Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Posts related to handguns (pistols, revolvers)
Post Reply
User avatar
shadowring
On the way to nirvana
On the way to nirvana
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: India

Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by shadowring » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:02 pm

After the my timely enlightenment about ER-432 from winnie_the_pooh and Doc, every
pistol and every make is now a suspect.(see http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=15081)
My Dad keeps his Chrome Basque .32 ACP around despite getting good offers for it. What I want to know from my
fellow IFG members is whether its a keeper or not. Please inspect the following pics and tell me what you think:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
“Never mistake motion for action.”

For Advertising mail webmaster
ankit.arora
Learning the ropes
Learning the ropes
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:21 pm
Location: sirsa

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by ankit.arora » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:14 pm

it is alloy pistol .......its bolt is i think repolished.....i think basque is not good pistol....

art_collector
Shooting true
Shooting true
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 11:53 pm
Location: DELHI

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by art_collector » Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:31 pm

Don't know why we are so biased towards alloy pistols.

User avatar
shadowring
On the way to nirvana
On the way to nirvana
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: India

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by shadowring » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Is it true that aluminium alloys frame isn't a problem until you get to really big calibers or until you shoot thousands of rounds?
“Never mistake motion for action.”

winnie_the_pooh
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 1776
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:49 pm

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by winnie_the_pooh » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:52 pm

Shadowring,

There is nothing wrong with alloy frame revolvers/pistols.

A 'Basque' pistol I am seeing for the first time.Probably a 'cheap and cheerful' copy of something made by a better known manufacturer.

Re. your fathers pistol,I would suggest you keep it till such time you find something better.Considering where you are located,I would look around for a Makarov in .380.Better pistol and a better calibre to boot.

User avatar
timmy
Old Timer
Old Timer
Posts: 3086
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 7:03 am
Location: home on the range

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by timmy » Thu Aug 25, 2011 12:05 am

The use of alloy in either a revolver or a pistol may have one or both of two reasons:

1. Depending on the alloy used, it may be cheaper to manufacture

2. Alloy is chosen for making significant components of the weapon to reduce weight.

This can be good or bad -- for instance, a number of rifle manufacturers will make magazines, floor plates, and trigger guards from alloy to reduce costs, especially if there is a complex design required. Weight savings can also be obtained by making the magazine out of alloy in certain circumstances. Ruger has long used alloy parts in their single action revolvers to save weight and cost. The grip frame/handguard assembly is alloy, as is the ejector rod housing. In the case of the Ruger, using alloy for these parts doesn't affect the durability of the gun, although there are some who do not like the finish. It is very difficult to make alloy match blued steel in appearance. Also, the finish of alloy parts may not be as durable as blued steel, or, when the finish is worn, it becomes apparent that the alloy part is not made of steel. Such an instance doesn't affect the durability of the gun, although some do not like the appearance of it. That is why there is a brisk aftermarket manufacture of blued steel ejector rod housings and blued steel and brass grip frames for Ruger single action revolvers.

Regarding strength and durability when alloy is used for major parts, the question might largely break down like this:

1. Alloy frames for revolvers.

2. Alloy frames for pistols.

In the first case, alloy revolver frames make the gun much lighter and can make the gun cheaper to manufacture. In the latter case, a quality alloy part is also expensive to make. A cheap, die-cast part is not strong. It will not only make the gun light, but it will make it cheap. A high quality alloy frame, such as used in Colt "Coltalloy" frame revolvers and S&W "Air Weight" revolvers is a quality part. The alloy still does not have the ultimate strength of its corresponding steel part, but it is strong. In these instances, the manufacturer usually recommends that only normal pressure .38 Special loads be used, or that only a limited number of .38 Special "+P" rounds can be fired, with "+P+" ammunition being strictly forbidden. In these cases, you MUST consult the user's manual for the firearm, which should be available for any arm of respectable quality. DO NOT GUESS about which ammunition you can use in these alloy framed revolvers!

In the second case, alloy framed pistols, the alloy frame is not quite as critical as far as strength is concerned as it is in the revolver. However, as with the revolver, alloy may be used in the frame to save weight, or to make manufacture cheaper, or both. And, as with the revolver, high strength alloy construction doesn't usually mean a reduction in cost. With a pistol, the slide is normally steel, as is the barrel, and these components are the parts which provide the locking strength in many designs. The frame serves more to keep these parts together in proper alignment. In this, one of the chief problems of durability has to do with where the slide moves in locating rails on the sides of the frame. Alloy generally isn't as durable as steel in this area, although a high quality alloy can offer good durability. What this means is that the pistol is strong, but that it may shoot loose over a period of heavy use. Die cast frames would almost always be of inferior durability and strength, as well.

