Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


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

  1. 2 hours ago, J-BAR #18287 said:

    The 38/44 was created in 1930 in response to law enforcement requests for a cartridge that would penetrate cars.  Apparently the .38 Special was sufficient for crooks on foot or horseback, but wouldn't go through car doors or other car parts reliably.  So S&W souped up the .38 Special with more modern powders and made a heavier N Frame revolver to handle it.  Unfortunately, some folks tried to use the souped up cartridges in their smaller regular .38 Special guns, resulting in dangerous spontaneous disassembly.  So in 1935 S&W lengthened the .38 Special case by 1/10" to prevent chambering in .38 Special guns, and called it the .357 Magnum.  The early .357 Magnum revolvers were the "Registered Magnum", quite expensive.  The 38/44 revolvers remained popular with police departments because they were just as powerful and lots cheaper.  38/44 revolvers were manufactured from 1930 to 1966 (except for the war years 1941-1946), when less expensive .357 Magnum revolvers became available.


    Ah.   It seems my memory of the dates of the origin of the .357 Magnum was off by about 20 years.   Thanks for clarifying that point.

    I wonder if it's fair to say that the .38/44 that led to the .357 Magnum was essentially .38 Special +P?

    • Like 1
  2. In simplest terms, .38 Short Colt made a little longer is .38 Long Colt.  .38 Long Colt made a little longer is .38 Special.  .38 Special made a little longer is .357 Magnum.

    In more detailed terms, .38 Short Colt started out as the cartridge used in centerfire conversions of old .36 caliber cap and ball revolvers.

    Both the Short and Long Colt used a heeled bullet where the bullet's caliber was identical to the outside diameter of the casing.  The bore size for these guns was .375".   At one point in the late 1890's, the bore diameter was reduced to .357" when the LC cartridge switched to an inside the case bullet.  Modern Short and Long ammo is loaded with the inside the case bullet, although as far as I know, no guns were ever made specifically in Short Colt with the smaller bore.  This was "overcome" by loading the cartridges with a hollow base bullet so they would engage the rifling in older, larger bore guns.  I have vintage firearms of the same make and model in .38 Long Colt with both the large and small bore.

    At one point, the Army decided to ditch the .45 Colt and adopted the .38 Long Colt as it's new caliber for side arms.  All was well until the Spanish American War and the Philippine Insurrection happened.  First, the .38 Long Colt was found lacking in stopping power.  Second, Colt couldn't churn out .38 DA revolvers fast enough to meet the need, so S&W was asked if they could supply the Army with a revolver to supplement the Colt.  Thus was born the S&W Model 1899.  (Known today as the Model 10)  It was chambered for the .38 Long Colt, or .38 MIL CTG as it was stamped on the revolvers.  (I know, I have one.)  Anyway. soon after delivering these pistols, knowing of the LC's lack of performance, S&W developed the .38 Special round by making the Long Colt a little longer.  It was more powerful, and the extra length was to prevent people from chambering it in older LC revolvers that could not handle the pressure.  The Army eventually bought some 99's in the caliber, and off and on over the years, especially during WWI and WWII, they bought a bunch of M&Ps, VictorY models and Model 10's in .38 Special that were finally withdrawn from service in 1986, making the revolver America's longest serving sidearm, even if it was a supplemental one.

    Anyway, sometime in the late 50's/early 60's (I don't know exactly when) it was decided that the .38 Special wasn't powerful enough.  The first solution to this was something called the .38-44, essentially a hot loaded .38 Special.   But eventually they instead lengthened the case again to create the .357 Magnum.   All of this adds up to why the guns chambered in these calibers are "backwards compatible" with the earlier ones.


    .38 S&W is a completely different animal, not a part of this Short Colt to Magnum family, and not interchangeable in any way.   Among other things, it uses a .360" bullet.

    But the .38 S&W has it's own peculiar history and derivatives.

