I agree with Jim, way too many issues would have to be overcome to see this plan ever get off the ground and given the limited finances/technical knowledge that were suggested, to say nothing of a rather limited market.......I just do not see it happening.
Reproducing old Handguns legality issues - mauser c96 -colt 1903 - colt 1903 pistol
- Thread starter X9ballX
- Start date
- Status
Mauser
I've read of Companies that make a Mauser actions that are a true reproduction of the real one. I can't remember the era that they reproduce, or even the company name. However, I seem to remember that their TRUE, absolutely correct, Mauser action runs a few thousand $$$ each. I don't think anyone has really improved on the original Mauser action. Most of the "advances" in everything are more an "advance" in manufacturing, materials, and ways to manufacture it CHEAPER not BETTER. Cheaper is the goal.
Here is a non-firearm example. I just purchased a top of the line dish washer costing approx. $800 that was supposed to be a super dooper washer. All stainless interior, dozens of settings and buttons, top of the line. Well it's all BS. The sad truth is, it is not nearly as good AT ANYTHING as my older model. Just a lot more USELESS bells and whistles and settings that worsen the true performance. Same goes for refrigerators. They are much more expensive, flashier, more gadgets, more complex and doing nothing better. Now there is a study out that the super efficient clothes washing machines. Are a breeding ground for bacteria IN YOUR CLOTHES. Seems the temps and agitation is so deficient that they really breed bacteria and germs MAKING YOUR CLOTHES SMELLY AND PERHAPS EVEN DANGEROUS. Hot water is a good thing when it comes to really cleaning your clothes and dishes. That's LACKING in many of these products. Truth is the underlying principles are the same today for these machines as they were generations ago. Engineers were not stupid back then, and pretty much achieved their goals. Today FORWARD is looking more and more like BACKWARD. Only it's disguised with clever marketing and flashy facades.
As for energy efficiency, I call BS on that too. The "energy Star" rating is not earned. It has been shown to be a "PURCHASED RATING". For example the efficiency of a refrigerator motor is not nearly as relevant as the efficiency of the insulation. Rant over, go back to sleep (grin).
I've read of Companies that make a Mauser actions that are a true reproduction of the real one. I can't remember the era that they reproduce, or even the company name. However, I seem to remember that their TRUE, absolutely correct, Mauser action runs a few thousand $$$ each. I don't think anyone has really improved on the original Mauser action. Most of the "advances" in everything are more an "advance" in manufacturing, materials, and ways to manufacture it CHEAPER not BETTER. Cheaper is the goal.
Here is a non-firearm example. I just purchased a top of the line dish washer costing approx. $800 that was supposed to be a super dooper washer. All stainless interior, dozens of settings and buttons, top of the line. Well it's all BS. The sad truth is, it is not nearly as good AT ANYTHING as my older model. Just a lot more USELESS bells and whistles and settings that worsen the true performance. Same goes for refrigerators. They are much more expensive, flashier, more gadgets, more complex and doing nothing better. Now there is a study out that the super efficient clothes washing machines. Are a breeding ground for bacteria IN YOUR CLOTHES. Seems the temps and agitation is so deficient that they really breed bacteria and germs MAKING YOUR CLOTHES SMELLY AND PERHAPS EVEN DANGEROUS. Hot water is a good thing when it comes to really cleaning your clothes and dishes. That's LACKING in many of these products. Truth is the underlying principles are the same today for these machines as they were generations ago. Engineers were not stupid back then, and pretty much achieved their goals. Today FORWARD is looking more and more like BACKWARD. Only it's disguised with clever marketing and flashy facades.
As for energy efficiency, I call BS on that too. The "energy Star" rating is not earned. It has been shown to be a "PURCHASED RATING". For example the efficiency of a refrigerator motor is not nearly as relevant as the efficiency of the insulation. Rant over, go back to sleep (grin).
Last edited:
Never say never, but I can't imagine anything about an auto pistol that could be considered a secret, state or otherwise. All the ideas have been around for decades, some almost a century and a half old; designers just keep rehashing and recombining the old stuff. The only real breakthrough in modern times has been in the use of polymer and even that wasn't really that new, it was just that Glock hit the right time to use and promote it.
