Ever shoot an antique?

[CoRoMo]

Many.

 

[justashooter in pa]

i have a mauser 1871/1884 bolt action in 43 mauser, and shoot it with handloads made from 45-90 cases and .452 bullets swaged to .446. works every time. horrible battle sights. lotsa fun.

 

[Acera]

I have a small pocket, 7 shot, .22 caliber, SA revolver made in the 1860's that I shoot. Don't run full power .22 shorts, but do run CBs through it regularly.

Also got some real modern stuff from the 1940s I shoot often

 

[silicosys4]

I have a few older guns that I shoot regularly,
an M96 carl gustav mauser that was sporterized and rebarreled to .308 by Kimber, action dates to 1902
a 1956 39a that gets shot pretty frequently,

but I'm still working up the courage to fire a cylinder full of .38 S&W through the Merwin Hulbert pocket pistol I have.

 

[Grassman]

Not really antique, but I guess the oldest guns I have are approaching 80 years old, and they shoot fine.

 

[montanaoffroader]

Several, including a .41 Swiss muzzleloader, an original 1851 Colt Navy, a Winchester 97 shotgun made in 1900, a Colt Lightning .22 rifle, a Winchester 1890 in .22 WRF, a couple of Colt Automatic Pistols in .22, various Winchester 94 and 92 rifles (mostly built around the turn of the century), etc. Most of them are/were my Dad's, a couple of them are my brother's and some are mine.

I've fired plenty of old guns with no issues at all. As long as they check out safe I have no problem shooting them.

 

[JockeyShifter]

As long as you don't exceed the intended load/grains that the gun was built to shoot, you should be good. The old guns were made of much better metal than the ones we get today.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I have an old Winchester model 37 Steelbilt 16 gauge. Don't know when it was built because it was before they started putting serial numbers on them. Somewhere between 1936 and the early 60s. I'm betting its from the 40s because it was my grandfather's and that would put the time about right. I'm the 3rd Paul to have it. It prolly isn't worth $100 to a collector but I wouldn't take 10x that.
It's been a few years since I've shot it. I need to go dust some squirrels in his memory. He would prolly be pissed if he knew it had sat in the cabinet for several years without being used.

 

[Agsalaska]

I regularly shoot a myriad of rifles dating back to the 1860's. Just don't try to get nuts with your pressures. They are a real hoot and many of the odd-balls really get the attention of the younger shooters. They are amazed at the size of the cartridges as well as the length and weight of these rifles they have not only never seen ... they've never even heard of them.

That's the duty of we who own old firearms ... show 'em and when you can, shoot 'em. Living history always makes a bigger impression on people.

Let me elaborate on this sentence and clarify my post 71. I think you are 100% correct that the best way to preserve history is to live it. Couldn't agree more. I remember being a kid and staring at my grandpas Luger he brought home. We didn't shoot it, but it live in the sense that he let me see it every time I went to his house. But the reason we never went and shot it is because it was in 99% condition. My grandpa was smart enough to preserve it.(He took it off an old officer after Hitler died that was hiding under some hay. He was not a combat officer and was probably happy my grandpa was a GI and not a commi. Unfortunately, in 1994, my grandpa was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. The gun disappeared and we think he sold it.)

I guess my point is that there are shooters and there are historical examples that need to be preserved. IMHO, any gun older than about 30 years that is in as new condition or close to it needs to be preserved. That graduates to a lower rating as the guns age. I would say the same thing about an all correct 1917 in good condition, or an original condition all matching Krag. Or an 1884 that still has its color, and on and on. If you want to shoot a 1917, get a shooter. Dont shoot one that looks like it is still 1917. That just pisses me off to no end.

I am not sure what % should be shot or not, but my sole purpose in the gun world is to preserve good examples of different firearms. I have many good examples, but have a LONG way to go. This includes guns made as late as 1986. But when I die they will all be in the condition I found them, often as new. The only guns I shoot are a Glock, a Taurus snubby, a Ruger 30-06, and a few different 22's. I have a few others I would be willing to shoot but not many.

