Armscor 200 .38 Spl Questions

O

oldNewbie

New member
I recently inherited an Armscor .38 Special from my father. I haven't shot it yet, but have dry-fired it and I think I'll be happy with the trigger compared to my Taurus 82. It seems well-balanced and the grips feel good in my hand. The grips seem to be made of a hard black plastic. The sights are like those on my Taurus 85, blade on the front and groove in the top of the frame.

On the barrel is stamped "MFTD. BY ARMS CORPORATION OF THE PHILLIPINES MARIKINA CITY". I have no idea of its age and unfortunately, found no manual with it. The (redacted) serial number is AP23xxxx.

I was looking to hear of anyone else's experiences with this firearm and/or with Armscor in general. Thanks in advance!
 
Review: http://ezine.m1911.org/showthread.php?t=140

These have been discussed here previously. I own one -- I bought it for my wife when she said she wanted to learn to shoot, because I thought she would learn easier on a revolver ... then she decided she really DIDN'T want to learn to shoot, so the Armscor became mine. I like it a lot.

When mine came in at the shop, the guys behind the counter couldn't believe how nice the trigger was for a sub-$200 gun straight out of the box.

Mine is now wearing a set of square-butt wood grips from CDNN, for a Colt Detective Special. I don't recall if I had to do any fitting -- possibly a little bit. If so, it wasn't much and it wasn't difficult, or I wouldn't have bothered.
 
I have one that I carry in my parka pocket when the weather gets really cold. Great little snub nose, I called Pahrump and asked if they sold spur hammers for it. A few days later I got one in the mail free of charge, you can't beat customer service like that.

Hope you enjoy yours.

BTW the 206 is also a very nice gun.
 
Many thanks for the replies and the link to the review. It confirmed my initial take that the trigger was as good or better than my more-expensive Taurus 82, and I did note the stop-bar safety on the M200. Great info on the history of Armscor as well. Thank you! I look forward to taking it to the range perhaps this weekend. I want to give it a good cleaning first.
 
Now the question is -- if your "new" Armscor is an older revolver, is it an M200 (as in the review to which I offered a link), or is it the older M100 (which is, according to the review0 closer in mechanical layout to the Colt Detective Special)?

Somewhere I read that Armscor used to produce a version in the M100 series that was chambered in .22LR and styled like a Colt Diamondback. I would really REALLY like to find one of those.
 
Well, I've never tried to post a photo here, let's give it a try. I haven't found a serial number lookup yet, so I don't know the age of the gun. I did remove the grips and found a coil-spring-over-rod mainspring (correct me if mainspring is the wrong description!)
 

Attachments

  • armscor200.jpg
    armscor200.jpg
    153 KB · Views: 109
Well, it does say "Armscor 200" on the barrel. I guess that's what we'd call a "clue."

Looks just like the one in the review. Have you shot it yet?
 
Looking back at my original post, I did omit the "Armscor 200" barrel stamp. I'm sorry about that. And I did notice that it looks just like the one in the review. One interesting thing was that the cylinder latch moves backward instead of forward, unlike most revolvers I've handled.

I have yet to shoot it, I'd like to do so this weekend. Been busy clearing out Dad's house etc. I bought a used Colt MKIV Series 80 Government Model the day before he died, and haven't spent enough time with that either. Ammo for that is at a premium right now, but I've been reloading .38 Spl for a few years and have plenty of 158-grain LSWC's to put through the Armscor. When I get back to the range, I might try my hand at posting a report. I'm especially interested in how it runs compared to my Taurus 82.
 
oldNewbie said:
One interesting thing was that the cylinder latch moves backward instead of forward, unlike most revolvers I've handled.
Click to expand...
That's because it's modeled after a Colt rather than after a S&W. All Colt DA revolvers operate the same way. (Well, not including the Lightning and Thunderer.)
 
Well, now you know why I go by Old Newbie. The two revolvers I owned before the Armscor came into my possession were both Taurus - a model 85 that I bought in 2009 for self-protection, because the neighborhood was (and still is) going downhill; and a model 82 that I bought because I wanted to shoot a handgun well at longer ranges than a snubby could really do. I got my CCW and a membership at a local range, took up reloading to save money on my hobby, read a lot of books by Ayoob and others, and went to practicing. But I'm still a newbie at the historical aspects and the heritage, such as in your comment, and which I am very interested in. The finer points like that, are just why I come here.

Just wanted to say, thanks Aguila!
 
Finally took the inherited Armscor 200 to the range and put about 100 rounds through it. It shoots well, and I do like the trigger in DA better than my Taurus revolvers. There were several failures to fire in which the firing pin dented the primer but did not ignite. These cartridges fired the second time through. I wonder if the mainspring might be a little weak?
 
You mentioned reloading. Were those factory loads, or reloads? If a primer isn't fully seated, often the first hit doesn't set it off, but does seat it fully. Then the second hit fires it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top