Of All Modern Produced Civi Available Handguns Which Would You Trust......

Status
Not open for further replies.

cslinger

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
5,462
Location
Nashville, TN
Of all modern pistols, revolvers (handguns) which would you trust to be in working shooting condition after say 150 years. Assume the weapon was stored with a modicum of care but not stored with the intent of making it an airtight capsule. You know your basic oiled heavily, placed in a plastic box or oil rags etc. and left in the basement, attic, safe or cabinet. Lets assume we are talking production guns as of this year.

Just musing.

Chris
 
Just about any of them. Except a Glock.

If they are stored properly, what do you think is going to happen to them in the next 150 years that would render them unusable?
 
I am thinking rust, small part degradation etc. I am really just bored and thinking about what it would be like for somebody to find a Glock 17 200 years from now vs. say a Ruger GP100.

Chris
 
I'd probably opt for an automatic. I think it'd be hell to get cosmoline out of the inner workings of a wheelgun. :D
I guess I'd take a SA 1911. A single-action trigger has less crevices for that dratted cosmoline to creep. DA triggers, though I love 'em, add an extra helping of complexity. As for Glocks - I have no idea. I don't think storage for a hundred-plus years in cosmoline would ruin 'em, but we have no data on the subject. We've had steel-framed autos surviving fine.
Steel has many natural enemies (most of which can be ixnay-ed with a liberal coating of grease), while polymer is more like Superman. The stuff that ruins steel doesn't seem to phase it, but it crumbles when exposed to kryptonite. Steel guns don't care about kryptonite. I couldn't say if the ingredients in cosmoline would turn the plastic to something resembling rubber or no, or if long-term storage in hot places would do it.
 
On the basis of simplicity and quality of materials, something along the lines of a Ruger Vaquero or a reissue Colt SAA. I have seen a M1911 (not an A1), however, that was placed in an attic sometime after WWI here in Arizona, found in the 1980s when the house was demolished - the magazine was loaded (Condition 3 when found). After a very, very brief inspection and a little oil on the barrel hood, bushing and cocking ramp, the weapon fired (the old ammo) without a problem. Since that was fifty or sixty years, it was a decent test of your thesis.
 
Any of them from the popular manufactures. Almost all designs these days are proven.
 
Colt 1911. There are enough early ones still working after almost 100 years... Seems like a modern copy using modern steels, lubes and protectants could easily last 150 years.
 
To me there is only one modern pistol out there the venerable M1911 milspec pistol. I trust it with my life. When that thumb safety is up and I mean up I know it is loaded when I look at it. From a couple of angles and from afar. Nothing beats a .45 1911. John moses Browning knew what he was doing even when the federal government wanted that thumb safety on there. No plastic guns for me. No 9mm, no nothing. I shoot those things like nobody's business. The one gun that come close is the XD and that is if there were no other decent 1911s left on earth.
 
Really, almost anything made of steel or stainless if stored with minimum care.
A S&W revolver or well-made 1911. Stash extra critical parts--parts do wear out. Store stocks apart from the gun.

A better question--what brand of ammo will make the 150 year journey and still fire? THAT is a hard one.
 
Any decent metal gun. I don't know how the polymers would stand up after 100 years, but metallurgy has been around a while.
 
I would think that with reasonable but casual storage, your most vulnerable parts would be the springs. Therefore, I'd look for whatever design had the fewest springs in it, or alternately, whatever design had the springset that would be easiest to fabricate with hand tools.
 
geekWithA.45 said:
I would think that with reasonable but casual storage, your most vulnerable parts would be the springs. Therefore, I'd look for whatever design had the fewest springs in it, or alternately, whatever design had the springset that would be easiest to fabricate with hand tools.
Why not just remove the springs and store them along with the pistol, with no tension on them? I would think that, properly protected from the elements, a 150 year old spring without tension on it would work as well as new when put back in the gun.
 
Neo-Luddite said:
Really, almost anything made of steel or stainless if stored with minimum care.
A S&W revolver or well-made 1911. Stash extra critical parts--parts do wear out. Store stocks apart from the gun.

A better question--what brand of ammo will make the 150 year journey and still fire? THAT is a hard one.

Nailed it.

I inherited a Colt 1862 Pocket Police 38 Rimfire conversion (145 years old?) that is still in 100% working order, though 38 rimfire cartridges are rarer than hen's teeth these days.

I've also got a Luger P08 and a Colt M1911, both from 1917 (90 years old), that are still working perfectly.
 
Give it a squirt of Mobil One synthetic engine oil, wrap it in some oily rags, put it behind the drywall in your attic and let you great-great-grandkids find it someday.

That is, if it doesn't burn down the house with spontaneous combustion first...
 
I would think that with reasonable but casual storage, your most vulnerable parts would be the springs.

What happens to springs over time? If untensioned, will they retain their "spring"?

I don't know how the polymers would stand up after 100 years, ...

Am I write in thinking that the major destructive force wrt polymers is UV radiation? I think that I read that the Egyptian mummification process used polymers, and inside a pyramid, they have lasted millennial.

Mike
 
What's to break? Nothing. I would not trust thermoplastic framed stuff, but anything steel, just have to clean out the oil. That stuff will evaporate and turn into a sludge.

What wears a firearm out is use. Stress/strain, metal fatique. All that stuff.

I have an 130 year old Mauser M71/84 to prove that. No use, no wear.

Am I write in thinking that the major destructive force wrt polymers is UV radiation? I think that I read that the Egyptian mummification process used polymers, and inside a pyramid, they have lasted millennial

Sunlight, heat, and oil, is bad for polymers. As for mummies, the process was to keep the meat from being ate up by bacteria. They used salt to dry out the guy, wrapped him up, poured resin, and stuffed them in a hot dry environment. And now that they are unwrapped and in museums, those mummies are falling apart.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top