Anyone ever shot a Whitney Wolverine?
- Thread starter IBM
- Start date
Yes, friend of mine has an original. Very fussy feeder. - dan
I actually have two that I acquired when I was living in the US. I don't quite know why I picked up two of them about ten years ago, but at the time it seemed like a good idea. I had trouble with feeding with both of them. I acquired these old, used pieces just as the updated models started to be manufactured and released in Washington state, where I lived at the time. I took both to a gunsmith who was certified by the new manufacturer to be one of their go-to guys for repairs. He did whatever he did and pronounced them fixed. I have not fired either since the work was done, and so can't say that they were in fact "fixed". Hope so.
They are a really an unusual and clever design, built around the "tube within a tube" concept used in a turn-of-the-century European pocket pistol. The take-down is relatively fussy and particular, and it's easy to reassemble them so that they won't work.
The design could have been easily scaled up to handle more powerful cartridges. They were relatively complicated to manufacture, were not traditional in appearance, and just weren't successful when they first came out. They were ahead of their time, and their appearance was not that of the kind of .22 plinker that Americans were either used to or interested in. But I suspect had they been successful, other calibers in the same basic frame would have appeared. As they are, they're almost unique examples of an autoloading design that had considerable merit, except low manufacturing cost.
They are a really an unusual and clever design, built around the "tube within a tube" concept used in a turn-of-the-century European pocket pistol. The take-down is relatively fussy and particular, and it's easy to reassemble them so that they won't work.
The design could have been easily scaled up to handle more powerful cartridges. They were relatively complicated to manufacture, were not traditional in appearance, and just weren't successful when they first came out. They were ahead of their time, and their appearance was not that of the kind of .22 plinker that Americans were either used to or interested in. But I suspect had they been successful, other calibers in the same basic frame would have appeared. As they are, they're almost unique examples of an autoloading design that had considerable merit, except low manufacturing cost.
hatman1793
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I like them...
I have handled many versions of the gun at the SHOT SHOW.You can even get them in pink! The original design is unique, but the updated new Whitney is very nice. The only reason they cannot come into Canada is that they would be considered prohib due to the barrel length.
Should they make 4.5" barrel unit, they would sell like hotcakes here...
I have handled many versions of the gun at the SHOT SHOW.You can even get them in pink! The original design is unique, but the updated new Whitney is very nice. The only reason they cannot come into Canada is that they would be considered prohib due to the barrel length.
Should they make 4.5" barrel unit, they would sell like hotcakes here...
I brought mine into Canada from the US. CFC classified them as "restricted" and I have them registered as such. There was no problem with bringing them in. They never were a popular pistol, and my gues is that they still would not be. But they are neat guns.
(((Echo)))
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Old Man Land, AB
If I ever have the urge to play Buck Rogers, I know the gun to buy 
FUGLY
(E)
FUGLY
(E)
