Javascript DHTML Drop Down Menu Powered by
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 06, 2015, 05:08:56 pm

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
* Home FlashChat Help Calendar Login Register
Currently there are 0 Users in the Cas City Chat Rooms!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10

 on: Today at 08:23:16 am 
Started by Bat 2919 - Last post by Drydock
No, but I'd bet it'd be a lot of fun at a vintage bolt match!   Grin

 on: Today at 06:53:52 am 
Started by medic15al - Last post by ndnchf
The antiquing debate rears it's head regularly. I don't believe there is a definitive answer. In most cases a man's sidearm would be well taken care of and would not see the same wear that a 100+ year old gun would show. But the bluing used in the 1870s was not as durable as modern hot tank bluing. Consider a hard case such as a working cowboy who purchased a new SAA in 1875. He wears it day in and day out on numerous round ups, cattle drives and daily ranching. Rain or shine, snow or dust storms, a cowboy's work was never done. Blowing sand and dirt gets in the holster contributing to accelerated wear. Maybe once a week he would have an opportunity to clean and oil it? Let's say this young cowpoke worked the range for 10 years. By 1885, it is plausible, perhaps even likely that Colt would have most of its original finish worn off, or corroded off from residual fouling (remember he may only get to clean it days after firing it). All these factors could contribute to an excessively worn gun after only 10 years. Certainly not common, but IMHO possible.

Over 30 years ago I bought this SAA clone from EMF. I didn't care for the shiny new look, so I gave it an aged finish. Over the last 3 decades it hasn't changes much, but to my eyes it has a pleasing, comfortable look. To each his own - right?

 on: Today at 06:49:36 am 
Started by OD#3 - Last post by OD#3
I traded recently for a Uberti 1866 Sporting Rifle in 44 WCF.  It was one of the ones Cherry's of Greensboro NC imported back in 1995.  One of its previous owners had run a prop-gun business for film-makers, and this rifle had obviously had quite a few blanks run through it.  So a thorough cleaning was in order.  I wasn't too impressed with the inside of the receiver.  There were a lot of surfaces inside that had received no attention and were in a rough, grainy, sandcasted, state.  The main areas that appeared to matter had been finish machined, but the bottom inside surfaces of the frame that flank the lever had pretty large surface voids.  There is even a shiny silver speck several millimeters in diameter on the outside of the frame that appears to be a blob of zinc that didn't get all the way mixed into the alloy. 

My only other brass-framed levergun was a Uberti Henry I once owned back in the mid 90's, but I don't remember what it looked like inside.  Is Uberti doing a better job these days?

On the plus side, this rifle is old enough to have a welded ladle and a ladder sight, and the brass has mellowed to a very nice mustard patina.  It is well broken-in, but I don't think it has had a live round through it since it left Uberti's factory.   

 on: Today at 06:21:55 am 
Started by Silver Creek Slim - Last post by Major 2
Got up about 2:40 AM to wring out , flipped on the Firecracker 400 just to see if they were still circulating ...
Saw the WREAK  Shocked  glad the kid is OK ,  Hendricks HAVE's chalk up another....

The down side I'm tired ...had a rough time going back to bed , up side is I'm off today.

 on: Today at 05:56:21 am 
Started by ndnchf - Last post by ndnchf
I agree the grip is tight, it feels similar to a. 44 Remy I used to shoot. That thing beat up my fingers. Recoil is milder on this one so it's not as bad, but I do wish it was shaped more like an 1851 Navy. I noticed the nipple angle/hammer nose angle seemed a bit off. But I was reluctant to grind the hammer nose for fear of increasing clearance too much causing misfires. It's too bad Pietta didn't address this in their design Angry

 on: Today at 05:38:06 am 
Started by Silver Creek Slim - Last post by Texas Lawdog
I grilled some smoked sausage on the Patio last night, with some leftover potato salad and Baked beans. It all turned out good.

 on: Today at 05:34:47 am 
Started by Silver Creek Slim - Last post by Texas Lawdog
The Cawffee and Hot water are ready for drinking. Enjoy!

 on: Yesterday at 11:40:44 pm 
Started by Black River Smith - Last post by Marshal Will Wingam
I also have a wooden one that I use. I've tried several others but that is the best. Amazon has them for a fairly good price.

 on: Yesterday at 11:36:11 pm 
Started by Grizzly Adams - Last post by hatman

   According to an Ideal Reloading Manual, (1890's) reprint, Wolfe Publishing 1991, the rearmost Mould List shows, "512138.(450gr.)
This bullet was first made by our Mr. Barlow for a heavier ball for the .50-95 Winchester. It was afterwards adopted as the standard bullet for the .50-110-450 (.50-100-450, actually) Winchester." (I'm assuming that this is the Mould being used.)
   I believe that A.C.Gould MAY have designed this bullet, and had the Ideal Co. cut the Mould for him, but those books are packed, and can't verify. My immediate assumption was that the bullet was designed for the Winchester Single-Shot (Hi-Wall) chambered for the same Ctg. My belief was that this longer bullet, if seated into the case SO AS TO CYCLE PROPERLY IN THE WIN. 1876, the bottom most lubricated grooves might protrude past the neck, into the powder, and cause powder contamination, or aggravate barrel fouling, whereas in the "Hi-Wall", one MIGHT be able to seat the bullet out enough to eliminate the possibility. I currently don't have an Ideal/Lyman #512138, so that I can't check this myself. Please do post with details, and let us know how this loading works for you, as I have wondered myself! If your friend has a different Mould, please post the Manufacturer/Number!

         Be Well!


Thanks M.T.
I will be sharing the words in your post with him.

 on: Yesterday at 11:29:37 pm 
Started by Broomhandle - Last post by Molasses Mike
  A couple of months ago I got a couple of new 58 Remingtons with 5 1/2" barrels and conversion cylinders. I am an O.K. shot. When I first shot them at 15 yards I was pleasantly surprised. First 5 shot group about 1 1/2" and on P.O.A., that is real good for me. I was nervous to shoot the second one. The second one did just as well. I was very pleased. I have several '58 rem.s going back to a Lyman brand in the early 70's and have had varying results.
                                              Molasses Mike

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.05 seconds with 16 queries.