Jim
Jim
paintballdude902
Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2007
- Messages
- 2,872
i think a better target pistol would be a borchardt. it just seems like it would be much better balanced than a broom handle. i would want the grip angle changed though
Vodoun da Vinci
Member
I wanted to respond to the idea that this idea of reviving one of these older designs would be near impossible in terms of investment and capital....I can get a one off custom built Colt 1903 replica built "one off" for less than many probably think by a custom builder using CNC. The CNC programs to make the individual parts is expensive but not enough to make me cringe.
If one started with the idea of making 25 or 30 individual pistols via CNC and some hand fitting they would be expensive but not break the bank unless ones budget is only a few thousand $...I already have buyers willing to buy others excited enough to invest and I'm willing to bet a lot of money that I could sell the first 100 copies of a Colt 1903 Model M in .380 or .32 and recover most of my initial investment.
In this day and age of concealed carry in all 50 states now, and with tens of thousands of new CCW folks (many who will buy such a design as it fills a niche not filled by currently available pistols) looking for what some of these designs can do I think it is short sighted to believe it cannot be done financially.
Time will tell if I'm a fool for thinking this way.
VooDoo
If one started with the idea of making 25 or 30 individual pistols via CNC and some hand fitting they would be expensive but not break the bank unless ones budget is only a few thousand $...I already have buyers willing to buy others excited enough to invest and I'm willing to bet a lot of money that I could sell the first 100 copies of a Colt 1903 Model M in .380 or .32 and recover most of my initial investment.
In this day and age of concealed carry in all 50 states now, and with tens of thousands of new CCW folks (many who will buy such a design as it fills a niche not filled by currently available pistols) looking for what some of these designs can do I think it is short sighted to believe it cannot be done financially.
Time will tell if I'm a fool for thinking this way.
VooDoo
Like I said, I don't want to discourage initiative. If what the OP proposes is really as easy as Vodoun da Vinci says it is, why not raise a few thousand and go at it? The patents have long expired and I don't think anything about the guns, except the maker's logo and name, were ever trademarked. So if everyone and his baby brother can make 1911 clones, Model M clones should not be a problem. (Chinese manufacture is out unless the president revokes the ban on Chinese handgun imports, but other countries have the capability of making those pistols.)
I like the little pocket model and if a good repro appears on the market at a reasonable price, I will buy one. (Yes, I mean that.)
Jim
I like the little pocket model and if a good repro appears on the market at a reasonable price, I will buy one. (Yes, I mean that.)
Jim
Aint no way in hell I would let the Chinese build anything of my ideas.
I appreciate the honesty Jim. I would rather have hard honesty than flattery.
We still pretty much just toss out ideas. only two ideas actually made it to paper so far.
The top break and and the 1903. the 1903 is really just going to be a copy. maybe novak sights. the top break needs a strong latch and thats whats slowing us down.
Then comes actual production for a test model. and someone willing to risk losing their hand lol.
And thats money we do not have and doubt Kickstarter would allow us to do.
I appreciate it guys.
I appreciate the honesty Jim. I would rather have hard honesty than flattery.
We still pretty much just toss out ideas. only two ideas actually made it to paper so far.
The top break and and the 1903. the 1903 is really just going to be a copy. maybe novak sights. the top break needs a strong latch and thats whats slowing us down.
Then comes actual production for a test model. and someone willing to risk losing their hand lol.
And thats money we do not have and doubt Kickstarter would allow us to do.
I appreciate it guys.
Resist Evil
Member
Please proceed forward as best as you can. So what if it is a hard road ahead? So what if it will take hard work to achieve? I would rather fail in having tried than sit on the sidelines with the boo-birds doing nothing but producing guano.