    The first was the .38-44 cartridge, which is NOT the same cartridge as the .38-44 that led to the .357 Magnum.   This much earlier .38-44 was a .38 S&W case made to be the same length as the cylinder of the S&W New Model 3.  The bullet would sit entirely in the cartridge case.   Designed for target use, it was a VERY accurate round.   You can safely chamber .38 S&W in anything chambered for the old .38-44.  I do it all the time.  (Black powder only) 


    Oh yeah, there is also .38 New Colt Police.  This IS .38 S&W, that's just what Colt called it in their guns chambered for it

    The other .38 S&W derivative is the .38-200 round that the Brits made their standard sidearm caliber just before WWII.  It uses the same case as the .38 S&W, but is loaded to much higher pressures.   While it can be safely chambered in the Mark IV Webley and Enfield revolvers it was designed for, as well as Lend Lease Victory Model S&W's, loading .38-200 in an older .38 S&W revolver will blow it up.   But, you can of course load the older weaker round in the modern revolvers if you wish to do so.  I have never been able to find an ammo with the ,38-200 headstamp, but it is possible to use regular brass and load to those levels if you so desire.

    And I think, that sums it all up in a nice general way. 

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 6
  3. 14 hours ago, Trailrider #896 said:

    No .44-40's? Bahhh!  Humbug! :blink:


    I do find it odd that it's .357 Magnum only.   But thinking about it, there are a few reasons why this may be the case...


    1.  It's just the introductory caliber.   Other calibers may come later.  I would bet on .44 Magnum, and maybe .45 Colt.


    2.  .357 is believed to be what will be the best seller.  If it will reliably also feed .38 Special, then it's all the more viable from a marketing POV.


    3.  The gun is aimed at the more general market, and not CAS specific.  This would be why .44-40 won't make an appearance in the short term.  If it winds up being a great seller, that may change.  


    In the end, I suspect all three reasons were factors, especially, number 3.   If they were really going for the CAS crowd, they'd all have front sights like the brass one.  But the more modern front sight on the carbines suggests to me a more general audience appeal than folks like us.  Plus, the specific large loop used seems to me to support this idea as well.

  4. Historically, .32-20 has a reputation for shooting low, at least in revolvers.




    These three old Colts have all had their front sights lowered by previous owners.

    Now, compare them to this out of the box 3rd Generation that I got new.




    Its front sight is noticeably shorter than the one on my unmodified .44's and 45's.  


    For example...



    All of 'em seem to shoot where I aim, so yes, adjusting the front sight can help if they are hitting to high or low.

  5. 8 hours ago, Griff said:

    It belongs with your .22 collection.  Or... your lever collection that consists of any lever action ever made.  So you have many more to collect!  Start with a Volcanic...  end up with the S&W 1854... and everything in between!


    Oh dang!  I have always loved lever actions.  Ever since I was a little kid, I thought they were cool.   How I became a Lightning guy is a mystery to me.

    It was goal to have a complete Winchester collection, and over time, that has expanded a little, but not quite to every lever gun ever made.  Here are my current thoughts on it all, and the status thereof...

    Winchester Family (Including shotguns)


    Volcanic:  I think these are cool, especially the pistols, but since no one make a functional replica that can shoot modern ammo, I'll never have one.

    Henry:  Uberti Replica, .44-40

    1866:  Uberti made carbine, .44-40.  Uberti Rifle, .45 Colt.  Uberti .22.  (This is more like a brass frame replica of the Winchester 73 .22's than anything else.)

    1873:  Winchester rifle .32-20.  Uberti .44-40.  I got a second stock for this one, which has a factory 16" barrel.  Chopped one of the stocks and put a big loop lever on it to create an ersatz 73 "Mares Leg Buntline."

    1876:  Uberti replica, .45-60

    1886:  Winchester, .45-70

    1887:  Winchester.  Chiappa in "Terminator" configuration.

    Model 88:  I don't have one of these...

    1892:  Rossi carbine, .44 Magnum.  Armi San Marco rifle, .45 Colt, Winchester carbine, rebarreled to .44 Magnum and with big loop lever.  Winchester 92, .32-20

    1893:  I actually found one in great mechanical condition

    93/97:  Found one of these too,

    1894:  Sears Ted Williams Model 100, .30-30.  Winchester .32 Winchester Special (pre-64), Winchester .44 Magnum, (pre-83)  All have 20" bbl

    9422:  .22 Magnum.  First gun given to me by my father.  .22 RF.

