Author Topic: Real Handguns ? (Read 3959 times)

Dragon31 · « **Reply #30 on:** August 26, 2003, 01:53:51 PM »

Graybeard:

Two questions:

1. How do you attach the wheels to pull it to the woods?
2. Does it have them holes up near the front like them other Taurus?

Graybeard · « **Reply #31 on:** August 26, 2003, 01:57:31 PM »

1. No wheels needed. I have a shoulder holster and they carry fine in it. Carried that long barrel S&W in my avatar all over the country for years and this one is only 1-3/8" longer.

2. Nope. Only the hole the bullet comes out of.

GB

Graybeard · « **Reply #32 on:** August 26, 2003, 01:59:58 PM »

Greg, it weights 56 oz. My old S&W 29 weighted 52 oz. It is NOT for scope use, irons only. It carries fine that way in my shoulder holster and is never in the way. I've carried that old S&W many a mile in many a state and killed bookoo game with it.

GB

Blunderbus · « **Reply #33 on:** August 26, 2003, 03:26:34 PM »

No flies on either DA or SA revolvers. I love 'em. For years, I've enjoyed having one on my hip while hunting or, wherever possible, while fishing or hiking.

But wasn't the T/C Contender the first handgun designed from the outset to serve as a primary hunting weapon? Just a thought.

It's all fun, though.

Blunderbus

Graybeard · « **Reply #34 on:** August 26, 2003, 05:40:41 PM »

Actually NO! Who told you that Warren Center designed the Contender as a hunting tool? Don't think that's in evidence as fact just yet.

Folks were using both single action and double action revolvers for hunting a whole buncha years before the Contender ever existed. Before the inventer was even born in fact.

GB

MePlat · « **Reply #35 on:** August 27, 2003, 01:23:18 AM »

I own both and like both revolvers and single shots. I don't in my feeble mind see what difference it makes concerning what we like when it comes to other people. It is really no ones business what each other likes.
To me a handgun is a firearm that can be shot offhand just like a revolver or a semi-auto such as a 1911. A single shot can be shot that way so to me it is a handgun. Scopes what is wrong with them? I use both Iron Sights and Scopes.
Seems to me that if we would put our attention to more important things we would be better off instead of worrying what the definition of a handgun is.
Sorta like worrying about what the neighbors do in the privacy of their bedroom. Kinda like saying the missionary position is the only way to define having sex.

Questor · « **Reply #36 on:** August 27, 2003, 02:40:46 AM »

There's just too much similarity between Al Goerg's rolling block (circa 1960) single shot and the Contender (circa 1965) to be a co-ink-ee-dink. Goerg's creation was strictly for hunting. So a decent argument can be made that the Contender's roots are in hunting. The Contender's first significant applications were for dazzling people at shooting ranges and for shooting woodchucks with the .22 hornet, the original chambering.

One significant point about the Contender is that it was originally conceived as having a relatively short barrel-- 10" or less. My opinion is that without the invention of the pistol scope, the Contender probably would no longer exist.

A lot happened between 1955 and 1965. We got the 44 magnum revolver, scopes that were practical for handgun hunting were developed and accepted, and the single-shot hunting pistol was developed. This is where handgun hunting as we know it today was invented. Things haven't changed much since then, except that our equipment is now much more refined.

Blunderbus · « **Reply #37 on:** August 27, 2003, 05:34:47 PM »

Graybeard,

Years and years ago I read in a mainstream outdoors magazine that Warren Center's prototype for the Contender was a .22 Hornet pistol created specifically for the purpose of shooting rats in a landfill. The prototype worked so well that Center recognized the possibility for broader sporting applications.

The source may be apocryphal or the story cooked up by a P.R. man. It was a long time ago when I read the article and I can't even peg the publication it appeared in. But I did read it. Perhaps someone on the TCH board can either verify or refute the story. But even without the original source as a back-up, you have to ask ... why did Center chamber the first one in .22 Hornet? That's not what you'd choose if paper-punching were Priority One.

I didn't intend to denigrate revolvers or to imply that Warren Center invented handgun hunting. I simply meant to note that the TC single shots had a hunting pedigree. Even if Warren Center had something else in mind, guys like Steve Herrett and Bob Milek pounced on the Contender's potential as a hunting handgun pretty much as soon as it hit the market.

