Cutting the frame for a loading gate, and legality.

Status
Not open for further replies.
You guys are right !

I am wrong ! I'm over cautious, I'm ignorant, I'm a BS'er, and apparently a fool!

And I'm OK with that!!

If I see and read things differently, that's only with me and my family, not everybody else. If you don't like what I think GREAT!!! If I don't think or agree with you GREAT!!! Nobody has ever been forced to send a revolver to me . . . not even Mr. Foster who is a past customer (5 yrs ago) but apparently has a problem with me now, because I don't accept his view on this topic. I still don't . . .

Mike

Hawg, if you don't agree with this, that's OK lol!! I edited this after you "liked" it so if you "unlike" it, it's OK !
 
Last edited:
Nah. I don't have a problem with anyone here. I remember when I was a kid in the Midwest, a lot of good farmers swore that docking a pig's tale would save you a bushel of corn. They heard it, believed it, bobbed them tails and spread the myth probably for generations. My father was a sceptic and asked a vet if there was any truth to it, and was told no, none. He believed the vet. I believe the gunsmith.
 
I think this thread should probably be locked at this point. The purpose was not to prove a point as much as it was to inform people that the feds don't have a dog in this fight, contrary to popular belief (at least not yet).
 
Well, the funniest thing for me is , I just happen to have a recent example of the "gunsmith's" offering in my shop because it won't function!! Lol I'm not saying it's an example of his normal work but the customer sent it to me because he received it (from the "gunsmith") in non-functioning condition!

So, small world ain't it ?! Lol!!

Mike

I don't question your skill or his. I'm totally happy with the work you did on my 1860, and the work he did on my ROA. Have you seen his Uberti Walker conversion to 45-60-250 "Brimstone"? That is a thing of beauty, and I want one! How's that .454 Casull ROA thing coming along? lol
 
Some people are so invested in their own half-baked opinions that they are terrified to learn that they may be wrong. Their best argument (without a trace of irony) is to call opposing views "ignorant".

After working at Fed DOJ and CA DOJ and being a prosecutor for 21 years I really should know better than to try to untangle serial non sequiturs and engage in disputed statutory construction with the "experts".

My bad.
 
Last edited:
I just tuned Clembert's 45 BPM (first video I ever saw of the BPM back around 2013) He says his was first.

The ROA gated conversion is almost done, it's a good one . . .

Mike
 
Last edited:
Some people are so invested in their own half-baked opinions that they are terrified to learn that they may be wrong. Their best argument (without a trace of irony) is to call opposing views "ignorant".

After working at Fed DOJ and CA DOJ and being a prosecutor for 21 years I really should know better than to try to untangle serial non sequiturs and engage in disputed statutory construction with the "experts".

My bad.

Some people do hate being corrected by an expert, for sure. I'm not the expert, just the messenger. BTW, those hog farmers knew everything about hogs. Timing for farrowing for maximum piglets, what to feed and when to feed it. All that stuff, but, regarding the tails? Yeah, they were ignorant... lol
 
Last edited:
You guys are right !

I am wrong ! I'm over cautious, I'm ignorant, I'm a BS'er, and apparently a fool!

And I'm OK with that!!

If I see and read things differently, that's only with me and my family, not everybody else. If you don't like what I think GREAT!!! If I don't think or agree with you GREAT!!! Nobody has ever been forced to send a revolver to me . . . not even Mr. Foster who is a past customer (5 yrs ago) but apparently has a problem with me now, because I don't accept his view on this topic. I still don't . . .

Mike

Hawg, if you don't agree with this, that's OK lol!! I edited this after you "liked" it so if you "unlike" it, it's OK !
Hey, at least this ain't Facebook! Complete strangers would've called you all sorts of unsavory names by now. I had a guy tell me my parents should've aborted me because I asked about his voting habits. :rofl:


Some people are so invested in their own half-baked opinions that they are terrified to learn that they may be wrong. Their best argument (without a trace of irony) is to call opposing views "ignorant".

After working at Fed DOJ and CA DOJ and being a prosecutor for 21 years I really should know better than to try to untangle serial non sequiturs and engage in disputed statutory construction with the "experts".

