Colt saa question about antique status
- Thread starter 45C
- Start date
I believe 38 Special is a no go caliber so not antique status.
A while back it would have qualified as antique. Now, probably not. If it was originally made in one of the "no go " calibers, changing the caliber to one not on the list doesn't work. A Colt letter is needed. But without a serial number, that isn't going to happen.
By modern frame, you mean one with the plunger base pin release? To qualify as antique, it would have to be pre-'98 and in an antique caliber when made.
.38 Short and Long Colt are on the list, .38 Special isn't.
By modern frame, you mean one with the plunger base pin release? To qualify as antique, it would have to be pre-'98 and in an antique caliber when made.
.38 Short and Long Colt are on the list, .38 Special isn't.
- Location
- ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Vancouver Island
Antique status is determined by serial number and "original " caliber " when manufactured . It appears like someone replaced barrel and cylinder to 38 spl.
MosinMan13
CGN Regular
- Location
- Thornbury Ontario
That’s probably why.
Short answer no, longer answer some people do. I wouldn’t, and I don’t, and I never advise people to fire smokeless in a BP gun but you’ll read about all kinds of people who do and still have their hands. For what it’s worth loading BP cartridges isn’t difficult and it’s wicked fun to shoot.
Well I will probably be fried from the folks here for this but my 38 Special, Colt SAA, made in 1893 is only fed smokeless. I think a frame made to handle 45 Colt can deal with my low power 38 Special handloads. YMMV but years later that revolver is still showing no signs of wear from this.
Cheers
Moe
Cheers
Moe
fingers284
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Alberta Cowboy Ranges
Your splitting hairs on this one, miles of difference from what you may be loading and characterizing as light loads and the over the counter .38 sp factory loads that some one less knowledgeable might try to shoot in that gun.
I will say tho that that cylinder is prob made in the smokeless era because .38 sp is a smokeless era round but the barrel may be a BP era manuf for .38 colts
MosinMan13
CGN Regular
- Location
- Thornbury Ontario
.38 special wasn’t even designed until 1898. Are you sure you don’t mean 38 Colt? Or was yours converted after the fact? If it was I’m assuming they fitted a modernized cylinder and barrel, which in a lot of ways rectifies the issues firing smokeless.
Still bad practise to suggest to someone just learning themselves, again I’m no expert here, but 45LC was originally a black powder cartridge, with much lower pressures than modern smokeless 45LC offerings. Again I see people come up with all kinds of smokeless loads that haven’t harmed them, but I would never advertise to someone that they’re fine to fire smokeless in an antique pre-smokeless firearm. That’s a bridge you have to get informed, experiences and cross on your own at your own discretion.
Last edited:
If yours is as you say it is...well that's interesting as 38 Special debuted in 1898. You likely have an upgraded unit, we used to be able to do that. Good for you that you are Grandfathered.
But they closed that loophole IIRC. OP should be careful.
Non legible SN sounds like trouble as well.
A lot of money on the line if it gets the Thumbs down from a CFC tech. Guessing it wouldn't make the border crossing if that happened.
Me, I'd just brew up some sedate loads of Unique...folks say the curve is close to BP. I use Unique in old ones.
Lots of speculation here about my gun but that is my fault as I didn't give enough detail. My Colt was re-barreled and re-cylindered to 38 Special by Colt with a Colt barrel and Colt cylinder in the 1950's. Except for the risk of frame stretch I don't think I am taking undue risk. The cylinder and barrel were made for smokeless powders and not much was done to the SAA frames after 1889 to make them stronger even into the smokeless era. My loads are light. I am definitely not driving +p 38 Special through her. My load for this is 4.2Gr of TrailBoss and Hornady 158Gr cast running at 650Fps. It has survived probably a thousand rounds of this and asks for more. I use to use Unique powder but I have this TrailBoss to use up then I will go back.
Cheers
Moe
Cheers
Moe
MosinMan13
CGN Regular
- Location
- Thornbury Ontario
Which is great but with all due respect your antique is now only an antique in the sense that it holds the title, it was worked by professionals to suit your needs, many are still original and the metallurgy/QC changed plenty in that time, heck the first 95,000 frames are supposedly still iron, the OP was inquiring about potentially purchasing one, under the prospect of it being classified as an antique today, without paperwork or SNs and asking what type of ammunition it can fire.
I was just saying as a responsible person on the internet, the OP shouldn’t assume it safe for smokeless unless he determines it otherwise. Even in the event that particular or the next one he looks at works out, even some other new user reading this as research down the road unknowingly shouldn’t just assume they’re safe to fire smokeless because of a comment this misread on the internet.
There is a belief that black powder loads are always lower pressure than smokeless.
This simply is not true. Smokeless loads can produce greater pressure than black, but there are many examples of black being replaced with smokeless in regular production of commercial ammunition. This applies to everything from .22 rimfire through .45-70.
The United States is perhaps the most litigious country in the world. Does .45 Colt packaging bear a warning not to use in vintage Colt revolvers? .44-40? Same for .38S&W. Current production ammunition is manufactured knowing that there are a multitude of 19th century top break revolvers out there.
There are examples of vintage cartridge with smokeless loadings not being safe in antique pistols. .32-20 High Speed is one. Safe in 1892 Winchesters, not in revolvers.
As far as high pressure black powder loads go, 19th century muzzleloading long range target rifles, which fired elongated heavy bullets with substantial powder charges, employed platinum lined nipples because the 28,000 lbs plus pressure rapidly eroded nipples, blowing hammers back.
