Limits of the crescent buttplate

Kelley O.Roos · Post by **Kelley O.Roos** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 6:45 pm

Texas Shooter,

The Borchardt isn't legal because it's a stricker action. The rules for silhouette says we need an exposed hammer to be legal, even though the Borchardt meets the time period requirement.

Kelley O.

Texas Shooter · Post by **Texas Shooter** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 6:50 pm

What is a stricker action? What advantage does it have over and exposed hammer?

Being period correct, is the "Exposed Hammer" an arbitrary rule, or is there a reason for it?

Thanks,

Texas Shooter

" The Borchardt isn't legal because it's a stricker action. The rules for silhouette says we need an exposed hammer to be legal, even though the Borchardt meets the time period requirement."

Kelley O.Roos · Post by **Kelley O.Roos** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 8:46 pm

Texas Shooter,

A stricker action is like a Ruger #1. The action has no hammer, here's what happens, the firing pin is in the breach block and has a spring around the firing pin, when the breach is block is opened it pushes back the firing pin and the sear locks the firing pin into the cocked position. When the safety is pulled off, the rifle is ready to be fired, squize the trigger and it release's the firing pin and real fast the rifle goes bang. A stricker action like the Borchardt has a very quick lock time, speeding up the firing process. What the founding fathers wanted was a level playing field for silhouette and felt the exposed hammer did that. The stricker type of firing is fast by maybe a couple of milli-seconds and is a big advantage. A Borchardt is period correct. And the exposed hammer rule isn't arbitray.

Kelley O.

Jim Watson · Post by **Jim Watson** » Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:04 pm

Ruger No 1 has a swinging hammer. It just doesn't show (Much, you can spot it in the trigger guard if you look hard.)

The '78 Sharps Borchardt has a straight line striker driven by a "spiral" spring, and no hammer at all. It is self-cocking (but so is a Winchester) and has fast lock time, but mostly it just doesn't look right. And might be the camel's nose in the tent for all sorts of things like... uh, well... er, ah...

Well dang, how many 19th century American hammerless single shots WERE there?
Ah, HA! The Martini, there is the danger. There were thousands of Peabody Martinis built in the USA and many more thousands built abroad to the same design and therefore just as legitimate as an Italian copy of a Sharps. Maybe that is what the rules folks wanted to keep out. Sure a lot more common (And cheaper.) than Borchardts.

Texas Shooter · Post by **Texas Shooter** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 12:32 am

Thanks for the responses.

Very interesting.................. I guess the Borchardt like the scoped 1874's?, would probably require their own catagory. I guess with the price, there is a good chance the Borchardt would not be found in sufficient numbers to warrant their own catagory.

Bummer, They are really beautiful rifles.

Texas Shooter

Gunny · Post by **Gunny** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 1:29 am

Texas Shooter,

All is not lost with the Borchardt yet. While they are not legal for Silhouette, that is not the only game in town. The Borchardt is legal for Mid-Range, Long Range and Creedmoor shoots. So there still is a reason to go ahead and order that Borchardt from Kirk.

Gunny

Texas Shooter · Post by **Texas Shooter** » Tue Nov 18, 2003 5:56 pm

Gunny:

That's good to know, they are too pretty to be left out of the fun. What is the competition called that they can be used in? Is it known as just mid-range and long range competition?

Thanks,

Texas Shooter