Why doesn't H&R make a handgun?

[BillinOregon]

Sure seems like it wouldn't take a whole lot to "Contenderize" the Handi Rifle series and be able to compete very forcefully with TC, especially on price point. H&R could probably even tweak the frame in some simple way so as to avoid the whole rifle-to-handgun-to-rifle issue that TC has. All it would take is a good pistol grip.

[Troyboy]

Sounds like a good idea i guess ? I just dont see the point in rifle cartridges on a handgun frame. IMO seems like needless punishment and not as accurate as a rifle. A hand gun buys time to get a rifle or shotgun. Just my opinion of course.

[Graybeard]

Yer can't legally make a handgun from a rifle. Since the action was first a rifle it can't be used to make a handgun. They would have had to first make a handgun and then follow up with rifle the way TC did it.

[krod47nw]

H&R actually did make one in the 20s and 30s.  It was evidently affected by newer laws in that time period that caused them to stop producing it.    http://www.4-10.freeuk.com/mwhandygun.html

Kevin

[quickdtoo]

Yer can't legally make a handgun from a rifle. Since the action was first a rifle it can't be used to make a handgun. They would have had to first make a handgun and then follow up with rifle the way TC did it.

Bill, since you brought that subject up, please splain to us how Ruger legally made the Charger out of the 10/22, is there some rimfire exception to that law?

thanks,

Tim

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=4901&return=Y

[towpro]

Tim, I think what he meant was it's ok for the factory to make the handgun, and sell it as a handgun. Once you buy it,  you can put a rifle barrel and stock on it if you want.

But if they make it as a rifle, the owner is not allowed to put a barrel shorter then 16" (I think that is the measurement). 

if you buy a TC, buy it as a pistol, then put the rifle stock and barrel on it if you want.  that way you have a real convertible.

[Swampman]

"if you buy a TC, buy it as a pistol, then put the rifle stock and barrel on it if you want."

I think there are still questions on this subject.  Even the BATF can't give a firm answer.

[Sourdough]

When the Gun Control Act in the 60s was passed most makers rolled over and quite making pistols that could be turned into a rifle.  T/C and Remington did not.  They went to court and won.  T/C in good faith did stop making the 410 barrels for the contender for many years.  Then when T/C came out with the Carbine conversion for the Contender and ATF tried to shut them down over it, T/C again took them to court and won.  T/C also at that time started making then 410 pistol barrel again, sort of like rubbing their face in it.

The major problem is that any new conversion has to go to ATF for their approval.  Everyone is so scared of ATF that no one wants to cross them.  They (ATF) is a good example of a Federal Agency that is out of control.

Maybe Remington can do that with the Handi.  They have enough clout to possibly get it done, if they are so inclined.

[Sourdough]

Just for everyones information I do shoot a Contender also.  I have taken Caribou with both the 30-30 and the .35 Remington barrels. 

[NM Shooter]

If I'm not mistaken, my brother used to own a top-break .22 pistol in the mid-70's that was made by H&R. If I remember correctly, it was a fixed-sight, double action "western style" revolver that he used to "plink" with. I know that you were all discussing the "handi-pistol", but forgiveme for being nostalgic for a moment 

[Sourdough]

Yes H&R made pistols.  Some were top break, others I'm not sure if the cylinder swung out or they had a loading gate.  The only ones I've seen were .22, .32, and .38 cal.  Have been told that the quality was not very good, most people consider them wall hangers now.  See them on guns america every once in a while.

[towpro]

I have one of these.  It's missing the clip but I don't think it's hardly been used.

[buffermop]

H&R did make a 22 revolver at one time. It fell in the same class as Iver Johnson, a POS.

[tykempster]

BillinOregon mentioned tweaking the frame so you couldn't interchange rifle and pistol parts...

Only problem, is I don't really like the H&R looks.  Sure, some of them look sort-of neat, and I love my 45-120 for the combination of price and power, but they would really need to get a good looking pistol grip going for me to be interested.  IMO, TC's look much better than H&Rs, but they are also much more expensive, and have the same accuracy issues.  I think H&R could make their guns look just as good by changing stock and forearm design.

[krod47nw]

Check the link from my earlier post.  It has a picture of the original single shot H&R pistol.  It says though it looks similar to the long gun action, most parts do not interchange.  Here's the link again  http://www.4-10.freeuk.com/mwhandygun.html

 Kevin

[coyotejoe]

The H&R frame would make a very large, heavy and clunky pistol. That H&R "blast from the past" was built on a much slimmer and lighter frame, as were their .410 and 28 gauge shotguns back then. The current H&R handi rifle is built on a full size 12 gauge frame. Compared to a T/C frame from any angle, the H&R is huge.