There were excellent articles in DGJ examining smokeless 12 gauge loads suitable for use in Damascus barrel shotguns. Access to modern pressure testing equipment was available. The smokeless loads published produced pressures equal to or less than standard black powder loads.
Care has to be exercised when handloading ammunition. Consider what happens when a double charge of bullseye is fired in a modern .38 Special revolver - the top of the cylinder will be gone, and the top strap broken and bent.
This simply is not true. Smokeless loads can produce greater pressure than black, but there are many examples of black being replaced with smokeless in regular production of commercial ammunition. This applies to everything from .22 rimfire through .45-70.
The United States is perhaps the most litigious country in the world. Does .45 Colt packaging bear a warning not to use in vintage Colt revolvers? .44-40? Same for .38S&W. Current production ammunition is manufactured knowing that there are a multitude of 19th century top break revolvers out there.
There are examples of vintage cartridge with smokeless loadings not being safe in antique pistols. .32-20 High Speed is one. Safe in 1892 Winchesters, not in revolvers.
As far as high pressure black powder loads go, 19th century muzzleloading long range target rifles, which fired elongated heavy bullets with substantial powder charges, employed platinum lined nipples because the 28,000 lbs plus pressure rapidly eroded nipples, blowing hammers back.
There were excellent articles in DGJ examining smokeless 12 gauge loads suitable for use in Damascus barrel shotguns. Access to modern pressure testing equipment was available. The smokeless loads published produced pressures equal to or less than standard black powder loads.
Care has to be exercised when handloading ammunition. Consider what happens when a double charge of bullseye is fired in a modern .38 Special revolver - the top of the cylinder will be gone, and the top strap broken and bent.
Last edited:
Pardon my ignorance gents, I don’t post too often and I haven’t been following the latest regulations that the Emperor has imposed.
Is it no longer legal for me to retrofit one of my Colt 1892’s with a 38 Special cylinder and barrel from a later model Double Action New Army and Navy?
As .38 Special is not a specifically named “no-go” calibre and if you are persistant you can find the parts to convert it, I had thought that it would not be a legal problem with doing so. I purchased a 4 1/2” barrel and smokeless cylinder from a 1907 New Army from a man in Idaho who was selling the whole worn-out old gun. I told him I did not want the gun as that would be a legal issue crossing the border with it, so we stripped it and he kept the frame (which he joked about throwing in the river next door). I kept as many decent parts as they will come in very useful since I already have 2 1889 Navys, 1 1892 that is very nice, an 1895 Navy, and the 1892 that I want to build up into a .38 Special Shooter.
While I love to shoot my .41 Colts, the brass is very dear. Whereas .38 Special brass is basically free each time I go to the range!
While I was reading this thread, I might have mistaken that .38 Special was now a calibre that was Verboten.
Any clarification would be much appreciated or also a learned opinion that says I am not about to break a law(especially after anouncing it on a wide open public opinion)
Cheers, brothers. Let’s stay strong in these diminishing days!
Is it no longer legal for me to retrofit one of my Colt 1892’s with a 38 Special cylinder and barrel from a later model Double Action New Army and Navy?
As .38 Special is not a specifically named “no-go” calibre and if you are persistant you can find the parts to convert it, I had thought that it would not be a legal problem with doing so. I purchased a 4 1/2” barrel and smokeless cylinder from a 1907 New Army from a man in Idaho who was selling the whole worn-out old gun. I told him I did not want the gun as that would be a legal issue crossing the border with it, so we stripped it and he kept the frame (which he joked about throwing in the river next door). I kept as many decent parts as they will come in very useful since I already have 2 1889 Navys, 1 1892 that is very nice, an 1895 Navy, and the 1892 that I want to build up into a .38 Special Shooter.
While I love to shoot my .41 Colts, the brass is very dear. Whereas .38 Special brass is basically free each time I go to the range!
While I was reading this thread, I might have mistaken that .38 Special was now a calibre that was Verboten.
Any clarification would be much appreciated or also a learned opinion that says I am not about to break a law(especially after anouncing it on a wide open public opinion)
Cheers, brothers. Let’s stay strong in these diminishing days!
If you change the caliber to 38 Special it is no longer classed as an antique. Rules have changed.
I would suspect as long as it is not a no-go cartridge...you would be fine.
If brother Egon converts a 41 LC to 38 Spl...I doubt anyone would raise an eyebrow.
I wouldn't try that starting with 38 LC.
Could be wrong, sound off.
I think you are wrong here, with all due respect. The regulations have not changed, and 38 Special is not on the list of exempt calibers. If you can prove that your frame is pre-1898, and the original gun was not chambered in one of the exempt calibers, you can change the barrel and cylinder to any caliber except the one's listed in the SOR-98/464, and still retain antique status. These regulations have not changed since 1998. If you have different information, I would be very interested in knowing (as I profess to not knowing everything...).
I'm recalling that it wasn't a list of excepted calibers but rather a list of No-Go calibers.
Perhaps I am mistaken...enlighten me...pls.
There are no "no-go" calibers (at least as far as I know), only the ones listed in the regulations https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-98-464/index.html . Occasionally, the technical division does re-classify old calibers such as the 38 Merwin and remove them from the list of acceptable calibers, but they have not (to my knowledge) moved any modern ammo into the list of excluded calibers.
So is 38 Special on the list friend?
I'm under the impression that these cartridges are No-go? A handgun manufactured before 1898 that is capable of discharging centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson, 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges
Help me out here?