Right now if i wanted to produce a gun i would have to mill it out by hand like these guys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wxFD0o57t8
Me being Filipino it would be the same as learning about where i come from on the other side of my family seeing as though my mother lived in a place like that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wxFD0o57t8
Me being Filipino it would be the same as learning about where i come from on the other side of my family seeing as though my mother lived in a place like that
Vodoun da Vinci
Member
I'm not trying to portray reviving some of these old classics as "easy"..it certainly would not be cheap and would involve some serious thought about which designs might be viable. While some of us love the old designs (I adore the old Mausers and Lugers) I doubt they could be commercially successful.
One should probably do a market study or enlist the aid of folks who understand that before jumping in full tilt.
I remember when Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms (both local companies in my back yard) got eye rolls when trying to make match grade M1A's and tricked out Colt 1911 clones. But both of those companies are now wildly successful after the teething.
We also have Les Baer Customs here locally and I remember when they were in a little shop a few blocks from here 25 years ago or so...making 1911 style pistols one at a time. It can be done with the older designs the biggest hurdle is whether or not it is worth the investment in time and energy and if the product will sell.
Personally? I feel very deeply that several forgotten designs might sell quite well if only to a dedicated and specific audience. Les Baer *still* makes pistols one off and they are not cheap but he is backlogged and doing well apparently. There is a market for the right designs done well and marketed properly.
VooDoo
One should probably do a market study or enlist the aid of folks who understand that before jumping in full tilt.
I remember when Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms (both local companies in my back yard) got eye rolls when trying to make match grade M1A's and tricked out Colt 1911 clones. But both of those companies are now wildly successful after the teething.
We also have Les Baer Customs here locally and I remember when they were in a little shop a few blocks from here 25 years ago or so...making 1911 style pistols one at a time. It can be done with the older designs the biggest hurdle is whether or not it is worth the investment in time and energy and if the product will sell.
Personally? I feel very deeply that several forgotten designs might sell quite well if only to a dedicated and specific audience. Les Baer *still* makes pistols one off and they are not cheap but he is backlogged and doing well apparently. There is a market for the right designs done well and marketed properly.
VooDoo
Cosmoline
Member
Ditto that. If there's a missing piece in the market that could be filled by vintage designs, it's a break-top or bulldog style big bore CCW revolver. Low velocity, large mass, low pressure.
I don't think the M1A and the 1911 are really fair comparisons. There was a HUGE demand for a semi-auto version of the M14 and at first the makers couldn't turn them out fast enough. The 1911 has never really become obsolete and is a very practical pistol today even though it is 102 years young.
Sorry, but I don't think there is any huge demand for C96 Mausers. A copy of the Colt pocket model might do OK, but you have already seen the arguments over whether to keep it traditional or turn out an improved version. IIRC, there was someone a few years ago making an improved model (upgrading original guns); it got some gunzine play and that was the end, as far as I know.
Jim
Sorry, but I don't think there is any huge demand for C96 Mausers. A copy of the Colt pocket model might do OK, but you have already seen the arguments over whether to keep it traditional or turn out an improved version. IIRC, there was someone a few years ago making an improved model (upgrading original guns); it got some gunzine play and that was the end, as far as I know.
Jim
Jim Watson
Member
I THINK there was a short lived 1903 repro.
There was a short lived FN 1910 repro, US made post 1968.
I have seen some gunsmith "upgrades" of 1903s, some look nice, some look clunky.
As said, the Luger has failed to make a return... twice.
And Rock River made some nice 1911s until they found out ARs paid better.
There was a short lived FN 1910 repro, US made post 1968.
I have seen some gunsmith "upgrades" of 1903s, some look nice, some look clunky.
As said, the Luger has failed to make a return... twice.
And Rock River made some nice 1911s until they found out ARs paid better.
Gun Master
Member
"Replica" Production Handguns Legally
Until you get a high quality, reputable gun manufacturer (like Ruger et al) to legally research and commit themselves, "you 're spittin' in the wind". It's OK to spit, as far as I'm concerned.
You might get something started ! We don't need a company with a "Big Name", to farm out a project, to produce garbage.:banghead:
Until you get a high quality, reputable gun manufacturer (like Ruger et al) to legally research and commit themselves, "you 're spittin' in the wind". It's OK to spit, as far as I'm concerned.
