Re: [Rollei] Re: OT 1911

["Gene Johnson" <genej2 >]

In the spirit of expanding the expansion, I still kick myself for long ago
passing on a Smith and Wesson model 1917 revolver in .45 ACP.  It used two
half moon clips to hold the rimless cartridges for loading in the cylinder.
It was beautifully made, and was issued, along with the Colt New Army I
think, possibly due to shortages of the 1911.  Both of these were 6 shot
pistols.  I've seen several of the New Army model, but just the one Smith
1917.  The Colt was not bad but lacked the fine finish and smooth action of
the Smith. As for the 1911, I agree with all that it is a fine pistol right
out of the box.  Given a few hours in the hands of a skilled pistolsmith
they can be very nearly perfect.  And this is from me, a big revolver guy.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Marc James Small" <msmall  >
To: <rollei  
Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: OT 1911


> At 05:38 PM 5/24/03 -0400, Eric Goldstein wrote:
> >Expanding upon this a bit, my Father relayed several stories of officers
> >regularly replacing .45 ACP with revolvers (.38 I think)... Reliability,
> >accuracy and handling taking priority over brute force and rapid
reload...
> >
> >Anyone know what revolvers were standard issue at the late stages of WW
II?
>
> The Cavalry, that Prima Donna of combat arms, had refused the M1911 .45
> automatic and had insisted on a five-shot Colt revolver with a rimless .45
> cartridge.  These were obsoleted in the early 1930's under MacArthur's
> military rationalization program.  Well, we still had a SLEW of these F
> Troop type cavalry posts out west, and they all had these rather
mysterious
> "arms room fires" in which almost the entire stock of these revolvers
ended
> up "missing, presumed destroyed".
>
> Even more mysteriously, when the War broke out, a lot of these guns
> reappeared.  The Army first noted this when the Ammo Requests from
overseas
> began listing orders for the special ammunition for this now-obsolete
> weapon.  The boys in Washington just chuckled and issued the ammunition.
>
> The M1911A1, though, was a phenomenal weapon and was much hardier than
some
> of you are suggesting.  The very reason it was issued was that it didn't
> need a lot of finicky CLA's to keep it in operational condition.  A staff
> officer could simply wear it day in and day out and trust that it would
> work when the enemy over-ran the Division Rear -- and it would.
>
> The only regular alternative sidearm available in the late War would have
> been the Smith & Wesson .38 Police Special or its equivalent.  I cannot
> imagine any soldier in his right mind choosing the one over the other.
> General Officers were issued a dinky little .25 automatic but most saw
that
> as a "harlot's gun" and refused it.  MacArthur never wore a sidearm, while
> Eisenhower, Patch, and Bradley wore M1911's and Patton, of course, his
pair
> of ivory-handled .38's.  (These might have been .44's:  I'd have to look
it
> up.)
>
> (A .25 pistol is really lightweight and has little kick, so it is often
> carried by ladies moving in uncertain society.  The corollary of its
having
> little kick, of course, is that it also has little impact and will not
even
> penetrate the breastbone or skull at a standard bar-room brawl distance.
A
> .22 Long Rifle will, and this was the preferred weapon among special
forces
> in the War, as it has become the Mafia's assassination weapon in recent
> decades.)
>
> Marc
>
> msmall    FAX:  +276/343-7315
> Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!
>
>

------------------------------