Question, Are Short Stroked Rifles NCOWS Legal.

[Ornery Orr]

My wife's '73 has a short stroke in it simply because she has shorter arms and it helps her to handle the rifle.  To my knowledge the rules state "no external modifications".  If this issue is to come in front of the congress, I hope someone has the sense to realize that short strokes are not new to the CAS scene.  If they were going to make a ruling against it, it should have been done a long time ago.  Since it wasn't, LEAVE IT ALONE!  I don't have one, I prefer the bobbling front sight of my '92 weaving back and forth through the BP smoke as my short arms rack the lever.  Like Major Matt, I too will abide by the rules that the congress sets forth but this particular issue is not hardly worth consideration.  I've met many a woman that had absolutely no concern about 1/2 an inch of shorter stroke.

[Derby Younger]

"..As far as if NCOWS makes short strokes illegal we will lose potential members, I say that is possible.  Because it is setting a precidence and perception of the culture of the organization as a whole. .."

Matt:

I would say definitely possible. Speaking only for myself, yes NCOWS has a perception problem. That is coming from two former members that in leather,dress, weapons made sure we wouldn't have a problem. Chicago Sioux would have made the most rabid rules enforcer cry.

Then, of course, there was the ongoing rumblings about gun carts and justification of and for anything. I happened to be shooting BV's, legal then, not now.

Yep, there is a short stroked 38WCF 73 in the safe, as well as, a tuned but not stroked 44WCF. OK, both legal now, possibility of one soon not to be?

We stopped renewing. It just wasn't worth the concern about being braced by somebody at a large shoot. Do I have a problem with NCOWs? No. Play by the rules or choose not to play.

Apologies for the semi rant. Best wishes for a great shoot to you.

Derby

[Wymore Wrangler]

I think the short stroke kits just aren't what NCOWS is about, you will never find one in my rifles, but if someone has installled one, well I really don't care, it's their gun.  I agree with just about everything Major Matt has posted on this subject, and Orney Orr has made a valid point about the use of a short stroke rifle, but just like our National government we can pass all the new laws and regulations to cover just about everything, but the real heart of the matter is will they be enforced and who will step up and be the leaders that puts those changes into action.  I am far more concerned about updating and establishing range safety rules that will be followed by all clubs rather than if some one has the stroke in their lever shortened....

[Derby Younger]

"..I am far more concerned about updating and establishing range safety rules that will be followed by all clubs rather than if some one has the stroke in their lever shortened...."

I've been out of the NCOWS loop for awhile, what is the issue on range safety? If I'm hijacking here, I'll start another topic with that question.

[French Jack]

I have read with interest the different views expressed on this thread. 

There are just a few points that I would like to make:  For one, exactly where in the arc of the lever travel is the mgic "half-inch" measured?  I have seen several "short stroke" modifications done to various rifles, and there is a great divergence in results.  I have seen some that simply removed the inherent over-travel of the parts in a toggle link but did not measurably change the travel.  I have seen some that changed the travel as much as TWO Inches from center of lever at the end of loop away from the receiver.  What degree is actually acceptable? Certainly in some cases the change would be negligible, in others a major difference glaringly apparent.

For another, in causing prospective members to flee our organization, there are a couple of points to consider:  First, we give prospective members a year or more to get their clothing, arms,  and equipment in order.  This is certainly enough time for new people to see if they wish to become a member, and see if they wish to follow the guidelines and philosophy we embrace.  No one is blind sided in this way.  Secondly, NCOWS while an organization that promotes shooting, the difference between our organization and most others is fundamental, we also promote and stress historical basis for our dress and equipment. 
If people are drawn to our organization, it is NOT because we are "just another place to shoot", or "practice for other matches"... It is the fundamental differences and philosophy that attracts our member base.  If not, we would simply be another CAS club with no reason to exist.  This is what the entry time is for, to allow prospective members to see if they embrace our core values, and wish to become a supportive member of our organization.
We should not assume that we will recruit disenchanted members of other organizations, NCOWS certainly has more than enough to offer that we do not have to do that.  We tend to forget that some of the disenchanted persons are not disenchanted because of the values we support and embrace in NCOWS, but would be equally disenchanted with NCOWS or any other organization that seeks to impose rules on the members.

Just a few thoughts-- sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

[Cuts Crooked]

This has been interesting!

I too have seen the pictures elsewhere purporting to be of original 73s  next to reproductions with short stroke kits. In those pics the originals appear to have about the same lever throw as the modified reproductions. Now we also have some pards who claim that their originals do not have the same lever throw as their reproductions with kits in them. This is a puzzlement!

Leaving us with the following possibilities: 1.Someone is prevaricating, 2.Orginal factory tolorences were much more sloppy than todays manufactures, 3.There were gunsmiths in the old days who knew who how to shorten up the lever throw on a toggle link, or 4. there was a change in factory specifications at some point in the old days.

I would prefer to beleive that #1 is unlikely...but it's a possibility. 2 through 4 would require a LOT of dedicated research to prove or disprove either way.

In the end I really don't think it's worth haggling over. Unless the new Corvette that is the prize for the winner is really that important to someone!

[Ornery Orr]

A finely slicked '73 with the most advantageous short stroke kit that money can buy would probably make me good enough to win the screws that hold the license plate frame on that shiny new Corvette.

[Irish Dave]

Damn. Amazing how many responses a "hot" thread can generate just overnight.
That's encouraging.

Major Matt:
No offense taken, pard. Just think you missed my point.
I don't care how anyone spends their money and was not trying to tell anyone what to do. But during the Bisley Vaquero debate that preceded the Congress vote to disallow them, we all heard all the arguments about how this was so unfair because folks had already spent their "hard-earned money" on these revolvers (even though they were not formally approved).

All I was trying to do was to suggest that folks might not want to invest in this rather expensive modification until the Congress has resolved it, so as to save them the expense of buying something that was later prohibited.

If folks want to do it anyway and take their chances, then, by all means, go for it. But I would not want to listen to them complain later should the Congress reject this modification and now they're stuck and mad at NCOWS.

As far as Working Cowboy is concerned, if the object as you suggest is to provide newcomers a way to shoot who can't afford all 4 guns lemme ask a question: How many newbies do you think will spend $200 on a SS mod rather than figure that's halfway or more toward a second revolver or nearly all of a Chinese 12-gauge?

My suspicion is, not many.

My only suggestion about dual rifles is that it would be one solution for those who want to play the equipment-race, techno-gimmick SASS game with their SS rifle, SS Vaquero and whatever else and still have one rifle that would be legal for NCOWS -- if the Congress rejects the modification.


PS: Very nicely done, LG. 

[Derby Younger]

"..But during the Bisley Vaquero debate that preceded the Congress vote to disallow them, we all heard all the arguments about how this was so unfair because folks had already spent.."

Dave:

Good point. But let me ask this question - How many years elapsed from the introduction (1998) of the BV's to their banning?

Derby

[Cuts Crooked]

Query:

If yer lever gun has been modified, is it possible to retain the original parts and put them in the gun when yer runnin' wif an "unmodified" crowd?

(sure itsa dumb question, but I wanna know! )

[Ottawa Creek Bill]

LG,
you're such a Ham..................OCB

[Major Matt Lewis]

Cuts,

With some I think it is.  With others, welding is involved.

[Books OToole]

If a short-stroked rifle does not give the shooter any advantage, then why do it?

If it does give the shooter an advantage; then that isn't really fair, is it?  (There is a big difference in fair and legal.  I've been through a divorce, so I know this to be true. )

Therefore, maybe OCB's idea of a short-stroke class should be considered.  Or a one second penalty per shot with a short-stroked rifle.

The spirit of the game is what NCOWS is about.  The game is late 19th style shooting.

Since we do not have mega-buck prizes all competition is for pride.  How much pride is gained by spending hundreds of dollars more than the poor book store owner, so you can out shoot him?

We humans tend to use our gift of rational thought to justify what we want.  [We spent centuries justifying slavery.  I know it is a far cry from the short-stroking issue, but it is a classic example of the process.]

If this thread makes you think, that's good.  If it makes you mad, maybe you should stop and think about it.

Books

[St. George]

This one was hashed over for quite awhile on TFS - probably about two years back.

No real resolution then, as I can recall.

I'll just point out one thing, here.

When these weapons were originally built - far more hand-fitting was the norm.

Actual craftsmen built them - as opposed to whomever is assembling them today.

This accounts for the sometimes amazing smoothness and fit of period-original weapons.

Alas - this capability went into decline after WWII - but the 'average' gun that pre-dated that time far exceeded those that were to be built after, as far as 'feel' and 'finish' were concerned.

Pride in craftmanship is a powerful thing - whereas a mere paycheck doesn't exactly guarantee that work surpasses the lowest standard.

That being said - taking and stoning off the various burrs and machine marks left on modern weapons is merely giving the shooter a closer approximation to what he'd've bought at the local Hardware and Dry Goods.

Music-wire or Coil springs, short-stroke kits and the like - are SASS-inspired competition devices - designed for gaining a mechanical advantage over fellow competitors.
Somehow - not quite the 'Cowboy Way'...

Rather than do that - spend that money - discretionary though it may be - on practice ammunition and range fees.

You can have 'the' most slicked-up, lightened-up and tuned piece on the Line - and a 'Thing of Beauty and a Sight to See' -  it will be, indeed.
But when some guy - dressed in his Salvation Army/yard-sale modified cast-offs and carrying the only rifle he has ever shot and knows 'exactly' where it prints - is opposite you and shoots rings around you simply because he's been shooting and shooting and shooting the piece - well, don't be surprised.

Remember what TR said - "The Only Shots That Count Are the Ones That Hit..."

If this is truly going to become an 'issue' rather than a 'discussion' - then remember to tell your NCOWS Reps and have it brought before the Congress.
Talking about it here will just be that - talking about it 'here' - and the baiting and naysaying will continue to cloud NCOWS' perception to the public.

Good Luck to you all,

Scouts Out!

[Ottawa Creek Bill]

Books,
I think we should have our Reps bring it up at this years convention, a Short Stroke Class that is. Since we don't have a modern class that these guns should be shot in, I think that is a vialble alternative. Lets see.....hmmmm...we might get 6 or 7 members out of all the NCOWS members to shoot in this class....it could be a warm up match for when they shoot SASS, gosh they could even compare notes on who has the shortest stroke (? )...... Flush.....Whoops....there goes the "Spirit of the Game (ers)" right down the toilette, as they say in France....

TIC
OCB

[Derby Younger]

Well, philosophically' I'm closer to NCOWS than SASS. Having said that and with respect, Bill your comment reminds me of why I chose to leave NCOWS.

[Ottawa Creek Bill]

Derby,
I am sorry my comment offended you, but which part, since there are several things covered in it. As far as you leaving NCOWS for SASS or what ever, that was your choice, you made it and it has no effect on me what so ever, you lose the weak, the strong stay.
If you'll notice the TIC over my initiials they stand for Tongue In Cheek, you know.....for fun....just kidding. If you left NCOWS I would bet it was because it wasn't SASS enough for you, with that said, I belong to both organizations and shoot both, actually shoot SASS more, but, NCOWS is not SASS and I hope it never will be....TIC

ST. George,
You are right, I started it out as light humor but it seems it has come to the point where it has peeved some folks off, so I will drop it. From one old combat vet to another one, some folks just can't stand the heat!!

OCB

[Irish Dave]

Derby:

IIRC, the Bisley Vaquero was rejected in 2004 with that ban to take effect in the spring of 2006. You have a valid point that it had been six years since the BV's introduction.

My point, (apparently not too well or clearly made) was not that there was anything wrong with folks being concerned about the rejection of a gun that they had already bought, but rather to try to prevent that from happening again -- by suggesting that folks might not want to repeat that situation by spending more money on a SS mod until there is a clear ruling from the Congress.

FWIW, I see a distinct difference between the typical "action job" or smoothing and stoning rough parts and the modification of parts, changes in function and addition of new parts that occur in a SS modification.

[Derby Younger]

OCB:

You didn't offend me, no harm, no foul.

.."If you left NCOWS I would bet it was because it wasn't SASS enough for you"...

Now that statement did come close because it was an assumption, an incorrect one. As I said, philosophically I'm closer to NCOWS than SASS. Again, no harm, no foul.

Dave:

I absolutely agree, there is a difference in SS rifles. In fact, given two shooters with equal ability, equal practice time, equal dedication, one with SS, one without, I'll bet on the SS shooter.

The problem remains that folks, coming in or already in, read the forums. They are aware of the SS mod, people already have and are using them in SASS, W3 and, I expect NCOWS. Obviously, it is never too late to ban them, precedent has been set.

With respect to both of you,

Derby

[Lars]

I too have seen the pictures elsewhere purporting to be of original 73s  next to reproductions with short stroke kits. In those pics the originals appear to have about the same lever throw as the modified reproductions. Now we also have some pards who claim that their originals do not have the same lever throw as their reproductions with kits in them. This is a puzzlement!

Leaving us with the following possibilities: 1.Someone is prevaricating, 2.Orginal factory tolorences were much more sloppy than todays manufactures, 3.There were gunsmiths in the old days who knew who how to shorten up the lever throw on a toggle link, or 4. there was a change in factory specifications at some point in the old days.

I would prefer to beleive that #1 is unlikely...but it's a possibility. 2 through 4 would require a LOT of dedicated research to prove or disprove either way.

I seems to me that the NCOWS rule makers have a lot of research and documentation to do on this subject before making any change in the rules re "short stroking".

Lars