You might get something started ! We don't need a company with a "Big Name", to farm out a project, to produce garbage.:banghead:
Last edited:
I remember seeing those Mauser Lugers under glass in the 70’s, I did not care for the Swiss M1929, but even P08’s were way out of my price range. When you have less than $100 in your bank account a $250 pistol is only a dream. For the rest of the world, they were still too expensive for a mass market who wants the “best cheapest”. Wish I had the money for one as I really wanted one. Now, those pistols are even more expensive.
Something I was able to get in on was the N frame 44 Special.
In the 80’s Skeeter Skelton finally convinced Smith and Wesson to make an N frame 44 Special again. The M29 44 Magnum had buried the 44 Special. People did not see a reason to have the same sized handgun in a lower energy round, and since the 50’s an N framed 44 Special had been out of production. Collector demand had raised the prices on older M24’s and a combination of Skeeter and letters to the editor must have convinced S&W that the demand was there.
It was not. My local dealer had to severely discount the M624’s, because, for the same reasons as in the 50’s, people did not want to pay for a similarly sized handgun compared to a 44 Mag in a lower energy round. Collector’s wanted original M24’s and sniffed at the “reproductions”. Fools! The dealer said stocking M624’s was the greatest mistake he had made, or something to that effect. I however, wanted 44 Specials and I got mine at great prices. Just shows that I am clueless about trends. So maybe I am the greater fool. Even so, I am still happy with mine:
Don357
Member
Nobody has mentioned these, but, Mexico built a rotating barrel .45acp based on the 1911 called an "Obregon"http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/mex/obregon-e.html which could probably be redesigned for double stack capability.
Russia built a break open .357mag called the Izmech MP-412 Rex(not available for US import due to Clinton gun ban)http://world.guns.ru/handguns/double-action-revolvers/rus/izhmeh-mp-412-e.html I would love to have one of these in .357mag and/or .44mag.
China built a .45acp version of the C-96 called the "Shanxi type 17" (this is copied from Wikipedia)
Shanxi Type 17 (.45 ACP)[edit source]
During the Warlord era of Chinese History in the early 20th century, the province of Shanxi was ruled by warlord Yen Hsi-shan, who had established a modern arms factory in his capital city of Taiyuan. Yen was equipping his troops with a locally produced copy of the Thompson sub machine gun, chambered for the .45 ACP cartridge, but was experiencing supply difficulties as his troops' sidearms were 7.63mm calibre C96 handguns.[20]
Yen's solution was to produce a .45 ACP caliber version of the C96, thus standardizing ammunition and making supply logistics easier.[20] Designated Type 17, production on the .45 caliber handgun began in 1929 at the Taiyuan Arsenal. They are inscribed (in Chinese) "Type 17" on the left hand side of the gun, and "Republic Year Eighteen, Made in Shansi" on the right hand side.[20] They were issued (along with Thompson SMGs) to railway guards in the province as defense against bandits and other warlords.
Besides being chambered for a larger cartridge, the Shanxi .45 pistols are noticeably bigger than their 7.63mm counterparts, with the 10-round magazine extending below the trigger guard. It was loaded using two 5-round stripper clips rather than the single 10-round stripper clips of the standard 7.63mm Mauser.
Most of the Shanxi .45 pistols were melted down after the Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War, largely due to their odd caliber for Chinese Communist standards, but a few examples were exported overseas for sale on the commercial market.[20] Approximately 8,500 Shanxi .45 caliber Broomhandle pistols are believed to have been produced by the Taiyuan Arsenal, but there is some debate as to how many of the Shanxi .45 caliber Broomhandle pistols currently on the commercial market were actually produced for Yen's troops, and how many are more recent productions for the US collectors' market.
Just food for thought.
Russia built a break open .357mag called the Izmech MP-412 Rex(not available for US import due to Clinton gun ban)http://world.guns.ru/handguns/double-action-revolvers/rus/izhmeh-mp-412-e.html I would love to have one of these in .357mag and/or .44mag.