My bad.
Ok, so what about the guy that builds these guns for a living and has had untold conversations with the ATF about this very subject? Does his opinion count or are you guilty of what you just accused the rest of us of?
 
You guys are right !
If I see and read things differently, that's only with me and my family, not everybody else. If you don't like what I think GREAT!!! If I don't think or agree with you GREAT!!! Nobody has ever been forced to send a revolver to me . . . not even Mr. Foster who is a past customer (5 yrs ago) but apparently has a problem with me now, because I don't accept his view on this topic. I still don't . . .

Mike

Hawg, if you don't agree with this, that's OK lol!! I edited this after you "liked" it so if you "unlike" it, it's OK !

Nah man, I agree with you.
 
Well now that all the screaming is over I'll add my 2 cents.
The loading port thing never made any sense to me,
as I own a Model 1873 BP percussion revolver.
It has a gated loading port , and an ejector.
If cutting a loading port makes a black powder revolver a modern firearm,
how can the Italian Makers sell these as a Black Powder Revolver?

AntiqueSledMan.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_01.jpg
    IMG_01.jpg
    165.6 KB · Views: 9
Well now that all the screaming is over I'll add my 2 cents.
The loading port thing never made any sense to me,
as I own a Model 1873 BP percussion revolver.
It has a gated loading port , and an ejector.
If cutting a loading port makes a black powder revolver a modern firearm,
how can the Italian Makers sell these as a Black Powder Revolver?

AntiqueSledMan.

To be fair: Because the frame also has an offset hammer strike. It can't shoot cartridges as it is even with a loading port. It was made NOT to be able to shoot cartridges, specifically. Now if the frame and hammer are modified to align with a cartridge cylinder (and I think someone did that, and it wasn't easy), it would not be able to shoot c&b anymore. That makes it a "permanent" conversion, and then qualifies as a firearm (in my humble opinion).
 
Last edited:
Well now that all the screaming is over I'll add my 2 cents.
The loading port thing never made any sense to me,
as I own a Model 1873 BP percussion revolver.
It has a gated loading port , and an ejector.
If cutting a loading port makes a black powder revolver a modern firearm,
how can the Italian Makers sell these as a Black Powder Revolver?

AntiqueSledMan.

LOL!!!! Well I thought the same thing for a long time but, a Howell won't work in them (I don't think) and I don't think a Kirst will either because of the offset hammer nose as well as the frame opening for said nose. Neither one of these negate the fact that there's a loading port and gate but here is the real kicker -- I don't care enough to call and argue about it!! Lol
You see, I'm 64 yrs old and don't give a rat's patooty what anybody calls me, I enjoy way too much what I do as well as the "innovation" of some of it . . . but what I enjoy most of all is when my grandkids come see us (or us them!). I'm content to stay well within the laws (as I understand them) and don't care to try and find the "edge" of right and wrong . . . I don't want my grandkids coming to see "Papa" in the "big house" . . . so that's the way it'll stand.

Mike
 
To be fair: Because the frame also has an offset hammer strike. It can't shoot cartridges as it is even with a loading port. It was made NOT to be able to shoot cartridges, specifically. Now if the frame and hammer are modified to align with a cartridge cylinder (and I think someone did that, and it wasn't easy), it would not be able to shoot c&b anymore. That makes it a "permanent" conversion, and then qualifies as a firearm (in my humble opinion).

I think Fingers did one several years ago and a few other people have too. Some of them simply widened the firing pin hole and put a regular hammer in. Some reported success and some complained that it blew primers out of the pockets. The best way would be to weld the offset hole up and drill a new hole with a bushing.
 
LOL!!!! Well I thought the same thing for a long time but, a Howell won't work in them (I don't think) and I don't think a Kirst will either because of the offset hammer nose as well as the frame opening for said nose. Neither one of these negate the fact that there's a loading port and gate but here is the real kicker -- I don't care enough to call and argue about it!! Lol
You see, I'm 64 yrs old and don't give a rat's patooty what anybody calls me, I enjoy way too much what I do as well as the "innovation" of some of it . . . but what I enjoy most of all is when my grandkids come see us (or us them!). I'm content to stay well within the laws (as I understand them) and don't care to try and find the "edge" of right and wrong . . . I don't want my grandkids coming to see "Papa" in the "big house" . . . so that's the way it'll stand.

