Bond Arms

Honestly I would love to have one of those. Not as a shooter, at least not with 45-70, but as part of my collection.

gunbroker is your friend, especially if you are looking for the higher-quality original gen2 bond arms derringers:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/948855876

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/938942919

second one is “buy now” for $300, which is just $50ish more than the price of a lesser-quality rowdy/roughneck.

since b.a. derringers are built stoutly and shot little, i wouldn’t worry about getting a used-up lemon. i do worry about the lower finishing of the rowdy/roughneck, as worry-free barrel interchangeability requires uniform platform finishing to a consistently high level of common precision. i learned the hard way, others are happy, ymmv.
 
I had a Snake Slayer in .45/.410. In a way I'm sorry I sold it. But it's sale funded my Speed Six grail gun, so only somewhat sorry. They fill a niche and they are fun. A shot of a three inch #4 will have a feral cat tumbling and rolling. And for you cat lovers, really, I did it a service. It had something seriously wrong with it.
Anyways, back to the SnakeSlayer. If you want to do it up right, buy the generic ClipDraw. But don't use that glue strip. Have a good gunsmith drill and tap it so the clip screws directly to the firearm. It works really well!
 
So I have a bond arms 45LC/410 that I got a while back, and it's been in the safe and I have never even fired it. I bought it cause it, "looked cool" and felt like an anvil. Do they serve a real world purpose? I don't think I'd ever carry it, as obviously that is not practical. What are your thoughts?

Do gimmick derringers shooting obsolete/irrelevant cartridges have a real world purpose in 2022?

lol come on guy. Of course not. You'd be better served with a snubbie J frame .38.
 
second one is “buy now” for $300, which is just $50ish more than the price of a lesser-quality rowdy/roughneck.

since b.a. derringers are built stoutly and shot little, i wouldn’t worry about getting a used-up lemon. i do worry about the lower finishing of the rowdy/roughneck, as worry-free barrel interchangeability requires uniform platform finishing to a consistently high level of common precision. i learned the hard way, others are happy, ymmv.

Actually Rowdys are about $300. Roughneck about $280. So you are saying the Rough Series are lower quality based on some trouble mounting a different barrel? I would guess that that was a factory defect. The Rough Series guns are supposed to be every bit as high of quality as their more expensive guns, just a budget finish.
 
gunbroker is your friend, especially if you are looking for the higher-quality original gen2 bond arms derringers:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/948855876

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/938942919

second one is “buy now” for $300, which is just $50ish more than the price of a lesser-quality rowdy/roughneck.

since b.a. derringers are built stoutly and shot little, i wouldn’t worry about getting a used-up lemon. i do worry about the lower finishing of the rowdy/roughneck, as worry-free barrel interchangeability requires uniform platform finishing to a consistently high level of common precision. i learned the hard way, others are happy, ymmv.
I think they were referring to the American Derringer 'Alaskan Survival 45-70' Derringer I posted. Those are on Gunbroker though.

I think you got a lemon Roughneck. Mine has been 100% reliable, and completely interchangeable with the normal barrels. Again, zero problems over two years. Also, I bet I've fired more rounds than your average derringer buyer. My estimate is 300 rounds out of the derringer so far. It passed the 300 round test, which is pretty normative for any guns to test whether it is working properly or not.
Do gimmick derringers shooting obsolete/irrelevant cartridges have a real world purpose in 2022?

lol come on guy. Of course not. You'd be better served with a snubbie J frame .38.
1) Collectible: As far as history, derringers are one of the most iconic handguns
2) Fun
3) Still serve same function they did 100 years ago, but even better quality and more powerful cartridges. Are there better self defense guns? Of course.
Actually Rowdys are about $300. Roughneck about $280. So you are saying the Rough Series are lower quality based on some trouble mounting a different barrel? I would guess that that was a factory defect. The Rough Series guns are supposed to be every bit as high of quality as their more expensive guns, just a budget finish.

Right, in my experience the Roughneck and Rowdy BAs are plenty quality and reliable. Their frame isn't as polished, but in reality one doesn't need that for a functional firearm. They are still better built and will outlast likely 90% of semiautos (if not all). I bet if one took care of any BA, it will last 100 years.
 
Do gimmick derringers shooting obsolete/irrelevant cartridges have a real world purpose in 2022?

lol come on guy. Of course not. You'd be better served with a snubbie J frame .38.
What does that have to do with anything? Necklaces, rings, and other jewelry don't have a "real world" purpose. Paintings or art sculpture don't have a "real world" purpose. Neither do bowling balls or golf clubs for that matter. None of those things will help you when attacked by marauding hordes of evil-doers so they must be useless too. There are lots of things that have no real purpose yet, oddly, some people enjoy having and owning them.
I have (so far) 7 Bond Arms derringers. I carry a J frame "snubbie".
 