    1895:  .30-40 Krag.  My first Lever Gun purchase

    1897:  20",  30", Trench Gun replica, Trap Model

    1901:  Don't have.  

    So, it's pretty complete.

    Recently, I acquired a Marlin 1888, the early top eject model, in .32-20.  This makes me want to obtain a model 1881 in ,45-70 and an early .22 for completeness.  I may also eventually consider a battery of the side ejects, but we'll see.


    Other stuff?  I dunno.  The Whitney Kennedy is interesting looking, but I don't know if I wanna go down that road.   Same with the Evans.   Not interested in the "Henry" family.  

    And then there's "sub models" of Winchester which are esentially 92s, 94s or the 86 with a button magazine and maybe in odd calibers.  I hate button magazines. 


    Is this a good start?

  6. It's not the large loop itself that's the problem, it's the shape of it.  Essentially a triangle, it looks kinda goofy.  To be honest, between it, and the front sight, I don't think those two are really aimed at the SASS crowd.   The brass frame with a more traditional front sight and regular loop is prolly more attractive to many in the SASS crowd.

    And if you wanna have a big loop, it should look like this...



    Or maybe this...



    But I've got weird opinions.

  7. 3 hours ago, Assassin said:

    There were other pump shotguns produced before 1918. Other than safety concerns, why aren't they allowed in WB shooting? Seems like if it doesn't say Winchester it's not worthy. Remington model 10, Browning A5, etc. And, folks wonder why WB never really caught on.


    Before SASS created rules for Wild Bunch, those things were quite commonly seen.  But when SASS created rules, they made WB a 97 only game.  That kinda carried over from the 97 being the only allowed pump shotgun in CAS, even though some of those others are perfectly safe to use.  As to why early autoloaders are not allowed for WB?  "They just aren't" seems to be the only answer.

  8. 12 minutes ago, Hashknife Cowboy said:

    Mine is in the category of a great rifle to shoot  and so glad I got it when I did.... 




    Winchester 9422 .22LR Serial #F516427.JPG


    Oh!   I like how shiny your stock is!   

    I have two of them, to be honest.   My first one is the first rifle I ever owned, my father gave it to me when turned 12, and it's in .22 Magnum.

    Then, about 2 or 3 years ago, I found one in a local shop in LR, and snatched it.  Surprised at how expensive they've gotten!

  9. The Winchester 9422.

    Great rifle no matter how you slice it.  But, what would you "consider" it to be"


    The name of course, 9422 implies that it's a .22 version of the Model 94, but we all know that's not true.


    Others point out that while it's not one of them either, it is in some ways more similar to the Model 92 than the 94.

    It matches the general profile of either rifle just fine.

    With all of that in mind, if you were trying to, if for no other reason that a point in your collection, trying to put together a batter of rifles in .22, pistol caliber and rifle caliber lever actions, would you pair the 9422 with a 92 and and 86, or with a 94 in .44 Magnum and .30-30?   Or would you use a 9422 for both sets?


    This is just a "for fun" experiment.  (Although I am doing this for a few different "families" of rifles.  Don't know if I'll complete the acquisition of everything)


    • Confused 1
  10. If you mean physically loading and unloading the gun while shooting, they are all pretty much the same.  


    If you mean which one is easiest to reload ammunition FOR, then the first question is, what do you already load for with regard to rifle cartridges?  

    Generically, I'd say it's easier to reload something like .45-70 or .30-40 Krag than .43 Spanish or another "obscure to Americans" cartridge that it can be hard to get brass and/or bullets for.

    So, what about 7mm Mauser?  I'd avoid this caliber.  Not because I it's a hard cartridge to reload, but because I have read that the chambers in Rolling Blocks in that caliber tend to be oversized and that the brass will wear out a lot quicker, and may even bulge.  I discovered this when I was considering purchasing one in 7mm and did a little research. (I already reload the caliber.)  

    Good luck.