Personally, I would avoid weapons of die cast construction, whether pistol or revolver. As far as pistols or revolvers of high quality alloy construction, this would depend on the gun's intended use. Ideally, one could use the lightweight alloy gun as a carry weapon, and do most practice with a more durable all-steel gun. This would keep the number of rounds fired through the alloy weapon to a minimum. Still, some alloy guns, like Smith & Wesson's 9mm pistols, are quite durable.

So with regard to the use of alloy, it makes a difference what alloy is being used (high strength vs. die cast), it makes a difference what the gun is used for, and it makes a difference what part is being made of alloy in any particular design. I suggest that you evaluate any alloy gun on these basis of what you want to use it for and what quality you are willing to accept.

Regarding your Basque pistol, if you have it for protection and if you are sure (because you've shot it enough to have such confidence) that it will go Bang! reliably every time you pull the trigger, then it would be reasonable to keep it, at least until you can get something else that you like better.
“Fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim.”

saying in the British Royal Navy

MoA
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:08 pm

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by MoA » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:03 am

Get something else.

User avatar
The Doc
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 1253
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:25 am
Location: India.

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by The Doc » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:26 am

shadowring,

I think your pistol was produced by Echave y Arizmendi, in Eibar in Spain. This particular model was sold by different importers and under different trade names, "Basque", being just one of them. Other names were, "Echasa", "Fast", etc. It should have letters "E Y A in a circle" stamped on it with the letter "Y" illustrated like the three spokes of a wheel. This piece was probably made in the 'sixties' .

The size seems convenient to carry, though the grips are a shade smaller than my liking. I guess your father has owned it for a long time and it is better than having no pistol at all. Enjoy it till you find something better.

best,
Rp.
It's always better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it !

User avatar
shadowring
On the way to nirvana
On the way to nirvana
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: India

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by shadowring » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:57 am

Thank you for your advice friends, Winnie and MoA, Timmy you really broke it down, very interesting read.
Yes my father has had it for a few years and he didn't have any problem with it. Yeah, Doc
it is a little small reminds me of a purse gun. Never really into small gun, unless its an
ankle gun which brings me to the next topic:
He wants to gift it to a friend and get a brand new Beretta 3032 tomcat for it. Do you think they'd
will be weak? It has a superb grooving though.
“Never mistake motion for action.”

User avatar
The Doc
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 1253
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:25 am
Location: India.

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by The Doc » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:51 pm

shadowring wrote: He wants to gift it to a friend and get a brand new Beretta 3032 tomcat for it. Do you think they'd
will be weak? It has a superb grooving though.
A stainless steel Tomcat INOX model would be nice but in our country we have a very limited choice as far as the firearms go. I recently came across a new Tomcat at Amritsar at a dealer's shop, fell in love almost immediately (No it was not for sale). There have been mixed reports about the Tomcat especially the earlier model's cracked slides, jamming etc. The pistol lacks an extractor, relying upon the expanding gasses to force the spent casing rearward. This means that racking the slide will not remove either unspent or defective cartridges. This can lead to complications in a self defense situation, but is often balanced out by the tip-up barrel. I have always considered a "tip up" barrel a convenient and safe feature.

Beretta had to redesign the slide of the matte-finish Tomcat to have a greater mass, more comparable to the mass of the Inox version, in the belief that this will reduce recoil stress on the alloy frame and prevent cracking. Results ? Debatable again . Here is a thread for you and I am sorry if it amounts to raining on your parade. Personally speaking I would go ahead and buy a new tomcat if it was available at a decent price.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=441751

best,
Rp.
Last edited by The Doc on Thu Aug 25, 2011 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's always better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it !

winnie_the_pooh
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 1776
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:49 pm

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by winnie_the_pooh » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:34 pm

Doc,

Oh My God, what has this world come to.Only IOF pistols are supposed to be defective.Now how can I say shame! shame! IOF when I know even the mighty Beretta makes pistols that have a design flaw. :mrgreen:

User avatar
shadowring
On the way to nirvana
On the way to nirvana
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:52 pm
Location: India

Re: Basque .32 pistol keeper or loser?

Post by shadowring » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:56 pm

Its too small for my taste but hey the price wasn't too little. Good link Doc. 5000 round life for India is ok I think, given the amount of
ammo's we can buy in a year. The gun agency guy was asking for 9L or something. I am going to wait for him to collect his senses.

I totally agree with you winnie. A well known company like Beretta making sub-standard guns, that's a real shame. Can't wait for the arms act to soften up and then
maybe private arms companies can start making the kind of guns we deserve instead of the sub par stuff we get now from a highly monopolized market. Do you think
IOF has quality control in place?
“Never mistake motion for action.”

Post Reply