Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless: Education Request

[Mr. Mosin]

I have two originals (see my earlier post), and the new ones vary enough in detail that they would not pass for originals.

I'm still waiting patiently, good sir. "... vary enough in detail..." is oddly specific, given the advertised total parts interchangeability between the originals and the re-productions.

 

[ThomasT]

The 1903 I shot that day was nice and flat and easy to hold. It has its own feel. And there isn't another gun like it. I understand why the OP asked about it. I read an article many years ago by JB Woods on the 1903 and he also gave a detailed description of the takedown. It didn't look too hard but it would have been without some guidance the first time around.

If I found a clean model that was priced in the less than $400 range I would probably buy it. Mainly because I am a real 32 caliber fan. The only 32acp I own now is the Walther/Manhurin PP I mentioned earlier. And I bought that in what appeared to be almost new condition for $250 OTD back in 2008. But someone had lost the plunger that operates the extractor. Thankfully S&W was making the PPKs at the time and faxed me a parts diagram and I ordered the parts I needed. Cost me around $15 for the parts and an hours time figuring how to take it apart and repair it. It works perfectly now.

I need to buy some leather and make a flap holster for it. I do reload for it with a cobbled up set up that makes nice looking lead bullet ammo. I haven't shot it yet but it hand feeds just fine. I use a 100gr Lee RN tumble lube bullet made for 32 long but it fits and chambers fine. And I got the load data from CE Harris so it should be good data.

Here is one of his articles and is well worth the time to read it. And it is based around the 1903 Colt pistol. That makes it even better. And the whole ack Creek Diary site is a good place to spend some time. I promise you will learn new things.

https://www.hensleygibbs.com/edharris/articles/32ACP.htm

 

[ThomasT]

I'm still waiting patiently, good sir. "... vary enough in detail..." is oddly specific, given the advertised total parts interchangeability between the originals and the re-productions.

Dan if I were you I would just hold out and buy an Original Colt that is challenged on the finish and has little collector value. Most of those were carried a lot and shot a little. The biggest question would be are the magazines good and can you find a spare?

 

[Monac]

The 1903 I shot that day was nice and flat and easy to hold. It has its own feel. And there isn't another gun like it. I understand why the OP asked about it. I read an article many years ago by JB Woods on the 1903 and he also gave a detailed description of the takedown. It didn't look too hard but it would have been without some guidance the first time around.

The takedown is the only flaw in the Colt 1903 that I can think of. (Well, the sights are kind of small, but they are normal or better for the period, and I did not mind much when I was young.) I have no idea why Colt decided NOT to put the safety catch's slide hold open cut at the takedown point, and I have never heard of anyone who did. It turns takedown from the snap it ought to be into a finicky minor headache.

Thank you for the hensleygibbs.com link, I had never seen that website before.

 

[Speedo66]

The most desirable of these, to collectors, are the U.S. General Officers' pistols. Since they run $2,000 and up, they are sometimes faked. Beware of spurious markings.

Can you tell us what markings were unique to the general's pistols? Photos of the guns and accoutrements would be great.

 

[Mr. Mosin]

The takedown is the only flaw in the Colt 1903 that I can think of. (Well, the sights are kind of small, but they are normal or better for the period, and I did not mind much when I was young.) I have no idea why Colt decided NOT to put the safety catch's slide hold open cut at the takedown point, and I have never heard of anyone who did. It turns takedown from the snap it ought to be into a finicky minor headache.

Thank you for the hensleygibbs.com link, I had never seen that website before.

If I had to guess, Colt probably did not place the slide lock catch in the same position as the takedown position; to avoid the aggravation of the barrel getting accidentally turned and having some unaware individual buggering up the piece.

 

[Monac]

If I had to guess, Colt probably did not place the slide lock catch in the same position as the takedown position; to avoid the aggravation of the barrel getting accidentally turned and having some unaware individual buggering up the piece.

This is as good an explanation as any. I would point that no other major manufacturer (such as FN) thought this way, but on the other hand, pistol ownership was far more common in the US than elsewhere, raising the odds that a given pistol would come into the hands of an unaware individual. Which is the reason for quite a few of the questions we get here.

 

[AlexanderA]

Can you tell us what markings were unique to the general's pistols?

1. "U.S.PROPERTY" (all caps) on the right side of the frame above the trigger. This is in a specific size, depth, and font.
2. Checkered walnut grips with silver-colored rampant Colt medallions.
3. Of course, the serial number is all-important. There are reference books listing all the serial numbers of the government-issued pistols, and in most cases the General to whom issued.

The Generals could, and usually did, purchase their guns when they left the service. That's how the guns eventually found their way into the hands of collectors.

