converted antiques
- Thread starter Hawking
- Start date
It has need done before successfully, and with the nod from the CFC. From what I hear, it's a touchy subject with the CFC these days though... Good luck finding a gunsmith to do the work! If you do, let me know who... I have a little .32rf I'd love to have sleeved for 17mach2.
My local gunsmith thinks that a change in caliber on an antique, to any other cartridge which it was not originally chambered is illegal. (regardless of if the cartridge is named or not)
He has no proof of course, he just says (in his most condescending voice ) "its buried somewhere in the firearms act"
I cannot convince him otherwise. YMMV.
Not sure
I've met a one gunsmith that believes this, one who acknowledges that it's legal but will not do it, and several that won't do conversions at all because they get angry letters and are harassed by the provincial CFO for doing anything like that. One gunsmith I met has been working on similar projects dealing with other guns and was hassled for to no end for years by the CFO.
End of the day the CFC will grant you antique paperwork for an antique in a not listed caliber, so it's legal.
I think it is downright stupid to convert a gun to 17 rimfire and expect the CFC to not hassle you or more likely the provincial firearms office. I think rechambering larger antiques to semi obsolete calibers like 44 russian or 45 scofield will bring far less flack for the simple reason that the shells are semi obsolete. I also think that converting to readily available rimfires like the 17 rimfire will hasten any tendency for the government to ban the changing of caliber in antiques or in increasing the number of no go cartridges on their list
I would also question the strength of most antique handguns to safely handle shells like the 17 rimfire
cheers mooncoon
burnt_servo
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- right in the middle of b.c.
from a safety aspect , isn't .17mach 2 pressure alot higher than a 22 rf ? ( i'm too tired to google it right now ) .
The sentiment behind your statement is understood Mooncoon but the law is as it is, the 17 is not on that list. The 22 should not be on that list. Of course it should all be a moot point but we are stuck with the law as it stands. Any conversion has the potential to raise an eyebrow. If the CFC or CFO should choose to give me a hassle over obeying the law, and enjoying myself in a lawful manner than they may have to speak to my lawyer. The good folks at both the CFC and CFO serve us Canadians, not the other way around. As a law abiding citizen I not not fear them, and they certainly have nothing to fear from me. There job, is to do there job, according the laws, us, the people have put in place, not to push agenda's. Our job is to follow those laws and enjoy the liberty our ancestors earned for us.
I will however consider the wisdom in your words and ponder this.
Regards,
As for the strength of a 22 or 32rf being strong enough, I will leave that to the gunsmith.
Yeah, it is.
.22 MRF runs at 23000 or so if I recall correctly.
Was pondering a reline of a 1'st year Marlin 1897 .22lr to .17HMR ..... decided it's not a good idea.
That old girl is still sitting at the back of the safe, in limbo.
I considered the same thing - but when you factor in the difference in metal quality, pressures and thrust (something I still have a hard time understanding but can muddle through) I find it's generally not a good idea.
There are however many other options for conversions that would be safe and also not provoke undue aggression.
There are however many other options for conversions that would be safe and also not provoke undue aggression.
Adding to the chorus....
...the .17 M2 is not usually safe for the older .22 LR....
And the .17 HMR was the one built off of the .22 WMR case
, right ?....
y
I bought a wreck 1881 vintage SAA that had been used hard and stored poorly for many decades. It was originally a .45 colt but had been converted to 44-40 probably in the early part of the 20th century. The grip frame, frame, ejector housing, and trigger guard are now the only original parts because everything else was worn or corroded to the point of no return. I had it rebuilt as a .44 special with all new parts except the aforementioned. I have a letter from the CFC confirming that it is indeed a prescribed antique.
I suggest that you don't bother your gunsmith with the details of antique eligibility. If you have a project in mind then find someone to do it and when it is complete you can get it deregistered on your own without involving your 'smith with the details. He is a gun mechanic, not a lawyer.
I personally would not convert to any cartridge with a signifigantly higher saami pressure than the original chambering.
I bought a wreck 1881 vintage SAA that had been used hard and stored poorly for many decades. It was originally a .45 colt but had been converted to 44-40 probably in the early part of the 20th century. The grip frame, frame, ejector housing, and trigger guard are now the only original parts because everything else was worn or corroded to the point of no return. I had it rebuilt as a .44 special with all new parts except the aforementioned. I have a letter from the CFC confirming that it is indeed a prescribed antique.
I suggest that you don't bother your gunsmith with the details of antique eligibility. If you have a project in mind then find someone to do it and when it is complete you can get it deregistered on your own without involving your 'smith with the details. He is a gun mechanic, not a lawyer.
I personally would not convert to any cartridge with a signifigantly higher saami pressure than the original chambering.
The issue is not what is the law but rather that if you poke someone or an agency in this case, in the eye with a sharp stick and do it often enough, eventually you are going to get a response. Further the provincial firearms offices appear to be more stringent and anti gun ownership than the CFC itself and they operate under policies which often exceed the written law. For example the frame of a prohibited handgun that has been converted to restricted is in itself prohibited if the barrel is removed. That is policy not law but they do enforce it. Early in the present discussion someone commented on a gunsmith being hassled severely for converting restricted antiques to antiques not on the no go list. It would take very little for the provincial firearms office to expand the list of calibers that are not considered antique.
