What killed the Automag?

for no real advantage over a .44 magnum revolver which, I suggest, is easier to carry.
Click to expand...

In other words, the .44AMP is so big and unweildly that it may as well be a small carbine, thus missing the whole point of a pistol,
Click to expand...

It's a matter of opinion what the point of a pistol is. Defensive pistols are one thing. Hunting pistols are another.

yes, the magnum autos are big and heavy. If they are too much for you, grow stronger! :D

one way to look at them is not that they are bigger and heavier than a pistol should be, but that they are smaller and lighter than a carbine CAN be.

One "real advantage" to me is the feel of the recoil. Magnum autos are simply less punishing to my hand than revolvers of the same power level. Balance this against the extra size /weight. Its a personal matter, make your own choice, there is no wrong answer, but what's right for you may not be what's right for me.

I've got a 10" Contender, a Ruger Super Blackhawk, a S&W model 29, a Desert Eagle, and an Auto Mag all in .44, and a Wildey and an LAR Grizzly in .45Win Mag. At full power levels the Contender is a vicious beast to shoot, and the S&W only slightly less so. The Autos are much more comfortable.

Early Auto Mag ads used the slogan, "strap a rifle on your hip", and if you look at it that way, they aren't all that big, or heavy.
 
I always wondered what the "AMP" meant in your screen name. I find the information you posted to be fascinating.

Funny how Clint Eastwood movies kicked off sales for two big guns. There was also a movie to go along with the launch of the Grizzly .45 Win Mag, but nobody remembers the movie which is probably why it never got off to big start.

When I first saw Sudden Impact, I remembered the gun quite well, and had the desire to own one. (His never failed in the movie!) I had just assumed it fired .44 Mag and didn't know any different until now.

Always enjoyable to learn something new, even for an old geezer like myself.
 
"Hi Standard still produces some of their designs." So they're still plagued by terrible reliability and poor management.
 
yes Tim, my AMP is from Auto Mag Pistol.

The Auto Mags in Sudden Impact were made up for the movie by Harry Sanford, out of "parts he had lying around". Guns & Ammo magazine did an article on them, I have it somewhere...

Two guns, one fully functional and one blank firing only, serial # Clint 1 and Clint 2.

The guns are .44 and have ribbed 8" barrels. This was never offered during production. The standard 6.5" barrel had a vent rib, and the longer barrels did not. The movie gun(s) is truly unique.

I believe the "300grain cartridge" Harry refers to is the entire loaded weight of the round with a 240gr bullet.

The scene where he shoots through the heavy angle iron is actually realistic. They will do that. I once shot the differential (rear end) of a 65 Impala, with a round of the CDM factory 240gr. Round struck about the 10 0'clock position, blew a hole the size of my thumb knuckle (I wear size 9 gloves), and left a dent sticking out the other side about 1/2".

The CDM bullet is nearly a full metal jacket. There is a small hollow point, but they don't expand at all. They do bulge and deform a bit if you shoot them through steel, but anything less, they just punch right through. I don't doubt they might defeat light armored vehicles!

Remington, Speer, Sierra, Hornady, all behave normally at the appropriate velocities. I've used Unique (not well suited & too dirty), Blue Dot (does pretty well at moderate loads) and Win 296 (top end loads). I've never used 2400 in the Auto Mag but only due to reports of it being too dirty and the gun gumming up too soon.


.44 AMP
S&W M29

Both with 6.5" barrels. I don't see the Auto Mag being all that much bigger. It is heavier, quite noticeably so.
 
I was only answering the question, and only for myself. However, I do believe most people will not carry around a pistol above a certain size, but you'd have to poll everyone to know for a fact.

Same thing as a calculated 94% of the firearms I own: fun, enjoyment, range time, aiming at targets and hitting them, pride of ownership and taking in the artistic craftsmanship in the device.

I will never understand people who miss that entirely. Robotic, mechanized thinking. Bland, colorless, pitiful. It's sad.
Click to expand...

Actually I've brought this up several times, when people start talking about how "Useless" a certain caliber is for self defense, as if that is the only reason to own a gun.