 

[Whiskeyhotel2020]

I had a chance to pick up a .32 and am kicking myself for not taking advantage of the opportunity. I am not a collector by any stretch however, Browning's work has always fascinated me. I was looking for a smallish carry gun. Plus not far fro. The 1911 that the design would lead to.

 

[Tallball]

I got lucky and won mine for a $330 bid on GB. It's refinished and has new grips, which apparently destroyed its collector value.

It shoots plain ball ammo reliably. I haven't tried to shoot anything else out of it.

The sights are tiny and field stripping it is annoying, but it points naturally and is pleasant to shoot. Everyone who shoots it likes it.

Colt 1903

• Tallball
• Jan 7, 2018
• 1

 

[DustyGmt]

love the 1903. I would carry it. I havent shot it a ton, but it has been 100% reliable. I wish .32acp was cheaper, I usually keep at least a few boxes on hand. I found some the other day for $22/50. Should have grabbed them, I love shooting it, just don't often. I think it's a type 2, idk. I once knew these things but I cant keep it all in...

Mine came from a close friend shortly before he died. There was some drama about it, family members were mad that I had it but at the end of the day I paid for it and unfortunately my friend died. If I had bought a lawnmower from him a month before would I be expected to just turn it over. Maybe not the same thing but idk.

 

[Monac]

I got lucky and won mine for a $330 bid on GB. It's refinished and has new grips, which apparently destroyed its collector value. It shoots plain ball ammo reliably. I haven't tried to shoot anything else out of it. The sights are tiny and field stripping it is annoying, but it points naturally and is pleasant to shoot. Everyone who shoots it likes it.

Colt 1903

• Tallball
• Jan 7, 2018
• 1

That gun is refinished? Wow, refinishing techniques have really improved. I would not have known, at least from that photo. I suppose I should have guessed it was TOO nice for a gun that is 75+ years old, but I probably wouldn't have.

 

[BigBlue 94]

That gun is refinished? Wow, refinishing techniques have really improved. I would not have known, at least from that photo. I suppose I should have guessed it was TOO nice for a gun that is 75+ years old, but I probably wouldn't have.

My 1903 is an early model, and does look too nice to be original... It shoots great, but being 110+ years old, i dont shoot it much. If the rampant colt was as crisp as the roll stamp, I wouldn't question its originality. Either way, its a sleek and beautiful firearm. Something an americanized James Bond might've carried.

Det. James R Leavelle (tan suit) was likely carrying his 1908 PH as backup during this incident... A short article below, from American Rifleman, describes a personal experience with this pistol.



https://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/nra/ar_201211/index.php?startid=51#/p/50

 

[BigBlue 94]

I got lucky and won mine for a $330 bid on GB. It's refinished and has new grips, which apparently destroyed its collector value.

It shoots plain ball ammo reliably. I haven't tried to shoot anything else out of it.

The sights are tiny and field stripping it is annoying, but it points naturally and is pleasant to shoot. Everyone who shoots it likes it.

Colt 1903

• Tallball
• Jan 7, 2018
• 1

Collector value be d@mned, id pay more for that one than a junky one in original condition. I really do like the checkered walnut grips, but mine has its original hard rubber ones.

 

[sgt127]

I have two. Top .380 Bottom .32 Both refinished. But, nicely done.

They quite literally feel like a well worn bar of soap. Just wonderful little guns.

I kind of prefer the .32. It’s a lot of fun to shoot and with a (practically) fixed barrel, quite accurate.

Ton of history in those little guns.

 

[Jimbo80]

Don't be too quick to assume 1903s have been refinished. A whole lot of them sat untouched in nightstands for decades.

 

[Mr. Mosin]

Don't be too quick to assume 1903s have been refinished. A whole lot of them sat untouched in nightstands for decades.

Aye. Much like Model 10 Smith's and Colt Official Police.

 

[il_10]

There are lots of "shootable" 32s available. I shot a guys 1903 at the range one day. Nice gun but nothing I would go in debt over. It wasn't better than my PP made in 1957 and there was no way I would trade my PP for his 1903 except to sell it and buy two PPs to replace the one I traded.

Here is an affordable 32acp if you just have to have one. And CZ has an excellent reputation. And since its more of a range toy than anything else it should scratch that itch just fine.

https://aimsurplus.com/ceska-zbrojovka-czech-cz50-32acp-pistol/

I have to differ with this opinion. I have 2 1903's (a 1911 and 1912 vintage), a PPK, and a CZ50. The PPK is of particular historical relevance, and the CZ50 is fine, but neither are the shooters that the 1903s are. Of the ~40 handguns in my current modest collection, the 1903s are far and away my favorite handguns. They point naturally, are flat-out boring in their reliability, are fantastically accurate, and carry like a dream. There's a big difference between a Browning designed single action trigger pull and an early DA/SA.


