I have a modern production one in 380. it's my ccw and t is just as easy to carry today as it was then. People say it's too big but with the 32 and 380 it requires a longer barrell length to get decent ballistics. Modern pocket guns with 2.5 inch barrels aren't getting anywhere near the ballistics advertised on the ammo box. For me, it's still the perfect carry gun
I had a 1903 32 acp. Was a great "Pocket Pistol" and I really carried it on outings. Got married in 1993 and well kids came along and I needed some coin , well I miss it.
Oh of interest in some of those movies RUBY. 32 Pistols were also used in movies which looked like a bit larger Colt 1903 pistols. Most however were the Colts and even 1908 VEST Pockets as well.
I had back in the mid 70s a US GOVT marked 1903 AKA Model M in .32 ACP. I traded it later for something more powerful. That was a bad move as I would love to have researched the serial number as these were issued to General Officers and even the OSS. I still have a regular 1903 in really nice shape and a 1908 in .380. These are excellent guns and they never have failed me thus far accurate and reliable.
Every American general in WWII , was issued one usually in .32 caliber. OSS and SOE , issued and used them. It was a point and shoot handgun that is why it has no real sites. See the movie KEY LARGO , with Bogart, to see how he just pointed it fast and secured hits at about fifteen feet range or less. For a movie he had the use of this gun right on. You should have cleaned and oiled the hundred year old gun before test firing it, just to be fair.
@@YonderOak Sorry, it should work without a hitch . Bad magazine , old springs , old ammo, something is sabotaging one of the best firearms ever designed...
Power is rather limited. One of the factors that made the cartridge popular then was the lack of antibiotics. A serious penetration of the skin and outer body would easily turn 'septic'. Infected in the current speech. Without antibiotics, infection was often lethal. The .380 ACP cartridge was of greater power. However, the bullet is only .144 inches greater in diamiter (.356" vs .212"), heavier by twenty-four grains and faster by fifty-five fps. Not much. Shooting at seven yards: One notes ALL rounds impact on the paper place. I'm not sure the exact size of that plate, but the ones I use for such things typically range 10 inches or less. That is a little larger than the size of the 'serious' area (thoracic cavity of a a human adversary. One notes fifty yard accuracy is unlikely to be required. Considering the arm was designed for self-defense carry, the accuracy is quite acceptable. Heel release. So what? Looking at the history of handgunning in the past fifty years - I was there, by the way - the concept of the "instant reload" is important in pistol games involving running and firing many cartridges in the lowest possible time. FBI stats indicates between two and three rounds (all parties) are usually fired. The sights are wretched. The rather small size of front and rear sights make the alignment difficult, as it all seems to blend together under stress. But there is no point complaining now. The use by criminals has always been over emphasized. Probably all the famous criminals mentioned carried them but so did Clyde the man across the street, Wally the meat man and likely your great aunt. None of them but the criminals made the newspapers or movies. I like this pistol as it is a serious step in handgun design. I own seven of them now. Including a type One.
So you're saying that someone chose this cartridge based on the fact that, in a gunfight, they might wound the assailant and he would possibly die a few days later from infection? Guns are used to stop the existing threat IMMEDIATLEY, whether that means killing, incapacitating, or scaring away the potential threat.
@@HistorywithG-Hall Pehaps you should read all the words. You shold note the word 'then' in the first sentence. One should understand the following information relates to the time of adoption and use. Antibotics were not in common use - development pending - until the Second World War. This increased rather than decreased the instinct to avoid being wouded at all. You are correct in that currently and for the last few decades, defensive pistols are ideally used with the intent of immediate incapacitation. Your statement of '"...scaring away the potential threat" is valid. And knowing what was happening, totally defeats your entire misunderstaning.
@@OldManMontgomery Sir, I am a historian with a Ph.D. in the field of military history. I read your entire comment and I am very aware of the impact of antibiotics on the modern battlefield. I am also a combat veteran who has seen the effects of gunshots firsthand. However, you stated "One of the factors that made the cartridge popular then was the lack of antibiotics. A serious penetration of the skin and outer body would easily turn 'septic'. Infected in the current speech. Without antibiotics, infection was often lethal." You are correct that an infection would be difficult to treat, and therefore deadly, but people were not choosing ammunition based on its ability to wound and cause infection, they were hoping to stop the threat. An infected wound would not immediately incapacitate someone. People make firearms choices based on a number of reasons, but its ability to cause infection is not a reasonable example. What good would it be to shoot an attacker solely for the purpose of hoping they died three days later? The shots would be fired with the hope that they would stop attacking the victim, or in combat, stop the enemy.
@@HistorywithG-Hall I'm not claiming possible infection was the sole reason for using this round, but - possibly unthought by the defender - it was on or in the mind of the shootee. Other reasons for use likely included convenience both in carrying and loading the arm and possibly the idea of many shots available. It was also considered 'powerful' as it would penetrate a number of specific thickness pine boards a standard test at the time. Or part of the allure might have been the 'new' effect. Heaven knows that is still around. One also notes numerous Europen Armies issued pistols of the caliber to officers. One also notes the .38 Special - with far more power - was already available at the time.
I have a modern production one in 380. it's my ccw and t is just as easy to carry today as it was then. People say it's too big but with the 32 and 380 it requires a longer barrell length to get decent ballistics. Modern pocket guns with 2.5 inch barrels aren't getting anywhere near the ballistics advertised on the ammo box. For me, it's still the perfect carry gun
I had a 1903 32 acp. Was a great "Pocket Pistol" and I really carried it on outings. Got married in 1993 and well kids came along and I needed some coin , well I miss it.
