Baby Ithaca in 38/357

Status
Not open for further replies.

twoblink

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
3,736
Location
Houston, Texas
As some of you might or might not know, I'm obsessed with building a bottom eject, pump rifle that eats 38Spls/357Mags. Basically a Baby Ithaca on a 357 diet...

I'd just like to get some feedback, if I were ever crazy enough to open a gun company and build it:

1) Would you buy it? (I know, dependent on price and build quality, assuming excellent build, what is a fair price that you would fork over?)

2) What features would you like to see on it? (Please, it's a cowboy gun, it will not be able to fit all the accessories that Skunk wants to fit on it, let me just get that out of the way..)

3) What barrel length would you like to see? (I had 18.5" in mind.. but would someone prefer something like a 21" or even 24"?)

4) Anybody prefer it in .44Mag?

Give me some feedback, as I devote a little bit of time every week/month, to reading up on gun designs, and specs, in hopes of someday designing one and manufacturing it..
 
1. No.
2. If it is to be a SASS Cowboy gun it must have an exposed hammer and be a reasonably close replica of a 19th century firearm. I know of nothing even close. SASS disallowed the Henry Big Boy lever action. If you mean generic cowboy as in any revolver caliber carbine, ok, but see No 1 above.
3. 20" is best to give a good combination of balance and tube magazine capacity.
4. Yes, .357 isn't much of a rifle round.
 
I'd buy one, but I think it would be nice to have a 16" barrel - compact, handy, light. I also think that .357 can be a pretty good rifle round, depending on what you are using it for. I would say that, for me, the main thing would be to make it so the forestock didn't wiggle. That's just my experience with pump shotguns speaking, but it would make accuracy tough in a rifle, I would suspect.

Also - ghost ring/peep sight in the rear.
 
I'd buy it IF the parts were made of "roto forged steel" and the scale chunkyied up the breech bolt locks ect. Also NO little bitty stamped widgets and springs ect. Make the scale like a model 14 1/2 Remington pump, which I like VERY MUCHO!:D
 
1. Yes, I'd buy it.

2. Receiver drilled and tapped for Scope Mount, peep sight, etc. Full-length tube magazine. Needs to be offered in stainless with a synthetic stock.

3. 16.1" Only. Any longer is a waste for balance, velocity, etc.

4. Actually, make it able to take 500 S&W and then it can take everything from 500 down to 38 Special with minor modifications Heck, a 30/30 or 45/70 isn't a big deal and the gun can still be quite handy.

One last point. The bottom-ejection is a great idea and works well on the Ithaca, but a side-loading port is much more useful and simplifies the shell carrier, ejector, extractor, and makes a more reliable gun. Design isn't a big deal, look at the Remington 870, change the size and give it a trigger mechanism like an AK-47. Safe, simple, proven, and cheap to machine.

The main advantage of this gun over a lever gun is that it has bottom loading with a HUGE loading port that doesn't cut your fingers or pinch you like that of the lever guns.
 
So what you are all saying is, you are all right handed, and I'm left handed.. gotcha..

:D

You don't think a 357 is much of a rifle round?? It can exceed 30-30 specs.. It can do a deer out to 100 yards without much problem.. I think that's awefully handy..

I hear ya on the wiggling forestock. I've got a system to make it rock solid, but I'm wondering if that will eat into reliability of shucking..
 
You don't think a 357 is much of a rifle round?? It can exceed 30-30 specs.. It can do a deer out to 100 yards without much problem.. I think that's awefully handy..
I beg to differ on the MARKETABILITY of the 357 carbine, not on the power. It's not that much of a stretch to build a 357 gun fron a 500, but the other way around might be impossible. Based on sales history, the 357 Magnum as a rifle round has been vastly overshadowed by the larger pistol calibers and of course the traditional lever action offerings like 44 magnum, 45 colt, and others popular ones today.

As to the wiggling of the fore-grip, you'll find it's much less pronounced on a well-designed gun. It won't effect reliability at all. The reason Mossbergs rattle is because they're designed with huge tolerances and clearances to facilitate their cheap manufacture.
 
You might note that AWA went out of business selling Colt Lightning rifles... there are two other MFG's claiming they will bring the Lightning to market... but the market just isn't that big.

The IMI Timberwolf likewise sold in low numbers as did the Savage 180 (I think that's the pump action 30-30)

I think The AWA was a tad overpriced. It was well blued, lightwieght, handled well... wood to metal fit was good, but I was a bit concerned by the brass blade front sight and the rattle in the fore-end. AWA's were selling for 699-799 USD here in Colorado and were never available in .44 mag, in that caliber I just might buy one. If the price is closer to a Marlin levergun (the cowboy model 1894 sells for 550-650) you might expect more interest.

Bottom line is the AWA was a purpose built (CAS) or 'gallery" gun/range toy, where the Marlin is a hunting rifle, that you can use for CAS. Where do you mount sling swivels on a Lightning?

Cowboy guns don't need scope rails, ghost ring sights and plastic furniture, but it IS nice to see an action slicked up, or small improvements made (ie a bead front sight ala Marlin on the AWA, and improving fit to reduce the 'rattle' of the slide)

I'd be willing to spend $500-600 on a Lightning rifle in 44 Magnum.

Does that answer your question?
 
IAI tried something similar several years back. It was basically a 'Baby' Remington 870 in .357 and .44 Mag. called the "Timberwolf'.

