Why can a designated antique be in 38 special or 45 acp but not any other caliber?

gallen270 said:
shouldnt be an issue with an antique, they allow other guns (.32rf's and snubbies) to be issued an antique letter, and it doesnt affect them.
Click to expand...


.25RFs and .32RFs are exempt. Barrel length is irrelevant for deemed and prescribed antiques.

You are right. .25 centerfire cartridges aren't on the list of non-antique calibers. Yet another irony that a pistol in .25-20 would be exempt, but one in .32-20 is prohibited.
 
tiriaq said:
.25RFs and .32RFs are exempt. Barrel length is irrelevant for deemed and prescribed antiques.

You are right. .25 centerfire cartridges aren't on the list of non-antique calibers. Yet another irony that a pistol in .25-20 would be exempt, but one in .32-20 is prohibited.
Click to expand...

not doubting you, but where is it deemed .25 and .32 rimfires are exempted? in law? CFP policy?
 
For pre-'98 pistols, those in .22RF are restricted or prohibited. All other pre-'98 rimfires have antique status.
The "Fact" Sheet for antique firearms has reappeared at www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca.
 
Here's one.....
.32ACP/7.65 Browning makes a post 1897 pistol a 12-6 prohib.
But .32ACP is not on the antique disqualification list. The .32 Colt, S&W and WCF are.
So how about converting a pre '98 .32 to .32ACP?
Could turn a prohib. into an antique.
 
the_beege said:
Hey corral. As far as I am concerned it is an antique here. The date of manufacture is 1876 and it has been converted to 38 special which it says on he barrel. I asked the seller to clearly mark these things for customs to see so there would be less headaches
Click to expand...

Great....don't forget to post pictures!

OK
 
I think the laws relating to antique handguns failed to take into account rechamberings. They figured the list they had would pretty much mean any gun that passed the list would not have readily available ammunition.
 
the_beege said:
Can someone explain this one to me? I know the obvious answer which is our firearms laws are ridiculous and make no sense, but why? 45 colt is just as easy to get as 38 special so why is 45 colt not considered an antique but 38 special is? this is crazy and makes no sense.
Click to expand...

The real question is why is there any cartridge classifications at all?
 
id think a pre 98 .25-20 would be good to go even if it was rechambered in the .25 acp

its the cartridges on the list nothing more nothing less you can rechamber it in a cal that if it was not antique it be prohibited

.320 bulldog is a go cal because its not on the list alot of other cartridges would be too
 
tiriaq said:
Here's one.....
.32ACP/7.65 Browning makes a post 1897 pistol a 12-6 prohib.
But .32ACP is not on the antique disqualification list. The .32 Colt, S&W and WCF are.
So how about converting a pre '98 .32 to .32ACP?
Could turn a prohib. into an antique.
Click to expand...

I hate to be the one making "safety" comments :( , but please be plenty careful chambering .32 ACP in most antiques !.....:eek:...

The pressures and velocities and energy (and etc. :D ) for that round are quite powerful (relative to antique-calibres); the 8mm "Lebel" revolver's round was loaded nowhere near as "hot" as factory .32 ACP .....

connexion123 said:
But .32 short colt, .32 s&w, and .32-20 are all mentioned as no go, and not on .25 cal is. So, what about the bulldogs in .320, they are .32 cal but o.k., so then .25-20 is good.
Click to expand...

.320 is indeed allowed (and I have the RCMP documentation that "verifies" this :redface: , in addition to the calibre not being on the "no-go" list).....:wave:....it is one of the oldest centrefire cartridges around, by the way !.....:yingyang:
 
You are correct, .32ACP is a pretty snappy little round. Some poor old ratty nickleplate might come unglued with factory ammunition.
Readily available for handloading, though.
I was commenting more on the irony of the law - a post '97 .32ACP is prohibited, a pistol made pre '98 and set up in the caliber would be antique.
I worry about discussion of conversions to .22 Magnum. It is way over what most of these old guys were intended to handle. .22WRF would place less of a strain on the piece, and fresh ammunition is available.
Personally, I'm not enthusiastic about the permanent alteration of collectible pistols to modern calibers, just to take advantage of a current set of rules.
 
tiriaq said:
You are correct, .32ACP is a pretty snappy little round. Some poor old ratty nickleplate might come unglued with factory ammunition.
Readily available for handloading, though.
I was commenting more on the irony of the law - a post '97 .32ACP is prohibited, a pistol made pre '98 and set up in the caliber would be antique.
I worry about discussion of conversions to .22 Magnum. It is way over what most of these old guys were intended to handle. .22WRF would place less of a strain on the piece, and fresh ammunition is available.
Personally, I'm not enthusiastic about the permanent alteration of collectible pistols to modern calibers, just to take advantage of a current set of rules.
Click to expand...

Understood (and mostly agreed-with ! ) :yingyang: - I could cry at the .22 "open-top" Colt pocket revolvers that were decimated by use of even .22 standard-velocity ammo !....:(



The conversions I "like" best are the ones from the tragically "under-loaded" (and typically under-appreciated) antiques: the 1873 Chamelot-D was seriously over-strengthened but used a puny loading :redface: , and the Reichsrevolvers (sp?) were [at one time] plenty cheap and able to withstand significantly heavier loads.



An 1892 "Lebel" revolver probably could handle much hotter loads than it was historically fed (the French, all jokes aside, really did tend to over-strengthen their firearms ! :wave: ), and that picture of the .22 WMR-rechambered 1892 that seems to be floating around....really does look enticing !



I guess I in-general take a cue from milsurp rifles: don't "bubba" the unaltered, but fully appreciate the design and potential of those that have [unfortunately] already been altered....
 
Absolutely the .320 is good. This is why I'm trying for a .25-20. You can't read into laws, they are what they are. Pro and anti firearm people operate in the grey, and it really isn't grey at all. Antique in .32-20, no dice, antique in .25-20, plenty of dice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom