Reproducing old Handguns legality issues - mauser c96 -colt 1903 - colt 1903 pistol


PDA






X9ballX
September 13, 2013, 05:42 AM
One of the thoughts me and a few friends have had was reproducing the old guns listed as well as a two new designs

We are currently not interested in exploring the cost but the legality of such.

One of our new design ideas was to take the detective internals and build a top break in 45lc/45acp as well as a 38 +P and 32hmr

the other design was a simplified mauser c96 built as a target pistol in 9mm and 45acp that will take either glock or para mags

We also know the mausers weakpoint is the bolt. our plans were to beef it up using better materials and making the gun somewhat larger. We planned on exploring further after getting a hold of a few models

We already came up with a few creative ways to cut costs. it's the legality thats holding us back from pursuing further design

To my awareness someone already has the rights to produce an old german luger P08 Otherwise that would be on the list

I know the patent on the 1911 went out. thats why I ask.

Would it be legal?

So long as i build it for myself i know it is. but we planned on selling these items further down the road.

The two new designs would be our cash cow and the old ones were to pay homage to history

If you enjoyed reading about "Reproducing old Handguns legality issues - mauser c96 -colt 1903 - colt 1903 pistol" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
huntershooter
September 13, 2013, 07:37 AM
A C-96 "target pistol"??
I can't think of a lousier platform for a dedicated target pistol. I tried, but can't come up with one.
I imagine the "legality" would not be an issue.
With due respect; have you considered what the market for said ideas might be?
I would be amazed if this is financially viable.

Carl N. Brown
September 13, 2013, 08:47 AM
The question is could one reproduce or copy or offer improved versions of the Mauser C96 or Colt 1903 Pistol legally (due to patent considerations). That is the question.

(Names and model names if not numbers would probably be copyrighted or trademarked and probably could not be used. However, how many pistols based on old Beretta designs have been made under the maker's name and model? Did they pay to license the patents? or have the patents expired?)

As far as a C96 target pistol, best group with my C96 off hand 25 yards ten shots (shot in the local blackpowder cartridge match using Triple7 and .312" bullets since the rifling is very worn):
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=170613&d=1346071719
I consider myself a participant not a competitor at that.

TRX
September 13, 2013, 10:27 AM
If you're talking about a patent, it would have expired long ago.

You could probably hire an intellectual property lawyer to write an opinion to include with your business plan, but the design is over a century old. Companies all over the world sell replicas of older firearms. I don't think anyone actually knows how many different companies make 1911 Colts now, for example.

AlexanderA
September 13, 2013, 11:34 AM
Patents and copyrights expire, but trademarks live forever. That's a bit of an oversimplification, but it points out what would be your main legal problem in replicating a Mauser C96 or Colt 1903: trademark infringement.

Obviously you couldn't use the name "Mauser" or "Colt" on your gun. But certain aspects, such as the profile of the Mauser Broomhandle, might also be trademarked.

It's not for nothing that patent/trademark lawyers are so highly paid. This is a specialty that requires very particular qualifications. Typically, patent lawyers are trained as engineers, pharmacologists, or doctors as well as lawyers.

Your proposed business plan would have to have a lot of potential for financial success to justify the expense of hiring a patent/trademark lawyer. Personally, I don't see it happening.

highlander 5
September 13, 2013, 11:39 AM
The C96 could be a nightmare to produce even with modern CNC machining. IIRC the C96 had only 1 screw in the whole pistol and the rest was precision machining at it's finest even by today CNC machining capabilities. I'd love to have a modern version of a C96 but I think the cost would be very expensive.

Jim Watson
September 13, 2013, 11:42 AM
Agree, patents expire. Just look at all the copies of CZ 75.
You will have to have a manufacturer's FFL to build guns for sale. Just as well get that in the works and incorporation, too, if you are serious.

I don't think a beefed up and simplified offshoot taking Glock magazines is much of a tribute to the C96. Just as well do a clean sheet design for a forward magazine pistol.
You won't be able to sell it in California and other repressive jurisdictions that consider such things to be "assault pistols."