Last edited:
What does that have to do with anything? Necklaces, rings, and other jewelry don't have a "real world" purpose. Paintings or art sculpture don't have a "real world" purpose. Neither do bowling balls or golf clubs for that matter. None of those things will help you when attacked by marauding hordes of evil-doers so they must be useless too. There are lots of things that have no real purpose yet, oddly, some people enjoy having and owning them.
I have (so far) 7 Bond Arms derringers. I carry a J frame "snubbie".
That's my view.

People collect far less functional things than firearms, including derringers. They collect jewelry, art, antiques, etc.

I’ve carried my BA only 3 odd times. My normal carry is a .380 semi auto.
 
Last edited:
On another forum, it has been years now, but there was a member that went by the screen name of Peggy Sue. This member would post the most eclectic and fun firearms collection I have ever seen. I always looked forward to his threads because it was like stepping into a very diverse gun store/ museum of both everyday and off the wall firearms. I do not believe that most of these firearms were ever fired by him as most still had the price tags on the trigger guards and were in whatever box/package he had them in.

For me anyway, shooting is fun and having a gun with a purpose is practical, but as already mentioned previously a collection, even if not fired, is very satisfying just like jewelry, art, etc etc is to someone else.
 
What does that have to do with anything? Necklaces, rings, and other jewelry don't have a "real world" purpose. Paintings or art sculpture don't have a "real world" purpose. Neither do bowling balls or golf clubs for that matter. None of those things will help you when attacked by marauding hordes of evil-doers so they must be useless too. There are lots of things that have no real purpose yet, oddly, some people enjoy having and owning them.
I have (so far) 7 Bond Arms derringers. I carry a J frame "snubbie".

Ok.

The person asked for a 'real world purpose' on something as subjective as a gun. For a *real world purpose* the answer is no. Only a knucklehead would genuinely carry a 2 shot gun in a goofy caliber, if my definition of real world purpose is the same as the OPs.

If the purpose is C&R (no, they're new production) or just neato range toys, sure. Fine. That's a purpose I guess.

Jewelry and art can appreciate in value, not gimmicks like modern production derringers.
 
Ok.

The person asked for a 'real world purpose' on something as subjective as a gun. For a *real world purpose* the answer is no. Only a knucklehead would genuinely carry a 2 shot gun in a goofy caliber, if my definition of real world purpose is the same as the OPs.

If the purpose is C&R (no, they're new production) or just neato range toys, sure. Fine. That's a purpose I guess.

Jewelry and art can appreciate in value, not gimmicks like modern production derringers.
4987B077-FDD2-4D79-B10E-A36792CF5DDC.jpeg


:rofl:
 
I don't care about the eventual financial value of my firearms. I haven't hunted in years. There are maybe six handguns that do nightstand duty or get carried sometimes.

The rest are range toys and firearms that I bought because they were cool and interesting. I enjoy them. None of them are worth much, but I like to shoot them and tinker with them and admire them.

My kids are already taken care of, but after I croak they can get some more money from my firearms. My tools and antique vehicles will also be worth something. I'm guessing they'll just give away my thousands of books.

When my dad passed, he had 20-something guitars, My stepmom gave them to me and my sister, We spent a few hours estimating their value and dividing them up. We each saved a couple for sentimental reasons, and the rest we slowly sold on Ebay. My dad loved his guitars and enjoyed them. He didn't purchase them as investments, but we did well with them regardless.
 
Last edited:
I had the Rowdy .45/.410 to the range yesterday and it was a blast. Shot 180 grain cowboy loads and it was like there was no recoil at all. If felt so light. I packed my range bag with some 250 grain standard and cowboy. Hoping to go back tomorrow and see if I can get some recoil out of this thing.

What barrel would give me more recoil? .2.5 inch 45 ACP? 2.5 inch .357 magnum? The .357 ought to really kick, more than any other barrel they offer, because they don't offer magnum barrels in either .44 or .45.
 
I had the Rowdy .45/.410 to the range yesterday and it was a blast. Shot 180 grain cowboy loads and it was like there was no recoil at all. If felt so light. I packed my range bag with some 250 grain standard and cowboy. Hoping to go back tomorrow and see if I can get some recoil out of this thing.

What barrel would give me more recoil? .2.5 inch 45 ACP? 2.5 inch .357 magnum? The .357 ought to really kick, more than any other barrel they offer, because they don't offer magnum barrels in either .44 or .45.
.357 mag, compared to .45 acp or colt. But, I thought they did make .44 mag barrel at one point
 
What barrel would give me more recoil? .2.5 inch 45 ACP? 2.5 inch .357 magnum? The .357 ought to really kick,
They've never made a .44 Magnum. That was American Derringer.

