Rescued 1377 lives again

[Crosshairs]

Safety is the first rule for gun ownership there is a reason they put them on guns. I would not shoot next to someone with a safety removed. I have seen two people shoot themselves one in the butt and one in the leg and both guns did have safetys on them, it's only a matter of time before you or someone else gets hurt. Im not trying to tell people what to do but really would hate to see one of you get hurt.
                                                 Mike 

[woody67]

My safety is always on, no matter what gun I'm shooting. I think it's my OCD that makes me keep checking to make sure the safety is working.

I won't ever shoot myself, because I never ever point the muzzle towards any part of my body. Also I kind of freak out whenever anybody points a gun in my direction.
Unless it was my girlfriend... I wouldn't really be surprised to see that actually. hahaha

[BDS]

T Gaylord.... ... "and no mechanical device adds anything to improve safety."

Seriously ? He should stick to selling airguns, he obviously missed that ONE day that they taught engineering at poly-sci school!

[7624452]

T Gaylord.... ... "and no mechanical device adds anything to improve safety."

Seriously ? He should stick to selling airguns, he obviously missed that ONE day that they taught engineering at poly-sci school!

I do not know who T Gaylord is and I do not understand your remark.

[7624452]

Safety is the first rule for gun ownership there is a reason they put them on guns. I would not shoot next to someone with a safety removed. I have seen two people shoot themselves one in the butt and one in the leg and both guns did have safetys on them, it's only a matter of time before you or someone else gets hurt. Im not trying to tell people what to do but really would hate to see one of you get hurt.
                                                 Mike 

You are getting into the old argument of "Who killed this guy, the person who shot him, or the gun that was used?"

[jdub]

Safety is the first rule for gun ownership there is a reason they put them on guns. I would not shoot next to someone with a safety removed. I have seen two people shoot themselves one in the butt and one in the leg and both guns did have safetys on them, it's only a matter of time before you or someone else gets hurt. Im not trying to tell people what to do but really would hate to see one of you get hurt.
                                                 Mike 

Does that mean you leave the range when someone pulls out a Glock, Kahr, LCP, or any of the other dozens of firearms without a manual safety? :-)

None of my three different Baikal airguns (IZH-46M, 53M, 61) have manual safeties nor do many (most?) 10m Match pistols. 

Regards

BTW, I'm not meaning for this to sound rude in any way.  I'm just curious how those of you who feel strongly about having manual safeties feel about the abundance of firearms (some of the most popular concealed carry weapons) that don't have manual safeties, and do you handle a gun with a manual safety *differently* than one without?  I believe it's a training issue--not a mechanical issue.

[BDS]

I do not know who T Gaylord is and I do not understand your remark.

ok...?

The "remark" was a response to Jdub, not you, if you don't get it, then you dont get it.

[7624452]

ok...?

The "remark" was a response to Jdub, not you, if you don't get it, then you dont get it.

Sorry - that post was on another page and I had forgotten about it.

[jdub]

ok...?

The "remark" was a response to Jdub, not you, if you don't get it, then you dont get it.

If you take Tom's *entire* quote in context it's pretty clear he's referring to *manual safeties*. 

"As for the lack of a safety being a problem, I respectfully disagree. I don't think the pistol needs one. The shooter is the safety for any gun, and no mechanical device adds anything to improve safety".

There are obviously differing opinions here that won't be changed by anything said on this forum.  The end result will likely be just a bunch of pissed off people 

Cheers

[BDS]

Nah... there's waaaay more important stuff to worry about before getting P.O.'d about a Gaylord comment!

Still... "no mechanical device adds anything to improve safety" is pretty definitive on it's own merit, with other context or not, It's a Gaylord-ism.

[jdub]

Nah... there's waaaay more important stuff to worry about than getting P.O.'d about  a Gaylord comment!

Ha!  We agree!   

[Crosshairs]

the polish jobs you do to your guns is amazing.i dont know if its patience of what
i cant get my guns to look like that

thanks Ed !!

[Fronzdan]

the polish jobs you do to your guns is amazing.i dont know if its patience of what
i cant get my guns to look like that

I know!  Seriously man, I hope to someday do a polish job that nicely.  I just finished my first...well the frame and the barrel.  I used a Cothran tube.  Only the RJ breech is black still.  It was a lot of work!

[cmj21973]

Where did you get that information ?

When I said new and old, I should have said  phase IV, phase III and phase II.

Your 1377 is clearly a phase I.  Skeletonized grip frame and scriptive "American Classic" tube imprint.

All of the 1377 EVP's from Crosman show and list the front sight/ pump arm pivot pin as a roll.

Thanks for the pic of the Crosman's solid pin.

[7624452]

When I said new and old, I should have said  phase IV, phase III and phase II.

Your 1377 is clearly a phase I.  Skeletonized grip frame and scriptive "American Classic" tube imprint.

All of the 1377 EVP's from Crosman show and list the front sight/ pump arm pivot pin as a roll.

Thanks for the pic of the Crosman's solid pin.

My research indicates it is a phase II(second variant) made from 1981-1988.  The phase I had a steel breech and was not set up for bb's.  It was made from 1977 to 1998.  The Crosman web site shows the same manual and evp for both.  The picture is of the original parts, plastic breech and brass bolt with magnet on front.