Is it time to allow the 93/97?

[Frontier Lone Rider]

3 hours ago, Nimble Fingers SASS# 25439 said:

Just out of curiosity why 30?  Are there that many different configurations for the original 18?  Not judging, just interested. 

 

I used to be a Hoarder, now I am a Prepper.

 

When Wild Bunch first came upon the scene I jumped right in with both feet.  I purchased additional firearms to use as loaners for those just trying out the sport.  The pard hosting our Wild Bunch Matches had a stroke and the powers to be would not allow anyone else to continue the matches.  Thus, I don't shoot any of these now.  In Wild Bunch one loaded the tube at the table.  You didn't have to load during the stage unless the scenario called for a reload.

 

I still have five new IAC/Norincos, still in their original box.  I sold a couple to Barleycorn Outfitters and have been taking one at a time to a local pawn shop.

[Frontier Lone Rider]

1 hour ago, Mister Badly said:

I am jealous of your 97 collection. I use a 97 to shoot Outlaw. 

 

I preferred the "Es", but I did have a couple of really nice "Ds".  One good thing, the fifty plus shotguns were already worn to shoot.  Most had very smooth actions.

 

When the Wild Bunch and the Wild Bunch Crew started allowing the Model 12 in competition, I bought and still have ten of those.  One is a Trench Gun which I will keep.  It is not as valuable as a 97 original Trench Gun, but it is a piece of history.

[Bailey Creek,5759]

They should be allowed . No advantage .

["Big Boston"]

IMHO. at the core, the issue is the availability of Winchester 1897s, whether originals or clones. I've been to gunshows, asked about a 97 on a table and the first comment from the vendor was, "You're not one of those cowboys that cut down the barrels are you?". It's getting harder and harder to find originals that are not nearly worn out. Yes, there were many made, but most of the good ones are in "collections", and some are being hoarded. Case in point, a previous poster stated there were still lots of good originals around, he has 18 in his safe. That is way beyond a pair and a spare IMHO. 

 

I'd like to see Winchester bring out a new 97 built by Miroku. The price point would be a bit higher than the Chinese 97 tribute model, but it would probably be a bunch better built. I'm only familiar with the versions of the 97s that are available in Canada, they may not be the same as those imported into the USA. Not all the Chinese 97s were made in the same factory. The ones made in Jianshe came with screw in chokes and were made with a riveted together 2 piece arm on the action slide. The later version imported here was made in some other factory, as they are not built the same. They are not stamped with a manufacture, and only have the UN code on the action. These were not allowed into the USA. They were dumped in Canada and sold for $400 CAD new and are about $250 used. Many require some rework to make them function. Mine was bought used, with the understanding that it didn't feed from the magazine. Yes, some were that bad. 

 

Personally, a new '73 will run you upwards to $2000, a used Uberti will be in the $1000 to $1500 range, so paying the same for a new Miroku 1897 doesn't seem too out of line. Canadian dollars, YMMV.

 

Perhaps a group lobby to Winchester is in order.

 

IMHO, the 93/97 should not be legalized for competition.

 

Nitro

[Captain Bill Burt]

I have a few 97's but don't shoot them in competition so I don't have a dog in the fight. 

 

IMO if they don't offer a competitive advantage over a 97, there are no safety issues, and they're almost identical in appearance what's the problem with allowing them?

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

This matter was discussed ad nauseum 15 or so years ago.  I think a lot of people are not even sure what is being discussed so I will post a few pictures of an original 93 and an E Model 97.  The 93 was the precursor to the 97 and featured a dog leg shaped loading port.

 

 

 

The 93 had a few design flaws and could be dangerous, especially with the new smokeless loads coming on the market.  The 97 corrected those flaws and was itself improved with three major manufacturing revisions.  These are the C, D and E versions of the 97.  Among the changes from the 93 was the elimination of the dog leg port into the rectanglar port on the 97 that most shooters are familiar with.

 

 

 

Look at the size of the 93 port at its forward (smallest) end compared to the rear sight groove.  I.e., the centerline of the receiver.  Then compare it to the 97 port.  Tossing a shell into a large hole is definitely easier than tossing it into a small hole so the idea that the 93 size loading port offers "no competitive" advantage is wrong.  When the 93/97 was banned by SASS the rules also had a provision added reading "The dimensions of the ejection port on a slide action shotgun may not be altered."  Does anyone seriously believe if the prohibition on the 93/97 were lifted that people would not be out in their garages that night with a hack saw and dremel enlarging the ports on their 97s?

 

The 93/97 is a modern made Chinese 97 with the port milled out to look like a 93.

[Yul Lose]

6 minutes ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

This matter was discussed ad nauseum 15 or so years ago.  I think a lot of people are not even sure what is being discussed so I will post a few pictures of an original 93 and an E Model 97.  The 93 was the precursor to the 97 and featured a dog leg shaped loading port.

 

 

 

The 93 had a few design flaws and could be dangerous, especially with the new smokeless loads coming on the market.  The 97 corrected those flaws and was itself improved with three major manufacturing revisions.  These are the C, D and E versions of the 97.  Among the changes from the 93 was the elimination of the dog leg port into the rectanglar port on the 97 that most shooters are familiar with.

 

 

 

Look at the size of the 93 port at its forward (smallest) end compared to the rear sight groove.  I.e., the centerline of the receiver.  Then compare it to the 97 port.  Tossing a shell into a large hole is definitely easier than tossing it into a small hole so the idea that the 93 size loading port offers "no competitive" advantage is wrong.  When the 93/97 was banned by SASS the rules also had a provision added reading "The dimensions of the ejection port on a slide action shotgun may not be altered."  Does anyone seriously believe if the prohibition on the 93/97 were lifted that people would not be out in their garages that night with a hack saw and dremel enlarging the ports on their 97s?

Back when I first got into CAS I bought a Winchester 93/97 from a gun shop up in Murrieta and at the first match that I took it to at Norco I was informed that it wasn’t allowed because of safety issues. Nobody mentioned that it would be an advantage to load it versus the 1897. I think you’re correct about the hack saw and Dremel kit coming out should the 1893 be allowed.

[Griff]

My response to this subject has been edited to allow publication in a family oriented shooting sport forum.  

 

Leave it be.  The singularly advantageous hybrid '93/97 should remain an illegal firearm for cowboy action under SASS rules.   Submit change request when the proposer for such change will commit to buying one for every current SASS member and any future shooters that desires one.   Added during edit:  An idea that might be considered for all proposed firearms changes... 

 

If you'd like a copy of the unedited version, feel  free to drop me a pm stating that you will not feel offended by my response, with proof of identity that you are of legal age (i.e. over 18).

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

I don't think that people modifying the ejection port on the 97's would become a problem if the 93/97 were allowed.

Consider the following.

Hypothetical Rule A:  The Winchester Model 97 is allowed.   The Ejection Port may not be modified in any way.   Doing so results in an MDQ.
Hypothetical Rule B:  The modern made 93/97 is allowed.

With these two rules in place, the "concern" over mods to the 97 become non-existant.

I've watched right handed shooters go over the top to load their 97's.  Just looking at the physical actions required to do it, I don't see how the larger ejection port would help.  Being a left handed shooter, I don't find it any easier to toss a shell into my 93, or my 93/97 than my 97's.    Granted, I am an average at best shooter.  Might some of the top guns be able to do a little bit better?   I can't rule it out.   But the top 10 97 shooters are still gonna be the top 10 93/97 shooters.  It's not gonna change anything.

 

Both guns are just glorified single shots anyway according to our rules.  I don't see the problem.

[Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933]

^^^^^^^

 

This is non-sense and part of the issue with allowing the 93/97.  If someone takes a Chicom 97 and modifies it how would you know?  YOU might not be able to tell the difference from throwing a shell into a large hole vs a small one but a lot of people can.  So you are saying if you have a genuine Winchester 97 you should be put at a disadvantage over a ChiCom copy.  Rubbish.

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

54 minutes ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

^^^^^^^

 

This is non-sense and part of the issue with allowing the 93/97.  If someone takes a Chicom 97 and modifies it how would you know?  YOU might not be able to tell the difference from throwing a shell into a large hole vs a small one but a lot of people can.  So you are saying if you have a genuine Winchester 97 you should be put at a disadvantage over a ChiCom copy.  Rubbish.

