H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

Well, I don't get anything in my eyes, the big eyeglasses pretty much prevent that. But I do get blowback. I can feel it on my cheeks, sometimes, and see it on my cases. But I only get it with .45 Colt. I don't get it with .44-40. The very thin case walls of the .44 seal the chamber much better than the .45 does. And yes, I use 200 grain bullets with both cartridge. The blowback is not really all that annoying. I usually don't notice it, and it is much more significant on my Lightning than my 92. Doesn't seem to be an issue with my 66 or my Burgess. I've noticed with the Lightning that it will cause a buildup of gunk in the firing pin channel, so I always flush that out with Gunscrubber after every match to prevent failure to fire problems. That's my experience.

There is only 1 way you could use a derringer for your pistol+ shot. To quote the handbook... "Pocket pistols and Derringers are popular for use in side matches and are occasionally introduced as an additional firearm in main match stages." Now, in all the years I've been doing SASS, I have never seen this happen, but it can. If the stage directions were to say something akin to "Extra pistol shots may come from a reloaded main match revolver, derringer, or pocket pistol" then yes, you could use the derringer. I would think that the derringer or PP would have to either be carried in a third holster, or staged at a predetermined location, as specified by the stage directions. Just like if there were an extra 2 to 4 shots specifically for those pistols. But to just use one without the stage directions saying you can, no, you can't. And to be be honest, I'd much rather see a pocket pistol used for the extra stuff. To many people don't know how to safely load and handle a derringer.

Ah, Rancho, I just noticed that you are "south of Boston." I will recommend Sergey at Rustblue Gunsmithing. He's in Natick, and does good work. He's done some things for me over the years, and I have always been pleased with the results. For example, I have an antique Colt 1860 that was pretty messed up. He got it working like new, and had to fabricate some of the needed parts. And, it was not stupid expensive. https://www.rustbluing.com/ That's his website. I give you my strongest recommendation for him. Good luck.

I have found, in general, that flushing out the firing pin channel with Gunscrubber goes a long way, generically, to prevent failures to fire. Especially if you've got a caliber like .45 Colt. .44-40 seems to not have that problem. More specifically, I have an early Navy Arms 66, the one that has the 73 style lever safety. Previous owner(s) had removed it, and lightened the hammer spring so much you could see the hammer falling more slowly than on my Henry. I took the gun to Happy Trails, who is retired, and asked him to more or less return the gun to "factory specs." Or at least as close to it as practical. It's probably slicker and smoother than an untouched gun, but it's not "over tweaked" anymore. All of that adds up to what others have mentioned, maybe your hammer spring is too light. That's something I'd check.

Would help to confuse the seller if we were to run away some more?

Yup. Some sort of a bolt contraption in the trigger guard. You'd have to work up something like that to "slam fire" a lever gun.

If you want to slam fire your rifle, take the following steps. 1. Get a Lightning 2. Hold back the trigger while working the pump back and forth. This also works on a 97. To slam fire a lever gun, study this video.

Lotsa good advice here. I'll try some it myself. Of course, I am not a fast shooter by any definition, so I can't offer any realistic suggestions. That being said, I am faster with a Lightning than any lever gun. But that's not really something that'll help most folks. But... Here's something I've always wondered about. Put a little more powder in the case. That'll increase your muzzle velocity! And that means the bullets are moving faster, so they will hit the target more quickly! And in a game where things can be decided by a .001 margin, that very well might help in some way. And if you'll buy that...

Yeah, that was one of the things I wondered about. These guns have been "together" for a long time, and suddenly reunited all, or just as many as possible, original parts might make the reunited pistols look rather odd. This would be a major reason not to do it, as would the fact that "mismatch" is a historical one. This really was an idle thought on my part, I don't even own an artillery model, but do have some 1st gens, (All matching) and I got to wondering about this specific scenario. I also have one that is a little mixed up, as well as some other mixed guns that have clearly been mixed for decades, if not over 100 years, and they don't look mixed up, so to speak. I had not considered the "Kopec Factor" but that is a very valid point. Anything is possible, of course. But practical is by far and away a much different concept. Just finding the different parts would be difficult in the extreme, but there are a host of legitimate reasons to not "reunite" an old Colt. I just hope the idea itself was one worth wondering about!

The only way it could possibly work, would be if there was some sort of a searchable database where owners could input the various serial numbers, and then see if anyone else has put in the same serial number for a different part. Then you'd have to figure out how to contact each other and arrange to meet, see if you want to make the swap, and so on. A huge, daunting task to be sure. And hundreds of people would probably have to input their data before a match was found. But it wouldn't be "just another used Colt." It would be a US Army issue one with matching numbers.

This was not expected; more information! I like it. This one of the best things about the Wire, you can learn things from folks who have more or additional information.

