own, I'd give these guns of mine... For pistols, a pair of Colts. For a rifle, Any one of these. From top to bottom, a Colt Small Frame Lightning, an Uberti 66, or a Winchester 9422. Yes, I'd risk the kid getting the Lightning Bug, just like me. The 66 would make for an easy transition to a full size Henry, 66 or 73. The 9422 is just a fantastic rifle no matter what, and would be a good trainer for moving on to a 92 someday. Or, if the kid is Marlin inclined... A 39A makes a good trainer for someday going to a Marlin 94. I hope you sense a theme here; give the boy guns that are likely to be as close to possible as the guns as he's likely to graduate to someday. Other good candidates would be .22 caliber Rugers, for example. Now yes, there are other excellent examples of .22 pump and lever guns that don't necessarily correspond to a "full size" main match rifle, and there is nothing wrong with them. They are simply more generic learn to shoot guns than they are specific training for what will someday come. Now, for shotguns, it's a little more complicated. Assuming you want to with a .410, there really isn't one that'll let you train for a Winchester 87 or 97, but a SxS is a SxS, and there .410 SxS. Or, even a .410 single shot might be a good way to go. Something like this... A Stevens Fully Guaranteed Single Shot .410. Fairly inexpensive, a good gun to learn with, and fun to shoot. These are what I'd start a 9 year old with. There'd never be any regrets. Yes, except for the Stevens, you're talking some serious expense, but I think it's worth it. Good luck.

Back in the day, a lot of single shot pistols were made in everything from .22 Short to .50 caliber cartridges. Some of these are very interesting to me. But, I have noticed that out on the used market, when looking for these vintage firearms, about the only things I can find are .22 RF pistols. I did once see a S&W 1891 in .38 S&W, but it was in such bad condition that I passed on it, in spite of being a real fan of the caliber. That was years ago, and I have not seen another one since. Occasionally, I'll see a vintage Rolling Block in .50 caliber, but not very often. All of this leads me to believe that the overwhelming majority of single shot pistols made back then were in fact, 22's Nothing against .22's, I have one myself... ...but it would be nice to have something, ANYTHING, in a centerfire caliber between, say .32 Short Colt and .45 Colt. I know some modern replicas of the Rolling Block are out there, but I'd really prefer something "vintage." And it does not have to be a rolling block. There are a plethora of interesting makes/models of .22's out there, but centerfire single shots seem to be exceedingly rare. Could it be because these were mostly seen as target pistols, and the .22 was the dominate cartridge for that kind of shooting? In fact, as I work though the files in my mind, I have only ever seen 2 single shot pistols of vintage make out in the wild. The first was that .38 S&W 1891 I mentioned above, and the second was a Remington Rolling Block in .38 Special that was NOT its original caliber. Passed on it as well, but wonder if I shouldn't have. Anyway, setting the various .22's aside, what exactly was made as a single shot cartridge gun with a pre 1900 design? Are these really the only 2 options, or is other stuff out there, and I just need to keep looking till I find something? Any experts who can chime in are welcome.

Okay, all of this is helpful. Gives me a good ballpark idea of what they charge. I'll be honest, and say that I knew it'd be expensive, but didn't think it'd be that expensive. I will consider various options carefully.

Absolutely, and we all need to be silly from time to time. To be honest, assuming I could create a .25-20 revolver, the idea of a second cylinder in .25 ACP does make a modicum of sense. I think it would be fun. Lower right gun is a Cimarron Lightning with dual .32-20/.32 H&R Magnum cylinders. I think this would be the perfect gun to become the .25.

What Nimble said.

If I ever do this, I am assuming I'll load the .25-20 the same way I load .22 Hornet for use in my converted SAA; with a load of Trailboss. It winds up being a little quieter than a .32-20 and with even less recoil. Hmm... .25. Dual cylinders. 25-20 and .25 ACP... Now I'm just being silly.

I am very seriously considering sending the Big Iron and the Small Iron to Turnbull to have them refinished nice, and possibly engraved. My thinking is, I'll never recoup the costs I've already sunk into them, and I want to enjoy them and for them to look impressive. And, these are my "special" guns, so I may as well make them more special, if that makes any sense. But I am wondering what Turnbull actually charges for stuff like this. Their website doesn't say. The only clue is that for engraving, they offer A, B, and C level engraving, as well as "standard" or "expert" I'd assume that those options get progressively more expensive. I'd also guess that they charge not quite as much as Colt charges for their engraving with the same names. Of course, Colt's pricing is... Well... Astronomically expensive. So it would be too hard to charge less than them, but still a lot. But who knows? As far as their refinishing goes, I can make a guess based on what other people charge, but I really am shooting in the dark here with guesswork. Does anyone actually know?