Blunderbus

Graybeard · « **Reply #38 on:** August 27, 2003, 05:57:33 PM »

Guys don't get me wrong. I've done a LOT of hunting with Contenders. No doubt will continue to do so at times in the future. What I personally said was I am finding it harder and harder each year to convince "myself" I am truly handgun hunting when I take one afield.

That's not to say if you take one you aren't handgun hunting. I'm speaking ONLY for myself. I'm moving back more to using either an iron sighted handgun or a rifle. The TCs are seeing less and less use for me personally. Yes I will use one again this season on some days. But not as many days as I use something else.

GB

WildBill · « **Reply #39 on:** August 28, 2003, 03:00:28 AM »

I don't know what this topic has to do with sex positions but this forum sure is a great place ,to hear everyones opinions. I love this stuff it makes for great , morning coffee break reading material ! :eek:

Mikey · « **Reply #40 on:** August 28, 2003, 04:47:20 AM »

Folks - this is a forum about handgun hunting. Positions regarding shooting and handguns are fine - let's leave the other stuff out and stick to the topic. Thanks. Mikey.

Questor · « **Reply #41 on:** August 28, 2003, 05:46:50 AM »

Mikey, let it roll. It has to do with hunting equipment and the ethics of what equipment is suitable for hunting.

Mikey · « **Reply #42 on:** August 28, 2003, 07:58:43 AM »

OK! Roll, roll, roll. Mikey.

Blunderbus · « **Reply #43 on:** August 28, 2003, 10:21:26 AM »

:grin: I ought to mention up front that if I ever seem argumentative, it's really more a case of me being bluntly inquisitive ... sort of a professional habit. In an interview one can ask a question, or even make a statement, hoping to obtain a correction or rebuttal or clarification of the matter discussed. It's simply a method of inquiry. It's how I learn things every day. On this forum it is never my intention to offend.

I've shot handguns for many years, but aside from an incidental rat, crow, squirrel, rabbit or groundhog I've managed to take with a rimfire or centerfire "field revolver" I haven't been a handgun hunter, per se. This year, I've finally decided to test the water intentionally. My past positive experiences with TC Contenders led me to settle on the Encore.

In the meantime, I am fascinated by the history of the subject. Most of what I know ... or what I can remember of what I think I know ... about the history of handgun hunting comes from all kinds of different articles from all kinds of different outdoor magazines reaching all the way back into my teen years. I've been a voracious reader of all kinds of hunting and fishing literature.

Is anyone aware of an authoritative book dealing with the history of handgun hunting?

Blunderbus

Questor · « **Reply #44 on:** August 28, 2003, 10:47:20 AM »

Blunderbus:

These are the books that I'm aware of:

1) Hunting for Handgunners by Jones and Kelly has some good articles about the history of handgun hunting since about 1955. Very authoritative and informative. Still in print. A good picture book.

2) Pioneering Handgun Hunting by Goerg. Out of print since 1965 but can still be found occasionally through used book sellers. It won't be cheap. These are the personal accounts of the top pioneer in handgun hunting -- Keith notwithstanding. He pioneered the use of scopes and built himself a Contender before Contenders existed. Keith pioneered the 44 magnum and some hunting loads, but Goerg pioneered the techniques we use today. There's a chapter on Goerg in Hunting for Handgunners.

3) Successful Handgun Hunting by Johnston. Has a section on the history of handgun hunting. Out of print. Still easy to get at a decent price. If you can only get two of the books, get this one and Hunting for Handgunners.

4) Sixguns, by Keith. Great book. One chapter is on hunting and his pioneering use of the 44 special. Rest of book is on other uses of handguns, principally revolvers. Fun to read. Availiable in paperback in current publication.

5) Handgun Hunting, by Nonte and Jurras. Hopelessly outdated. Lots of bad advice. Not worth reading. Out of print.

6) Handgun Hunting, by Hampton. Dull and uninformative personal accounts of what were probably interesting hunts. Not worth reading. In current publication.

Blunderbus · « **Reply #45 on:** August 28, 2003, 12:24:46 PM »

Gracias Questor!

I appreciate not only the recommendations but also the culls.