Oh of interest in some of those movies RUBY. 32 Pistols were also used in movies which looked like a bit larger Colt 1903 pistols. Most however were the Colts and even 1908 VEST Pockets as well.
I had back in the mid 70s a US GOVT marked 1903 AKA Model M in .32 ACP. I traded it later for something more powerful. That was a bad move as I would love to have researched the serial number as these were issued to General Officers and even the OSS. I still have a regular 1903 in really nice shape and a 1908 in .380. These are excellent guns and they never have failed me thus far accurate and reliable.
Obligatory "hurr durr, yOu WoNt Be AbLe To FiNd aMmO fOr tHaT"
Keep up the good work dude
I appreciate you taking care of that for me!
Every American general in WWII , was issued one usually in .32 caliber. OSS and SOE , issued and used them. It was a point and shoot handgun that is why it has no real sites. See the movie KEY LARGO , with Bogart, to see how he just pointed it fast and secured hits at about fifteen feet range or less. For a movie he had the use of this gun right on.
You should have cleaned and oiled the hundred year old gun before test firing it, just to be fair.
I did clean and oil it before the video.
Thanks for watching!
@@YonderOak Sorry, it should work without a hitch . Bad magazine , old springs , old ammo, something is sabotaging one of the best firearms ever designed...
Nice video sir! subscribed :)
👍👍
Hello this is Ed from Lynchburg. Do you know if any of the 1903’s were produced in nickel?
From my very limited research, it does look like there were 1903s done with a nickel finish from the factory.
Thanks I’m lucky enough to have one. I’m thinking they were used as a presentation piece .
Ed from Lynchburg
I have a 1903 in nickel, just ordered new grips. Love it for my every day CC pistol. It shoots like it's brand new
There is one of these in very good condition, 1940's, at a local shop, asking, $1200 + tax. Nope
Yeah, no thanks.
Power is rather limited. One of the factors that made the cartridge popular then was the lack of antibiotics. A serious penetration of the skin and outer body would easily turn 'septic'. Infected in the current speech. Without antibiotics, infection was often lethal.
The .380 ACP cartridge was of greater power. However, the bullet is only .144 inches greater in diamiter (.356" vs .212"), heavier by twenty-four grains and faster by fifty-five fps. Not much.
Shooting at seven yards: One notes ALL rounds impact on the paper place. I'm not sure the exact size of that plate, but the ones I use for such things typically range 10 inches or less. That is a little larger than the size of the 'serious' area (thoracic cavity of a a human adversary. One notes fifty yard accuracy is unlikely to be required. Considering the arm was designed for self-defense carry, the accuracy is quite acceptable.
Heel release. So what? Looking at the history of handgunning in the past fifty years - I was there, by the way - the concept of the "instant reload" is important in pistol games involving running and firing many cartridges in the lowest possible time. FBI stats indicates between two and three rounds (all parties) are usually fired.
The sights are wretched. The rather small size of front and rear sights make the alignment difficult, as it all seems to blend together under stress. But there is no point complaining now.
The use by criminals has always been over emphasized. Probably all the famous criminals mentioned carried them but so did Clyde the man across the street, Wally the meat man and likely your great aunt. None of them but the criminals made the newspapers or movies.
I like this pistol as it is a serious step in handgun design. I own seven of them now. Including a type One.
So you're saying that someone chose this cartridge based on the fact that, in a gunfight, they might wound the assailant and he would possibly die a few days later from infection? Guns are used to stop the existing threat IMMEDIATLEY, whether that means killing, incapacitating, or scaring away the potential threat.
@@HistorywithG-Hall Pehaps you should read all the words. You shold note the word 'then' in the first sentence. One should understand the following information relates to the time of adoption and use.
Antibotics were not in common use - development pending - until the Second World War.
This increased rather than decreased the instinct to avoid being wouded at all.
You are correct in that currently and for the last few decades, defensive pistols are ideally used with the intent of immediate incapacitation. Your statement of '"...scaring away the potential threat" is valid. And knowing what was happening, totally defeats your entire misunderstaning.
@@OldManMontgomery Sir, I am a historian with a Ph.D. in the field of military history. I read your entire comment and I am very aware of the impact of antibiotics on the modern battlefield. I am also a combat veteran who has seen the effects of gunshots firsthand. However, you stated "One of the factors that made the cartridge popular then was the lack of antibiotics. A serious penetration of the skin and outer body would easily turn 'septic'. Infected in the current speech. Without antibiotics, infection was often lethal." You are correct that an infection would be difficult to treat, and therefore deadly, but people were not choosing ammunition based on its ability to wound and cause infection, they were hoping to stop the threat. An infected wound would not immediately incapacitate someone. People make firearms choices based on a number of reasons, but its ability to cause infection is not a reasonable example. What good would it be to shoot an attacker solely for the purpose of hoping they died three days later? The shots would be fired with the hope that they would stop attacking the victim, or in combat, stop the enemy.
@@HistorywithG-Hall I'm not claiming possible infection was the sole reason for using this round, but - possibly unthought by the defender - it was on or in the mind of the shootee. Other reasons for use likely included convenience both in carrying and loading the arm and possibly the idea of many shots available. It was also considered 'powerful' as it would penetrate a number of specific thickness pine boards a standard test at the time.
Or part of the allure might have been the 'new' effect. Heaven knows that is still around.
One also notes numerous Europen Armies issued pistols of the caliber to officers.
One also notes the .38 Special - with far more power - was already available at the time.
Old man is the reason that people shouldn’t get drunk and text stupid comments.🤷♂️