 

Uhm...   I don't think you understood what I said.

How would we know if someone modified a 97?  You'd look at and see that it's been changed.  Unless the modifier is REALLY good at hiding their work, it should be obvious.   Okay, yeah, cheaters are gonna cheat, but I'd like to believe that the vast majority of us will abide by the no modification rule.  Or just the fact that we are a mostly honest bunch and that we are not a bunch of cheaters.  

And I really don't understand how having a real 97 is advantageous over a replica made in China.  I never said or implied that.  How could I?   The replicas seem to be pretty much the same as the originals.

And I did say that the top tier shooters would likely be able to realize some differences that I can not.

 

[Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001]

Folks 

 

  I ended up with a 93/97 , was boxed as a 97 , I ask the MD at a local match , if I could run it one match 

 

 I have been a 97 shooter for most of my time in SASS , so I am used to firing and feeding one 

 

 I had more rounds , flip backwards than fed in straight , it was slower than a single shot 

 

 I don't care what happens , sold it many years back to a Wild Bunch shooter 

 

  Chickasaw Bill 

[Captain Bill Burt]

1 hour ago, Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 said:

This matter was discussed ad nauseum 15 or so years ago.  I think a lot of people are not even sure what is being discussed so I will post a few pictures of an original 93 and an E Model 97.  The 93 was the precursor to the 97 and featured a dog leg shaped loading port.

 

 

 

The 93 had a few design flaws and could be dangerous, especially with the new smokeless loads coming on the market.  The 97 corrected those flaws and was itself improved with three major manufacturing revisions.  These are the C, D and E versions of the 97.  Among the changes from the 93 was the elimination of the dog leg port into the rectanglar port on the 97 that most shooters are familiar with.

 

 

 

Look at the size of the 93 port at its forward (smallest) end compared to the rear sight groove.  I.e., the centerline of the receiver.  Then compare it to the 97 port.  Tossing a shell into a large hole is definitely easier than tossing it into a small hole so the idea that the 93 size loading port offers "no competitive" advantage is wrong.  When the 93/97 was banned by SASS the rules also had a provision added reading "The dimensions of the ejection port on a slide action shotgun may not be altered."  Does anyone seriously believe if the prohibition on the 93/97 were lifted that people would not be out in their garages that night with a hack saw and dremel enlarging the ports on their 97s?

That discussion from 15 years ago predates my entry into SASS so forgive my ignorance.  Now that I've seen the ports I think it does provide a competitive advantage.  A bigger opening is going to make it easier to feed.

 

7 minutes ago, H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619 said:

 

Uhm...   I don't think you understood what I said.

How would we know if someone modified a 97?  You'd look at and see that it's been changed.  Unless the modifier is REALLY good at hiding their work, it should be obvious.   Okay, yeah, cheaters are gonna cheat, but I'd like to believe that the vast majority of us will abide by the no modification rule.  Or just the fact that we are a mostly honest bunch and that we are not a bunch of cheaters.  

And I really don't understand how having a real 97 is advantageous over a replica made in China.  I never said or implied that.  How could I?   The replicas seem to be pretty much the same as the originals.

And I did say that the top tier shooters would likely be able to realize some differences that I can not.

 

So what happens if the rule against modifying 97's is effective?  That's easy.  There will be a big run on 93/97's as top shooters try to get that extra edge. So, the 97 will become to the 93/97 what the Stoeger is to the SKB.  How does that help?  I don't believe it does. 

[Abilene, SASS # 27489]

13 minutes ago, Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001 said:

Folks 

 

  I ended up with a 93/97 , was boxed as a 97 , I ask the MD at a local match , if I could run it one match 

 

 I have been a 97 shooter for most of my time in SASS , so I am used to firing and feeding one 

 

 I had more rounds , flip backwards than fed in straight , it was slower than a single shot 

 

 I don't care what happens , sold it many years back to a Wild Bunch shooter 

 

  Chickasaw Bill 

This is what I was asking about earlier.  Sure the port is bigger and it SEEMS like it would be an advantage, but is it?  Looks can be deceiving.  Only those who have tried can know.

