Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

IAC Norinco 1893/97 illegal for Cowboy Matches but legal for Wild Bunch matches...


Diamond_Jack

Recommended Posts

Purchased a beautiful IAC/Norinco 1893/97 for matches. The seller listed it as legal for Sass matches. Well, I found this was partially true. They are legal for WILD BUNCH matches but not for COWBOY matches. I called for an explanation. Hipshot called me back to advise these shotguns are not legal for SASS Cowboy matches as the "scalloped" (my word not his) receiver is a "perceived advantage" for single loading through the ejection port. I thought WTH. I vehemently disagree with this reasoning on this basis of testing both the IAC and a "legal" '97 with three other shooters to see if it presents an "advantage" just today.

 

At Charlie Elliott Wildfire Center in Madsion, GA I went with two other shooters one right handed and one left-handed. We all fired runs with exchanging both shotguns portloading single shells each shot. There was no advantage one to the other. As a matter of observation the 1893 with the scalloped receiver we found the shells swallowed around more with the additonal space sometimes causing a delay as you pumped the round. All guns fired normally through 4 boxes of AA each. We tested both extensively and see no speed advantage one to the other. If anything our left handed Cowboy had an advantage using his right hand to load from the right side on both guns. Guess you need to ban left-handers there Wild Bunch! What is funny is SASS Cowboy allows 1873 Winchester/clone rifles with "short stroke" kits which ARE a definite advantage for rifle shooters and especially onus when this modification wasn't available in the 1800's. Go figure.

 

I would request the Wild Bunch (or whoever makes this decision) to reconsider the legality of the IAC/Norinco.1893/97 for Cowboy matches unless there is a better reason for banning them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

This has been the rule for many many years.

It has been brought many many times and has always remained the same.

 

When I get asked about what types of guns to get for CAS, I suggest reading the rules and then go for what you want that the rules allows.

 

Saves a lot of "I think it should be allowed because..........."

it's period corect

everyone is doing it

I don't think it has an advantage (If it didn't have an advantage, why did the manufacture build it to replace the older model?)

or what ever your point of view might be that does not conform to the rules as written.

 

If you want something made legal, submit it to the TGs and get it voted on until you get it accepted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW - The SASS rule regarding the 1897 & clones being the ONLY pump SGs allowed for main match use was NOT a TG "voting issue".

Any change in legallity re: the 93/97 will involve convincing the Wild Bunch to rescind their edict on this issue.

 

The WBAS has different rules (and very different method of implementing rule changes) on this mainly due to the fact that the shotgun is generally PRE-loaded at the LT for Wild Bunch competition, rather than being staged empty & then loaded 'on the clock'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PaleWolf that's what I am trying to do is get them to rescind the rule against them. And not simply because I bought one (although that's a really good one) but because the reason for illegality as stated is lame. Pre-loaded or loading on the clock doesn't make much different except they believe port loading has an advantage with this SG. Where did they get this idea! I've heard also "they blow up" because of the cut reciever... heck I've seen three Schofields blow their top straps and one 1873 SAA clone blow it's cylinder wall. These were caused by faultly handloading mostly. Made by modern standards and materials I haven't heard of one of these 93's blowing up and since they are allowed in one discipline why not the other. Seems like a pretty lame reason to me "perceived advantage". Admittedly there is I lot I don't know but am always willing to learn. Maybe I missed the page but where is the illegal list or statement in the rule book?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can throw all the logic you want at this issue and it won't change a thing. The Wild Bunch has heard it all. They don't care.

That is FACT :excl:

BTW, I'll bet you won't have any issue at your monthly shoots with it.

With that said-You should have done some research before you bought it.

NEVER, believe the salesperson........ ;)

LG

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Maker-Wright

It ain't all bad, Like Lumpy Grits said... wouldn't be surprised if they will let you shoot it at your home club. And, It's always good to have more than one '97. I may be wrong, but I'd imagine there's many parts that you could swap from the '93 to a '97 if you needed an ejector, extractor, carrier pin, mag tube (all parts I've broken in my '97). I believe it was a quote from Holy Terror that I'd read that stated you need 3 '97's; one your using, one for a back-up, and the one that's currently in the shop. Might sound extreme, but at times it ain't far from the truth. (and yes, I have 3... a shooter, a back-up, and one that I pound the p*** out of dry-firing)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I thought the 93 was outlawed due to a safety issue of single loading and the potential for it to fire out of battery and really ruin the ROs day. I know I read this somewhere. I'm not that bright to make it up.

