by R. K. Cambell | Contributing Editor
I am constantly amazed at the resurrection of old time calibers and those who seek after obsolete firearms for their personal use. I am not discussing collecting, far from it, as I am not a collector at all, but an accumulator. My accumulation for the most part involves working guns that earn their oil and grease. If you are seeking out firearms that are long out of print and paying a scalper’s price, you just may be basing your procedure on flawed reasoning. I can make a case that the modern handguns are the best ever. Empirical tests will back me up. There is a reason that things change. We do not all drive ’58 Chevys anymore. Some things are fine to look back wistfully upon, but the reality is different. Kind of like the high school girlfriend we were enthused with, but ended up with a more reliable, if more solid model. The distaff side also makes their share of mistakes.
Don’t get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with replacing handguns we wished we had not sold in our youth.
Nor is anything wrong with obtaining a period pistol just to satisfy our curiosity. But if you are going to the gun show cash in hand to pick up an older pistol based upon some idea of superior performance or accuracy, you may be disappointed. In fact, I can guarantee you will be disappointed if you compare the piece to a modern handgun. Folks who seem to be the worst about this kind of thing are those who favor the Colt 1911, but Smith & Wesson revolver shooters rank right up there with them. There is a slight tendency toward this aberrant behavior among Ruger shooters but it is not nearly as bad. When you are looking for deep rich blue and walnut I feel your pain, but it can be assuaged by Les Baer and even by a modern Smith & Wesson revolver. Performance is another matter, and performance is what handgunning is about.
Let’s look at the 1911 first. The 1911 is a great handgun, reliable, powerful and accurate. It is difficult to screw up the 1911, but Colt has done so on occasion.
The original 1911 was a fine handgun but accuracy standards, while higher than that for previous service revolvers, were casual by modern standards. A five-shot group of five inches at 25 yards was the standard, and ten inches at 50 yards, if the GI sights let you see that well. These pistols were not heat treated to the same standard as later models. I have seen plenty of cracked slides. They deserve to crack after 50-60 years of service.
OK, you don’t want a 1911, you say, you want one of the ultra reliable wartime 1911A1 pistols. The 1911A1 represents an improvement over the 1911. The hammer, tang, trigger and sights are improved and the frame features finger reach cuts. These guns are almost always well worn and the majority seem to have replaced internal parts. OK, I am being unfair.
We all know the Series 70 was the finest Colt ever made. They simply cannot afford that type of hand-fitting anymore. If you really believe that, we are going to a different church.
When Series 70 pistols were current I owned quite a few. My first service pistol was a Combat Commander Series 70. They aren’t all that. Sure, they were well finished for the day and they were Colts but not a high point of production. The Collett bushing fitted to the Government Model pistols aided accuracy but no more than a good National Match bushing. The sights were still pretty poor. I am glad I had the Series 70 but we cut up a lot of Series 70 pistols and added aftermarket sights and beavertail safeties. The Commander hurt when you fired it, more due to sharp edges on the tang than the recoil of the lighter model. I remember the 1970s Colts fondly but do not regard the Series 70 as superior to a good tight GI gun. The Series 70 as I remember was marked by a considerable difference in accuracy between the Government Model and the Commander, with the larger pistol much more accurate. The types are better balanced today. If you wish to pay out good money for a base for a custom gun, and you really like that billboard stamp on the slide, then go for it. For performance, look elsewhere.
When the Series 80 pistol came out I traded up immediately. Stainless steel was introduced in this series, which we take for granted today, but stainless construction was a big issue at the time. Remember, we are talking service pistols and shooting pistols. The Series 80 was a huge improvement. The pistol feeds all JHP and SWC loads or at least the feed ramp is better polished while maintaining the necessary 1/32nd inch gap between the two-piece feed ramp. Controlled feed was maintained. The Collett bushing, thankfully, was done away with. (You will seldom find a Series 70 Government Model that has been fired very often that retains the original bushing.) The sights are improved. They resemble the King’s Hardballer sight.
The big difference mechanically is the firing pin block or drop safety. With SIG and others moving into the marketplace, Colt had to have a firing pin block to remain competitive. The firing pin block is a good addition. You can achieve a good trigger action with the safety intact. If you screw it up, you are in no more trouble than with any other Colt— perhaps the action is less dangerous if botched, but who wants to botch an action? The grip safety is improved over the Series 70. The Series 80 is far more of an improvement over the Series 70 than the 1911A1 was over the 1911. The Series 80 is worth twice as much as a shooter as the Series 70 to the author, but the price the respective pistols bring is inverse to my opinion.
