If colt started making the 1903/1908 pocket hammerless again would you buy one?


PDA






MUSICALGUNNUT45
September 30, 2011, 05:18 PM
I've always wanted colt to start making the 1903/1908 pocket hammerless again I always loved the design and I think that if they made it again today anyone who likes 1911s would have the perfect carry gun. Id buy one in a heartbeat.

If you enjoyed reading about "If colt started making the 1903/1908 pocket hammerless again would you buy one?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MICHAEL T
September 30, 2011, 05:21 PM
I would like a new one .

gripper
September 30, 2011, 05:46 PM
And as a.wildcard offering-make it on 9x18mm and .32 NAA.....with modern metallurgy,a design tweak or two; why not?

Jim Watson
September 30, 2011, 05:49 PM
If they didn't "modernize" it too much.
I think a little bigger thumb safety - about like a GI 1911 - and slightly bigger sights would help, though.
I sold my Remington Model 51 because it wouldn't feed the hollowpoints I was hung up on at the time. Dumb. But it would pay Colt to set the new version up for JHP just because they are the fad.

Trebor
September 30, 2011, 08:29 PM
I'd buy a reproduction of either model if was pretty true to the original and in a price range I could afford. If it was at about $800 to $1,000 I'd do it. More than that I'd think about it. And $2,000 or up, I'd pass.

SharpsDressedMan
September 30, 2011, 09:55 PM
I'd like to see USFA do one. Their QC, fit, and finish have forced Colt to keep prices a little more reasonable, and they certainly set their own bar to be matched.

Weevil
September 30, 2011, 10:02 PM
I think the .380 would be a pretty decent seller if they offered it at an affordable price.



Of course being Colt they'd have a ridiculous price that only collectors and gun-snobs could afford.


I'm surprised none of the other knock-off companies like Taurus or Armscor offers a repro version of them.

420Stainless
September 30, 2011, 10:04 PM
Nah. They're beautiful and feel good, but I'm too much of a fan of my polymer pocket gun that's in a larger caliber without weighing much more. If I run across an older one at a good price I wouldn't mind buying it just to admire, fondle, and shoot for fun.

420Stainless
September 30, 2011, 10:10 PM
I think the .380 would be a pretty decent seller if they offered it at an affordable price.



Of course being Colt they'd have a ridiculous price that only collectors and gun-snobs could afford.


I'm surprised none of the other knock-off companies like Taurus or Armscor offers a repro version of them.
I was a little surprised recently to see that a company called Precision Small Arms (PSA - I never heard of them until I saw this ad) is marketing a "Baby Browning".

WardenWolf
September 30, 2011, 11:11 PM
I'd certainly consider one, and I think it could definitely compete with a lot of the other commercial .380's out there. They could probably even use an alloy frame to reduce weight.

Weevil
October 1, 2011, 12:47 AM
Nah. They're beautiful and feel good, but I'm too much of a fan of my polymer pocket gun that's in a larger caliber without weighing much more. If I run across an older one at a good price I wouldn't mind buying it just to admire, fondle, and shoot for fun.


They are a lot of fun.


I've got one of the .32s for those exact reasons.


http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n200/srebough/1903a.jpg


They're a very thin pistol, something that surprises a lot of folks about such an old design.

The design is ideal for CCW especially considering the current fad for thin pistols.

Now the size and weight are drawbacks, but there are a lot of folks, particularly the ladies, who would appreciate a little bigger easier to shoot .380 than the wee little pocket .380s. Walther has done alright with their PK380 in this segment and a modern Pocket-Hammerless perhaps with a lighter alloy frame would give them some competition for this share of the market.

And you know it would sell well just for the nostalgia factor also.

Dr.Rob
October 1, 2011, 12:48 AM
In a heartbeat.

devildog4329
October 1, 2011, 03:24 AM
I would love a 1903/1908 in .380. If colt didnt over price them I would buy it in a heart beat.

Armed012002
October 1, 2011, 03:34 AM
I would buy one too.

Though I want better sights and a larger thumb safety.

Perhaps have an "enhanced" model to go along with the classic model.

BConklin
October 1, 2011, 08:47 AM
I have two of the old ones and I love them but I'm not sure I'd go for a new one.
I'm not sure I'd trust that safety unless it was re-engineered.