Mike
"I am wrong ! I'm over cautious, I'm ignorant, I'm a BS'er, and apparently a fool!"

Yes (don't feel like the lone ranger). Yes (but I don't have a problem with that at all), Yes (regarding fed definition), only if you spread it, and I didn't call you a fool (I said I wasn't foolish enough to pay FFL fees when I don't have to). I have walked away from deals where a seller wants to go through an FFL for a c&b gun.
 
Last edited:
To be fair: Because the frame also has an offset hammer strike. It can't shoot cartridges as it is even with a loading port.
Yes but the same holds true for the topic at hand. The whole argument here is that the loading port and only the loading port makes it a cartridge gun. It confirms the point that the loading port alone does not allow the gun to fire cartridges.
 
The ROA gated conversion is almost done, it's a good one . . .

Mike
I wanna see, pretty please, pretty please!!![/QUOTE]

I wanna see, pretty please, pretty please!!!

Me too. But my interest is more in the cylinder than the gate. Supposed to be .454 Casull. At least that was the idea 5 or so years ago.[/QUOTE]

Here lies the biggest problem of all, as if I'm not "timely" enough (!!) it's hard to find time to work on my personal projects. I have made a lot of headway the last year and a half and am closing in on a comfortable time line that will allow me to work on new and existing projects (like weekends). I've talked with Walt many times about the gated ROA and he knows exactly the problem (as he explored the same thing)as far as what needs to be done and I know how to "jump" (and for the most have addressed the issue) that hurdle. So, it's not too far that this conversion will be a "doable" thing.

It obviously won't be a 454 Casull but a 45C. I know Dick Dastardly has (on occasion ) fired his ROA with 454 type pressures in 45C.

Mike
 
"I am wrong ! I'm over cautious, I'm ignorant, I'm a BS'er, and apparently a fool!"

Yes (don't feel like the lone ranger). Yes (but I don't have a problem with that at all), Yes (regarding fed definition), only if you spread it, and I didn't call you a fool (I said I wasn't foolish enough to pay FFL fees when I don't have to). I have walked away from deals where a seller wants to go through an FFL for a c&b gun.

That's all fine but what got me was I (me) read the info and came to my conclusion (which may contain a fair amount of "built in safety"), you are going by what you were told (heresay) and telling me I'm flat wrong so - that's the rub. Oh, it was the " mama Foster didn't raise such a fool" line.
You said you served or military and I too appreciate that (I come from a military family on both sides). While you did that, you were protecting my right to think freely (be it right or wrong) and you even said as much . . .

I'm quick to forgive and forget (to a fault sometimes), life is way too short to carry grudges but many do . . .

Gotta get in the shop, they won't fix themselves!!!
Mike
 
It obviously won't be a 454 Casull but a 45C. I know Dick Dastardly has (on occasion ) fired his ROA with 454 type pressures in 45C.

Well that's a bit of a bummer. Turning my ROA into a firearm (oops, ;) ) should get me more than I can already do with my NMA. Maybe you can make a new thread and fill us in on it.

For a successful product, I assume the conversion will cost a good amount less than a new Blackhawk? Do you think Walt will put the "cowboy action loads only" caveat, same as the other conversions, or is this one being certified for higher pressures and loads?
 
Last edited:
Oh, it was the " mama Foster didn't raise such a fool" line.
Mike

Sorry about that Mike but I think you misread what I said. Didn't call you a fool. I did call you ignorant but that isn't an overall condition, it is a state based on one topic. Hell, I'm ignorant on a gozillion topics. Anyway I'm done with this. Keep doing what you do.
 
Yes but the same holds true for the topic at hand. The whole argument here is that the loading port and only the loading port makes it a cartridge gun. It confirms the point that the loading port alone does not allow the gun to fire cartridges.
If it did, wouldn’t everyone who’s converted one of the replicas need to register as a manufacturer in order to sell the thing with or without the conversion cylinder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top