 

The 93 was replaced by the 97 due to safety concerns even back in the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This really is a dead issue - just ain't gonna happen! Your local club might let you shoot it at monthly matches, but many local clubs stick to the rules. Can't hurt to ask, however! :)

 

Same thing with the 97 trench gun. Same 97, but it has a hand guard, so it is not legal for cowboy, but it is legal (and cool!) for Wild Bunch. No bayonet though........ <_<

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess like the old Marine saying, "Tis better to beg forgiveness than ask permission..." I'm disappointed the Wild Bunch is so monolithic and somewhat neolithic... Maybe I will put duct tape over the scallop ;) after all as the Ultimate Cheater I have a reputation to uphold. I can shoot my sidexside or my other '97 but frankly the lock up on this '93/97 is sweet and the pump action is extremely positive. I have been in SASS since the mid-90's when I retired from the Corps but left retirement for duty with the Navy and didn't do much as I travelled constantly until my second retirement in 2011... Grizzly, I might take you up on that suggestion and dust off my 1911 and shoot Wild Bunch...yeah that all teach 'em ;)

 

John Barleycorn, I have seen those hard feelings and just don't understand why some in leadership get so "butt-hurt" when an average money poor cowboy makes a suggestion. I will never be in the tall cotton bunch and am ok with that I want to have fun not drama. Thank all you guys for the great suggestions. It's illogical to ban the '93 since the 97 evolved from it. They are family. BTW all guns from the 1800's had safety issues of one kind or another. If Wyatt Earp was alive today and shot SASS he would undoubtely holster a Ruger Vaquero.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I thought the 93 was outlawed due to a safety issue of single loading and the potential for it to fire out of battery and really ruin the ROs day. I know I read this somewhere. I'm not that bright to make it up.

 

The 93 was replaced by the 97 due to safety concerns even back in the day.

It's legal in SASS Wild Bunch matches. ;)

So that 'kills' the safety concerns, me thinks.

LG

Link to post
Share on other sites

This really is a dead issue - just ain't gonna happen! Your local club might let you shoot it at monthly matches, but many local clubs stick to the rules. Can't hurt to ask, however! :)

 

Same thing with the 97 trench gun. Same 97, but it has a hand guard, so it is not legal for cowboy, but it is legal (and cool!) for Wild Bunch. No bayonet though........ <_<

You can't use the sling either. Wish we could, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Winchester '97 replaced the '93.

 

The shotgun being discussed is a Chinese reproduction called a 93/97. I don't think there are any safety concerns about the gun.

 

Over the last couple of years I've had people ask about this gun. I tell them it's not SASS legal but it's approved for Wild Bunch. I never suggest that someone buy it and then hope that their local club will let them use it.

 

I've seen these listed on Gunbroker and almost every time the description states or at least implies that it's a great gun for cowboy action shooting. While I'm sure there are unscrupulous sellers out there who might know it's not SASS legal and promote it as a cowboy gun, but in my experience many gunshop employees don't know the difference between cowboy action shooting, mounted shooting or whatever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's legal in SASS Wild Bunch matches. ;)

So that 'kills' the safety concerns, me thinks.

Wild Bunch loads from the magazine. The safety issue comes from single loading where a shell can get into such a position that it fires in open battery.

 

Yes, all old "period correct" guns have or had safety issues. Thats why the 1866 became the 1873 and the 1893 became the 1897, because they recognised these issues and corrected them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Original Winchester 93's had some legitimate safety issues. That's they Winchester turned it into the 97.

 

For safety reasons, original 93's are dissallowed. Most folks don't have a problem with this. Occasionally someone who has a vintage 93 that works just fine wishes he could use it, but this is a real rairity.

 

The new "93's" are really 97's that have been made to look like 93's.

 

I bought one, knowing that they were not legal, because I wanted to have an example of every 1800's Winchester model in my collection.

 

As I understand it, the reasons why the new 93/97 is outlawed is twofold:

1. The percieved advantage that the larger ejection port gives.

2. Somone might try to sneak in a real 93, claiming it's a 93/97, which would be unsafe.

 

Personally, I think both reasons are silly, and the 93/97 should be allowed, but I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.