I paid heavily for the first one I bought - but just picked up the second one yesterday for a song - $215 with the original two tone mag. It's kind of rough cosmetically - with quite a bit of surface pitting on the rear of the slide especially - which is a shame as it has almost all of its original blueing otherwise and the barrel cleaned up very well. Mechanically it seems to function well - a range test is in order. If it shoots well I'll look into getting it refinished and fitted with new sights to use at the range instead of my nicer 1903

RX-178
October 1, 2011, 08:58 AM
They wouldn't have to start making them again in order to get me to buy one.

:D

scramasax
October 1, 2011, 09:47 AM
I've got a .32 and would buy two more in a heartbeat if they weren't so high. I'll seconf the .32NAA as an additional chambering. For those of you stuck on polimer guns, none of them come close to the feel of the old colt.

Cheeres,

ts

Zerodefect
October 1, 2011, 09:57 AM
Not too familiar with these.

But the gun pictured above would be nice with a few changes.
-Get Vz or some other fibreplastic company to make checkered grips that fit the frame fully
-better sights
-is that a safety lever? If it is,looks like it could use some work on placement.
-full length dustcover and straight slide, a slot cut into the dust cover to use as a rail like a glock has would also be nice.
-Not sure how I feel about a heel mag release. But at least it's ambi. If it's easy to use I'm all for it. The heel release on the HK P9 is too stiff for my taste.
-melonite, or Gun Kote it black.
-I don't see why these couldn't be reproduced to shoot 9mm.

mdauben
October 1, 2011, 10:14 AM
I've always wanted colt to start making the 1903/1908 pocket hammerless again I always loved the design and I think that if they made it again today anyone who likes 1911s would have the perfect carry gun. Id buy one in a heartbeat.
As a practical CC weapon? No.

At over 2 pounds in weight and around 7 inches in length, its much too large for it's caliber. If I was carrying a gun that size I would chose one in 9mm or larger.

PapaG
October 1, 2011, 10:14 AM
Had one, a general officer's model, nib with rod and original target. One of the dumbest moves I ever made was to trade it...and I don't even remember what for.
The new Solo by Kimber is the closest thing to it I've ever seen and sells for less than what the Colt could be made. That said, the Solo is about as scarce as the Colts.

Hangingrock
October 1, 2011, 10:26 AM
The cost per unit would be prohibitive. The volume would not be there thus economical manufacturing methodology most likely could not be employed.

420Stainless
October 1, 2011, 11:22 AM
I've got a .32 and would buy two more in a heartbeat if they weren't so high. I'll seconf the .32NAA as an additional chambering. For those of you stuck on polimer guns, none of them come close to the feel of the old colt.

Cheeres,

ts
I agree completely that the feel of the Colt is better than my PM45. I'm just a little more comfortable having .45ACP in my pocket. It certainly doesn't have the class and charm of these old designs though.

LawofThirds
October 1, 2011, 11:40 AM
Yes.

MUSICALGUNNUT45
October 1, 2011, 01:46 PM
As a practical CC weapon? No.

At over 2 pounds in weight and around 7 inches in length, its much too large for it's caliber. If I was carrying a gun that size I would chose one in 9mm or larger.
Ok what if they updated it to a 9mm lockbreech.

USAFret
October 1, 2011, 07:28 PM
I have both a Colt Vest Pocket 25 and a Ruger LCP 380. I would choose the LCP for carry every time. Better performance, better ergonomics, lighter weight, and fitted with a Crimson Trace. That would be my choice!
Bob

Weevil
October 1, 2011, 10:33 PM
Ok what if they updated it to a 9mm lockbreech.


It's been done already.


Kimber calls it the Solo.


http://zero7one.defensemk.com/SHOT_Show_2011/slides/zero7one_SHOT_Show_2011_Kimber_SOLO_Carry_9mm_002.jpg

gordy
October 1, 2011, 11:06 PM
The colt 1903 and 1908 are the sweetest shooting old autos out there.
I would want one in blue and nickle. Then I would go and buy one of those cool long coats and one of the great hats you all ways see in the old movies.

Jim Watson
October 1, 2011, 11:11 PM
As a practical CC weapon? No.

At over 2 pounds in weight

Which Colt .32 is that, Mike? My old catalog says 24 oz.