Ah! For some reason I thought .38 Special was created in 1901. I stand corrected. In that case, I'll happily include in the the list of "classic" .38's.

As we all know, a First Generation Colt SAA will have the serial number in three places, the bottom of the frame, the bottom of the trigger housing, and the bottom of the grip. As we also know, the vast majority of the so called "Artillery" models that were reworked into the configuration by Colt, will not have those number matching. Has anyone ever thought of creating a kind of Artillery Model collectors association whereby owners of said pistols might be able to trade parts with each other so they can put their pistols back together again? I know that many of these mixed up pistols have been together for a long time, and that reassembling the original parts might with up with some odd looking pistols, and it would take a LOT of work for just 2 people to complete their guns, and would likely involve quite a few different owners/pistols, but it is an interesting concept. Any thoughts on the matter? Is it just too impractical? Would doing this hurt or help said pistols value?

Oh heck... Legalize the Mare's Leg.

Only .38 Short Colt, .38 S&W, 38 Long Colt and .38-44. (.38-40 is already okay) Those are the only classic .38's. I think... But then again, by that logic, .32-20 should also be okay. As should .32 S&W and .32 S&W Long and.... Ah... The permutations are endless!

I seem to recall something called Glazer Safety Slugs. Seems to me that would make more sense.

As promised, here are some pics of my pistol. Given the shape of everything, and the checkering on the grips and location of the sights, I am fairly sure this is a 1901 model. It looks a little rough around the edges, but overall is in good functional shape. From this side, you can see how the markings are still clear and sharp. But you can also see the broken forestock. I am gonna be showing this to a gunsmith soon, one who specializes in restorations. I've seen some before and after pics on his website where he has taken things that look too far gone to repair and now has them looking like new. At the very least, I plan to ask him to fix the stock. I may go further. I think it would be nice to see this gun looking like new again, but I have not yet made up my mind. Still wish there was a side match where I could use this.

WyliefoxEsquire posted a list of what people said. I like the list in that it's a good reference, but I'm gonna comment on a few of them. Neon followers: NO! There should be no rule that requires people to modify a historic and possibly valuable firearm. Stoke 98 &87 Long overdue. Please do as soon as possible Allow adjustable sights Yes Allow other pump shotguns Yes! At least the Burgess and the Spencer. The 93 is also safe with short shells and black powder, just like an 87. The Marlin... The later members of that family may be all right, but I agree with whoever said you need to document it being safe. Shoot and move: Not high on my list, but I'd not object to it. Multiple "P's" per stage No allow 22LR Yes Allow SxS ejectors Yes! Create Steampunk costume category: No need. It's at best a sub category of B Western, and it does not need defining. Increase Classis Cowboy power factor. No. The ones I deleted, I have no opinion of.

Seen many I agree with, but I'll add this one, legalize the Winchester 95 for long range events.

Okay, I am 99% certain mine is a 1901. I'd like to post some pics, but I left my phone at work. Maybe tomorrow. Sadly, the forestock is broken with about a third of it gone, but I still have the original piece. Maybe I'll look into getting it repaired somehow.

Interesting article. Based on the descriptions, mine is either an 1891 or a 1901 Target Pistol. But the serial number has 4 digits. What an interesting mystery. Probably a 1901. When I get home from work, I'll dig it out of the safe and compare it more closely to the descriptions and let you know.

Hi, everyone. I am wondering if anyone knows anything about the pistol version of the Remington Rolling Block. I have one in .22 LR, and I have seen them on the used market in .22 Short, and ".50 CF." The .50's are all advertised as being either US Army or Navy issue. Does anyone know if these are .50-70, or are they some other cartridge? Were the pistols available in any other calibers, or is .50 and .22 it? Is there any source that can tell me when my own pistol was made? First hand knowledge, or pointing me at some source with the information would be appreciated. On a more practical note, I do know that there were more than a few makers of single shot pistols in at least .22 rimfire. I don't know about large, centerfire pistols beside the Rolling Block, but I've often thought a single shot pistol side match could be fun. Would anyone else be interested?

A few years ago, someone posted something here on the wire about how a famous Old West personage, I think it was Buffalo Bill, ordered a customized SAA from the factory, and among other things, requested that the barrel be no longer than they ejector housing. I know it's vague, but that's all I remember from an awhile ago post.

That's a really pretty gun! And you got it dirty! Well, so what? Just clean it when your done. No reason not to get your guns dirty by shooting them. That's what they are for. This one was also made in 1901. And this one's 1904 One of the closest things I have to a matched pair. .32-20's. Haven't done black powder in them, yet, but I may.

Why? You may ask? Cuz the "pistol grip" stock looks much more natural than the cut down straight rifle stock. Which relates to "why a Pistol grip stock on a rifle" question. And, it also relates to the thumb wrap question as well. Perhaps in a silly way, but it is related.