Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

Members
  • Posts

    5,647
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

  1. Original or replica, doesn't matter. I have found that while it pretty much assures that you will come in dead last, especially if you are already a bottom of the pack shooter, shooting a Spencer is a lot of fun. Even in the carbine form they are accurate little buggers. But also in carbine form, they are still pretty heavy guns, so I shudder to think of how heavy the actual rifles were/are. My own Spencer is a model 1865 Burnside, and I have found that while the action works properly, it usually does not properly eject the spent cartridges. That triangular blade thing tends to pull them half way out of the chamber and leave them there, apparently after slipping off the rim. As such, I don't hold the gun to my shoulder when I work the action, but lower it so I can flick out the old case with my finger and then make sure the new one goes in properly. Which of course slows me down even more, but I count it as part of the charm of shooting a Civil War era Army Surplus firearm. Manually loading the last three rounds is also interesting. I've seen people pull out the magazine plug and drop in three, and other load direct into the chamber one at a time. Me, I load into the chamber, it's just easier. Neither method seems any faster from what I have observed. It is my understanding that the modern made Spencer Ammo with the proper headstamp is tailored to the replica's marketed by Taylor, and that the dimensions are oh so slightly different from the original ammo, and will likely not properly eject. So, I get the brass from Buffalo Arms that it fashioned from cutting down .50-70 brass. This is supposed to work more properly in original Spencers, but well, for me it's not quite perfect. Also, if you shoot reload this stuff, have you noticed that the expander die does so much bell the case mouth as put a slight bulge in the case about 1/3 of the way down from the mouth? For those who shoot replica Spencers, which model are they based on? For those who shoot earlier model originals, how do they extract? For others who may have an original 1865, do you have the same problem with extraction that I have described. To date, I have use the gun as my main match rifle for an entire match only once. I also just last weekend used it for 1 stage on a Veteran's Day themed shoot, just for fun. I don't know if I'll ever shoot it all that regularly, but who can say? Bottom line, Spencers are quirky fun guns to shoot. They do handicap you in a way, but so what? Maybe if I'm ever at a shoot that offers what used to be called a booby prize for coming in last place, I'll use mine for that one just to make sure I "win." Anybody have any thoughts on the matter?
  2. Today, in Mansfield, Massachusetts, the Mansfield Marauders put on a shoot with a Veteran's Day theme. I had a great time time, and the shoot had well designed, imaginative stages. Kudo's to Lesky for putting together a great experience, as he always does. Me, I had a great deal of fun. I am happy to report that the issues I have been having with my original Colt Lightning and Winchester 92 in .32-20 have been resolved. Putting in new magazine springs in each gun seems to have resolved the lingering issues that both guns were having. I also, in honor of Veteran's Day, took out an old Veteran to shoot one stage with. My Civil War era Spencer spoke today, and he didn't miss a single target. Shooting a Spencer may be as slow as molasses in January, but it sure is fun. In keeping with the military theme, I shot a couple of pistols that may have very well have served with my Spencer back in the day. Well, replicas of pistols from that time. A S&W American, and a S&W Schofield. (Well, Uberties.) Granted, both of the replicas are in .45 Colt, not the calibers originals would have been in, but that's a minor point. I found both pistols to be interesting and fun to shoot, but I have to admit that they are not as fast as Colts. Or, at least for me they aren't. I found it harder to find the sights than on an SAA, and they are not as easy to operate. Perhaps with more practice I'd find them easier to shoot, but that was my initial impression. Which gun is ''better?" Well, the Schofield is easier to get open for loading, it can be done with one hand, while the American needed two hands to open. But maybe that's just because it's still new and has not been broken in. (My real S&W New Model 3's can be opened with one hand, so maybe? They also fit the hand better.) The Schofield also has slightly better sights, IMO. The grips are of course different, but I can honestly say that either one had an advantage over the other. So when all is said and done, I think the Schofield really is an improvement over the American. I didn't shoot the New Model 3's today, but I do think they are better than the Schofield from previous comparisons. Which makes me wonder what I'd think of the Russian. It's grip is more like the New Model 3, with the exception of that "knuckle." I may have to get one some day to compare/complete the collection. Well, that's about all I can saw for right now. I hope you enjoyed hearing about what happened on the range today.
