Takedown vs Solid Frame Model 1897?

[bushmaster1313]

Not including the takedown feature which is considered to be superior, the takedown or the solid frame Model 1897?

Unless shortcuts were taken I would expect the solid fram to be a better platform.

 

[lobo9er]

solid frame you can pinch your fingers with slide and reciever my only thought on that. i prefer the take down model.

 

[Gunfighter123]

Solid frame --- the "take down" can get loose with age etc.

 

[rcmodel]

The take-down is easily adjustable if it ever becomes loose.

Most of the solid frame 97's were made before the 2 3/4" shell became standard, and are short chambered for 2 9/16" shells.

Solid frames are much more labor intensive to take apart & put back together if gunsmithing is ever required.

You can't get the bolt out without completely removing the solid magazine tube & hanger from the barrel first.

I think the chances of finding a nickle steel barrel is better on the later take-downs too. Far better chance of the bore not being pitted & rough.

rc

 

[ReloaderFred]

RC pretty much covered it. My wife shoots a solid frame '97 that was made in 1899, and has one for a backup. She likes it because the forearm is 1" closer to the receiver. It's a bear finding someone who can ream the chamber on a solid frame, though. I have a friend who ground down a chamber reamer to fit in the ejection slot of the 97, so he didn't have to remove the barrel to rechamber them.

I shoot take-down '97's myself. My original gun, which I just gave to a good friend, was made in 1912, but the one I switched to is a late gun, made in 1954. My Black Diamond Trap was made in 1926, and has seen a lot of use.

If I were going to buy a Model 97 to use, then it would probably be a take-down. You can also buy a Chinese copy of the solid frame for under $400.00, brand new. IAC just lowered the wholesale price, and that should trickle down to the dealers shortly.

Hope this helps.

Fred