China built a .45acp version of the C-96 called the "Shanxi type 17" (this is copied from Wikipedia)
Shanxi Type 17 (.45 ACP)[edit source]
During the Warlord era of Chinese History in the early 20th century, the province of Shanxi was ruled by warlord Yen Hsi-shan, who had established a modern arms factory in his capital city of Taiyuan. Yen was equipping his troops with a locally produced copy of the Thompson sub machine gun, chambered for the .45 ACP cartridge, but was experiencing supply difficulties as his troops' sidearms were 7.63mm calibre C96 handguns.[20]
Yen's solution was to produce a .45 ACP caliber version of the C96, thus standardizing ammunition and making supply logistics easier.[20] Designated Type 17, production on the .45 caliber handgun began in 1929 at the Taiyuan Arsenal. They are inscribed (in Chinese) "Type 17" on the left hand side of the gun, and "Republic Year Eighteen, Made in Shansi" on the right hand side.[20] They were issued (along with Thompson SMGs) to railway guards in the province as defense against bandits and other warlords.
Besides being chambered for a larger cartridge, the Shanxi .45 pistols are noticeably bigger than their 7.63mm counterparts, with the 10-round magazine extending below the trigger guard. It was loaded using two 5-round stripper clips rather than the single 10-round stripper clips of the standard 7.63mm Mauser.
Most of the Shanxi .45 pistols were melted down after the Communist victory in the Chinese Civil War, largely due to their odd caliber for Chinese Communist standards, but a few examples were exported overseas for sale on the commercial market.[20] Approximately 8,500 Shanxi .45 caliber Broomhandle pistols are believed to have been produced by the Taiyuan Arsenal, but there is some debate as to how many of the Shanxi .45 caliber Broomhandle pistols currently on the commercial market were actually produced for Yen's troops, and how many are more recent productions for the US collectors' market.
Just food for thought.
Last edited:
The obregon was actually the inspiration for our idea. Though We all Agreed it was ugly as sin.
we also didn't think the barrel bushing on it needed to be designed the way it was.
The obregon also uses the slide stop as a safety. because of how that design feature was made every time you wanted to disassemble the gun you needed to take off the left grip pannel.
We talked more on designs. we need a scanner to show you guys what we came up with.Sounds like a local trip to the library time
So far just the top break. No latch system has been put in place yet. But we like the webley design. Though still needs improvement.
we also didn't think the barrel bushing on it needed to be designed the way it was.
The obregon also uses the slide stop as a safety. because of how that design feature was made every time you wanted to disassemble the gun you needed to take off the left grip pannel.
We talked more on designs. we need a scanner to show you guys what we came up with.Sounds like a local trip to the library time
So far just the top break. No latch system has been put in place yet. But we like the webley design. Though still needs improvement.
Don357
Member
Oh, and I almost forgot, Mauser built a rotating barrel, double stack, .45acp. I think it was called the M-2.
Carl N. Brown
Member
I have always liked the look of the Browning 1910 .380 auto (strictly speaking FN Model 1910). I would add a trigger activated striker block internal safety.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Model_1910
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_Model_1910
The demand might not be tremendous, but it COULD be steady... It would be a niche market.
While a new Broomhandle would likely be tightly fitted enough to deliver target-grade accuracy, there ARE more ergonomically friendly platforms. On the the other hand, an exceptionally accurate one, chambered for 9x23, or 10mm, would be a VERY serious (if on the bulky side) defensive pistol. More so, if detachable double-column magazines accompanied it.
It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol. A pistol in either of the above calibers capable of taking a butt-stock would have the ballistics and accuracy necessary to take it out of the "butt-stocked pistol" stratum and into that of the "defensive/camp carbine".