  3. Buntlines... Buntlines... Buntlines... Well, if you define a "Buntline" as 10 or more inches, I guess I have two of them. The top pistol is what I call my "Big Iron." It started life as a fairly generic Armi San Marco clone with a 5.5" bbl. I modified it to this configuration after reading a description of the pistol that inspired the Marty Robbins song. With a 10" bbl, it's technically a Buntline. (.45 Colt) The bottom is a Colt, 12" in .44 Special. (I also obtained a .44-40 cylinder for it, after market.) Both guns are very accurate, and I have used them quite effectively at longer ranges. I did see an Uberti .45 with an 18" barrel once for a a very good price, but to my regret, I passed on it. I thought the 18" tube would be too unwieldy. Then, less than a month later, I saw someone shooting a pair of them gunfighter style, and have regretted not getting it ever since! Not seen another one either. Oh well. I will use these guns in a main match from time to time. I have paired the Big Iron with things as diverse as a generic SAA, a converted Walker and my Lighting Bolt. (Think Mare's Leg based on the Colt Lightning, not a Win 92.) The Buntline I most often pair with a Colt Sheriff's Model for contrast. I'm supposed to be confused there. Not sure if it come across. But a friend of mine did this with the picture... We had fun that day. Good luck!
  4. For long range pistol events, I always use my Colt Buntline 12" .44 Special revolver. People laugh, but nobody has ever objected.
  5. What does it currently look like? (That is to say, got pics?) Is it at least shootable as is?
  6. I'm sure that when it was made, this was considered to be an excellent sword fight. Today, I think it just looks over choreographed and silly.
  7. Okay... There ARE revolvers and other pistols chambered for .45-70. But I think in our hearts we all know that it is not a common revolver cartridge. These are novelty guns that, while interesting, is not what our game is all about. So, going back to things like 9mm, .380 and so forth. Yes, these were created for autoloading handguns, not revolvers. But they are common pistol rounds. The fact that a few revolvers are chambered for them, and even a few specific revolvers that are useful for our game, I feel, makes them common revolver rounds as well. If not "traditional" ones. Outside of a category that requires "rimmed" cartridges, I think that various "autopistol" cartridges, if loaded to SASS acceptable levels, are just fine. Again, my opinion, but you could argue that since only specific categories require rimmed ammo, other categories have have no such requirement. I don't think we need to overthink this.
  8. Someone asked me what I would do if someone challenged me with a sword. I replied, this...
  9. There was a club here that did that once a year. They called it their "Iron Man" match. Lotsa fun. Don't know if they still do it or not.
  10. Yep! That's a load a fun. A couple of years ago, this New Englander took 3rd place in the "big bore smokeless repeater" category! Used my 86 instead of a normal main match rifle. It was fun. I wanna get back out to Roop again again some day. It was a hoot and a half. I choose to believe there were more than three shooters in the category!
  11. Well, that's why I said 10-10-4 or 4. Give people the choice. If they don't have the single shot, they just use a shotgun as normal.
  12. Well, I do plan on suggesting the idea to one of the stage writers at one of the local clubs. But I was also curious to see if people thought it was interesting in a general way.
  13. Somebody made an off hand comment in another thread that has me wondering something. Would it be possible to take a reproduction Colt Walker and bore it out to accept the 56-50 Spencer cartridge? Wouldn't be SASS Legal, but based on a quick glance at my own Walker, it looks like there might be enough room to fit. The mind boggles at possibilities.
  14. Aw..... I've been trying to figure out how to get a revolver in this caliber for years! I asked Freedom Arms if they could do a custom for me, but they said no. But... Using a Walker is an interesting idea. Lotsa space to play with in that cylinder...