Perhaps 44 Magnum at one time, but I don't see it on their site now.
Any of those should give you more. The .45 Colt only would as well, I believe. With the .45/.410 barrel there is a lot of freebore before the .45 bullet engages the rifling. At the point the bullet meets the resistance of the rifling it is actually pushing the gun forward briefly, offsetting some of the recoil. I know .45 ACP seems harsher to me than a .45 Colt from a .410 barrel despite the bullets in my ACP loads being 25 grains lighter than my Colt loads and both having similar velocities from my 1911 and Ruger Redhawk respectively. There's also the issue of gas blow-by in the .410 barrel reducing velocity. The bullet is spending quite a bit of time in a part of the barrel that is larger diameter than it is.
The longer barrels (not .410) would technically have more felt recoil due to higher velocities and longer recoil impulse time but how noticeable it would be I can't say. I haven't done a side-by-side comparison between my 2.5 and 3" .45 ACPs but I suspect the difference would be negligible.
 
So I need to decide either to get a barrel only or go for a second gun. The Roughneck has the 2.5-inch .45 ACP . But for the money I probably should instead go with the 3.5-inch .45 ACP barrel only at $180., $100 less than the 2.5-inch .45 ACP Roughneck. I wonder if there would be that much difference between the 2.5- and 3.50-inch barrels for .45 ACP in recoil.

Back to the dry firing. Found this page at Bond Arms that repeats what my manual says about not recommending snap caps, but to use spent cases to dry fire, but adds that dry firing should be "for a few rounds only." It sounds like they basically do not recommend dry firing. I am okay with that. I want to fire real ammo, more fun!

They totally do not recommend any dry firing of the .22s, but I would think so long as you put the spent case so that a fresh part of the brass rim is under the firing pin it would work. Notice on the .22 the barrel centers are closer together so that the firing pins align with the rim. That was a clever way to accommodate rimfire without redesigning the frame with the pins closer together.
 
So I need to decide either to get a barrel only or go for a second gun. The Roughneck has the 2.5-inch .45 ACP . But for the money I probably should instead go with the 3.5-inch .45 ACP barrel only at $180., $100 less than the 2.5-inch .45 ACP Roughneck. I wonder if there would be that much difference between the 2.5- and 3.50-inch barrels for .45 ACP in recoil.

Back to the dry firing. Found this page at Bond Arms that repeats what my manual says about not recommending snap caps, but to use spent cases to dry fire, but adds that dry firing should be "for a few rounds only." It sounds like they basically do not recommend dry firing. I am okay with that. I want to fire real ammo, more fun!

They totally do not recommend any dry firing of the .22s, but I would think so long as you put the spent case so that a fresh part of the brass rim is under the firing pin it would work. Notice on the .22 the barrel centers are closer together so that the firing pins align with the rim. That was a clever way to accommodate rimfire without redesigning the frame with the pins closer together.
Not going to lie, if they come out with a new .22 BA I'm all over that. Or .32.
 
Perhaps 44 Magnum at one time, but I don't see it on their site now. There are some more unusual that I am not aware how they would recoil:
30 Carbine,
44-40, and
45 Glock.
Some of these barrels are random lol. Like, who really wanted a 30 carbine derringer? Or 45-70 for that matter.

If the 45 Glock is .45 GAP, then it will be roughly similar to .45 ACP, as that was the intent of that cartridge.
 
Some of these barrels are random lol. Like, who really wanted a 30 carbine derringer? Or 45-70 for that matter.

If the 45 Glock is .45 GAP, then it will be roughly similar to .45 ACP, as that was the intent of that cartridge.
Mostly useless. Surprised they even make such barrels. They do have quite the caliber selection right now, but lacking in the small calibers.
 
Mostly useless. Surprised they even make such barrels. They do have quite the caliber selection right now, but lacking in the small calibers.
Right, I would bet you that there is a far bigger demand for .22 lr, .32 acp, etc.
 
Not going to lie, if they come out with a new .22 BA I'm all over that. Or .32.
Yeah, either .22 or .32 would be fun. Depends on my barrel budget. Right now I am waffling between a 2.5" .45 ACP or a 3.5" .45 ACP and leaning to 3.5", but then that is $100 short of the whole Roughneck, a second gun for only an extra $100. But I would like the .45 ACP and then once I buy a stash of ammo for it, I will have good reason to get a .45 ACP semi-auto, looking for non-plastic and full DA. The AMT Backup .45 looks great. Neighbor has it, but on this site it gets a lot of bad reviews.
 
Back
Top