As for carrying these guns: around 1929 Colt added a half-cock notch to the hammer and shortened the firing pin to make them drop safe. The improved hammer and firing pin are interchangeable with earlier guns, and a half-cock ledge can be cut into an earlier hammer. I don't have any qualms about carrying my earlier models with a round chambered after updating to the 1929+ specs. Just as safe as a series 70 1911.

 

[roguesam]

I just won a Rock island Auction yesterday for one of the US Armament reproductions and am looking forward to taking possession. I am hoping the fit, finish and quality are as good as the written reviews indicate. Primarily intending to use it as a CC backup. The darn things just ooze historical style.

 

[CapnMac]

simply because it wouldn't print, but some people can't grasp that.

And the one that would recognize the "print" would mostly bu film noir buffs, and their being blue with jealousy would be hard to hind behind the fedoras.

And then of course there are the leather accoutrements that were issued to Generals along with the pistols. These are rarer than the pistols themselves. The belts, holsters, and magazine pouches were russet leather in WW2, and then black leather after 1956. Reproductions have been made.

The fact that Flag Officers were often tasked to purchase all their own uniform parts feeds into that, too. Many of those items were just specifications given to the uniform supplier.

 

[Monac]

I just won a Rock island Auction yesterday for one of the US Armament reproductions and am looking forward to taking possession. I am hoping the fit, finish and quality are as good as the written reviews indicate. Primarily intending to use it as a CC backup. The darn things just ooze historical style.

Congratulations, and please let us know how shooting it goes. I don't think there have been many first-hand reports here about shooting the new ones.

 

[roguesam]

Congratulations, and please let us know how shooting it goes. I don't think there have been many first-hand reports here about shooting the new ones.

Just getting things organized with extra magazines and a decent pocket holster for it's arrival.

 

[Tallball]

Kind of an old thread...

I just now noticed that someone mentioned the finish on my 1903.

I bought it on Gunbroker. The description stated that it had been "professionally refinished" because someone had scratched their initials on the slide.

The grips were replaced with wooden ones for the same reason. The person had also scratched their initials on the magazine, and they are still there.

I unfortunately found out that the pistol has slightly different versions and not all of the magazines are interchangeable.

It was a good pistol for my daughter to start shooting when she was 8 or 9 and bored with 22's. The recoil is nil and it's as accurate as the tiny sights allow.

Apparently when you are a young girl, the sights are plenty big enough.

Within a year or so I had bought a Colt Government Model in 380acp, which she also found easy to shoot (steel frame and locked breech).

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Springs, ammunition, and magazines.

A blowback pistol firing relatively low-powered ammunition is highly dependent on properly calibrated spring rates in both the hammer, recoil (return-to-battery), and magazine springs. If any of these has lost tension, reliability problems will result. Likewise, if the springs have been replaced, and are too stiff, problem s will arise.

Likewise, if the ammunition does not closely replicate whetever template the designers used with regards to bullet weight and shape, burn rate, and maximum pressure, reliability will suffer.

Finally, if the magazines are poorly designed, or have easily damaged feed lips or followers, you will have problems.

---
So you're familiar with the High Standard Jamamatic... I mean "Duramatic," I see...

 

[Gordon]

I think a 1908 is a Colt designation, maybe , as the actually Browning 1908 is a longslide version for the 9mm Browning long . Anecdotally my Model 1908 Browning when I got it was in perfect shape but as most Swedish 1908 imports had a .380 acp barrel and a cu down recoil spring. I would struggle to get thru a magazine of good ball .380 with out a jam. I found a new 9mm long barrel and a new Swedish issue recoil spring and swapped it in and with all 9mm long surplus and commercial new 9mm long ammo it seems 100% reliable ! Quite a bit more powerful than .380 also.
So the Colt 1903 model in .32acp has ben for me very reliable with ball ammo, I didn't even try HP in it ! never owned a Colt .380 but have shot them and yes the one i shot would NOT feed HP ammo and the owner said it would choke now and then on ball. It was cherry like my 1903 BTW. Both my .25 and .32 are VERY reliable and I would carry them if I had too. The Remington 51 is a 100% reliable .380 FWIW and the Mauser is a 100% reliable .32 with ball !At top is a Browning 1955 , which is a Browning 1922 version in .380 and it is 100% reliable with ball ammo and a little less so with HP, but pretty good with most new design HP .