Kimber calls it the Solo.

But the Colts work.
Been a lot of adverse reports on the Solo.

CapnMac
October 1, 2011, 11:27 PM
Yes, especially in old-school Colt finishes, like Royal Blue or Electroless nickle.

cvb
October 1, 2011, 11:37 PM
Got to shoot a copy of this gun in the Philippines a while back.
Its a hack job for sure but amazingly enough worked.

orionengnr
October 1, 2011, 11:43 PM
No. I am not really a fan of the .380 cartridge. That said, it has it's place, and I own an LCP....but would gladly trade it for a Kahr P380.
I once owned a Colt .380 and sold it...didn't do anything for me.

Weevil
October 2, 2011, 12:18 AM
But the Colts work.
Been a lot of adverse reports on the Solo.



Yeah and the old Colts aren't a lock-breech 9mm.


It does bring up a good point.

If it is completely modified and uses an entirely different action and caliber than the old Colts is it really a 1903/1908 or just something that looks like one?


Even so "adverse reports" or not, works or not, the Solo's are selling as fast as Kimber can make them. There's a huge waitting list and they're selling for way over MSRP at gun shows, shops that can get them, and at auction sights.


Yet there are those who have doubts that a new 1908 or a close repro version that actually works, would sell???

rodinal220
October 2, 2011, 12:58 AM
I would buy two.:evil:

rondog
October 2, 2011, 01:04 AM
They'd probably have to have the Hilary Hole in them to make the lawyers happy.....

MUSICALGUNNUT45
October 2, 2011, 01:06 AM
I have both a Colt Vest Pocket 25 and a Ruger LCP 380. I would choose the LCP for carry every time. Better performance, better ergonomics, lighter weight, and fitted with a Crimson Trace. That would be my choice!
Bob
Im not talking about the colt 25 im talking about the 1903 pocket hammerless 32/380. Carrying a 25 is one of those situations where throwing rocks might actually be a better option. Still a nice gun though and I believe one company actually did start producing the baby browning again.

wlewisiii
October 2, 2011, 01:23 AM
1908? Hell, yes.

Loosedhorse
October 2, 2011, 08:10 AM
Why do you ask? Is freezing weather expected in Hell soon?

:p

Plan2Live
October 2, 2011, 08:20 AM
4 inch barrel, weighs 2 pounds. How big are your pockets?

Onmilo
October 2, 2011, 08:35 AM
No, I would not buy one.
I own a 1903 and frankly, there are far better and more modern designs on the market right now.

It took 70 years before manufacturers started making clones of the 1873 SAA revolver, another 40 before they started offering earlier versions of the gun as reproductions and about 65 years before copies of the 1911 were offered on a commercial basis.

With that in mind, one MIGHT expect to see reproductions of the 1903/1908 surface in about 30 years to satisfy the demand created by future gun collectors.;)

NMGonzo
October 2, 2011, 08:50 AM
It was good for the Archiduke ...

MattTheHat
October 2, 2011, 10:41 AM
No, I would not buy one.
I own a 1903 and frankly, there are far better and more modern designs on the market right now.

It took 70 years before manufacturers started making clones of the 1873 SAA revolver, another 40 before they started offering earlier versions of the gun as reproductions and about 65 years before copies of the 1911 were offered on a commercial basis.

With that in mind, one MIGHT expect to see reproductions of the 1903/1908 surface in about 30 years to satisfy the demand created by future gun collectors.;)

Not sure about your math. I own an 03 that's well over 100 years old.

-Matt

MUSICALGUNNUT45
October 2, 2011, 12:44 PM
It's been done already.


Kimber calls it the Solo.


http://zero7one.defensemk.com/SHOT_Show_2011/slides/zero7one_SHOT_Show_2011_Kimber_SOLO_Carry_9mm_002.jpg
Am I the only one who really wishes that colt could have come out with the solo instead of kimber.

longhair75
October 2, 2011, 03:47 PM
Am I the only one who really wishes that colt could have come out with the solo instead of kimber.

I have been reading about the many issues the Solo seems to have. This leads to a lack of confidence in the weapon. Had Colt developed this concept, I would be on that waiting list.

I would gladly buy a 1908 if they were to suddenly come available.