 

So, enjoy the fact that you have a one of these guns. Shoot it when/where you can, and just have fun with it. That's the best way to look at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never say never! I remember that the Henry Big Boy was not allowed, was adamantly outlawed by the WB, voted down by the TG's all the while being touted by Henry as the perfect rifle for CAS..........................and then it was OK. :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one that's not SASS legal is the Marlin pump shotgun. There's nothing wrong with them (especially with the light loads we use) except Marlin was stupid enough to put in a "standard" safety disclaimer way back when. So, since Winchester was smart enough not to ,their pump shotguns are legal. One of our club members has 2 of the Marlin pumps. He shoots them once in a while at our monthly shoots, but we had to put our foot down about using them for the State shoot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one that's not SASS legal is the Marlin pump shotgun. There's nothing wrong with them (especially with the light loads we use) except Marlin was stupid enough to put in a "standard" safety disclaimer way back when. So, since Winchester was smart enough not to ,their pump shotguns are legal. One of our club members has 2 of the Marlin pumps. He shoots them once in a while at our monthly shoots, but we had to put our foot down about using them for the State shoot.

It was a heck of a lot more than a "standard" safety disclaimer. Marlin advised they were unsafe to shoot and not to shoot them.

 

Marlin Issues Warning on Obsolete Shotguns

The age of these obsolete models is now 70 to 100 years.

Unfortunately, Marlin has no records of manufacture such as

materials, heat treatment procedures, or acceptance standards. This

combination of age and unknown metallurgy and life history in a large

percentage of these units has prompted the company to strongly

recommend against these guns being fired.

Of major concern are failures in the firing system, but

there is no clear cut failure mode or sequence of events leading to

such failures.

Models;

1898, 16, 17, 19, 19S, 19G, 19N, 21, 24, 24G, 26, 30, 42,

49, 49N exposed hammer slide action shotguns.

 

28, 31, 43, 44, 53, 63 hammerless slide action shotguns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

 

I would not serve as TO for any shooter using the Marlin pump shotgun. YMMV!

 

It was a heck of a lot more than a "standard" safety disclaimer. Marlin advised they were unsafe to shoot and not to shoot them.

 

Marlin Issues Warning on Obsolete Shotguns


The age of these obsolete models is now 70 to 100 years.
Unfortunately, Marlin has no records of manufacture such as
materials, heat treatment procedures, or acceptance standards. This
combination of age and unknown metallurgy and life history in a large
percentage of these units has prompted the company to strongly
recommend against these guns being fired.


Of major concern are failures in the firing system, but
there is no clear cut failure mode or sequence of events leading to
such failures.


Models;


1898, 16, 17, 19, 19S, 19G, 19N, 21, 24, 24G, 26, 30, 42,
49, 49N exposed hammer slide action shotguns.

 

28, 31, 43, 44, 53, 63 hammerless slide action shotguns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never say never! I remember that the Henry Big Boy was not allowed, was adamantly outlawed by the WB, voted down by the TG's all the while being touted by Henry as the perfect rifle for CAS..........................and then it was OK. :huh:

Howdy Mr. Barnes, yep kinda weird how they got the toothpaste back in the tube on that one :wacko: And just last year we got the Model 12 approved for WB :D However I doubt the 97/93 will ever be approved for SASS, buttcha never know :blink: Good Luck :)

 

Jefro :ph34r: Relax-Enjoy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Much has been said on the safety, or lack thereof, of the old Marlin pump shotgun.

 

After much reading, I have come to believe that there are some very legitimate safety concerns with this gun. However, I have also come to believe that, with proper precautions, later examples can be perfectly safe to use. The problem is that while this is true, there is no way for a TO to know if a Marlin has been properly checked for safety issues.

 

I am very much oversimplifying here, but for the above reasons, I think that the ban on old Marlins makes sense. That being said, if Marlin (or someone else) were to come out with a modern reproduction that addresses the safety concerns, I think that it should be allowed.

 

But, it likely would not be. The whole "the 97 is the only legal pump shotgun" rule is the real culprit. This not only throws out the Marlin and the 93, for legitimate safety reasons, but it also throws out the Spencer and the Burgess, which I have never heard that there are any safety concerns with. (Other than the inherit questions about Damscus barrells) It also prevents reproductions of these fine old guns being recreated by anyone. Why would any company decide to reproduce anything when its most logical market, dissallows it. It also rules out the possibility of someone making a totally new pump shotgun that invokes the spirit of the era we play in, even though pistols and rifles like this are perfectly fine.

