Why not the 1903 Colt?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Buzsaw

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
38
Location
Newcastle WY
With the popularity of the new small carry guns, why isn't the 1903 Colt making a comeback? Was there a flaw in its design? Mine carries and shoots very well and feels flatter and smoother than the new mini 1911 style guns. Any thoughts?
 
parts availability would be my only concern with it being used a lot..

I will pick up one someday but it wouldnt see much use.
 
If I remember right, they were kinda pricey to manufacture.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere.

And I'm not a huge Colt fan, or a fan of calibers smaller than 9mm, but I'd probably buy one if they came into production again. Especially if they decided to make one in 9mm ;). Hell, if I came across an old one I'd pick that sucker up, too! Those are sweet little guns!
 
In 1903 the manufacturing costs were competitive, but today milling parts out of forgings isn't, and thin sections around the magazine well wouldn't work with investment casting or polymer construction.

For much less money you'd be able to buy a lighter pistol with a double-action/striker fired system that's safer to carry.

But the old Colt has a reputation (at least as a .32) for absolute reliability because of built-in cartridge guides that don't depend on the magazine lips, and on occasion I don't hesitate to carry one.
 
It's a big, heavy pistol (relatively) with expensive machining that shoots a small cartridge.

I believe that explains why you won't see them make a comeback.
 
Trigger and weight and size

BUZSAW,

I have a 1903 in good shape and it is a very good shooter. I would have no problem with using it for self defense. It even feeds hollow points without any problems (the reason I would use it).

If you were going to carry it in a holster, like an ASKINS Avenger type or PANCAKE style holser, the 1903 would be a very good carry gun. It handles well and I find it to be an accurate shooter that will feed hollow points without a problem, at least in my gun.

The problems with the 1903 for concealed, pocket carry are:

WEIGHT--It is heavy, especially for a .32ACP. My PPK weighs at least 5 ounces less. The 1903 kicks less and should not bite large hands like the PPK.

SIZE--It is big for a .32ACP. Compare it with a PPK or BERETTA TOMCAT or the even smaller micro guns like the NAA Guardian. I can drop any of the above mentioned into a pocket holster, it would be difficult with the 1903.
Also, many 9m.m. pistols, like the KAHR have the same length and height, some even less.

TRIGGER-SAFETY--I call this one problem. The trigger on my 1903 is smooth and easy to shoot. The bad news is that if I carried the gun, it would have to be with an empty chamber, which makes it a two handed proposition.

Yes, the 1903 has a very well placed safety, but single action autoes are a niche market. Aside from the 1911's and the occasional BROWNING Hi-Power, there are only a few models for carry, like the KIMBER Solo, COLT Mustang and SIG 238.
Most pocket pistols have either a double/single action or double action only trigger. A small safety is hard to without a lot of practice and many of the 1903's have a weak safety spring (my experience with handling several of them).

To bring the 1903 back"

SIZE--shorten barrel and slide to @ 3 1/3 or 3 1/4 inch to reduce overall length and shorten the grip by 1 round. This would give a lighter, more concealable picture.

TRIGGER--Adopt a GLOCK style safe trigger or double action only mechanish and eliminate the thumb safety, but keep the grip safety, if affordable.

WEIGHT--Aluminum frame, using one of the high strength alloys might allow the same trim dimensions and good handling with a lighter carry gun.

The 1903 has many good traights. It handles well and is an instictive shooter. It is very slim and the concealled hammer is a much better design for a pocket pistol than an exposed one on the COLT Mustang or SIG 238. The smooth, rounded read of the slide does not have anything to hang up on when coming out of a pocket.

LAST, BUT NOT LEAST IS THE FACT THAT THE COLT 1908 WAS THE SAME GUN AS THE 1903, BUT IN THE MUCH MORE POWERFUL AND POPULAR .380ACP ROUND.
Personally, if they would bring in back with a lightweight frame, I would probably buy one as it is now.

OH, MAGS COST WAY TO MUCH. I HAVE SEEN THEM FOR SALE AT $120.00 EACH.

Have fun shooting it.

Jim
 
My Colt 1903 .32 is on the top right, refinished with high polished, dark bluing. Love it!!

The lower left is his not yet refinished brother 1908 .380.