Blunderbus

BlkHawk73 · « **Reply #46 on:** August 28, 2003, 12:25:06 PM »

Quote from: 340wby

can,t rapidly fire at least 5 shots are NOT at least in my opinion true HAND GUNS

Just curious, why do the shots need to be fired rapidly? Not flamin', just curious? Do single actions fall under the "handgun" cat. still?

if you can,t draw and fire five shots minimum before reloading from your HAND GUN your not HAND GUN HUNTING

5!? If you do your part correctly, you should only need 1. Once again, not flamin' ya just wondering. And why 5? Why not 4 or 3 or 6 or 7 or 8? With some companies making 7 and 8 shot revolvers,it seems like getting more lead in the air in a hurry is more important than being sure of your abilities and making the first shot count.

Personally, I use SA revolvers but because of past experiences with them, would not doubt it if a single shot handgun finds a place in my house. Proberly a Competitor in .357 max.

Questor · « **Reply #47 on:** August 28, 2003, 12:59:13 PM »

Blunderbus:
I forgot to mention that www.abebooks.com is a good place to look for out of print books. I use them and recommend them.

Old Griz · « **Reply #48 on:** August 31, 2003, 06:11:26 PM »

BlkHawk:

Ya might need more than I shot if there's more than one squirrel. And they ain't gonna hang around all day for you to reload!

TScottO · « **Reply #49 on:** August 31, 2003, 06:18:27 PM »

Ya know after seeing the new gun of GB's I saw a gun at the gunshow this weekend that had his name all over it. It was a 22lr Taurus with a 12" tube for 299 bucks. I just looked at it and smiled. One good thing about hunting small game with a barrel like this, if you shot a squirrel and he hung up in a tree you could use the barrel to knock him down.

Good luck and be safe,
Scott

RipOne · « **Reply #50 on:** September 03, 2003, 06:05:41 AM »

Reading and laughing my heinie off - gotta love the Outdoorsmen.

Hey, we arn't shooting these things with out feet - maybe they're All Hand Guns :-D

Old One Shot · « **Reply #51 on:** September 03, 2003, 02:49:40 PM »

Hey Guys !!! I am new to this sight but NOT new to handgunning !!!! A lot of what I have read from the replys to comments ,etc. are all questionable !!!! This is my feeling or (opinon) that all of us handgunners, hunters paper punchers etc., should stick together and not worry about what everyone shoots !!!! There are enough antis out there who cause enough problems we don't need to start any within ourselves !!! I have seen it in bowhunting especially if your not using a recurve or longbow your not a bowhunter....... god forbid you use a crossbow !!!!!! But you know what we are all hunters no matter what we use. We all take the time to go out scouting , lookinf for stand sights, etc. Lets all just enjoy the sport for what it is HANDGUNNING !!!!!!!! Sorry for preaching just my thoughts.

mtngator · « **Reply #52 on:** September 03, 2003, 05:22:42 PM »

After shooting my new .480 I was impressed at gentleness of the recoil and the acurate grouping. I think I will name her Liz after a fiesty woman I gentled. The RB rocks!!

Old Griz · « **Reply #53 on:** September 04, 2003, 01:38:27 PM »

Hey Old One Shot!

I don't think we really have a problem here. We're just funnin' around. If we can't kid among us gun lovers, well then the antis have taken half the fun out of it! Sorry the bow huntin' crowd got squirrelly on ya, but so far I haven't seen that here. I think most folks here just love the shooting sports, are honest about what they like, but don't take themselves too seriously. Besides, we don't want to give old Greybeard a strokeespecially now that he's got that new toy to play with!

But thanks for being concerned. We're glad to have ya around! Hope ya learn something new everyday (I usually do, but I'm as ignorant as a brick), and hope you have a lot of FUN! :cb2:

(But those Desert Eagles really DO make good boat anchors!) :mrgreen:

Questor · « **Reply #54 on:** September 04, 2003, 03:03:00 PM »

I like the Desert Eagles, but don't think I'll ever own one. How much do they weigh? I handled a couple and they feel like they weigh about five pounds.

Old Griz · « **Reply #55 on:** September 04, 2003, 06:17:04 PM »

For some reason 58 oz. (unloaded) comes to mind, so that's just a little over 3.6 lbs. (?) The only one I have fired was the .50 caliber (hey, why not start out at the top?), and it was tons of fun. However, we were at the range and we didn't have to carry it far. I would hate to have to lug that through the woods on my hip! The owner made the classic mistake of crossing his left thumb over his right thumb. When he fired it that slide came back and cut a nice chunk out of that left thumb. That's when he handed it to me and said, "Do you want to shoot it? I've gotta go find a bandaid," and he headed for the Range Master's office. Needless to say, I was REAL careful where all my fingers and thumbs went.