Question about a un-fired Colt 1903 .32

B

boolander

Inactive
I have just recently gotten back into shooting and my father let me have his Colt 1903 .32 Rimless Automatic (manufactured in 1920). I asked him how it handles and he told me that it was never fired. I gave it a close look and it would seem he is correct, there seems to be no wear and the finish looks fantastic. I had wanted to take this gun to the range and my question is: should I not fire any rounds through it?
If it truly is an un-fired gun, will I degrade the value of it?
 
Collectors are funny birds, but then aren't we all, about something?

Part of the gun's value is simply what it is, and part of it is the condition it is in. "Unfired" means just that (unfired, other than factory test fire, if done).

An unfired 1903 Colt .32 (with no wear) is extremely rare. Collectors pay for rare. Put even one magazine downrange and you move the pistol from extremely rare to just rare (or to uncommon), in excellent condtion, and what a collector will pay drops dramatically. Perhaps from thousands to hundred of dollars.

Ask your dad if he has the box and any papers that came with it. If he does, (and they are in condition matching the gun) that will further raise the value, a lot. Even if the box is trashed, it will raise the value of the gun some.

If you plan on always keeping it (sentimental value) then its market value isn't as important, but I would keep it unfired if you want to retain its full potential value.
 
Thanks for the replies, it has become obvious to me that I should not fire this gun, and that is a shame because after reading quite a few positive reviews, I really wanted to take this to the range.
I think I'll give it back to my dad and let him know about all the info I found out about his gun, and to remind him to keep it in top shape. And it's funny because my mom did not want the gun in the house, and long ago wrapped it up and just kept it with a bunch of other stuff in the garage, and had originally just wanted to throw it in the trash!
Hmmm, maybe I should hang onto it...just in case my mom gets any more funny ideas...
Thanks again for the replies!
 
See it this way, the difference in value is big enough you can go buy a shooter grade one for the range and still come out ahead.
 
Unless your dad is in his early 100s, he would have almost certainly bought it used...he PROBABLY means unfired BY HIM.
 
Unless your dad is in his early 100s, he would have almost certainly bought it used...he PROBABLY means unfired BY HIM.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily; Colt offered that gun for sale pretty much through 1941, and possibly old stocks were still extant for a year or two after the war.
 
Surprisingly, unfired Colt Hammerless Pocket Pistols are not that rare, though they aren't lying around on the street. Those guns (the Model 1903 in .32 ACP and the Model 1908 in .380 ACP*) were probably among the more common of the "bureau drawer specials", at least among autoloaders, and are often found in near new condition. In many cases, the gun will have external wear from simply being moved around under the socks while the internal parts show no sign of any use at all since the day the gun left the factory.

*The "model" designations are those used by modern collectors; Colt did not use them.

Jim
 
Surprisingly, unfired Colt Hammerless Pocket Pistols are not that rare, though they aren't lying around on the street. Those guns (the Model 1903 in .32 ACP and the Model 1908 in .380 ACP*) were probably among the more common of the "bureau drawer specials" ...
Click to expand...

I've noticed that. On the auction sites, the 1903's are typically well worn, but there usually a few that are nearly mint.

@Boolander this site has a lot of good info on the 1903's - http://www.coltautos.com/1903ph.htm

You might want to hold onto that pistol for safekeeping.
 
It should also be mentioned that if you want to shoot a 1903, relatively cheap ones are fairly easy to find. After all, around 570,000 1903s were produced. A quick search of GB reveals several complete auctions for well-worn 1903s in the low $300 range.

One of the nice things about the 1903 is that, unlike some other early .32 autos, it's rugged enough to withstand regular use without constant tinkering. This is one of the reasons why it stayed in production for a relatively long time.
 
They are very tough and durable guns, like most of JMB's work. Unfortunately, many have been damaged by people taking them apart without knowing how to put them back together. Most directions give "reassemble in reverse order" or some such - not true, there is a very important "trick" that the writers either don't know or keep hidden. The best advice is to NOT disassemble those guns further than field stripping for cleaning.

Jim
 
Thanks again for all the replies. Does anyone know of a way (or things to look for) to determine if the gun had been fired, or does a gunsmith need to look at it? Looking at it with untrained eyes, i see no wear like I do with my other guns. Also, is there any info out there on what should be lubricated on this gun? It looks a little "dry".
 
In the case of a brand new, unfired (except at the factory) gun, any wear, disassembly, etc. could reduce the value.

With that noted, the best way to determine if the gun has been fired is to look at the barrel and the breech face. Remove the barrel (if you don't know how, ask!!) and see if it looks unfired. At the time that gun was new, most cartridges used corrosive primers, so even one shot without prompt cleaning would take the shine off the metal. Look also for any signs of brass or copper jacket on the edges of the chamber or the feed ramp. Then check the breech face and around the extractor for any signs of brass or any signs of a primer sealant (probably red or blue) around the firing pin hole.

Look at the magazine follower, also for signs of brass rubbing when cartridges were loaded.

Most of those signs (except barrel corrosion) would show in a gun that was loaded or worked with ammo, even if it was not actually fired. But it would not be factory new, though.

Jim
 
Colt's archive dept. can provide you with a letter documenting the original spec and delivery of the pistol. This will confirm whether your dad was the original purchaser - and if he's never fired it, then you'll know. Otherwise you've got to look for tell-tale signs of wear and repeated firing (e.g. brass marks on the breech face, significant wear on the exterior surface of the barrel end towards the muzzle ). But I assume that Colt test fired the 1903's, and if so all of them would have some signs of having been fired. If you're really interested, an appraisal may be in order. But whatever you do, I'd recommend that you not strip the pistol.
 
+1 to James K's suggestions, but I have two more.
  • Inspect the inside bottom of the mag well for scratches from mags being inserted. A few small scratches are nearly unavoidable, but deep and distinctive scuffs are generally a surefire sign of repeated use.
  • Since the Colt uses a spring-loaded mag release latch on the heel of the pistol, the same goes for the part of the magazine that contacts the latch (I assume the pistol has at least one original mag with it).
 
It seems we get a new 1911 each month. Would there be any complications to bring the Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless back in production? I'd buy a new one in a heart beat.
 
A Colt letter will only give the distributor to whom the gun was shipped. It cannot give the retailer or the retail customer. Retail sales records were not required until the late 1930's and even those have been lost or turned over to BATFE and effectively are unavailable.

Colt did proof fire their guns, but they were meticulous in making sure that the gun was cleaned and all signs of firing were removed before shipping. The signs I gave (and the ones added by Carguychris) will not be present on a NIB Colt pistol or revolver.

As to making the Model 1903/1908 again, I can't see it happening. The gun would simply cost too much to make as it was made then, and I doubt a copy made with a polymer frame, a cast slide and MIM parts would satisfy the nostagia bug.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top