krs
Member
Looking at my photo of the S%W I'm not sure how successful a chop job would be. There are important differences in how the frame lines go.....hmmm.
is this an abused colt?
- Thread starter Dimis
- Start date
- Status
Jim Watson
Member
I have seen pictures of S&Ws mutilated in that manner. There has to be a nubbin of the front end of the trigger guard left because of the cylinder stop screw.
I'm against it, I don't care what Fitz did.
I'm against it, I don't care what Fitz did.
Relative to Smith & Wesson, Jim's comment is correct. While I have seen S&W revolvers that had the trigger guard cut fully away, it is more common to see them with the guard slimmed and narrowed.
The problem is, as Jim observed, the spring that tensions the cylinder stop is located in an area where if you cut the frame fully away it would leave a very thin amount of metal at a critical point.
Taurus makes the only revolvers being currently manufactured that would allow a true Fitz conversion. However I highly doubt that they have any intention of coming out with anything along these lines.
Jim is not alone in his opinion concerning a cut-away trigger guard. But nowhere is it written that he or anyone else has to have the operation performed if they don’t want it. On the other hand those that did favor it made up an interesting and very gunfight-proficient group. It might be a mistake to ignore their proven expertise…
The problem is, as Jim observed, the spring that tensions the cylinder stop is located in an area where if you cut the frame fully away it would leave a very thin amount of metal at a critical point.
Taurus makes the only revolvers being currently manufactured that would allow a true Fitz conversion. However I highly doubt that they have any intention of coming out with anything along these lines.
Jim is not alone in his opinion concerning a cut-away trigger guard. But nowhere is it written that he or anyone else has to have the operation performed if they don’t want it. On the other hand those that did favor it made up an interesting and very gunfight-proficient group. It might be a mistake to ignore their proven expertise…
krs:
It should be understood that Mr. Fitz-Gerald designed his Fitz Special around the concept of being carried in a pocket. This was the rationale behind the short barrel, bobbed hammer shortened/rounded butt, and cut-away trigger guard. When holster-carry was expected, it was less likely that an extra short barrel would be employed and the hammer wasn’t always bobbed.
An N-frame S&W is a little much for pants-pocket carry, although is does work in some coats. I wouldn’t shorten the barrel below 3 1/8”, but would round the butt and possibly bob the hammer spur. A cut-away or narrowed trigger guard would be optional, but only if it might be carried in a coat pocket.
It should be understood that Mr. Fitz-Gerald designed his Fitz Special around the concept of being carried in a pocket. This was the rationale behind the short barrel, bobbed hammer shortened/rounded butt, and cut-away trigger guard. When holster-carry was expected, it was less likely that an extra short barrel would be employed and the hammer wasn’t always bobbed.
An N-frame S&W is a little much for pants-pocket carry, although is does work in some coats. I wouldn’t shorten the barrel below 3 1/8”, but would round the butt and possibly bob the hammer spur. A cut-away or narrowed trigger guard would be optional, but only if it might be carried in a coat pocket.
Men's Trousers were somewhat different years ago, were cut and proportioned different, from now.
Front Pockets were larger, much larger than now...up even through the 1950s.
Even an average size man could carry a four inch S&W M&P in a front pants Pocket...and or a short Barrel Large Frame Revolver, such as a Colt New Service, Merwin and Hulbert .44, or as may be.
For reasons others have already mentioned, S & W Hand Ejectors were less likely to be shortened radically, than Colts.
Although, when they were, they were usually 2-1/2 or 3 Inch, unless wishing to allow the Ejector Rod to pay Homage to the Model of 1899, where, it was free-floating.
Those who did front Pocket Carry as a habit, usually had their Seamstress or Tailor re-inforce the intended Pocket, or, install a Leather or stout Canvas or Buckram for substiuting or augmenting the Trouser Pocket material.
Now-a-days, men's Trousers are high-tight crotch, small shallow Pockets...in the old days, no one would have bought such style pants anyway, nor found them comfortable or pratical if they had.
Front Pockets were larger, much larger than now...up even through the 1950s.
Even an average size man could carry a four inch S&W M&P in a front pants Pocket...and or a short Barrel Large Frame Revolver, such as a Colt New Service, Merwin and Hulbert .44, or as may be.
For reasons others have already mentioned, S & W Hand Ejectors were less likely to be shortened radically, than Colts.
Although, when they were, they were usually 2-1/2 or 3 Inch, unless wishing to allow the Ejector Rod to pay Homage to the Model of 1899, where, it was free-floating.
Those who did front Pocket Carry as a habit, usually had their Seamstress or Tailor re-inforce the intended Pocket, or, install a Leather or stout Canvas or Buckram for substiuting or augmenting the Trouser Pocket material.