 

Do I like it? No.

 

Do I wish it would change? Yes.

 

Is it likely to change? Well, never say never, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

Nothing wrong with disagreeing with parts of the rules, I guess. Nothing wrong with intelligently discussing them or even advocating for change. As long as agree to abide by them when it matters, (whatever that means) then we'll be fine. And who knows, maybe someday changes that people really want will come to pass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with disagreeing with parts of the rules, I guess. Nothing wrong with intelligently discussing them or even advocating for change. As long as agree to abide by them when it matters, (whatever that means) then we'll be fine. And who knows, maybe someday changes that people really want will come to pass.

 

+1 :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....well, Mr. Pettifogger -

Back in the day, I saw a Marlin Model 19 pump. The price was right, and I had the occasion to speak to U.S. Grant "Hizself", about other matters and also happened to ask him about the Model 19. At that time he said it was perfectly legal for what we were doing, and that it was ok to buy, and so, I bought it...........I have it to this day.

......I sure wish he'd buy it from me.....................

JM2centsW, Doc

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Jack,

 

I call rules like these "The Mom Rule." (When you asked mom 'WHY' she always said 'because I said so.' Accept the fact that there doesn't always have to be a why. It just is.

 

You might be interested to know that your findings equal my own when I first bought a 93/97. Got it on sale at Big 5 for $250. It served me well as a practice gun and now is our 'house gun'. Funny how the wife, Cimarron Larna feels more comfy with a 97 loaded with buck...

 

I found the larger port, if anything, encouraged shells to bounce right back out (I'm a lefty) and wasn't any kind of advantage. Truth is a matter of perception. That was what was perceived at the time, a time when SASS, by rules and/or edicts was trying to 'curb the arms race' to put it politely.

 

Other than that difference there is no real difference between a 93/97 and a 97 internally. A real 93 is a different animal; they were an unsafe design and I sure wouldn't fire one, especially under the conditions we SASS shooters do. There is no real reason to continue to ban a perfectly good gun BUT...they don't make or import the 93/97 anymore so I think this is largely a moot point. For now...

Purchased a beautiful IAC/Norinco 1893/97 for matches. The seller listed it as legal for Sass matches. Well, I found this was partially true. They are legal for WILD BUNCH matches but not for COWBOY matches. I called for an explanation. Hipshot called me back to advise these shotguns are not legal for SASS Cowboy matches as the "scalloped" (my word not his) receiver is a "perceived advantage" for single loading through the ejection port. I thought WTH. I vehemently disagree with this reasoning on this basis of testing both the IAC and a "legal" '97 with three other shooters to see if it presents an "advantage" just today.

 

At Charlie Elliott Wildfire Center in Madsion, GA I went with two other shooters one right handed and one left-handed. We all fired runs with exchanging both shotguns portloading single shells each shot. There was no advantage one to the other. As a matter of observation the 1893 with the scalloped receiver we found the shells swallowed around more with the additonal space sometimes causing a delay as you pumped the round. All guns fired normally through 4 boxes of AA each. We tested both extensively and see no speed advantage one to the other. If anything our left handed Cowboy had an advantage using his right hand to load from the right side on both guns. Guess you need to ban left-handers there Wild Bunch! What is funny is SASS Cowboy allows 1873 Winchester/clone rifles with "short stroke" kits which ARE a definite advantage for rifle shooters and especially onus when this modification wasn't available in the 1800's. Go figure.

 

I would request the Wild Bunch (or whoever makes this decision) to reconsider the legality of the IAC/Norinco.1893/97 for Cowboy matches unless there is a better reason for banning them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a pretty good reason, if you need another -

 

Allowing the new built 93/97 but not the 93 would bring on ANOTHER round of arguments and confusion about which is the Chinese clone and which is the Winchester, and why discriminate against the Winchester but not some foreign built gun, etc, and so on, and forth.

 

By disallowing the 93/97, it makes it easy to ensure that no 93s get on the firing line. That is what the "safety basis" is, and it's good enough for most of us.

 

Good luck, GJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it is possible that someone could get a "93" on the firing line at a "Wild Bunch" match. Most of the Arguments against the 93/97 are weak in my opinion, The current 93/97 is nothing more than a Winchester 97 clone that is made to look like a Model 93 and has little or no competitive advantage over the traditional model 97.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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