AlexanderA
September 13, 2013, 11:51 AM
And anyone with a manufacturer's FFL also has to pay the State Department's ITAR license fee, whether they intend to export or not. That alone runs to a couple of thousand dollars a year.

X9ballX
September 13, 2013, 04:03 PM
thanks all. this was quite helpfull. if we ever get anywhere with the idea i'll post pics and let some lucky guy on here test out the first batch

Right now we are focusing on the revolver design. top break revolvers weak points are the latch so coming up with a new one is key right now

golden
September 13, 2013, 06:31 PM
X9,

If you are serious about producing an old COLT, the 1903 POCKET HAMMERLESS would be an outstanding gun with 2 or 3 modifications.

1. ALUMINUM FRAME--The steel frame gun is very steady in the hand, but really overkill for the .32ACP or even the .380ACP.

2. SIZE--Shorten the barrel to 3 1/4 inches and the grip by 1/2 inch. That gets you into the COLT MUSTANG size range.

3. SAFETY--I love shooting the old COLT 1903, but for self defense, I just am not interested in a single action gun. I don't own a SIG 938 or COLT Mustang and probably never will. I want a double action or GLOCK style safe action. Flicking off a safety on one of these guns is just too dicey to me.

Oh, If I were going to copy a 96 Mauser, I would use the later detachable magazine one that could use a 20 shot magazine.

Jim
Good luck

macadore
September 13, 2013, 09:27 PM
The C96 could be a nightmare to produce even with modern CNC machining. IIRC the C96 had only 1 screw in the whole pistol and the rest was precision machining at it's finest even by today CNC machining capabilities. I'd love to have a modern version of a C96 but I think the cost would be very expensive.
I agree. While I like the look and feel of the C96 the internals would require some serious rethinking to be competitive today. Something like a roller locked action action might work.

Dr.Rob
September 14, 2013, 06:00 AM
You do all those mods you need a NEW patent, don't worry about the old ones.

X9ballX
September 14, 2013, 06:06 PM
I appreciate All the comments and advice given here today.

Right now me and my friends will do planning for the items.

We need to get ahold of originals. And unfortunately money and gunsmithing is an issue.

We did however add two a new ideas, that being a rotating barrel doublestack 1911 and a piston driven bullpup

One of the key differences between this 1911 is the magazine. rather than using the more common mags that funnel into one round at the top we thought steyr had the right idea with their mag design in the gb pistol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGFaiRBNvcU

The bullpup we decided we wanted something as easy to build as an ak but with as much modular adaptability as an ar15, but with a bullpup layout.

But we have too much on our plate. We will come up with a real design before we bother the internet with it further.

Thanks for the help guys

Jim Watson
September 14, 2013, 08:35 PM
I don't see how you can call a pistol with rotating barrel and double column, double feed magazine any sort of "1911."

The double feed magazine is superior for a rifle or SMG but I don't know if it is worth the width in a pistol. The GB is a Great Big gun.

Good luck and post drawings.

Dr.Rob
September 16, 2013, 07:06 AM
Don't copy that gas system, it will lock your pistol up on occasion, and won't unlock 'til it cools down.

X9ballX
September 17, 2013, 06:12 PM
We were just planning to Copy the mag design for the GB.

We came up with a simple idea for a Trigger mechanism for the mauser. Now we have to actually build one. And find a bench rest and some string in case it explodes lol

FIVETWOSEVEN
September 17, 2013, 06:23 PM
I would be all over a top break in .357. Swing out from my experience is superior but I love the top break.

Jaymo
September 17, 2013, 07:11 PM
I'd love to see a top-break .45 ACP or .44 Special.

Swing
September 17, 2013, 07:27 PM
I'd love to see a top-break .45 ACP

+1. I'd snap up a break-action, .45ACP snub-nose in a heartbeat.

The retro-futuristic Mauser C/96 sounds interesting too.

Jim K
September 17, 2013, 08:49 PM
The lesson of the Luger is informative. In the 1970's, Sam Cummings of Interarms got the idea of having Mauser resume production of the Luger (not reproducing, since Mauser is the successor to DWM and a maker of the gun up to 1942).