 

[Ed Ames]

... my sole purpose in the gun world is to preserve good examples of different firearms.

I have a .32 S&W Safety Hammerless 1st model, circa 1890, blued (much rarer than nickel) in very nearly perfect condition. The stampings/patent marks are clear, the finish is good, the case hardening is still colored, the bore is beautiful, the front sight is bright and shiny just like it should be, the action is perfect. Lots of fun to shoot.

I have both a .32 and .38 S&W single actions, circa 1880. They are nickel, not as perfect though still good to excellent. Also lots of fun to shoot.

I have a Webley MkI circa 1890 in .455 that is likewise in good/excellent condition with clear markings and proofs, and a lot of fun to shoot.

I've never fired my Lebel Revolver because I'm still hunting up ammo. It's in fantastic condition though and I can't wait. I'm sure it'll be fun to shoot.

I have a number of antique rifles as well. Moving away from antiques I have Carl Gustav Swedish mausers circa 1906, a stack of mosins including hex receivers and the like, a k31, and so on...most in above average condition. All are...fun to shoot.

I have a high standard HB circa 1947 ... this is a High Standard B .22lr pistol with an external hammer. Hard to find. It's my go-to plinking .22 pistol.

I have a .22 bolt action built in 1937, a special NRA model with a Lyman peep sight from the factory among other things. My most accurate .22, and lots of fun with super colibris in place of a pellet rifle. It goes with me on every range trip.

Oh, Luger...p-08...yep. Mine isn't 99% but it shoots nicely if you give it hot ball ammo. Not so reliable with weak sauce loads though because it still has the heavy springs.

I could go on...but I want to get to the point: scary thousands of dollars in antique guns and they come with me to the range if I can feed them...and they are all in as good, or better, shape as when I got them. I've had some of them a long time (20+ years in my custody) and have used them, but they are not coming to harm. You are acting as though there is a dichotomy between using and preserving. That is false.

I learned about guns from a man who wouldn't handle his guns without first washing his hands, who could tell you down to the hour the exact time and the circumstances that led to each and every ding in any of his guns...and that's because there weren't many, certainly not that you or I would notice. He had a S&W m29 he bought before I was born and fired thousands - tens of thousands - of rounds through and it looks better than many brand new guns I've seen in gun stores. I'm not as anal as he was...but I am more careful than most...and I think using is part of that care

I think these guns should be used, and that the risks of use are small compared to the benefits...which are infinitely greater than showing a paperweight-that-once-was-a-luger off to family.

 

[Old Fuff]

I have a .32 S&W Safety Hammerless 1st model, circa 1890, blued (much rarer than nickel) in very nearly perfect condition. The stampings/patent marks are clear, the finish is good, the case hardening is still colored, the bore is beautiful, the front sight is bright and shiny just like it should be, the action is perfect. Lots of fun to shoot.

And if you break one of the smaller internal parts or springs (that revolver is built like a Swiss watch, and largely hand fitted) gets busted you may have a fine time getting it fixed. Probably won't be inexpensive either.

I know because owners of similar Smith & Wesson's - as well as others - have come to me on occasion because (whatever) isn't working right like it should anymore. It only has to happen once, and when that will be is unpredictable.

 

[Ed Ames]

I wear a swiss mechanical watch daily too.

The sort of hidden weakness that would randomly break in normal use is what we'd call a preexisting flaw. In other words, it's already broken, you're just ignorant of the break. You are advocating keeping yourself in the dark about those flaws on the theory that if you don't know about them they don't reduce resale value.

A similar argument can be made about exercise. You could have all sorts of hidden defects that would be revealed by exercise. It happens all the time, and people die which when you consider it is probably a worse outcome than a spring breaking in an old revolver. However, on balance, most people think exercise is worth the risk. I think shooting the old guns is worth the risk.