The law at the moment appears to be that if a common person can walk into a store and buy factory ammunition for an antique, the gun should be considered modern. There are exceptions to that because the people drafting the legislation were not particularly thinking out side the box and/or did not anticipate people trying to converted antiques to powerful handgun cartridges (44 magnum comes to mind) I would hesitate to fire anything more powerful than a CB cap in a antique S&W but because the same chamber will accept 22 shorts and 22 shorts are readily available to the common person, such guns are considered prohibited or restricted.
To summarize; stick with calibers that more or less require reloading and either case forming or case modification or special ordering of empty brass, and the law will probably stay as it is. Rub the nose of the provincial firearms office in loopholes and they will probably change the law or at the very least cause people significant legal expenses to prove their innocence.
cheers mooncoon
Well said Mooncoon.
Is it not time?, .... for a directly worded sticky outlining the realities and responsibilities of antique ownership?.
IMO, this is NOT the appropriate firearms topic to be doing any political battle with. Gaining an improvement to our liberties, is not in the cards we have been dealt.
The powers that be hold all trump.
It needs only a simple policy edict, with no legal process, and poof, all of us could lose this precious freedom we so enioy.
That, .... should be the first thing held in mind.
Is it not time?, .... for a directly worded sticky outlining the realities and responsibilities of antique ownership?.
IMO, this is NOT the appropriate firearms topic to be doing any political battle with. Gaining an improvement to our liberties, is not in the cards we have been dealt.
The powers that be hold all trump.
It needs only a simple policy edict, with no legal process, and poof, all of us could lose this precious freedom we so enioy.
That, .... should be the first thing held in mind.
I am not sure how many people would actually read it and particularly those who are likely to make silly changes (like the 17 rimfire). This same topic seems to come up every month or so and ends up boiling down to one group saying "I can do anything I want and the government will never change the law" vs a second group saying "give your head a shake! Keep up this discussion and we will lose what little we have"
most frustrating
cheers mooncoon
Well said Mooncoon
Although this topic seems to come up often as a subject of conversation, I believe it to be massively over represented in reality. Just looking at the EE, 99% or more of the antiques for sale are in original antique calibers. Of the 1% or less that are no longer in their original caliber, all of them are in a caliber that can best be described as "antique" as the caliber is over 100 years old. Despite all the discussion, are conversions to modern calibers like 17M2 actually being done? NO!
Same with threads about hunting with antique revolvers, I wish people would just stop discussing this issue altogether because it gives the impression that it is widespread, when in reality it isnt happening.
CGN should consider deleting these threads in the interest of the antique community.
Although this topic seems to come up often as a subject of conversation, I believe it to be massively over represented in reality. Just looking at the EE, 99% or more of the antiques for sale are in original antique calibers. Of the 1% or less that are no longer in their original caliber, all of them are in a caliber that can best be described as "antique" as the caliber is over 100 years old. Despite all the discussion, are conversions to modern calibers like 17M2 actually being done? NO!
Same with threads about hunting with antique revolvers, I wish people would just stop discussing this issue altogether because it gives the impression that it is widespread, when in reality it isnt happening.
CGN should consider deleting these threads in the interest of the antique community.
cuerno de chivo
Regular
- Location
- Out of Quebec very soon
Well said Southlander !
But imagine explaining this to LEO : You open carry (in a place where it is legal of course) a Mod 1873 French ordnance revolver....First he will freak out but you explain...fine!.. you show him the RCMP letter stating it is an antique and/or the fact sheet....Then he believes what he reads or place a call to check...fine! This LEO is doing his job....Oupsss! he sees that you are loading it with 44-40 Win. shells. He doesn't know that the only way to fire this gun is to make your own shells out of 44 mag or 44-40 Win. This Guy is not an expert and concludes that it fires a caliber that is listed as NOT being antique.
Same with the French 1892 and Swiss 1882 with ammo made with 32-20
I always carry an original uncut case with me to show in case of.....
the odds are that the gun will be confiscated and you allowed to pick it up at the local station, a few days later. Even with a xerox copy of the regs, the local office will be contacted and asked to check their copy of the criminal code to confirm that you do not have a bogus copy. There is a good chance that the police copy of the criminal code will be an older one and not contain the pertinent sections and I am not sure where the statements of regulation are found. I know that was my experience when friend had injured himself at a range and the guns were confiscated until their registration etc could be checked. The timing coincided with the officer's week off and nothing could be done until he came back on shift
the bottom line is that discretion is extremely important and if you flaunt the rules, you may be found innocent in the long run but also end up spending a lot of non recoverable money on legal defense in the meantime
cheers mooncoon
the bottom line is that discretion is extremely important and if you flaunt the rules, you may be found innocent in the long run but also end up spending a lot of non recoverable money on legal defense in the meantime
cheers mooncoon