I own many handguns, but I only carry one small throw away plastic .380, barely adequate, or not even adequate according to some. It's legitimate to make the stopping power argument for a carry gun, but the 49 or so other handguns I own don't need to do anything except please my collecting and shooting demands. My .25 ACP collection is as valid as my big bore handgun collection in that regard, and arguments about stopping power are moot.

There are many people who could afford to buy an Auto Mag, but even so it's a small percentage of the total gun buying public. The purchase price represents an investment for a construed return of some kind, my point is that the average person would never spend that much money on a gun they don't want to pack around.

Wrong? The numbers don't lie, if the average person wanted one for the reasons I do and had the extra money they would have sold in the hundreds of thousands of them. Right?
Also, I do think most people (Unlike myself, who often buys for collecting) buy guns for a particular purpose related to shooting it. Most people who would buy a powerful game stopper to carry in the field do not carry an Auto Mag, and wouldn't even if available new today. For self defense most people (Please keep that part in your consideration) would not carry a pistol as large as the Auto Mag, and if they thought they needed extra power, would probably carry a rifle.

Yep, I think so.

Some people would carry a big pistol, true. Not that many that big.
 


Another size comparison, this time with a 10" barrel Contender.

While I grant you the Auto Mag is too big and heavy for most people's comfort, and well beyond what is considered suitable for a duty pistol, there are some people who pack around even bigger and heavier handguns, for sport and pleasure.

A scoped 14" T/C Contender, or an XP-100, or the S&W X-frame, or even a Ruger Super Redhawk, all are bulkier, longer, and a couple are even heavier. Yet one generally doesn't hear complaints about their size, because, perhaps, they are recognized as specialty pistols, and not compared to the "usual" handguns. Why not the magnum auto pistol? I don't know, but that is the effect I usually see.

NO, guns in the Auto Mag class aren't for everybody, but then neither is a high performance motorcycle. I don't hear people complaining about the size, weight and price of a Harley Sportster compared to the Combat Wombat or Super Rat they rode as a kid. (yes, I'm that old..;))

What killed the Auto Mag as a commercial proposition was the combination of factors, almost a "perfect storm" of things working against it.

First, is the fact that the Auto Mag wasn't just aimed at a niche market, it was creating that niche market.

The pistol's complex and complicated design and materials meant that it couldn't be competitively priced with existing revolvers or auto pistols.

It used a round for which there was no common factory load. (BIG point right there)

Auto Mags are not noted for reliable functioning. Not a total deal breaker for some buyers (some of us bought Lugers, too! ;)), but a bad point, and a reason for many to pass on purchase. It is rather a shame that the design never sold well enough to stay in production long enough to get the most serious bugs worked out. :(

On top of all this, the companies that made Auto Mags had business troubles too.

Compare this to the Desert Eagle, which is even bigger and heavier than the Auto Mag, but uses a commercially common round, and who's makers have managed to make them viable companies as well.

The DE had a couple of advantages, the two biggest were that the Auto Mag had established a niche, (although it failed), so there was a small market interest, and the use of a common caliber.

Also I believe that the decade+ between the Auto Mag and the Desert Eagle played a part too. And a few years after the introduction of the Desert Eagle, Hollywood (and the video game industry) discovered the DE, and so a larger niche was created.

For all its faults and flaws, and despite the fact that the Auto Mag never reached its potential, I've always felt it was one of the most handsome pistol ever made.
 
My useless pistol trumps your useless pistol.:D

The only reason it's not completely useless is because there is a shooting game that requires a pistol like this to be competitive.

DSCN0099.jpg
 
First, is the fact that the Auto Mag wasn't just aimed at a niche market, it was creating that niche market.

The pistol's complex and complicated design and materials meant that it couldn't be competitively priced with existing revolvers or auto pistols.

It used a round for which there was no common factory load. (BIG point right there)
Click to expand...
You make some absolutely outstanding points, especially the first one.
 