The Enhanced Colt is even better.
Some did not like the flat top slide, but by the same token, shooters had been paying big bucks for the Gold Cup pistol with flat top slide. Custom pistols with this feature were common and the Randall Combat model was a pacesetter in this regard. The Enhanced Model also features a frame cut out under the trigger guard that makes the pistol balance better in the hand. I own an Enhanced Colt, but it is outdated. Just the same when something has saved your life you tend to hang on to it.
An even better Colt is the XSE. This pistol features forward cocking serrations that I can live with or without.
But the XSE features high visibility sights, an ambidextrous safety and a well designed beavertail grip safety. I simply cannot imagine anyone spending good money to obtain a Series 70 pistol when the XSE is available. If you honestly prefer a GI type pistol for its uncomplicated lines and simplicity, then purchase a new Colt WWI pistol or a Colt Series 70 new production. You will have a far better handgun to face the night with. There is a minor interest in early model Kimber pistols without the present firing pin lock. I prefer my Kimbers the newer the better. They actually seem to be better every year and I have yet to see a bad example. This market will never grow because there are too few early Kimbers, and folks will not part with them in any case.
Folks who purchase a Ruger revolver get a vault tough revolver that is often very accurate. They are consistent with one as good as the last. There is a certain type of fellow who prefers the pre-change single action revolvers or the old flat top Ruger. That’s OK because he has a leg to stand on: they are good revolvers. Newer revolvers are simply just new revolvers for the most part but I fail to see paying a premium for a used version, flat top or not. The advantage, they claim, is the original revolver featured a superior action prior to the lawyer inspired new model action. Damn it to hell, what could be clearer! The new system is safer and does not impinge upon function or accuracy. Remember, we are not talking collectors but shooters. Ruger finally gave us a single action six shooter safe to carry fully loaded. And they gripe and hunt down the increasingly scarce originals. If I had one I would send it to Ruger for the free refit.
I would never engage in a retro fit.
The Rugers were good, always, but the new Ruger is better.
Smith & Wesson made excellent double-action revolvers prior to the turn of the previous century. While the thirst has abated somewhat for the old long action revolvers there were old timers and youngsters alike seeking out pre-war revolvers in my youth. Let me take you back—during the 1930s several gunsmiths perfected a short action job on the Smith & Wesson. This shortening of travel and lock time resulted in a revolver that was more accurate, faster in rapid fire, and overall much more modern. After World War Two, Smith & Wesson saw the handwriting on the wall and adopted the new short action in production handguns. That pretty well settles the case. But for decades some shooters clamored for the old smooth long action guns. Not I. The modern revolvers, beginning with the Combat Magnum and continuing to the present time, are far better practical double-action shooters. Currently the Classic line offers fixed sight, big bore revolvers that are far superior to anything in the past. The sights are better, the action is smoother and stronger, and they are readily available.
The pinned and recessed type of revolver remains immensely popular and sought after by true believers.
Some of these handguns are excellent examples of the gunmaker’s art but few of us are going to purchase a registered Magnum. Run of the mill revolvers are less exciting. The pinned part of the name refers to the pin that was placed in the receiver presumably to prevent the barrel from turning in the frame.
Recessed simply means that the cylinder is cut to enclose the case head.
This was a very big deal when the .357 Magnum was first introduced, but far less important with modern ammunition. As far as it goes it is just fine to hunt down a good example for hard use. The rub is the modern Smith & Wesson revolvers are better guns.
The superiority of the modern six shooters is more apparent in some calibers than others but I began noticing the change some years ago.
Modern Smith & Wesson revolvers have tighter throats. In the past, in the .45 Colt particularly, the throats were over large, resulting in poor accuracy. The .45 ACP revolvers are often worse. Experimentation with cast bullets of varying hardness sometimes helped and sometimes not. Today Smith & Wesson has finally gotten the message and the new revolvers have tighter throats that actually match the barrel! Accuracy results are much, much better than anything in the past. This is apparent in the big frame .357 Magnum revolvers as well. The modern CNC machined revolvers really are more accurate than anything Smith & Wesson has done in the past. And I haven’t seen the barrels loosening. I guess we may do without the pin. I had much rather purchase one of the Classic line today than an older revolver that may be nearing the end of its useful life.