347A704C-0175-4EB5-99C8-A939EC103DCF-7691-000007FE79F3DF7F_zps5485fed1.gif

Both of these are more fun to shoot than I ever expected!!

As for use as a CCW, I would be somewhat concerned with one in the chamber and the thumb safety sliding off... I know that there is a grip safety, but I am more comfortable with my Sig's DA/SA mode.
 
"many of the 1903's have a weak safety spring (my experience with handling several of them)"

That is incorrect. The Model 1903 doesn't have ANY safety spring. Tension on the safety depends on friction with the hammer and other parts.

Jim
 
What causes the safety to slide to easily

Jim K

I have handled several of the 1903 and 1908 pistols. Some have thumb safety's that have a normal amount of resistance and other slide much too easily without any real force being exerted. If it is not a weak spring, then the effect is the same.

I would not feel safe shooting one of these pistols as I could not be sure that the safety would not go off or on at the wrong time.

Jim
 
Thanks for the comments. I carry my 1903 in a pocket holster, but wondered about shortcomings. I like the concept of grip safety and safety, don't feel its that heavy, and like the way it shoots in spite of the sights. Do you all feel that it is safe to carry? I have to carry with a round in the chamber because it doesn't always feed a round in when you rack the slide.
It would not be my first choice in a gun, but supplements my other handguns. It just seemed like it was a high quality gun ahead of its time. Thank you all for your comments.
 
I have to carry with a round in the chamber because it doesn't always feed a round in when you rack the slide. It would not be my first choice in a gun, but supplements my other handguns.

If I had other guns, I wouldn't even think about carrying it if it didn't always reliably feed a round when you rack the slide. It could be kind of disappointing if it decided it wasn't going to feed a round when the slide cycled in the middle of a gunfight.
 
I have lusted after the Colt 1903 platform for years but everytime I have the money for one I find a better deal.

Try holding a Kimber Solo up to a Colt 1903. The Solo is not terribly bigger but even with standard P loads the 9mm outpaces the .32 ACP in miles. The downside to the Solo is it requires a slide spring change every 1,000 rounds which makes it more a carry gun than a range gun, but the same can be said of the Colt 1903 in the respect of carry versus practice.

I've almost bought a Walther PP to sate my .32 hunger but every time I look at the price versus ammo availability I keep going back to my Ruger Sp101 2.25" in .357 Magnum (Remington SJHP 125 grain .357 magnum).

A modern 1903 with bulked up in the right areas for a little more added weight would be an interesting gun but not enough of a one nowadays to win too many buyers.

Colt 1903s have a certain panache and classiness to them that make them coveted but I run my shooters hard and all my guns are shooters (unless they are 98%+ Model 19s then they are safe queens).

Even though the Colt 1903 could be turned out on an MIM system instead of a skilled smith, it's just so much cheaper to use polymer instead of forge cut and milled steel. The .32 ACP is not the round it used to be only because 9mm is the new hot round that everyone has to have. As companies find more and more profits in 9mm, .32 ACP will lose it's appeal to buyers and manufacturers alike. It's a shame, it's a dandy round and while it will never truly disappear, it's price per round point will put it eventually at .357 magnum and .45 ACP prices.
 
I love my 1903. It is a well worn model from 1926. Every time it makes it out under daylight for a little range time, part of me wants to send it out to be reblued. The rest of me however, loves the long gone blue finish replaced with patina and good honest wear. It is hands down the most worn gun I own. I can't say I'd ever hesitate to carry it. It runs 100% for me though it tends to jam here and there with others not maintaining a firm grip.
 
try COR BON Powerball

Buzsaw,

If you are worried about feeding, try the COR BON Powerball loads. I have found that they will feed in guns that are fmj-ball only.

Jim
 
I really like my 1903, I wanted one for years, found a refinished example at a show and bought it gleefully
I like shooting my 1903
I like .32acp as a mousegun caliber (it's a "get-off-me" gun, FTLoFSM, it doesn't need more power)
I stock quite a bit of .32acp
I'm comfortable with grip safety + thumb safety + decent holster
Mine is reliable with the factory mag and good ammo


But I don't carry my 1903 for a number of reasons
-I can't find decent magazines
-I can't find parts easily
-It is the same size as my 9x19mm Walther PPS or 9x19mm KelTec pf9 (I think it might be heavier than the pf9)
-I don't have a modern holster for it
-I can't casually replace it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top