Curio Carry (Warning, large pics)

Many years back, I carried a reproduction of the "1858 Army Remington"...

You read that right....a 7-1/2" barrel muzzle-loader. Only had to present it twice...

I can't begin to describe how big the miscreant's eyes grew when I drew that thing......

Once, I went to a SASS match without my daily carry guns. Since I was out a good bit of the day without being able to go home, I carried my Cimarron (Uberti) .38 Lightning loaded with 5 rounds of standard pressure Hornady .38 Special in a vintage-type spring-clamp shoulder holster. It wasn't my first choice, but I didn't feel unarmed.

ECS

i have carried a russian nagant w/ 32acp cylinder, as a secondary handgun once or twice. a couple times when walking the dog at night it was all i grabbed, just for coyotes though., [at the moment i only have 2 handguns, and my 4" 357 da/sa is primary]

Hey guys...

A gunshop fried of mine showed me a pair of COLT Thunders in .41 LC.

Both in fine working order but was in VERY GOOD working order.

Now that would be a carry gun of old!

Deaf

The Model 1877 is probably as good an example as any of a gun whose parts can fail at any time. I know about the Old West characters who supposedly carried them, but I fired a cylinder full out of each one and put them in the safe to sit there and increase in value. No way would I depend on one (or the Model 1878 either) to save my hide.

Jim

Jim K said:

Antique? Several years ago, I met the son of an old friend. He had a job that might have involved using a firearm and he carried what some folks would call an antique.

The gun - a Remington Rand Model 1911A1, made in 1943.

The job - guarding President Karzai.

He apparently thought that antique would work if he needed it, but he never did.

Jim

Click to expand...

Heck, I'm here because of a Remington Rand 1911A1, so I'd never feel I was using an antiquated handgun with one. I'll never know the year of manufacture, and always wonder where it is today. But, the day I needed it, I had it.

I've been shooting and carrying Colt C&Bs since the 70s. Pictured is my 2nd Generation Colt 1862 with pre-ban elephant ivory grips. One of my favorite woods guns. Back in the early 80s I came across a 1914 production Perfected Model S&W in .38 S&W. It was the last break-top model S&W produced and had two locks, the traditional top lock and a side lock for opening. Both have seen their share of use.

Nothing wrong with vintage arms.

This is amazing.
I own a number of vintage guns, like a .32 Webley. I would never consider carrying one for SD. I'm going to carry the most effective gun in the best caliber I can shoot. Typically that's an old Gen 2 Glock 17. Occasionally a Ruger Sec.6 in .357magum. Why would someone carry something that is obsolete? And by obsolete, I dont mean "old". The Smith Model 10 is basically over 100 years old and is still an effective carry weapon. A .32 S&W revolver was never an effective weapon.

Why would someone carry something that is obsolete?

Click to expand...

Now we are getting into the realm of opinion. I have different guns for different reasons. My Colt C&Bs get a lot of use on the farm and in the woods. I've hunted and taken small game with them, and there just a lot of fun to shoot. These days with all the gouging on ammo, they are also pretty cheap to shoot, especially if your casting your own balls. Properly loaded, mine have proved just as reliable as modern guns, with the exception of reloading being a little slow. So, yea - there just might be one in my truck at any given time.

I also live is a rural small town where there just aren't that many shootouts at the Sonic over cheese burgers. Running to the local Lowes is generally not a high risk activity at 10:00 in the morning. So you might find me packing a .22 magnum NAA Black Widow. If, I am going out of town, or where the threat level goes up, I'll pack a Browning HP.

I don't call anything that can throw a lead projectile accurately obsolete.

Bubba613 said:

This is amazing.
I own a number of vintage guns, like a .32 Webley. I would never consider carrying one for SD. <snip> A .32 S&W revolver was never an effective weapon.

Click to expand...

So, it wouldn't bother you to be shot at with one? Have one pointed at your forehead?

35W

So, it wouldn't bother you to be shot at with one? Have one pointed at your forehead?

Click to expand...

I dont want someone shooting rocks at me with a slingshot. Are you going to tell me a slingshot is an adequate SD weapon?

Here's my .38 S&W Webley , notice the safety.

A point not made in previous posts, all men born after the advent of the 357 Magnum, have a lot thicker skins and are a lot harder to kill than their weaker thin skinned ancestors

Cartridges shot out of guns such as the OP's 32 caliber revolver and some of the other shown would merely bounce off their skin and like the lowly 22 rim fire would just leave a blood blister .

have a lot thicker skins and are a lot harder to kill than their weaker thin skinned ancestors

Click to expand...

Dagger, if only at least part of that were true!

To stay on theme, I wouldn't want ANY of those listed here to be pointed my direction!

I wouldnt want to be beaten with a 2lb salami. I do not consider a 2lb salami a reasonable self defense weapon.
People shot with .32S&Ws and the like frequently died. Eventually.
In fact the .38spc cartridge got impetus from an event in Mexico when Rex Applegate shot a man multiple times with his .38 S&W and failed to stop him.

dagger dog said:

A point not made in previous posts, all men born after the advent of the 357 Magnum, have a lot thicker skins and are a lot harder to kill than their weaker thin skinned ancestors

Cartridges shot out of guns such as the OP's 32 caliber revolver and some of the other shown would merely bounce off their skin and like the lowly 22 rim fire would just leave a blood blister .

Click to expand...

Exactly. The same happened with whitetail deer. Where a 25-35 or 30-30 used to work fine, now nothing less than a huge magnum will do.

deleted

Okay, getting back to the original question posed by this thread...

What are the advantages to carrying such a gun; in other words, WHY would you carry an antiquated firearm (for personal defense use) instead of its modern equivalent?

Stress Test - I don't think anyone will argue that there are advantages, other than familiarity with a particular type of weapon. It's a personal choice, and some people just like the older vintage arms. They are effective and will work.

No one is going to argue that if SHFT, more rounds wouldn't be better or even that a long gun is not better than a handgun.