They did surveys and market studies, and almost everyone asked said that a new Luger would be welcome and would sell very well. So Mauser bought the Bern tooling (Mauser's own tooling had been destroyed in WWII), and set up production under the renowned August Weiss. The first pistols resembled the Swiss Model 1929 and didn't sell well. But the Luger claque assured Interarms that if the German P.08 style were copied, the guns would sell. The change was made, but the mobs still refrained from beating down the door.

The bottom line was that the new guns enjoyed some sales, but Interarms and Mauser both took a bath on the deal. Everyone claimed to want new Lugers, but once they were available, they were new guns with no collector value and little interest of the wallet-opening kind.

Worse, "real" Lugers were around in more than enough quantities to meet collector demand at a cost less than that of the new production ones.

So anyone planning to "repro" complex guns had best do a lot of thinking. If the idea works, and copies of the C-96 do sell, I guarantee that the Chinese, who probably still have the tooling, will make the thing at half the cost.

Jim

Vodoun da Vinci
September 17, 2013, 10:58 PM
In the case of the Colt 1903 Model M, most folks I know who would be willing to buy a new made version insist that it be as true to the original as possible. Changing the lines or making the frame out of aluminum would alter the superb balance and weight. I personally would love to buy a new made Model M but would insist it be virtually identical to the original.

It is classic and with a few flaws possibly the best pocket pistol ever made....changing much except to make it drop safe and maybe add a slide lock open on the last shot would be un necessary and a deal breaker for me.

And I own 2 and soon a third of the originals.

VooDoo

macadore
September 17, 2013, 11:19 PM
In the case of the Colt 1903 Model M, most folks I know who would be willing to buy a new made version insist that it be as true to the original as possible. Changing the lines or making the frame out of aluminum would alter the superb balance and weight. I personally would love to buy a new made Model M but would insist it be virtually identical to the original.

It is classic and with a few flaws possibly the best pocket pistol ever made....changing much except to make it drop safe and maybe add a slide lock open on the last shot would be un necessary and a deal breaker for me.

And I own 2 and soon a third of the originals.

VooDoo
I realize the purists wouldn't like it, but I think on in 9x18 would be nice.

scramasax
September 17, 2013, 11:47 PM
Colt 1908 clone, same size, keep the longer slide. DO NOT mess with the size of the gun or the grips. An aluminum frame and locked breach are possibilities.But why mess with pocket perfection. Build it in 9mm/.380/.22lr. you would have the best and most popular carry/practice gun. Snag free with enough weight to shoot comfortably but carry well. Mine go out on a regular basis.

Love both my MBH .30 made in 1899 and 9mm made in 1920. If I could have a new one it would have to be in 10mm or .45ACP.

Luger has been done before but was an economic loss.

Jim K
September 18, 2013, 06:07 PM
One thing I can pretty well guarantee; unless X9ballX and his friends have a lot more money, technical knowledge and experience than his posts seem to indicate, I would not hold my breath waiting for the first production models to come off the line.

I don't want to either insult or discourage anyone, but starting up manufacture of a gun, whether a new design or an old one, is a lot more complicated than most of us think, and licensing and patents are not even on the radar in terms of difficulty and capital required.

Jim

lechiffre
September 19, 2013, 02:14 AM
I have read that the CZ-75 was never protected under patent (except in Czechoslovakia), because the patents were a state secret.

44-henry
September 19, 2013, 02:39 AM
I agree with Jim, way too many issues would have to be overcome to see this plan ever get off the ground and given the limited finances/technical knowledge that were suggested, to say nothing of a rather limited market.......I just do not see it happening.

mes228
September 19, 2013, 08:50 AM
I've read of Companies that make a Mauser actions that are a true reproduction of the real one. I can't remember the era that they reproduce, or even the company name. However, I seem to remember that their TRUE, absolutely correct, Mauser action runs a few thousand $$$ each. I don't think anyone has really improved on the original Mauser action. Most of the "advances" in everything are more an "advance" in manufacturing, materials, and ways to manufacture it CHEAPER not BETTER. Cheaper is the goal.