Maia007
October 3, 2011, 11:01 PM
Probably not. I say that because I doubt that any modern day manufacturer could put one out without screwing it up by trying to appeal to today's "market".

Like putting a big ol' beavertail on it, an ambi safety and ambi mag release, lots of extra metal checkering cuts or "stipplings" on the frame and the slide, a double column magazine well, fiberoptic front sight, a loaded chamber indicator, a warning label prominantly rolled onto the slide, a tactical flashlight mount and an integral trigger lock. Of course, the trigger would have to have three holes drilled in it. And maybe some grips by Uncle what's his name. Did I miss anything? Oh yes, the finish would need to be olive drab.

MikeNice
October 4, 2011, 12:34 AM
I would love to say yes. The truth is, with a Ruger LC9 running only $379 I couldn't justify Colt's prices for a 1908 reproduction. If you start talking Colt money I would probably buy a Sig Sauer 239 DAK. It isn't much, if any, bigger. Plus you get 9 shots of 9mm.

It is an interesting retro gun, but it would be sorely out of place in the modern market. If they upgraded it to handle 9mm it might fly.

Old Fuff
October 4, 2011, 12:18 PM
The old Colt Pocket Pistol was a great one during its day, but the basic construction (especially the thin walls in the frame's magazine area) would be very difficult to duplicate using modern manufacturing methods. The company lawyers would also insist on some changes, such as a positive firing pin block or lock. When everything was said and done you have something with a street price around $800 to $1,200, and at that level the market would dry up quickly. It wouldn't help when potential customers discovered that original pistols in mint to like-new condition were selling in the same range, or for less.

After World War Two, Colt considered retooling and bringing back the Pocket Model (.32 & .380) and Vest Pocket Model (.25) but concluded the selling point would be too high for the market. They then developed several prototypes of "moderized" replacements, but never brought them into production.

Other manufacturers are not going to bring forth clones because of the same reasons that Colt didn't.

HisSoldier
October 5, 2011, 12:22 AM
I was a little surprised recently to see that a company called Precision Small Arms (PSA - I never heard of them until I saw this ad) is marketing a "Baby Browning".

I have one, old world craftsmanship, extremely well made gun, my only objection was the plastic trigger and mag latch, but they sold me steel replacements for both.

Am I the only one who really wishes that colt could have come out with the solo instead of kimber.

All I care about is good materials and workmanship, I don't know about the latter but the Solo has an aluminum alloy frame and probably MIM parts. pass!

BConklin
October 5, 2011, 08:03 AM
I just pulled mine off the digital scale - fully loaded it weighed in at 1 pound, 10.1 ounces.

Still - I agree that it's a big gun to carry when all you're getting out of it is 32ACP.

Even in .380 - I'd rather carry my S&W Bodyguard which weighs in at 14.3 ounces loaded and fits better in my front pocket than my wallet.

But - it is a wicked cool gun...that's why I have two of them - and if I could find one in .380 that was cheap enough, I'd probably have three

easyg
October 5, 2011, 12:02 PM
No.
I have no interest in those pistols.

berettaprofessor
October 5, 2011, 01:10 PM
If colt started making the 1903/1908 pocket hammerless again would you buy one?

No. I'd want three....or four. Love this gun; the way it fits my hand, the thinness for carry. BRING IT BACK!

DPris
October 5, 2011, 01:24 PM
I'd buy two, but Colt isn't going to do it.
Send your cards & letters to USFA, you've got a better chance there.
Denis

SharpsDressedMan
October 5, 2011, 02:29 PM
It just occurred to me that several manufacturers have done limited runs of discontinued guns over the years, to satisfy a limited but loyal market. The Luger was brought back by Interarms, as was the Mauser Hsc. The Radom factory even produced a limited number of P35 Radoms, and they are highly sought by collectors. I think it is important, if Colt does this, that they keep the markings similar or identical to the originals. Fans of "retro" guns also are fond of the retrol look, and fooling with newer, cheaper rollmarks and such is a disaster (Colt did this on the WWII and WWI Repros, and it detracts from the gun, as do the sharp edges :cuss:). If they are not going to do it right, it is better that they don't.

jahwarrior
October 5, 2011, 02:58 PM
i'd want one, but in 9mm.