There is value in use. There is value in exercise, in actually shooting your guns, in actually living your life. Not doing those things is a real cost. A cost that must be balanced against the potential cost of a failure.

The question is, is the value you are preserving by keeping yourself in the dark greater or less than the value you are abandoning by not using what you have? Is the slight risk of harm really worth the 100% chance of harm that deciding not to do something amounts to?

 

[Sav .250]

What do you consider an antique? What year? Ambiguous to sat the least.

 

[Ed Ames]

What do you consider an antique? What year? Ambiguous to sat the least.

In the united states, any firearm built before 1899 is an antique, a status with legal significance.

I could take one of my Commission '88 rifles, swap in a 16.1" barrel chambered for .40S&W, replace the bolt with a heavy blowback number (machining and tig welding the receiver as needed), machine a magazine well to accept Glock magazines, attach some pistol grips, and drop it in the US mail for delivery to someone in another state without breaking any laws (well, maybe old fuff would say it would break an unwritten law against antiquity or something). That's because they were made before 1899. I could do the same with one of my '96 Mausers but it would need to be transfered through an FFL just like a hi-point carbine because they were made in the 20th century.

Of course, if you get away from legalistic minutia they are all over 100 years old and would qualify as antiques as far as most people are concerned.

Personally, I think measuring collector value is probably more significant than measuring age. A few years ago someone showed me a Ruger mini 14, built in 1983, with a factory wooden hand-guard (unusual, they switched to plastic fairly early), unfired...not even sighted in. Is it an antique? No. Is there a collector somewhere who is pissed off that we loaded it up and got brass stains on the receiver? Almost certainly. Did doing so entail a risk that the wooden hand-guard would break? Ruger went to plastic guards because the wooden guards were cracking so yes. Did I feel bad about firing the first shot on a nearly 30 year old unfired gun? No, just the opposite.

There are fundamental differences in how people see things. That's why we'll never outgrow war.

 

[AethelstanAegen]

I could take one of my Commission '88 rifles, swap in a 16.1" barrel chambered for .40S&W, replace the bolt with a heavy blowback number (machining and tig welding the receiver as needed), machine a magazine well to accept Glock magazines, attach some pistol grips, and drop it in the US mail for delivery to someone in another state without breaking any laws

I had thought that the antique was much like the C&R classification, whereby once you start making alterations, it loses it's exempt status. I know once you significantly alter a C&R firearm it is no longer C&R eligible. Is this not true for the antique classification as well?

 

[Agsalaska]

Ed Ames:

Personally, I think measuring collector value is probably more significant than measuring age. A few years ago someone showed me a Ruger mini 14, built in 1983, with a factory wooden hand-guard (unusual, they switched to plastic fairly early), unfired...not even sighted in. Is it an antique? No. Is there a collector somewhere who is pissed off that we loaded it up and got brass stains on the receiver? Almost certainly. Did doing so entail a risk that the wooden hand-guard would break? Ruger went to plastic guards because the wooden guards were cracking so yes. Did I feel bad about firing the first shot on a nearly 30 year old unfired gun? No, just the opposite.

That would piss me off so bad I wouldnt have been able to watch you do that. I think that is just dumb. You can raitonalize it however you want. And so can I. Your going to see it your way. Im going to see it mine. You think its cool. I thikn its the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Your first thought is 'Hey, thats awesome. Thats a brand new 30 year old gun thats never been shot. And it has the wooden guards. Lets go shoot it.' My thought would be 'Hey thats awesome. Thats a brand new thirty year old gun thats sever been shot. I am going to buy it and put it in the safe. It will be a fine specimen many decades from now and worth a lot of money.'

There are fundamental differences in how people see things. That's why we'll never outgrow war.

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[brickeyee]

1866 Trapdoor in .50-70.

Goes bang just fine.

I do limit it to nothing but actual black powder loads though.

 

[Iggy]

Have you ever shot an antique?

Yeah, but he shot first!!!