Here is a non-firearm example. I just purchased a top of the line dish washer costing approx. $800 that was supposed to be a super dooper washer. All stainless interior, dozens of settings and buttons, top of the line. Well it's all BS. The sad truth is, it is not nearly as good AT ANYTHING as my older model. Just a lot more USELESS bells and whistles and settings that worsen the true performance. Same goes for refrigerators. They are much more expensive, flashier, more gadgets, more complex and doing nothing better. Now there is a study out that the super efficient clothes washing machines. Are a breeding ground for bacteria IN YOUR CLOTHES. Seems the temps and agitation is so deficient that they really breed bacteria and germs MAKING YOUR CLOTHES SMELLY AND PERHAPS EVEN DANGEROUS. Hot water is a good thing when it comes to really cleaning your clothes and dishes. That's LACKING in many of these products. Truth is the underlying principles are the same today for these machines as they were generations ago. Engineers were not stupid back then, and pretty much achieved their goals. Today FORWARD is looking more and more like BACKWARD. Only it's disguised with clever marketing and flashy facades.

As for energy efficiency, I call BS on that too. The "energy Star" rating is not earned. It has been shown to be a "PURCHASED RATING". For example the efficiency of a refrigerator motor is not nearly as relevant as the efficiency of the insulation. Rant over, go back to sleep (grin).

StrawHat
September 20, 2013, 08:31 AM
Another firearm that the public cried for was a recreation of the S&W big bore top break revolver, Schofield and others. S&W produced it and had a hard time selling it.

Jim K
September 22, 2013, 12:09 AM
Never say never, but I can't imagine anything about an auto pistol that could be considered a secret, state or otherwise. All the ideas have been around for decades, some almost a century and a half old; designers just keep rehashing and recombining the old stuff. The only real breakthrough in modern times has been in the use of polymer and even that wasn't really that new, it was just that Glock hit the right time to use and promote it.

Jim

paintballdude902
September 22, 2013, 12:23 AM
i think a better target pistol would be a borchardt. it just seems like it would be much better balanced than a broom handle. i would want the grip angle changed though

Vodoun da Vinci
September 22, 2013, 10:57 AM
I wanted to respond to the idea that this idea of reviving one of these older designs would be near impossible in terms of investment and capital....I can get a one off custom built Colt 1903 replica built "one off" for less than many probably think by a custom builder using CNC. The CNC programs to make the individual parts is expensive but not enough to make me cringe.

If one started with the idea of making 25 or 30 individual pistols via CNC and some hand fitting they would be expensive but not break the bank unless ones budget is only a few thousand $...I already have buyers willing to buy others excited enough to invest and I'm willing to bet a lot of money that I could sell the first 100 copies of a Colt 1903 Model M in .380 or .32 and recover most of my initial investment.

In this day and age of concealed carry in all 50 states now, and with tens of thousands of new CCW folks (many who will buy such a design as it fills a niche not filled by currently available pistols) looking for what some of these designs can do I think it is short sighted to believe it cannot be done financially.

Time will tell if I'm a fool for thinking this way.

VooDoo

Jim K
September 22, 2013, 05:59 PM
Like I said, I don't want to discourage initiative. If what the OP proposes is really as easy as Vodoun da Vinci says it is, why not raise a few thousand and go at it? The patents have long expired and I don't think anything about the guns, except the maker's logo and name, were ever trademarked. So if everyone and his baby brother can make 1911 clones, Model M clones should not be a problem. (Chinese manufacture is out unless the president revokes the ban on Chinese handgun imports, but other countries have the capability of making those pistols.)

I like the little pocket model and if a good repro appears on the market at a reasonable price, I will buy one. (Yes, I mean that.)

Jim

X9ballX
September 24, 2013, 03:29 PM
Aint no way in hell I would let the Chinese build anything of my ideas.

I appreciate the honesty Jim. I would rather have hard honesty than flattery.

We still pretty much just toss out ideas. only two ideas actually made it to paper so far.

The top break and and the 1903. the 1903 is really just going to be a copy. maybe novak sights. the top break needs a strong latch and thats whats slowing us down.

Then comes actual production for a test model. and someone willing to risk losing their hand lol.