One of the few older firearms worth searching out is a pre-64 Winchester Model 70. But recent developments have rendered this pursuit another case of the tail wagging the dog. The original Winchester Model 70 was a great rifle and, yes, Winchester ruined a fine old gun way back in ’64. Interestingly you see Winchester Model 94 rifles and other Winchester rifles also advertised as pre ’64, even though they were far less affected by the 1964 cost cutting changes. The ’94 was given a tinny shell carrier that was later replaced in production and could easily be replaced by the owner. But the Winchester 70 was changed in an offensive manner. I have seen Winchester 70 rifles with broken or separated bolts and in the end Winchester gave the market away. Today the modern Winchester 70, while expensive, is a first class rifle.
If you no longer trust Winchester then the Remington 798 is another rifle that offers top grade service. The 98 in the Remington name bears discussion.
Obviously it is a rifle similar to the Mauser 98. The Mauser features a rugged claw extractor that offers controlled feed. The round pops up from the magazine and the case rim snugs behind the extractor claw. The cartridge is then fed into the chamber.
If you are holding the rifle upside down the cartridge will feed. The big claw extractor holds a big chunk of the cartridge case. The push feed does not.
The modern CNC-machined rifles made to sell for less than $400 complete with a cheap scope mounted at the sporting goods store are not my idea of a rifleman’s rifle. They are OK until you have a tight case and you pop the pot metal extractor right off of the bolt during an attempt at extraction.
Do you have to chase down a Mauser action and make up your hard use rifle from it? While there is some merit in the Mauser MK X when it can be found, there is a simple answer.
Purchase the affordable but dirt tough Ruger M 77. Sure, it will set you back a little more than an economy grade rifle but the true value of a successful hunt or perhaps a life saved is incalculable.
If you wish to go for the gold, then purchase the Kimber controlled-feed bolt-action rifle. You will never regret purchasing quality.
I realize that pure efficiency does not always equate to commercial success.
After all the Savage 99 came along a few years after the Winchester ’94 but seemed a century ahead of the ’94.
Much greater leverage due to the striker-fired action, a sleek appearance, a much more powerful cartridge and greater accuracy were all on the side of the Savage. The Savage is out of production and folks pay a premium for the Winchester 1894 and its pedestrian cartridge. Go figure! There is also an interest in older calibers. I suppose someone is pining away for a reproduction of the .44 Remington. The .44 Remington and most of the other proprietary cartridges were swept away by the .44-40 WCF. With all due respect to the .44-40 I challenge anyone to point out any obsolete caliber that cannot be bested—and bested cheaply—by a modern cartridge. I got into loading the .44-40 WCF for a short time and tired of it just as quickly. Those semibottlenecked necks tend to crumple. If there were some advantage, it might be worth the trouble, but there is not. No wonder Elmer Keith and Skeeter Skelton preferred the .44 Special. If the .44 Special and the .44 Magnum cannot do, it cannot be done in standard handguns.
Let’s face it. Dedicated handgunners like Keith campaigned for the .44 Magnum for many years and when they got it, they laid the others aside. By the same token the .30-30 buried the .44-40 cartridge. If you are into cowboy action shooting, frankly, the .38 Special looks good. If you are a hunter, the .44 Magnum looks good.
The darned old “dash” rounds, including the difficult to handle .32 DASH 20, the .38-40 and the .44-40, are inferior to the modern cartridges. My lever-action pistolcaliber carbine is a .357 Magnum. This is very practical and hard hitting. If you desire more, the .44 Magnum pistol caliber carbine is even stronger and remarkably easy to load well compared to any of the DASH rounds.
I realize I may be banging my head against the wall, but this is simply the logic of things. While we may wax poetic on the virtues of the Winchester Model 70, the fact is there were a lot of Montgomery Ward rifles sold. There were more J.C. Higgins shotguns sold than Brownings. Everything wasn’t well made of good material; most of the guns out there were made to sell.
There were more owl-heads than Smiths. Today there is more good quality, inexpensive gear available. I concede there is also a lot of junk available, but you do not have to purchase junk. Good quality pistols, revolvers and rifles are readily available. You do not have to pay out of your nose for the ever-decreasing supply of older handguns and rifles in circulation. Go with the smart money and invest in the future rather than the past. You will be glad you did.