[coyotejoe]

BillinOregon mentioned tweaking the frame so you couldn't interchange rifle and pistol parts...

Only problem, is I don't really like the H&R looks.  Sure, some of them look sort-of neat, and I love my 45-120 for the combination of price and power, but they would really need to get a good looking pistol grip going for me to be interested.  IMO, TC's look much better than H&Rs, but they are also much more expensive, and have the same accuracy issues.  I think H&R could make their guns look just as good by changing stock and forearm design.

 I quite agree! The old Savage and Stevens break open singleshots had smooth, graceful lines, as did the Winchester single. The H&R is all weird angles mated to abrupt curves and nothing really "flows". They could be made to look a lot better without increasing the cost by a penny.  The buttstocks look like a lump of wood that someone never got around to making into anything.

[RugerNo3]

Yer can't legally make a handgun from a rifle. Since the action was first a rifle it can't be used to make a handgun. They would have had to first make a handgun and then follow up with rifle the way TC did it.

Bill, since you brought that subject up, please splain to us how Ruger legally made the Charger out of the 10/22, is there some rimfire exception to that law?

thanks,

Tim

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=4901&return=Y

You can bet the Ruger Charger action is serial numbered different then the 10-22 action. The serial number is the key to Factory built handgun or factory built rifle. Once a rifle is built it cannot be modified into a handgun per the Federal Regulations in the 1930's that regulated full auto weapons. The GCA of 1968 has nothing to do with it. The converse doesn't apply. All TC Contender and Encores are built as Pistols and modified by others into rifles which is legal. This has been hammered out in court cases requiring days of reading.

[Tencubed]

Yer can't legally make a handgun from a rifle. Since the action was first a rifle it can't be used to make a handgun. They would have had to first make a handgun and then follow up with rifle the way TC did it.

Bill, since you brought that subject up, please splain to us how Ruger legally made the Charger out of the 10/22, is there some rimfire exception to that law?

thanks,

Tim

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=4901&return=Y

You can bet the Ruger Charger action is serial numbered different then the 10-22 action. The serial number is the key to Factory built handgun or factory built rifle. Once a rifle is built it cannot be modified into a handgun per the Federal Regulations in the 1930's that regulated full auto weapons. The GCA of 1968 has nothing to do with it. The converse doesn't apply. All TC Contender and Encores are built as Pistols and modified by others into rifles which is legal. This has been hammered out in court cases requiring days of reading.

 
Not all Contenders are built as pistols.  I have a stainless contender that was built as a 223 rifle with the long barrel and buttstock.  It is identifiable as a rifle by it's serial number and, as has been stated, may not be legally converted to a pistol or used with rifle barrels less than 16" in length.

Mike

[Busta]

Since we are hashing this out, how about turning a Sidekick muzzleloader rifle into a muzzleloading pistol? The Sidekick is not considered a "FIREARM" by the Feds, and has a shorter frame than the Handi. I have tried looking into this a couple times, but don't know who has the final word. It is not covered very well, and I just don't want any headaches. I would however love to do this conversion, but would not even consider it until I had something in writing from the proper authority.

Here is a concept image of what I would like to have. I call it the Sidekick II Concept.

[kennyd]

I had a H & R Double Nine.  It was a nine shot .22, 6 inch barrel.  The cylinder pin would pull, you removed the cylender, and used the pin to punch out the cases.  Right now it is on my list of things I wish I never sold.  They also made the shortr barrels.  They fit in the "saturday night" category.

[ECV Slick]

Yes H&R made pistols.  Some were top break, others I'm not sure if the cylinder swung out or they had a loading gate.  The only ones I've seen were .22, .32, and .38 cal.  Have been told that the quality was not very good, most people consider them wall hangers now.  See them on guns america every once in a while.

The early H&R pistols were actually of exceptional quality and nicely finished.  I have an H&R model 950 that I bought back in the mid 1960's that's a nickel-plated 9-shot .22LR revolver.  Even the trigger is nice - in fact FAR nicer than any of the Ruger handguns I've bought in the past 20 years.

Unfortunately, as time passed and prices went up, H&R decided to "hold the line" price-wise and cut corners.  Some of the later versions of my very same gun are nothing short of pure junk and had hideous finishes (as in the same class as RG's).