And thats money we do not have and doubt Kickstarter would allow us to do.

I appreciate it guys.

Resist Evil
September 24, 2013, 05:25 PM
Please proceed forward as best as you can. So what if it is a hard road ahead? So what if it will take hard work to achieve? I would rather fail in having tried than sit on the sidelines with the boo-birds doing nothing but producing guano.

X9ballX
September 24, 2013, 08:07 PM
Right now if i wanted to produce a gun i would have to mill it out by hand like these guys

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wxFD0o57t8

Me being Filipino it would be the same as learning about where i come from on the other side of my family seeing as though my mother lived in a place like that

Vodoun da Vinci
September 24, 2013, 09:11 PM
I'm not trying to portray reviving some of these old classics as "easy"..it certainly would not be cheap and would involve some serious thought about which designs might be viable. While some of us love the old designs (I adore the old Mausers and Lugers) I doubt they could be commercially successful.

One should probably do a market study or enlist the aid of folks who understand that before jumping in full tilt.

I remember when Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms (both local companies in my back yard) got eye rolls when trying to make match grade M1A's and tricked out Colt 1911 clones. But both of those companies are now wildly successful after the teething.

We also have Les Baer Customs here locally and I remember when they were in a little shop a few blocks from here 25 years ago or so...making 1911 style pistols one at a time. It can be done with the older designs the biggest hurdle is whether or not it is worth the investment in time and energy and if the product will sell.

Personally? I feel very deeply that several forgotten designs might sell quite well if only to a dedicated and specific audience. Les Baer *still* makes pistols one off and they are not cheap but he is backlogged and doing well apparently. There is a market for the right designs done well and marketed properly.

VooDoo

blue32
September 25, 2013, 04:33 PM
Just give me a 1903 with modern steel.

Cosmoline
September 25, 2013, 05:21 PM
+1. I'd snap up a break-action, .45ACP snub-nose in a heartbeat.

Ditto that. If there's a missing piece in the market that could be filled by vintage designs, it's a break-top or bulldog style big bore CCW revolver. Low velocity, large mass, low pressure.

Jim K
September 25, 2013, 05:24 PM
I don't think the M1A and the 1911 are really fair comparisons. There was a HUGE demand for a semi-auto version of the M14 and at first the makers couldn't turn them out fast enough. The 1911 has never really become obsolete and is a very practical pistol today even though it is 102 years young.

Sorry, but I don't think there is any huge demand for C96 Mausers. A copy of the Colt pocket model might do OK, but you have already seen the arguments over whether to keep it traditional or turn out an improved version. IIRC, there was someone a few years ago making an improved model (upgrading original guns); it got some gunzine play and that was the end, as far as I know.

Jim

Jim Watson
September 25, 2013, 10:27 PM
I THINK there was a short lived 1903 repro.
There was a short lived FN 1910 repro, US made post 1968.

I have seen some gunsmith "upgrades" of 1903s, some look nice, some look clunky.

As said, the Luger has failed to make a return... twice.

And Rock River made some nice 1911s until they found out ARs paid better.

Gun Master
September 25, 2013, 10:44 PM
Until you get a high quality, reputable gun manufacturer (like Ruger et al) to legally research and commit themselves, "you 're spittin' in the wind". It's OK to spit, as far as I'm concerned.:) You might get something started !:D We don't need a company with a "Big Name", to farm out a project, to produce garbage.:banghead:

SlamFire1
September 26, 2013, 10:40 AM
They did surveys and market studies, and almost everyone asked said that a new Luger would be welcome and would sell very well. So Mauser bought the Bern tooling (Mauser's own tooling had been destroyed in WWII), and set up production under the renowned August Weiss. The first pistols resembled the Swiss Model 1929 and didn't sell well. But the Luger claque assured Interarms that if the German P.08 style were copied, the guns would sell. The change was made, but the mobs still refrained from beating down the door.

The bottom line was that the new guns enjoyed some sales, but Interarms and Mauser both took a bath on the deal. Everyone claimed to want new Lugers, but once they were available, they were new guns with no collector value and little interest of the wallet-opening kind.