Now-a-days, men's Trousers are high-tight crotch, small shallow Pockets...in the old days, no one would have bought such style pants anyway, nor found them comfortable or pratical if they had.
Hawk
Member
Indeed.
I have a benign view towards those that pin the grip safety of 1911s and suspect that many that read Jeff Cooper repeatedly might have a similar view.
This is THR and we remain mindful that noobs and the uninitiated may be reading so I believe we tend to err on the side of caution. Who knows what might come up if we knew the musings were private? Heck, I might even admit that the trap club I belonged to in New York in the 70s had a bar on the premises.
If wearing old style Trousers, and, having stout-enough front Pockets, it is fine.
When I routinely dressed up for work and liesure, it was always pre-War Clothes, and, my two-inch New Service in .45 ACP/LC, was fine in the right front Pocket.
If you are walking briskly, and graze a Chair back or other with your Pocket-area, there's a good, audible 'clunk', indeed!
If you graze the head of a child with your Pocket area while walking briskly, it could of course knock them for a loop.
Regular Pocket fabric is not usually strong enough for continuous carry of a short Barrel large Frame Revolver, and will seperate or tear through fairly soon.
When I routinely dressed up for work and liesure, it was always pre-War Clothes, and, my two-inch New Service in .45 ACP/LC, was fine in the right front Pocket.
If you are walking briskly, and graze a Chair back or other with your Pocket-area, there's a good, audible 'clunk', indeed!
If you graze the head of a child with your Pocket area while walking briskly, it could of course knock them for a loop.
Regular Pocket fabric is not usually strong enough for continuous carry of a short Barrel large Frame Revolver, and will seperate or tear through fairly soon.
He did indeed, at least some of the time, but they weren't all built on the .45 New Service platform. He owned several built on smaller frames.
That said, he enjoyed pulling out one or two .45 Colt (caliber) New Service guns with his own modifications, and telling someone that had no idea he was armed that, "You should never send a boy to do a man's job..."
That said, he enjoyed pulling out one or two .45 Colt (caliber) New Service guns with his own modifications, and telling someone that had no idea he was armed that, "You should never send a boy to do a man's job..."
krs
Member
I've carried this model 24 during the cool months (most of the year up here) in a jacket pocket. It's an M24 .44 Special and should satisfy my every urge to go around weighted with a boat anchor in my pocket but the second .45 M1917 could be a much more carefree carry.
This model 24 is a Lew Horton version and in perfect condition - not something I'd want to get caught in my car door.
So, I will purchase a Colt for such mangling; they're more deserving anyway, IMO.
This model 24 is a Lew Horton version and in perfect condition - not something I'd want to get caught in my car door.
So, I will purchase a Colt for such mangling; they're more deserving anyway, IMO.
Last edited:
theotherwaldo
Member
I thought that I was the only one that rebuilt my pants pockets for pocket carry!
Anyway, I'm in close pursuit of a battered and butchered '17 Colt to experiment upon (cue: maniacal laughter). It was shortened, simplified, and nickel plated back in the '50's, so it's pretty cheap.
Wish me luck, guys!
Anyway, I'm in close pursuit of a battered and butchered '17 Colt to experiment upon (cue: maniacal laughter). It was shortened, simplified, and nickel plated back in the '50's, so it's pretty cheap.
Wish me luck, guys!
I make a point to check pocket depth and size when I purchase pants, and I have had pockets modified to make them deeper. But rather then to make the pocket fit the gun I use a pocket holster. Otherwise the pocket may be worthless for any purpose except carrying a gun, and a particular one at that.
During Fitz-Gerald's day most pocket holsters were made to fit, and be used in hip pockets. I tried that method, and quickly abandoned it when I found it to be very uncomfortable when sitting down. Anyway I think that's the reason special side pockets were popular in certain circles.
During Fitz-Gerald's day most pocket holsters were made to fit, and be used in hip pockets. I tried that method, and quickly abandoned it when I found it to be very uncomfortable when sitting down. Anyway I think that's the reason special side pockets were popular in certain circles.
theotherwaldo
Member
My trick is to sew and rivet a patch pocket to the inner surface of the regular front pocket of my slacks. The new pocket is sized to be a tight fit for my pocket holster. It holds the holster in a steady position and allows me to keep keys-and-comb in the outer pocket (which reduces printing).
Works for me!
Works for me!
curse you KRS I have a thing for .44 spl's so went and did a search for your model 24 and found this.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=127558375
a little rich for my blood right at the moment but maybe some day.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=127558375
a little rich for my blood right at the moment but maybe some day.
- Status