[Cypress Sun]

I know a shooter that modified a '97 into a '93 before the '93/97 was banned. Without another '93/97 or a '93 next to it to gauge the difference, the vast majority of folks would not know the difference between a modified '97 and a factory '93/97. He actually did a pretty good job of altering the gun, so good most people would not notice the difference unless they saw Winchester Model 1897 on it.

 

As I stated before, I've no dog in this fight but what about when someone shows up with a real '93 and wants to run modern ammo through it? One of the reasons that the '97 took the place of the '93 was due to the (supposed) '93 weakness with smokeless powder shells. 

 

 

[Philosopher]

I've got a Coyote Cap 93/97 I use for Wild Bunch that I'd love to use more. 

 

Please change the rules to allow them.

 

[H. K. Uriah, SASS #74619]

1 hour ago, Cypress Sun said:

I know a shooter that modified a '97 into a '93 before the '93/97 was banned. Without another '93/97 or a '93 next to it to gauge the difference, the vast majority of folks would not know the difference between a modified '97 and a factory '93/97. He actually did a pretty good job of altering the gun, so good most people would not notice the difference unless they saw Winchester Model 1897 on it.

 

As I stated before, I've no dog in this fight but what about when someone shows up with a real '93 and wants to run modern ammo through it? One of the reasons that the '97 took the place of the '93 was due to the (supposed) '93 weakness with smokeless powder shells. 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone would try to pass off a real 93 as a 93/97.    I believe this for several reason.

 

More importantly, I think anyone who has a real 93, and I have one, is smart enough to know that it is a short shell, black powder only gun.   Just like a real 87, and nobody seems to not know that for them.   And before we get there, no I am not talking about making the 93 legal.  I am just saying people who have them know their limitations.

By the same token, if you have a real 87 or a real 93, yes you can lengthen the chamber and forcing cone to handle modern length shells, but both guns would still be black powder only.

But in any case, the 93 is not allowed.   Trying to get it okayed would be even more difficult than getting the 93/97 okayed, and I don't think it's worth going there.

[Kid Rich]

No.

kR

[watab kid]

well , at least now i understand a little better why the 93 is not allowed , 

[Widder, SASS #59054]

Just my opinion, but if some of SASS better 97's shooters were given a larger port to feed their shells,

the speeds they could obtain would be incredible and greatly outdistance speeds of the SxS and 87's.

 

Like I said, it just my opinion.

 

..........Widder

 

[Captain Bill Burt]

22 minutes ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Just my opinion, but if some of SASS better 97's shooters were given a larger port to feed their shells,

the speeds they could obtain would be incredible and greatly outdistance speeds of the SxS and 87's.

 

Like I said, it just my opinion.

 

..........Widder

 

You would know!!

[Nimble Fingers SASS# 25439]

6 hours ago, Yul Lose said:

Back when I first got into CAS I bought a Winchester 93/97 from a gun shop up in Murrieta and at the first match that I took it to at Norco I was informed that it wasn’t allowed because of safety issues. Nobody mentioned that it would be an advantage to load it versus the 1897. I think you’re correct about the hack saw and Dremel kit coming out should the 1893 be allowed.

I remember it wasn’t allowed as it was deemed dangerous as well, and only that. That was before the 2 shell modification was discovered and approved to be used. 
Why not let it in as another option?  The more selection the better I say. 
 

[Philosopher]

In a game that allows modern modifications such as funneled chamber mouths on double guns, short-stroked lever-actions and revolvers, etc., etc., banning the 93/97 because it "might" be quicker to operate seems inconsistent.

 

It's a faithful recreation of a historic design in a game full of modern guns that have nothing in common with the Old West except for having a lever and an external hammer.

[Ranger Dan]

Introduced in 1993 the Ruger Vaquero...

 

Hmmm, seems like we allow modern guns that look like their predecessors already. The 93/97 "looks" like a 93 but is of modern manufacture and is SAFE to shoot modern smokeless powder.

[Deuce Stevens SASS#55996]

The best use I found for my 93/97. It’s one of my shop gun loaded with OO buck. 