Old Fuff
October 5, 2011, 03:00 PM
Limited runs + all new tooling = exceptional high retail prices. :eek:

There is no way that Colt - or anyone else - can produce an exact reproduction of the 1903/08 Pocket Pistol, because they'd have to sell them for a price that was so high that potential buyers could buy an original one for less money. :banghead:

They might sub-contract the work overseas, but then it wouldn't be a Colt, but would still be priced over today's popular competition.

But dream on... :cool:

Mac Attack
October 5, 2011, 08:31 PM
If priced right I would buy one. I figure <$800 would be about the most I would pay for one considering I could buy an original for just about that much.

I have a 1908 which is a great little gun that is a joy to shoot. I used to shoot it frequently until the original magazine split. Since then I have not been able to find a magazine which would feed reliably so I haven't shot it in a couple of years. I also picked up a 1903 barrel and mag and switch them out when I want to shoot .32 ACP. I like shooting it in .32 better but I could not find an aftermarket mag that would feed it reliably at all.

Nakanokalronin
October 5, 2011, 08:49 PM
Mac Attack: When Numrich gets the mags back in stock, buy a few and run them. The 5 1903 mags I bought from them have been flawless.

I would defiantly buy a 1903/08 if a quality reproduction was made at an affordable price. IMO, it was ahead of its time as a carry conceal piece. Slim gun, slim controls, smooth edges, internal hammer and perfect dimensions for a pocket,jacket or holster. I'm down to 2 poly pistols now since steel or aluminum isn't any harder to carry, reduces recoil and makes me feel like I'm holding a gun to be proud of.

My Solo is kinda like a modern version of my 1903 but its still not the same thing.

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg683/scaled.php?server=683&filename=colt1903.jpg&res=medium
http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg844/scaled.php?server=844&filename=kimsolo1.jpg&res=medium

blakeci
October 6, 2011, 01:11 PM
heck, I'd be happy if Colt just made the magazines for 'em again.
I've seen original two-tones going for $100+ on gunbroker:eek:

DPris
October 6, 2011, 01:28 PM
Colt can't afford R&D+tooling & equipment for a low-sales product that wouldn't justify it.
Colt also doesn't make magazines.

USFA is more willing to experiment with expensive guns, they're more flexible than Colt can be in that area.
Denis

berettaprofessor
October 6, 2011, 09:23 PM
Who says it would be low sales? Do u know how many 380s have bben sold in the last 5 years? Enough to make a bunch of companies copy them.

DPris
October 6, 2011, 11:50 PM
Prof,
The .380 market today runs around $500 per ceiling-wise & it's leaning toward plastic.
A well-made 1903/8 repro would run easily twice that, and quite possibly three times it, even with a cast receiver.
VERY limited sales.

Those who buy a new .380 don't want to spend a grand on one. Why do you think Ruger's LCP is selling so well? It works and it's CHEAP!
The fact that 20 or so people on an Internet gun forum express interest in anything is NO indicator whatever of a national market demand.
Denis

SharpsDressedMan
October 7, 2011, 04:47 AM
Let's get CZ or maybe that plant in the Phillipines to make it (the one that is making some of the nice 1911 copies).

devildog4329
October 7, 2011, 05:36 AM
+1 to Sharpsdressedman, I believe Armscorp would make a nice one if they wold roll with it.

MikeNice
October 7, 2011, 08:08 AM
Now, if it was made by CZ and sold with a CZ price tag I would definitely consider it.

Isn't the CZ 92 basically the "Baby Browning" with a modern cosmetic overhaul? I don't see it being too hard for them to make a 1908.

SharpsDressedMan
October 7, 2011, 05:31 PM
Some of these foreign plants have "reasonably priced, skilled labor", modern machining equipment, gun making expertise, and the drive to provide a marketable product and make money. We can only hope.

statelineblues
October 8, 2011, 09:26 AM
heck, I'd be happy if Colt just made the magazines for 'em again.
I've seen original two-tones going for $100+ on gunbroker

I'd love to see some other new parts - barrels (they could experiment with different calibers :D), mags, other internals parts -

MUSICALGUNNUT45
October 13, 2011, 03:26 PM
I'd buy two, but Colt isn't going to do it.
Send your cards & letters to USFA, you've got a better chance there.
Denis
Thats a great idea. I might do that.