I have taken elk, mule deer, and antelope with a 1979 vintage Springfield Trapdoor with BP loads.
Have an early Winchester Model 94 rifle that was probably involved in the cattleman/sheepherder squabbles back at the turn of the last century here in Wyoming.
It still shoots just fine.
Shoot a couple of WWI vintage .45 revolvers quite often.

 

[Old Fuff]

(well, maybe old fuff would say it would break an unwritten law against antiquity or something).

The Old Fuff would point to the written law - the part about metallic ammunition that isn't commonly available. .40 S&W is, and if a Deputy U.S. Attorney wanted to pin a tail on your donkey he just might get it done if the defense depended on the antique status of the original rifle.

Concerning the Ruger Mini-14. The Old Fuff would have found a collector who was willing to pay big bucks to get it, and then bought a current production rifle to use for a shooter. The difference in price between the two would leave him with money in his pocket.

I have done this on a number of occasions, and always come out ahead.

 

[Ed Ames]

Fuff needs to read the actual code.

Any firearm
A) manufactured before...; or
B) a reproduction not designed or redesigned to fire metallic ammo commonly available.

These aren't reproductions so the "or" clause doesn't apply. I can chamber it for whatever I want and stay legal. And no, modifications don't change the status like a curio/relic. The antique receiver is an antique as long as you can prove providence. Of course the more you change it the harder proof gets...melting it down and casting a new receiver would be hard to prove for example.

Note that the ammo type matters for NFA rules, and antiques can become NFA items if you aren't careful, but I specified a barrel of >16" to avoid that.

As for the Ruger, that's my point in a nutshell. To me, a 30 year old gun nobody has ever used is a tragedy. The last thing I would do is be complicit in perpetuating the abuse of potential represented by an unused gun by selling it to someone who would continue the disuse. Plus when you factor in the time it would waste it can't possibly be economically viable to play the swap game.

 

[Old Fuff]

Plus when you factor in the time it would waste it can't possibly be economically viable to play the swap game.

Maybe not for you, but it has been for me. I have bought a number of guns by simply using the profits I obtained by playing the "swap game."

 

[grimjaw]

I think the oldest I ever owned and fired was a pre-1900 Mosin. It was built in France for Russia, and had seen at least two wars. Wasn't a great shooter, though.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=185113

jm

 

[Officers'Wife]

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=121550&d=1274406470

Well, there are these little guys...

My great-grandfather bought them in either Colorado or Montana sometime before the "War to End all Wars." Both are 32-20 and the carbine will leave a 1/2 inch group @ 100 meters with a good operator.

 

[Ed Ames]

Maybe not for you, but it has been for me. I have bought a number of guns by simply using the profits I obtained by playing the "swap game."

Yep. For me, spending time trying to swap guns would cut into the time I have to buy what I want. My constraint is finding 'em, not affording 'em. Plus I've got to ask whether the time spent trying to find a buyer, and the time spent selling, can pay a decent hourly wage. My experience is that I can make more money doing what I'm great at.

I'll give another example that won't bother the antiquarians but may bother you...

I recently managed to find a kel-tec RFB, brand new from a dealer, for $1199. The day I bought it they were selling on Gunbroker for $2700 or so. Of course a lot of that is panic pricing, and a lot is that supply hasn't caught up with demand. So every day I hold it, the amount I could sell it for goes down. It's probably $2500 now. Eventually the resale price will drop down below $1000. By fufflogic I should've listed it on GB the day I got it and used the money to buy several cheaper guns. I didn't and I'm not planning to. Instead I bought a trijicon scope (which cost about as much as the rifle) and use it as my truck gun. Why? Because the value of doing what I'm doing is higher (to me) than the $1000 or so I might've netted out of that deal. I can always get another $1000, I can't relive the last few weeks of my life.

I wouldn't buy guns just to look at, and my best investment is always going to be in myself, not guns.

 

[Agsalaska]

I dont swap guns. Ever. In my life I have sold two guns and given away one. And I may give away one or two more depending on who needs it. But I do not 'swap up.' I am a black hole.