  15. Here we go. I remember a few years ago when the Uberti 1862 in .380 ACP came out. A large, discussion, as to its legality ensued. (I don't recall the final outcome.) There was much disagreement as to if .380 was "a caliber commonly available in revolvers," when this particular pistol was the only one available in said caliber. This, it was "common." Oddly, by the "commonly available" criteria, .45 ACP would be legal. It's been available in a plethora of revolvers ever since 1917. Personally, I don't have a problem with a revolver chambered for "ACP" style cartridges. (Of which .40S&W is an example by type, if not name.) You're still using a single action revolver, so I don't see what the big deal it. But that's just my OPINION. Those who make the RULES may not agree with me. But what about .45 Autorim? It's a revolver cartridge, but is it common? Not every modern made .45 ACP wheel gun will accept this cartridge anymore.
  16. I have several 58's 3 by Uberti, 1 by Pieta, and 1 by Remington. They ALL have this problem. I think it's a design flaw. I was able to get them all corrected, but it was a pain to do so.
  17. Here is a strange idea that just occurred to me. What do people think of a 10-10-4 or 4 match? Shooter would have the option of shooting the normal 10 rifle, 10 pistol and 4 shotguns, or 10 rifle, 10 pistol and 4 single shot rifle targets. Everything on the stage would be the same except for the 4 targets the shooter chooses to engage. Might have to write the scenarios to always end with pistols. Would be a way to offer some minor variation or a chance to be a little different without penalizing those who wish to shoot in the more standard way. (Especially if they don't have a single shot rifle) Rifle targets would still be large, and just a bit further out than normal main match rifle distance for safety. This is not a "long range" addition. Just a variation. Anybody think it's a worthy idea?
  18. One of the local clubs in my neck of the woods is having a shoot this weekend with a Veteran's Day theme. They encourage people to somehow incorporate something in their stuff that is in honor of veterans. One year, I wore my Kepi hat, Cavalry belt and for pistols used a reproduction SAA set up to the same specs as a military one and a Walker. I can't remember if I used my Henry or not. Anyway, I think that THIS year, I will do something even more special. For at least 1 stage, I think I'll take out my GI Spencer and use it for at least 1 stage, allowing this literal old veteran to speak loudly on Veteran's Day. I also have an 1860 Colt made in 1861 that has been cartridge converted to .32 S&W Long. Again, probably only for one stage. It also has the look of having been converted to something else in the past. (.44 Colt?) I have not yet lettered the gun, so I don't know if it's GI, but I'd be willing to guess that it was. I wish it could talk and tell its story! The rest of the time I'll likely use a reproduction Schofield and a reproduction S&W American, but set up to military specifications. (Except for caliber.) Okay, with all of that in mind... There are several guns on the market that replicas of Army, and Navy, pistols from the era of our game. There are also a couple of rifles. How many folks own replica GI guns and enjoy shooting them from time to time. An even more interesting question is how many of us own actual GI surplus firearms from the era and then use them from time to time. And not just main match. Remember, a Trapdoor Springfield is a GI gun, even if it's only good for side matches.
  19. Ah, okay. Well, no matter what, my response made no sense. I'd love to have a pair of Freedom Arms chambered for the Spencer round...
  20. That's odd.... To the above, I meant to reply something like... I use real Colts. But in truth, I have just as many clones as I do Colts, and enjoy shooting them all. But what is intriguing is how many different clone makers there have been over the years, many of which are no long with us. (Hmm...) And one aspect of the clones that is fun to look at is the varied and different safeties that they slapped onto the gun. And THEN I was going to say something like, here's a pic of one of my Colts, and post the pic of the gold one that's above. Where the text of my earlier post went without taking the picture with it, I don't know. An NOW, after reading Rainmaker's initial post again, I now seem to realize that he was saying that no one uses clones. Not no one uses real Colts. Either way, I know he was being not serious, but man, my response must have made no sense!
  21. I fully admit that the cost is not the factor. It's equal combinations of the principle, and, if I am honest, the way the Boy Scouts have liberalized in the last few years makes me less inclined to support them. Might be foolish on my part, but I have to admit to the reality.
  22. Surprised to learn that it's a lost brass match. Didn't think that was still a thing. I know it's a small thing in comparison to the rest of the costs of going to EoT, but if it were to turn out that I can go, this would push me into the taking a pass category.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.