[Ya Big Tree]

On 1/4/2022 at 8:30 PM, John Barleycorn, SASS #76982 said:

It’s not about what I want. As I pointed out, It’s ok for Wild Bunch but not SASS, ending the old argument about an original dangerous 93 slipping by went out the window.  If it’s up to the TG’s I strongly doubt it will be reversed. 

 

TG's don't just make the decision by themselves.
The TG's are supposed to poll the clubs to find the consensus of the club members. That is where the process would start. If the majority of the SASS members think it's a good idea then the process to change the rule could be started. Let's not bypass the system.

[John Barleycorn, SASS #76982]

7 minutes ago, Ya Big Tree said:

 

TG's don't just make the decision by themselves.
The TG's are supposed to poll the clubs to find the consensus of the club members. That is where the process would start. If the majority of the SASS members think it's a good idea then the process to change the rule could be started. Let's not bypass the system.

I can count on one hand how many times a TG polled club membership. 

[Captain Bill Burt]

Would those who say the larger port is not an advantage be willing to modify your current 97 to have a significantly smaller port?  After all, if a bigger port isn't an advantage, then a smaller one shouldn't be a disadvantage. 

[Smokin Gator SASS #29736]

This would all make sense if the same logic and concern about competitive advantage had been applied to the development of short strokes. 

[Captain Bill Burt]

48 minutes ago, Smokin Gator SASS #29736 said:

This would all make sense if the same logic and concern about competitive advantage had been applied to the development of short strokes. 

Short strokes are still available yes? Still being manufactured? Is that true for the 93/97?

Did the introduction of SS kits force those who already owned ‘73s to ditch them and buy a new gun to realize the advantage?

 

Besides I wasn’t in SASS when SS’s came out so I have no duty to conform my opinion to what others thought about them at the time. That issue was settled when I came on board.

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

19 hours ago, Widder, SASS #59054 said:

Just my opinion, but if some of SASS better 97's shooters were given a larger port to feed their shells,

the speeds they could obtain would be incredible and greatly outdistance speeds of the SxS and 87's.

 

Like I said, it just my opinion.

 

..........Widder

 

And an excellent opinion it is.

I would like to see a properly tuned one in the hands of Widder.

 

Shoot - I aint anywhere near Widder level but I'd like to try one properly tuned.

 

I have had a couple come thru the shop - but they all needed polish and attention I was unwilling to devote for an unusable gun.

 

And YES, tell me that enlarged port is (now) legal and I WILL be in the machine shop with the milling machine, welder, polishing wheel and reblue equipment.

 

I am gamey enough to attempt EVERY legal assist and slow enough that every 10th of a second gained is a Godsend.

 

 

[Smokin Gator SASS #29736]

It's too late now but they obviously weren't concerned about creating a competitive advantage at the inception of short strokes. SASS was mostly Winchester 92s and Marlins previously. Eventually there were too many short stroked 73s being used to turn back the clock. Thousands of 92 shooters bought 73s to remain competitive. 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

 

There are Felony laws in most states/municipalities with severe penalties for abusing a CORPSE!!  There is no distinction between an Equine Corpse or a Human Corpse.  Beating a DEAD HORSE is absolutely abuse of a CORPSE!!  Sheesh.

 

Besides, the '97 ain't cowboy anyway. 

[Hendo]

1 hour ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

 

There are Felony laws in most states/municipalities with severe penalties for abusing a CORPSE!!  There is no distinction between an Equine Corpse or a Human Corpse.  Beating a DEAD HORSE is absolutely abuse of a CORPSE!!  Sheesh.

 

Besides, the '97 ain't cowboy anyway. 

If you don't beat a dead horse, how are you ever going to get the meat tender enough to eat?

[Ranger Dan]

WOW, some of the same individuals who say it's not the equipment (short strokes, Ruger Vaqueros, SKB Doubles) That the top shooters use that makes them the best, it's the hard work and practice, All a sudden think a 1/4 inch larger port will make Widder the World Champion and Matt Black won't have a chance against such an advantage.... sheesh.

 

The only advantage anyone has in this game is the amount of hard work and practice they put into it. I see no reason to disallow a period correct SAFE reproduction of any kind.