Double-swinging-link design - Colt M1903 pocket hammer etc.

[patentnonsense]

I just took down an old "pocket hammer" M1903 in 38ACP, and was interested to see some of the differences from the M1911 design. In some ways the M1911 is just plain better, but there's one very interesting feature in the M1903 is the use of TWO swinging links, at front and back of the barrel. Barrel to slide engagement is very similar to the M1911 (three crossways lands atop the barrel mate with lateral grooves cut into the interior of the slide), BUT the use of double links means that the barrel's direction doesn't change when it disengages from the slide.

(Very good detailed writeup of this model, with drawings, can be found at http://www.coltautos.com/default.asp; note that, confusingly, there were TWO 1903 models, one hammerless in 32ACP and one with an external hammer in 38ACP; it's the latter I'm talking about here. The 38ACP model was apparently a shorter-barrel derivative of the M1902 military, which had a six inch barrel I think.)

This double-link design seems to me to have some potential for improved accuracy. It must have been a bear to clean in the old days, since the barrel stays attached to the links and frame during field stripping, but with modern squirt-cleaning techniques that seems less of an objection.

The M1903 did not itself have any positive engagement between barrel and slide at the muzzle, so I'm not claiming that the 1903 was more accurate than the M1911! Also, look at the inside of the slide, I think this design must have been a bear to manufacture. However I do think that the double-swinging-link design, WITH barrel/slide engagement at front and back of the barrel, has some potential for improved constraint of the barrel location, and hence maybe improved accuracy.

Has anybody tried this in a modern design?

Thanks,

 

[BHPshooter]

I've never seen one stripped, but it's a very interesting design.

In a couple of books that I've read, the "parallel ruler" setup (as it was called) was said to be kind of finnicky and that it was hard on the gun, but I think they sure look neat.

How is it? Is it reliable? How's accuracy?

Cheers,
Wes

 

[patentnonsense]

I haven't shot it - it's an heirloom gun - but I've got a box of factory 38ACP, so I think I may have to give it a try. (It's never going to be a regular shooter, just sort of in honor to the piece and to my father.)

 

[Old Fuff]

Be careful!! That first design of Browning's is held together by a link at the front. If it cracks the slide can come back and hit you in the face.

When you remove the link the slide comes off to the rear. In later designs, including the 1911, the slide is moved forward to remove it from the frame.

 

[patentnonsense]

about the link at front: it's actually a little piece of plate, maybe 1/8" thick and maybe 3/8" extent parallel to the barrel - not wimpy. It took me awhile to puzzle out the takedown, but this one, at least, seems pretty solid.

Thanks for the warning though - and in any case I'm not going to shoot much through it, maybe just a mag or two.

This gun seems quite tight for its age - my father was on the pistol team at Annapolis, and I wonder if he might have competed with this - if so, tools are greatly improved these days!

Thanks,