Personally, I LOVE mine but it fizzled in the mass market. At the time of its conception, most LEO holsters carried some variation on the 4" .357 theme. One of the major marketing targets for it (IMO) was the LEA market as a patrol carbine with ammo compatability with the issue sidearm.

As a concept this has a lot going for it on several levels, from a practical perspective.

Howerver, there were a few design issues brought on mostly by trying to cover too many bases at once that tubed it, IMO.

1: You have to top off the magazine with the action open. No biggie for most civilians, but a major concern to an LEO.

2: The receiver was made with a big. clunky optics mount integral to it. While it is arguably hell-for-tough, it looks sort of weird and precludes the mounting of any standard receiver sight on it. It may have been added for the 'sporting purposes' points toward import, or from the mistaken assumption that most users would want a 'scope or Red Dot on it. Whichever it might of been it screwed up the aesthetics of an otherwise trim and handy little carbine. It doesn't really get in the way for carrying at the balance point, but from a purely functional standpoint it could've been done just as well with a separate conventional mount if it just had to be done.

3: The suggested retail price was outrageous compared to competing lever or semi-auto designs. You could buy a Marlin 94 for $100 less, retail-for-retail, almost anywhere. This changed quite a bit after it became apparent that most LEAs were switching to semi-autos and that their primary target market segment was thereby kaput. I bought mine NIB off the wall at Bradi's for $239. It had been marked down from a still-under SRP $399.

Those niggling bits aside, it is a truly great little all-around woods walker for small game and plinking. Extremely accurate, slick working, fast handling, lightweight..the whole nine yards. As a HD weapon, especially in a more urban setting, it'd be hard to beat for those whose budgets or physique couldn't handle a 12 or 20 ga. shotgun.

I personally like the concept you have, but it's probabvly more-than-evident that my tastes run contrary to the bulk of the market. I grew up with pumps and find them easier and faster for me to make accurate repeat shots with than any other manual action type.

FWIW, a couple of suggestions should you decide to pursue the concept.

Take a close look at the way the butt stock adjusts on a Timberwolf. It's not complex and is somewhat limited, but with some fiddling you can make it as easy and natural to point accurately as a custom shotgun. The sights become almost superfluous: you look at the target with both eyes open (just like a shotgun) and the can dances or the bunny drops.

Make the safety ambidextrous, on the tang let's say.

Make the magazine so that 'tactical' reloads or topping it off can be done with the action in-battery.

MARKETING!!! Have a campaign to show where the advantages are for the consumer. Show them where and how a pump shades a lever gun and why having a carbine in a revolver caliber is so practical and multifunctional.

Try to keep the price competitive. Tough to do, as Marlin, Winchester, Taurus/Rossi have long ago amortized their R&D, tooling. etc., have huge capital support and have the name rec and distribution edge. You're gonna need to make full use of modern manufacturing technology, materials and design to do it. Even then, you're gonna have to convince the consumer that it's the better choice somehow.

Done right and sold right, I think it can be done. If I could tell you just how exactly to do it though, I wouldn't still be working for wages.

Good luck, whatever you decide.
 
"It can exceed 30-30 specs." Never, No way,smoking rope!!!!! Theres 100% case capacity difference in a round mde to work in same pressure range! Also I don't think you guys ever handled a 141 Remington or it's 3/4 scale pistol caliber older brother the 14 1/2. Of course you could never do the machining today , even with CNC. But a modern simplification of the 14 1/2 in .357 or .357max would be nice!;)
 
I love the Timberwolf.. What I felt it sufferred from is "too-much idious" It tried to do too much, at one time.

I might go ahead and design it for a 500, but I doubt it would be a swappable system. Modular systems have their attractions, but also come built-in with compromises.

I do like the concept of a modular angle on the stock, will look into that. I am trying to figure out how to overcome the problems of a tube fed.. I am exploring a bleeding rotational gate, so you can empty the tube quickly..

Reloading without the tube open, let me think how to do these two things in combo..

Gordon, go ahead and read the specs on the Buffalo Bore Loads.. they meet or exceed 30-30 specs.

Now I am not even arguing that there are better loads, just that I'm usually not carrying a 500 pistol on my persons (should I??) and so (wait for it....) Logistically, a 357, 41, and 44 mag just is the smarter bet. It's not suppose to be a rifle you have alone, its roll is to be the rifle to accompanies your pistol on a short trip through the woods.. It's what you take when you have a 3" revolver on ya, but need something maybe slightly bigger, but don't want to carry 2 types of bullets..
 
I might go ahead and design it for a 500, but I doubt it would be a swappable system.
No way, Fixed barrel and magazine tube ONLY!
I am trying to figure out how to overcome the problems of a tube fed.. I am exploring a bleeding rotational gate, so you can empty the tube quickly..
Don't re-invent the wheel. Ruger patented a system for emptying the rounds one at a time, didn't they? The Ruger 44 carbine, the old tube-fed one with a 102 or higher prefix, has a button for such. Depress the button, one cartridge pops out of the mag to be removed manually. I'd like a button on the side of the gun, maybe concealed in a countersink so as not to be inadvertantly depressed. Now that I think of it, I just picked up my Ithaca 37 and found that I can EASILLY unload the magazine simply by depressing the right shell stop. The cartridges just pop out against my thumb and I can manually unload them... COOL!
Now I am not even arguing that there are better loads, just that I'm usually not carrying a 500 pistol on my persons (should I??)
You might want to if you walk my part of the country!
 
Badger, what are you trying to say, I need "Polar Bear Logistics" now??:neener:

Why not try to reinvent the wheel if you can (possibly) make a better wheel?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top