Pinkerton-grip Firearms?

Standpat Steve · January 27, 2005, 10:00:42 PM

Howdy,

In reading the new NCOWS by-laws I find a term I am not familiar with: Pinkerton-grip firearms. This is referenced in the Not Allowed Revolvers section. Could somebody refer me to a picture of such a grip, or describe what one looks like. Although I pride myself on a good knowlege of our period firearms, I find myself completely at a loss.
Thanks . . .

Bama Belle · January 27, 2005, 10:15:16 PM

Think of a Thunderer style without the flat part on top. The grip has a constant curve all the way down the backstrap. If I can gin up the ole digicam tomorrow, I'll take a picture of mine for you.

Standpat Steve · January 27, 2005, 10:54:45 PM

Thanks Bama Belle,

Sounds like pinkerton-grips are pretty much what I think of as bird-head grips. I understand exactly what you mean when you write of "Thunderer without the flat part on top." Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Trap · January 28, 2005, 09:23:23 AM

I have a question then, My wife has small hands. So I took a file to her normal grip colt look-alike. I was told they were acceptable because they were one of a kind, personally altered Firearms. So are these now unacceptable? They look somewhat like BH , Basically the bottom corners rounded off. jt

Will Ketchum · January 28, 2005, 01:29:49 PM

Trap, first who told you they were exceptable? That's always a problem. Now as for me, lodgic tells me that if you, with a file altered the grips to fix a need then someone else could have done the same thing. I think it's a non-issue. Many guns were altered for various reasons.

I don't see why anyone would have a problem with it. Then not everyone is lodgical.

Will Ketchum

Trap · January 28, 2005, 03:34:01 PM

Will;
Vaughan OKed these particular pistols several years ago. I think Dirk also said they were fine. jt

Will Ketchum · January 28, 2005, 04:25:35 PM

Then I wouldn't worry about it.

Will Ketchum

Wymore Wrangler · January 28, 2005, 06:42:08 PM

I'd submit them to the authenticity committee for a ruling, remember Vaughn came out and told folks that the Cimarron Model P Jr's were legal and they bought them and then the Congress voted them out. With what we just went through with slides and the Ruger Bisley, I'd want to written formal approval that could be shown several years and Judges from now....

Lone Gunman · January 28, 2005, 09:45:16 PM

"Pinkerton" is just emf's brand of birdshead, at the time the original rule was written emf was the only one selling birdshead SAA's. Since then other co's have marketed them under different names but "Pinkerton" has kind of stuck with us as a descriptive term, sort of how all locking pliers are called vise-grips.

The Ruger Bisley failed muster on two fronts (1) It is NOT a reasonably close copy of the gun it's named after, even the manufacturer doesn't make that claim, (2) it IS a perfect copy of a gun created in 1926 by Elmer Keith.

I've seen Trap's home filed grips, they certainly wouldn't be mistaken for any type of factory configuration.

It's not a subject that's had much formal discussion...I suppose there should be at least some sort of basic guideline for home gunsmithing. Maybe you should post a picture of them over on TFS, Joss was lamenting the recent drought of arguing

...well, something like that.

Irish Dave · January 30, 2005, 08:52:19 PM

Wy:

Good point regarding some folks' previous pronouncements. There are clearly examples of them not always being well-founded -- or appropriate.
It's my understanding that generally speaking a firearm isn't NCOWS "legal" until the Congress says it is. One person's "opinion" doesn't make it so, as I understand it.

Exceptions, of course, would be various companies' versions of a previously approved firearm (unless it was markedly different from its peers, of course).