I remember seeing those Mauser Lugers under glass in the 70’s, I did not care for the Swiss M1929, but even P08’s were way out of my price range. When you have less than $100 in your bank account a $250 pistol is only a dream. For the rest of the world, they were still too expensive for a mass market who wants the “best cheapest”. Wish I had the money for one as I really wanted one. Now, those pistols are even more expensive.

Something I was able to get in on was the N frame 44 Special.

In the 80’s Skeeter Skelton finally convinced Smith and Wesson to make an N frame 44 Special again. The M29 44 Magnum had buried the 44 Special. People did not see a reason to have the same sized handgun in a lower energy round, and since the 50’s an N framed 44 Special had been out of production. Collector demand had raised the prices on older M24’s and a combination of Skeeter and letters to the editor must have convinced S&W that the demand was there.

It was not. My local dealer had to severely discount the M624’s, because, for the same reasons as in the 50’s, people did not want to pay for a similarly sized handgun compared to a 44 Mag in a lower energy round. Collector’s wanted original M24’s and sniffed at the “reproductions”. Fools! The dealer said stocking M624’s was the greatest mistake he had made, or something to that effect. I however, wanted 44 Specials and I got mine at great prices. Just shows that I am clueless about trends. So maybe I am the greater fool. Even so, I am still happy with mine:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/ReducedM624rightsideDSCN5067.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/SlamFire/media/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/ReducedM624rightsideDSCN5067.jpg.html)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/ReducedM6246.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/SlamFire/media/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/ReducedM6246.jpg.html)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/DSCN1751M24-3.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/SlamFire/media/Smith%20and%20Wesson%20Pistols/DSCN1751M24-3.jpg.html)

Don357
September 26, 2013, 06:39 PM
Nobody has mentioned these, but, Mexico built a rotating barrel .45acp based on the 1911 called an "Obregon"http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/mex/obregon-e.html (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/mex/obregon-e.html") which could probably be redesigned for double stack capability.
Russia built a break open .357mag called the Izmech MP-412 Rex(not available for US import due to Clinton gun ban)http://world.guns.ru/handguns/double-action-revolvers/rus/izhmeh-mp-412-e.html (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/double-action-revolvers/rus/izhmeh-mp-412-e.html") I would love to have one of these in .357mag and/or .44mag.

China built a .45acp version of the C-96 called the "Shanxi type 17" (this is copied from Wikipedia)

Shanxi Type 17 (.45 ACP)[edit source]
During the Warlord era of Chinese History in the early 20th century, the province of Shanxi was ruled by warlord Yen Hsi-shan, who had established a modern arms factory in his capital city of Taiyuan. Yen was equipping his troops with a locally produced copy of the Thompson sub machine gun, chambered for the .45 ACP cartridge, but was experiencing supply difficulties as his troops' sidearms were 7.63mm calibre C96 handguns.[20]

Yen's solution was to produce a .45 ACP caliber version of the C96, thus standardizing ammunition and making supply logistics easier.[20] Designated Type 17, production on the .45 caliber handgun began in 1929 at the Taiyuan Arsenal. They are inscribed (in Chinese) "Type 17" on the left hand side of the gun, and "Republic Year Eighteen, Made in Shansi" on the right hand side.[20] They were issued (along with Thompson SMGs) to railway guards in the province as defense against bandits and other warlords.

Besides being chambered for a larger cartridge, the Shanxi .45 pistols are noticeably bigger than their 7.63mm counterparts, with the 10-round magazine extending below the trigger guard. It was loaded using two 5-round stripper clips rather than the single 10-round stripper clips of the standard 7.63mm Mauser.

Most of the Shanxi .45 pistols were melted down after the Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War, largely due to their odd caliber for Chinese Communist standards, but a few examples were exported overseas for sale on the commercial market.[20] Approximately 8,500 Shanxi .45 caliber Broomhandle pistols are believed to have been produced by the Taiyuan Arsenal, but there is some debate as to how many of the Shanxi .45 caliber Broomhandle pistols currently on the commercial market were actually produced for Yen's troops, and how many are more recent productions for the US collectors' market.

