Curio Carry (Warning, large pics)

Status
Not open for further replies.
To some folks on this board a 1911 is an antiquated carry gun. As for me I'll carry about anything including a 1903 Colt.
 
RevolvingGarbage,

Since I live in a low crime area I don't pack a gun around the house. Since you didn't mention where you were packing it home carry never occurred to me.

I won't get into a debate about what I know or don't know about handgun stopping power but consider this. As a big man would that little popgun stop you if you were really determined to attack someone?
 
Last edited:
I have an Iver Johnson Cadet in .22 LR that I carry occasionally. It is a very handy size and drops right into a pocket.

I actually picked it up to use as a trail gun in areas where bears aren't a serious concern, which realistically is most of the state (Montana). But it also makes a pretty decent CC backup gun.
 
I'd just pack my old Webley. A pocket model in .38 S&W.

attachment.php


Deaf
 
Today I handled a Colt Thunder .41 LC revolver.

The gun was tight. Good condition and I have no doubt it would fire fine.

Must have been made in the 1890s.

Now that would be a cool carry piece. Just load five chambers and the chamber under the hammer empty.

Deaf
 
Well RG,

I also have a Colt Police Positive with 'Chase National Bank' stamped on the backstrap. Also in .38 S&W. I even have a Lee Turret Press setup for .38 S&W!

And just today I bumped into a 'Victory Model' S&W M&P .38 S&W with 5 inch barrel. They want $350. I might get that to go with my other two guns.

Thanks for the complement (and if one day I do sell I'll remember you!)

For some odd reason I like the little .38s. I kick myself for passing up a nickel S&W 'Terror' 2 inch snub years ago (came with original box to!)

And I'd love to get a 'Lemon Squeezer' .38 like the one posted above but with 2 inch barrel.

Oh well....

Deaf
 
Posted this here before. It's for times when I'm feeling I was born in the wrong century.

HANDGUNS12-31-07-0006-1.jpg

If the lead don't stop them, I can just fade away behind the smoke screen.:D
 
Once in a great while, I'll take one of the Old Uglies out for a walk.
 

Attachments

  • BritColts 143.jpg
    BritColts 143.jpg
    181.7 KB · Views: 61
Funny nobody ever mentions the fact that Iver-Johnson revolvers made in the 1880s had transfer bar ignition and some had the "Glock" trigger.
My 32 Smiths are fine for real close work but bounce off 25yard target backgrounds that 22 long rifles go through.
 
No offense intended, but I would consider the OP's H&R .32 revolver a crime gun rather than a serious defensive gun. That is, you could use it once and then ditch it in the nearest river. No great loss.
 
dickydalton said:
Funny nobody ever mentions the fact that Iver-Johnson revolvers made in the 1880s had transfer bar ignition and some had the "Glock" trigger.
My 32 Smiths are fine for real close work but bounce off 25yard target backgrounds that 22 long rifles go through.
Click to expand...
Ya, I got one. Found it in the 1/4 panel of a 55 chevy. No real power though IMO. I dispatched a squirrel with it, and it worked to do that.

IMAG0475-1.jpg
 
Caliber aside, that H&R is not a good choice for carry. It can be safely carried only with the hammer down on a fired case (not on an empty chamber because the cylinder can rotate backward and let the empty chamber be the next up). It can also be carried with the hammer down and the firing pin between rounds, so there is an empty chamber at the loading port.

A serious problem is that the old guns are full of flat springs that can fail (as in snap!) at any moment and unpredictably, not good in a carry gun. The old S&W's are a better bet; some have a hammer rebound system which, while not a transfer bar or hammer block, is better than nothing for safety. They also have much better quality springs with a low failure rate. (Of course concealed hammer revolvers don't need protection against being dropped; the 642 does not have a hammer block.)

Jim
 
ANY gun in the hand at a moment of life-or-death assault is better than none at all...heck I believe my old Iver Johnson .22 will be more effective than a handful of rocks. I am all for a CCW to carry a gun they are operationally familiar with, proficient with the operation and firing of, reloading an empty gun with, and most of all have confidence in.

But, when it comes to CCW; please treat your choice of carry gun as if your life depends on it.

Because when the chips are down and it's the life of you or your loved ones; it depend's 100% on the choice of what you're carrying.

I have a WWII-era 2" Victory model .38, a 4" .38 Spl S&W that my great uncle carried as a duty gun in Las Vegas in the 40's, 50's and 60's, and even a M1951 Beretta 9mm residing in the safes. They all seem to work just fine, but none of these guns would pass muster as my CCW because I can't say how well they were treated (or mistreated) before I got them, and I just can't rely on "hope" when I am shooting the gun for my life and I "need" it to work.

IMHO, and that is all this is "my humble opinion;" I would rather take the nostalgia guns out for fun and play; I have more modern guns/calibers/ammo that will perform this most dire of tasks should I need it. Stay safe!
 
They all seem to work just fine, but none of these guns would pass muster as my CCW because I can't say how well they were treated (or mistreated) before I got them, and I just can't rely on "hope" when I am shooting the gun for my life and I "need" it to work.
Click to expand...

Don't want to bust anyone's bubble, but with today's rushed production combined with spot-check quality control procedures, I'm not so sure the latest/greatest is necessarily better then (within reason) an older gun that's was reasonably treated and taken care of.

My serious purpose guns - like they're owner - are older ones, and have been with me for many decades of reliable service. Some were obtained as used, others new, but none of them ever failed me. I continue to use/carry them without hesitation or qualms. None of them need to go through a trial or break-in period because that is far behind me. Double-action trigger pulls are now burnished to the point of extra ordinary smoothness. They do of course show finish wear, but in my view that is of no consequence.

Most of today’s guns are designed to involve the very least human input possible. Mine were made when skilled and experienced workmen were still affordable. When you carefully examine both with experienced eyes you can see a difference. ;)
 
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
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MatthewVanitas
  • Locked
Whoa, is this revo unsafe to carry hammer-down on live? (FIE Standard)
Replies
13
Views
756
MatthewVanitas
MatthewVanitas
Mr. Mosin
Modern Velo-Dog Revolver
Replies
11
Views
668
GEM
G
S
  • Locked
NAA Mini .22, Carrying with hammer in Safety Notches?
Replies
13
Views
2K
Walkalong
Walkalong
A
  • Locked
Safety question about NAA Mini-revolvers for CCW
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
c919
C
E
  • Locked
120 years of fun.
Replies
8
Views
973
EnsignJimmy
E
Back
Top