AMT never made Auto Mags. AMT made Automags (II, III, IV, & V).
Click to expand...
AMT did make Auto Mags. Actually, the OP's picture is of an AMT model. Likely they made them badly, if they were anything like the Government model 1911s they produced.
 
It's a matter of opinion what the point of a pistol is. Defensive pistols are one thing. Hunting pistols are another.
Click to expand...

The practical utility of a "Hunting Pistol" ...... is highly questionable, outside fo the "I want to handicap myself with a handgun" crowd...... and those folks are throwing practicality to the wind, IMO ......

Any "hunting pistol" chambering can be made more accurate (meaning more practical) and managable in a long gun form than as a pistol .......

The only reason to hunt with a pistol is to challenge yourself with a more challenging weapon ......

...not that there is anything inherently wrong with challenging yourself like that .... but to deny that the point of the pistol is that it is a defensive tool that you wear whilst you go about more mundane tasks (live your life, do what it is that you do), as opposed to a tool you take up and carry for a specific purpose (go kill that animal, in the case of "hunting"). A pistol is there, always, just in case you need a gun. If you plan on shooting something with the best tool available, that tool will have a stock on it.
 
The only reason to hunt with a pistol is to challenge yourself with a more challenging weapon ......
Click to expand...

Much the same as using a bow or a muzzleloader.

If they did start pistol only seasons, it would do the same thing to pistols that happened to muzzleloaders, turn them into something we would barely recognize, as close to stockless rifles that they can legally get away with.

Special restricted seasons is the main reason you see almost nothing but compound bows and bolt action muzzleloaders that use pellets and shotgun primers. The "black powder" section in the local Cabelas sells everything but black powder.
 
Any "hunting pistol" chambering can be made more accurate (meaning more practical) and managable in a long gun form than as a pistol .......
Click to expand...

Won't argue that, but this is also true...
Any "pistol" chambering can be made more accurate (meaning more practical) and managable in a long gun form than as a pistol .......

On the other hand, we don't see many .25acp, .32acp, & .380acp carbines. Even though they would be more accurate and manageable in a long gun form...

The best tool available might have a stock on it, but the most practical tool may not, depending on the situation.

you don't think heavy handguns are practical, I get that. Other's disagree.

My main point is that defensive handguns, while arguably the most important kind of handguns, are not the only kind of handguns, and the standards applied to one class do not apply to all others.

As to AMT making Auto Mags..hmmph, I actually did not know that. I stand (actually sit) corrected. Thank you for pointing that out Stevie-Ray. :o
 
I looked at the AMT's and they always seemed a bit glossy compared to my Pasadena so I passed on them.

The real trouble with the Auto Mags today is parts availability. I would not risk mine today due to the near impossibility of getting certain parts.

Now if someone who had say $10 Million and quickly wanted to have $1 Million and went into the CNC business of making Automag parts I would buy some. They would be fun to fiddle with if there were a parts market for spares.

44AMP_P7.jpg


Just another picture for size comparison.
 
Sadly it would seem that the Wildey has gone the way of the Auto Mag. Their website is still up, but their phone number is out of service. they are also fun to shoot, but finicky with the gas setting.
 
I think if the auto mag took a more common round that it may have done better. That said the semiauto magnum pistol is a niche market, but a very fun market.
 
On the other hand, we don't see many .25acp, .32acp, & .380acp carbines. Even though they would be more accurate and manageable in a long gun form...
Click to expand...

My tow package analogy holds- the prime attribute of those tiny cartridges is that the guns that fire them can be tiny .... only in the case of the .25ACP, that would be akin to "a tow package on a moped" .......

Now that I think about it, there was a .32ACP with stock (if a piece of bent wire can be called a "stock"): the Vz 61 Skorpion ..... I think they made a .380 version, as well .....
 
IIRC the Skorpion was designed as a machine pistol (aka submachine gun) and did have a folding wire stock.

the prime attribute of those tiny cartridges is that the guns that fire them can be tiny ....
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I believe the sole reason the .25ACP still exists is because it feeds, and fires more reliably in the same tiny pocket guns than the .22LR does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top