Seamore2001
October 13, 2011, 04:05 PM
In .380? Yes. Absolutely.

MattTheHat
October 13, 2011, 06:45 PM
I got my new Colt 1903 in last Friday:
http://www.d-slr.com/guns/classy/after.jpg


:evilgrin


-Matt

MUSICALGUNNUT45
October 13, 2011, 08:42 PM
WOW!!! heirloom precision custom colt 1908 I'm speachless.

Victor69
November 21, 2011, 05:33 PM
With that said here's my only C&R purchase to datehttp://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz95/VictorCastle/Colt1903A.jpg

Tinpig
November 21, 2011, 08:24 PM
I love my 1903 as a range pistol, as a piece of history, and as a thing of beauty. But I don't use it as a regular carry gun because of the safety and the caliber. The pistol conceals well and is comfortable to carry, but I have big hands and find the safety too small and thin and difficult to operate reliably, especially without looking.

There are better and cheaper modern small carry pistols.

Nice 1903s are still fairly easy to find, so why reproduce them?

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc91/ccanhamjr/Guns/Colt1903-1.jpg

jimherb
November 22, 2011, 05:07 PM
:(I regret selling my 1908. Would buy another.

Dr_B
November 22, 2011, 06:22 PM
I just found a 1903 .32 made in 1919 in a local shop. Came with two magazines. Took it to the range; worked perfectly.

Hondo 60
November 22, 2011, 06:23 PM
An 03? That I might do, if the price & caliber were right.

I had use of an 08. (belonged to a friend who let me have it for a couple of months)
It was a .25acp, and while it was a cool little gun, it was too small
& .25acp is not a caliber I would feel comfortable with.

Old Fuff
November 22, 2011, 07:20 PM
1908 was a big year for Colt. They introduced the following pistols.

Model 1908 .380 Pocket Pistol (Hammerless)
Model 1908 .25 Vest Pocket Model

The Model 1908 .380 was identical to the earlier Model 1903 Pocket Model, that was chambered in .32 ACP. This is the Model 1908 referred to in this thread.

You are not the first one to be confused by the different 1908 models that Colt made over the years.

The model 1903/08 in its original configuration would not be inexpensive to make. Over the years they made several market studies, but when the projected MSRP met or exceeded $800.00 to $1,000.00 interest quickly dried up.

Robbins290
November 22, 2011, 07:27 PM
Ummmmm! Yes!!!!

Billy Shears
November 22, 2011, 07:42 PM
I'd have to say no, I wouldn't buy one. But that's mainly because I already have a Model 1908, and I'm lucky enough to have got my hands on one that feeds Federal hydra shok and Speer gold dot hollowpoints (haven't tried any others) flawlessly. Truthfully though, Colt would never do this, nor would any other company. As great as the 1903/1908 was, it's an old design, made for manufacturing methods that existed when labor was a lot cheaper. It couldn't be offered today with both quality and a competitive price. Its being a single action would make some customers steer clear of it as well.

I'd rather see the Remington Model 51 put back into production, but that won't happen for the same reasons, only more so. The 51 was more expensive to make back then, and would still be so today. I also am lucky enough to have one of those that also feeds hydra shoks and gold dots, but I'd still buy a new 51 if they came back into production, as long as a modern one had a more ergonomic thumb safety and better sights. The Model 51 has absolutely the tiniest sights I have ever seen on a firearm.

Old Fuff
November 22, 2011, 08:30 PM
I'd have to say no, I wouldn't buy one.

Yup... and I wouldn't either.

What too many people don't understand is that if Colt (or anyone else) were to reintroduce the old 1903/08 they would have to start from scratch and completely re-tool it. That includes each and every part in it. A reasonable estimate would be several hundred, thousand dollars up to a half million! Then the total cost would have to be amortized over the number of guns they could reasonably expect to sell. Those add-in's could equal 1/4 or more of the pistol's total cost or more. Would they sell some? Sure they would! But would they sell enough to recover the necessary costs of bringing it into production? So far the answer to that has been, "no!"

SharpsDressedMan
November 23, 2011, 02:07 PM
Gratuitous picture of a Colt Hammerless that gets carried. http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m247/matquig/DSC05339.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "If colt started making the 1903/1908 pocket hammerless again would you buy one?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!