    • Like 1
  11. 23 minutes ago, Flying W Ramrod said:



    That's what I thought.   Which makes the statement in the handbook that reproductions of it are legal for WB all the more strange.


  12. 1 hour ago, Abilene, SASS # 27489 said:

    Chinese used to make the 93/97, not any more.  There's a few out there.

    The 93/97 is not a reproduction of the 93.   It's a 97 made to look like a 93.  If you compare a 93 to a 97 to a 93/97, you can see that this is true.  (I have all three)

    So the question remains.   Does someone make a reproduction 93?

  13. Interesting...

    I double checked to make sure I'd not forgotten.

    Legal Wild Bunch Shotgun...

    Winchester 97
    Winchester 12
    Winchester 87

    IAC 93/97

    Any SxS or Single Barrel shotgun.

    Lot's to choose from.

    But here's the interesting part....

    "Original Winchester 1893 shotguns were declared unsafe by the manufacturer and are NOT legal for use in Wild Bunch Action Shooting™ matches. Fully accurate reproductions are allowed."


    That would indicate that a reproduction 93 would be legal, even if an original is not.   Does anyone make a reproduction 93?









  14. Does anyone know anything about a one time collector/gunsmith named RF Enewold who apparently lived in Reno, Nevada?

    The information I have found online is rather minimal; he lived in Reno, he collected old guns, he was a gunsmith, he had a habit of stamping RF ENWOLD on the guns he owned, or worked on, a large portion of his collection was stolen, and that's about it.

    I have a rather nice S&W New Model 3 that has RF ENEWOLD stamped on the frame, under the grips, so there is apparently a connection to this fellow.  I am wondering if there is any way I might be able to learn more.   The gun is drilled for a shoulder stock, but S&W has no record of doing the mod themselves, so I am wondering if this was something done by Enewold.   


    The factory letter does tell me that it was once owned by AC Gould, a Boston area pistol shooter.  I've found losta info on him.

    Trying to document the history of an old gun is fascinating.   You'll never know what you unearth.

  15. 1 hour ago, Rye Miles #13621 said:


    The front sight on the brass frame is more to my liking, but while I don't personally care for the style on the other two, I don't believe it's not legal.  I've seen it on the range from time to time and no one has ever objected.

    Hmm..   The brass frame one could maybe be the basis for a Hollywierd Henry...


  16. 7 hours ago, watab kid said:



    i bet that is a sight to see , i know if i was watchin you do that it would make me chuckle - i just know im not going to buy another of the short ones , i couldnt shoot the one i had good enough to enjjoy it at a match , , mine went down the road with a number of others over the years , 


    Mine are .44 Specials with .44-40  spare cylinders.   What caliber is (was?) yours?

  17. 4 hours ago, watab kid said:

    ill not be shooting the 3" either - i tried that and it was a real PITA as i got older , i like my 5s 


    Oh, but you GOTTA try this sometime!


    I've have used to the two nickel guns together more often than I have the two Sheriffs.

    It is a HUGE amount of fun, and the laughs you get when other see that snubby come out of a holster that'll hold a second Buntline are worth the price of admission

    • Like 2
  18. 7 minutes ago, watab kid said:

    i dont see me wearing mine in a holster for a match but id like to have one for that BBQ event , 


    Actually, drawing one from a holster is a lot easier then you think.  In this pic, you can see an important detail...




    That holster, although it is on my left hip, is "technically" a right handed cross draw holster.  That little bit of a tilt makes it much easier to draw and reholster than if you were to have a straight draw one.  (Pic taken before I slimmed down from chemo!)

  19. 17 hours ago, Horace Patootie, SASS #35798 said:

    Thanks !  I'll check them out !



    They can be a little pricey if you go nuts with embellishments, but over the years, I have had them make me holsters for my three Mare's Leg type pistols, and a Buntline holster that that I really like.

    By the way, it is my goal to again visit Tombstone Arizona someday.  As you can see in my profile pic, I am wearing my Buntline Special next to the OK Corral.   It is my desire to shoot a SASS event there, with this...



    And this...



    I figure that'll make me all "Wyatt Earpey."


    • Like 1
  • Create New...

Important Information

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