Since the 9x23 approaches .357 Magnum performance more closely than the .38 Super, there is some real potential, there. Ditto, a pistol in 10mm auto. And a platform capable of housing a 10mm auto would ALSO accommodate the 9x25mm Dillon, another carbine-worthy round. Instead of the M1896 Broomhandle, though, you might want to examine the Bergmann M1908 platform, which was originally chambered for 9x21 Largo. Like the Broomhandle, it is a bulky piece, but is also probably capable of handling the chamber pressures of the newer rounds.
Just thinking out loud, here.
While a new Broomhandle would likely be tightly fitted enough to deliver target-grade accuracy, there ARE more ergonomically friendly platforms. On the the other hand, an exceptionally accurate one, chambered for 9x23, or 10mm, would be a VERY serious (if on the bulky side) defensive pistol. More so, if detachable double-column magazines accompanied it.
It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol. A pistol in either of the above calibers capable of taking a butt-stock would have the ballistics and accuracy necessary to take it out of the "butt-stocked pistol" stratum and into that of the "defensive/camp carbine".
Since the 9x23 approaches .357 Magnum performance more closely than the .38 Super, there is some real potential, there. Ditto, a pistol in 10mm auto. And a platform capable of housing a 10mm auto would ALSO accommodate the 9x25mm Dillon, another carbine-worthy round. Instead of the M1896 Broomhandle, though, you might want to examine the Bergmann M1908 platform, which was originally chambered for 9x21 Largo. Like the Broomhandle, it is a bulky piece, but is also probably capable of handling the chamber pressures of the newer rounds.
Just thinking out loud, here.
The demand might not be tremendous, but it COULD be steady... It would be a niche market.
While a new Broomhandle would likely be tightly fitted enough to deliver target-grade accuracy, there ARE more ergonomically friendly platforms. On the the other hand, an exceptionally accurate one, chambered for 9x23, or 10mm, would be a VERY serious (if on the bulky side) defensive pistol. More so, if detachable double-column magazines accompanied it.
It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol. A pistol in either of the above calibers capable of taking a butt-stock would have the ballistics and accuracy necessary to take it out of the "butt-stocked pistol" stratum and into that of the "defensive/camp carbine".
Since the 9x23 approaches .357 Magnum performance more closely than the .38 Super, there is some real potential, there. Ditto, a pistol in 10mm auto. And a platform capable of housing a 10mm auto would ALSO accommodate the 9x25mm Dillon, another carbine-worthy round. Instead of the M1896 Broomhandle, though, you might want to examine the Bergmann M1908 platform, which was originally chambered for 9x21 Largo. Like the Broomhandle, it is a bulky piece, but is also probably capable of handling the chamber pressures of the newer rounds.
Just thinking out loud, here.
While a new Broomhandle would likely be tightly fitted enough to deliver target-grade accuracy, there ARE more ergonomically friendly platforms. On the the other hand, an exceptionally accurate one, chambered for 9x23, or 10mm, would be a VERY serious (if on the bulky side) defensive pistol. More so, if detachable double-column magazines accompanied it.
It's a shame that the Orks who inflicted the GCA-1968 on everyone decided that only crooks would put a butt-stock on a pistol. A pistol in either of the above calibers capable of taking a butt-stock would have the ballistics and accuracy necessary to take it out of the "butt-stocked pistol" stratum and into that of the "defensive/camp carbine".
Since the 9x23 approaches .357 Magnum performance more closely than the .38 Super, there is some real potential, there. Ditto, a pistol in 10mm auto. And a platform capable of housing a 10mm auto would ALSO accommodate the 9x25mm Dillon, another carbine-worthy round. Instead of the M1896 Broomhandle, though, you might want to examine the Bergmann M1908 platform, which was originally chambered for 9x21 Largo. Like the Broomhandle, it is a bulky piece, but is also probably capable of handling the chamber pressures of the newer rounds.
Just thinking out loud, here.
tinygnat219
Member
USFA did it just fine with copies of the older Colt Single Actions and they were doing it cheaply. Problem was the trust fund baby that started it all got bored with it and shut everything down. It IS possible to do, you just have to find a good backer, and have a smart business plan.
jimherb
Member
My only beef with the Colt 1903 is the heavy trigger pull.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked