You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1903 conversion
- Thread starter woodit
- Start date
Daniel Watters
New member
Colt found that they could use they same breachface cut in the M1903 as the M1908 around 1910 or so. Gun Parts Corporation should have the parts necessary for a reversable conversion. I don't consider this objectionable, as long as the pistol is not permanently altered and the original parts are retained.
http://www.e-gunparts.com/products.asp?chrMasterModel=0660zPOCKET 380 HAMMERLESS
FWIW: A .380 ACP round will fit in my M1903 magazine, but I have not attempted the conversion. As an interesting piece of trivia, the successor to the M1903/1908, the FN M1910 used the same magazine for .32 ACP and .380 ACP. One side had counting holes for the .380 ACP while the other side had counting holes spaced for the .32 ACP.
http://www.e-gunparts.com/products.asp?chrMasterModel=0660zPOCKET 380 HAMMERLESS
FWIW: A .380 ACP round will fit in my M1903 magazine, but I have not attempted the conversion. As an interesting piece of trivia, the successor to the M1903/1908, the FN M1910 used the same magazine for .32 ACP and .380 ACP. One side had counting holes for the .380 ACP while the other side had counting holes spaced for the .32 ACP.
>>Colt found that they could use they same breachface cut in the M1903 as the M1908 around 1910 or so. Gun Parts Corporation should have the parts necessary for a reversable conversion. I don't consider this objectionable, as long as the pistol is not permanently altered and the original parts are retained.
>>http://www.e-gunparts.com/products.asp?chrMasterModel=0660zPOCKET%20380%20HAMMERLESS
Thanks. They also list a 15-round .380 magazine. ???
How is this possible?
>>http://www.e-gunparts.com/products.asp?chrMasterModel=0660zPOCKET%20380%20HAMMERLESS
Thanks. They also list a 15-round .380 magazine. ???
How is this possible?
Daniel Watters
New member
I have not personally handled any extended magazines for the M1903/M1908. My best guess is that the back wall of the magazine has a protruding lip which is engaged by the mag latch. I suspect that depending on the tolerances, the extended magazine would be either prone to premature release or nearly impossible to unlatch.
Daniel Watters
New member
RickB: D'Oh!, I must admit that I only tried one round of .380 ACP in my .32 ACP mag. (I have a single round of .380 ACP in my reference collection.) It looks like a .380 round with a short ogive bullet might fit in the .32 ACP mags, but this would really crimp one's options for ammo.
Alas, I suppose this may just be a one-way conversion. However, I can't imagine why anyone would want to convert a M1908 to .32 ACP.
Alas, I suppose this may just be a one-way conversion. However, I can't imagine why anyone would want to convert a M1908 to .32 ACP.
YOU HAVE A FINE PISTOL THERE.LEAVE IT B..32 is a fine rnd,there is alot of selection these days.IMHO the .380 isnt worth the effort to convert to.yes the .32 is no .40 sw but neither is the 380.those old 1903 colts are cool .thats what john dillinger was caught carring when he was ambushed.
Colt 1903 conversion
I have tried it with type III and IV. The older guns without the Mag. disconnect seem to function with little or no file work.
My Type III cycled 32s and 380s with ease. The 380 barrel is difficult to locate in the original but a reproduction is available. you must know the size of the extractor hole at the rear of the 380 to order. The barrel I ordered came sort of rough and had to be worked a little to get it to lock in correctly. I polished the breach and took off all of the sharp edges that hinder a round sliding in easily. I did a little file work on the bottom and top of the handle to allow the 380 mag to slide in and out smoothly. Now it is being plated with hard brushed chrome for my concealed carry piece. The Type IV required too much file work and just didn't seem like it was going to load smoothly even after the file work so I stopped and went to the older model.
I have tried it with type III and IV. The older guns without the Mag. disconnect seem to function with little or no file work.
My Type III cycled 32s and 380s with ease. The 380 barrel is difficult to locate in the original but a reproduction is available. you must know the size of the extractor hole at the rear of the 380 to order. The barrel I ordered came sort of rough and had to be worked a little to get it to lock in correctly. I polished the breach and took off all of the sharp edges that hinder a round sliding in easily. I did a little file work on the bottom and top of the handle to allow the 380 mag to slide in and out smoothly. Now it is being plated with hard brushed chrome for my concealed carry piece. The Type IV required too much file work and just didn't seem like it was going to load smoothly even after the file work so I stopped and went to the older model.