Just food for thought.

X9ballX
September 26, 2013, 11:04 PM
The obregon was actually the inspiration for our idea. Though We all Agreed it was ugly as sin.

we also didn't think the barrel bushing on it needed to be designed the way it was.

The obregon also uses the slide stop as a safety. because of how that design feature was made every time you wanted to disassemble the gun you needed to take off the left grip pannel.

We talked more on designs. we need a scanner to show you guys what we came up with.Sounds like a local trip to the library time

So far just the top break. No latch system has been put in place yet. But we like the webley design. Though still needs improvement.

Don357
September 27, 2013, 12:38 AM
Oh, and I almost forgot, Mauser built a rotating barrel, double stack, .45acp. I think it was called the M-2.

Carl N. Brown
September 27, 2013, 06:36 AM
I have always liked the look of the Browning 1910 .380 auto (strictly speaking FN Model 1910). I would add a trigger activated striker block internal safety.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Model_1910

Kosh75287
September 27, 2013, 09:56 AM
The demand might not be tremendous, but it COULD be steady... It would be a niche market.
While a new Broomhandle would likely be tightly fitted enough to deliver target-grade accuracy, there ARE more ergonomically friendly platforms. On the the other hand, an exceptionally accurate one, chambered for 9x23, or 10mm, would be a VERY serious (if on the bulky side) defensive pistol. More so, if detachable double-column magazines accompanied it.
It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol. A pistol in either of the above calibers capable of taking a butt-stock would have the ballistics and accuracy necessary to take it out of the "butt-stocked pistol" stratum and into that of the "defensive/camp carbine".
Since the 9x23 approaches .357 Magnum performance more closely than the .38 Super, there is some real potential, there. Ditto, a pistol in 10mm auto. And a platform capable of housing a 10mm auto would ALSO accommodate the 9x25mm Dillon, another carbine-worthy round. Instead of the M1896 Broomhandle, though, you might want to examine the Bergmann M1908 platform, which was originally chambered for 9x21 Largo. Like the Broomhandle, it is a bulky piece, but is also probably capable of handling the chamber pressures of the newer rounds.
Just thinking out loud, here.

Kosh75287
September 27, 2013, 10:09 AM
The demand might not be tremendous, but it COULD be steady... It would be a niche market.
While a new Broomhandle would likely be tightly fitted enough to deliver target-grade accuracy, there ARE more ergonomically friendly platforms. On the the other hand, an exceptionally accurate one, chambered for 9x23, or 10mm, would be a VERY serious (if on the bulky side) defensive pistol. More so, if detachable double-column magazines accompanied it.
It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol. A pistol in either of the above calibers capable of taking a butt-stock would have the ballistics and accuracy necessary to take it out of the "butt-stocked pistol" stratum and into that of the "defensive/camp carbine".
Since the 9x23 approaches .357 Magnum performance more closely than the .38 Super, there is some real potential, there. Ditto, a pistol in 10mm auto. And a platform capable of housing a 10mm auto would ALSO accommodate the 9x25mm Dillon, another carbine-worthy round. Instead of the M1896 Broomhandle, though, you might want to examine the Bergmann M1908 platform, which was originally chambered for 9x21 Largo. Like the Broomhandle, it is a bulky piece, but is also probably capable of handling the chamber pressures of the newer rounds.
Just thinking out loud, here.

tinygnat219
September 27, 2013, 10:46 AM
USFA did it just fine with copies of the older Colt Single Actions and they were doing it cheaply. Problem was the trust fund baby that started it all got bored with it and shut everything down. It IS possible to do, you just have to find a good backer, and have a smart business plan.

jimherb
September 27, 2013, 12:23 PM
My only beef with the Colt 1903 is the heavy trigger pull.

Jim K
September 29, 2013, 03:57 PM
"It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol."

The registration requirement for shoulder stock handguns (as short barrel rifles) was in the original 1934 NFA, not something "inflicted" by the 1968 law.

Jim

If you enjoyed reading about "Reproducing old Handguns legality issues - mauser c96 -colt 1903 - colt 1903 pistol" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!