Shooting Them

[INLAND44]

I have stopped shooting mine, and I never really shot it much anyway, maybe 250 rounds over the last 20 years. It's a rebuild but is in extremely good mechanical condition. I figure it's probably quadrupled in value since '91, to about $800 now. I have plenty of other carbines to shoot (AR, AK) so I think I'll just let it sit, except for perhaps special occasions, like when my sons visit from out of state, or maybe if a grandchild showed some interest. The same holds for my 1945 Remington Rand M1911A1 and my 1918 Colt M1911.
Generally it seems to me that most M1 Carbine owners do shoot theirs, or at least their 'shooters'. I guess mine is a 'shooter' too, but I just don't want to put any more wear on it.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[browningautorifle]

I don't have a carbine but I do have a scarce M1 rifle. I have one to shoot that's common and the collector just sits. I'd be so sad if I fractured the uncut op-rod or some metal fatigue thing occured. I can't get it fixed because there's no expert types here in Canada for that sort of thing. If you get a plain jane nothing special you can enjoy shooting A carbine without putting wear on THE carbine.

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

I'm sure we all have different reason why or why not to shoot our Carbine's and 1911's.

I don't feel shooting my carbines will hurt them. I'm sure they have had many rounds through them before they arrived at my house. Do I shoot them all, no. Four on a semi regular basis. They were not originals, really how many are? But all have maker correct parts in them, still considered shooters. Underwood, Quality, Inland and Winchester. Of those, the Quality is the best shooter. Some of the fun is seeing the looks on others faces at the range when you pull it out of the zipper case.

I'm not worried about hurting the value? These are probably $800-$1,000 guns. How much does your hunting rifle cost? You shoot them and lug it around in the woods. Parts can all be replaced and for me I have a lot of extra parts.

But on the other hand I do not shoot my 1911 and 1911A1's like Inland44. I don't have spare original parts for them. The WW1 and WW2 pistols cost about $1,500-$2,000. So what do I take, an Ed Brown and a Wilson which cost $3,000-$5,000. Now that doesn't make sense or cents if you are worried about value.

I think we are a strange lot.

[Stevo]

But on the other hand I do not shoot my 1911 and 1911A1's like Inland44. I don't have spare original parts for them. The WW1 and WW2 pistols cost about $1,500-$2,000. So what do I take, an Ed Brown and a Wilson which cost $3,000-$5,000. Now that doesn't make sense or cents if you are worried about value.

I think we are a strange lot.

I don't think that line of reasoning is strange at all. It's not about "value" per se, it's about the stuff you can't put a price on. They aren't making any more 1918 1911s but you can get a new Wilson any time you want. To use your examples, no matter what a Wilson Combat 1911 costs, it will never be worth as much as an original 1911, IMO.

In my case, I'll drag my $1500 AR-15 around through the mud, I'll chop parts off it with a Dremel, I'll generally ignore and neglect it until it won't run any more. But I won't treat a $200 Mosin Nagant like that.

[Johnny Peppers]

I remember the guy on one of the Luger forums that kept a running account of shooting his all original Artillery Luger. Every week or so he had something to add until the day he told about the breechblock cracking. Not a hand load or over load, and he didn't know it until he cleaned the pistol after a shooting session. Virtually every part of a Luger is serial numbered to the pistol plus their parts were not totally interchangeable. When the Luger was a military piece this would have been no big deal and it would have been repaired, but as a collectible today it had been seriously devalued.

I have guns that I shoot on a regular basis, but I don't consider any of them collectible. Some say they wouldn't own a gun they couldn't shoot, but all I have could be shot. I just won't shoot them if they have made it this far in nearly new condition. This pistol cost $600 32 years ago, and other than factory testing shows signs of hardly being fired since. If it made it 88 years in this condition, no need to make a shooter out of it now.

[fn111557]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I hope I look that good when I'm 88 years old. . . . .

. . . . . WAIT! I wish I looked that good NOW! (only 54)

[INLAND44]

A transitional M1911? Wow. Never seen one that perfect. It's a museum piece.

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

Very nice looking 1911.

[Johnny Peppers]

The name "Transition" was added by collectors. When it came out in 1924 it was initially called the Improved Model 1911 as it had the finger cutouts and shorter trigger, and longer grip safety spur, but in 1926 the designation was changed to Model 1911A1. At that time Ordnance decided that any pistol under serial number 700000 would be a Model 1911, and any pistol over serial number 700000 would be a Model 1911A1. Production of the Model 1911 had stopped in early 1919 at serial number 629500.

No more pistols were ordered until 1937, and Ordnance forgot to remove the MODEL OF 1911 U.S. ARMY from the prints, and the 1911A1's made in that year still have the 1911 slide logo. In 1938 it was removed, and M 1911A1 U.S. ARMY was added to the right side of the receiver.

[Rustship]

Beautiful