Giles Colt 38 Special Wadcutter pistol

With the recent inquiries regarding John Giles work on accurizing
pistols I thought I would dig out my Giles-Colt 38 wadcutter gun.

Found at a local show late on a Sunday afternoon,
this one taught me the value of sticking around until closing time !

Here are pictures, comments and description will be added. ..

Has anyone else ever seen a Colt 38 Special Kit ??













Evidently Giles created his own rib for various applications.

I had a 45 Wadcutter gun that had no rib.
















Kind of a shame about the early commercial frame having this
aggressive stippling, but this is a Giles signature .

















The quality of Giles work becomes evident when you disassemble the
pistol and see how each part is fitted and machined ..










Even the barrel reads "COLT 38 Special Kit" ..



































The 'Giles Bump' becomes evident when slide is disassembled.

It is my understanding that he began the accurizing process by centering
the barrel throat to the breech face of the slide.
Primer strikes are always consistent and directly in the center of the primer.















This pistol appears to have 2 bumps welded in place to center the barrel.




























a few rounds recently loaded to feed the Giles pistol and a newly acquired model 52...






Regards,

Allen Frame

Giles 1911 .35 Wadcutter on Kit frame

Allen-frame said:

With the recent inquiries regarding John Giles work on accurizing
pistols I thought I would dig out my Giles-Colt 38 wadcutter gun.

Found at a local show late on a Sunday afternoon,
this one taught me the value of sticking around until closing time !

Here are pictures, comments and description will be added. ..

Has anyone else ever seen a Colt 38 Special Kit ??

Regards,

Allen Frame

Click to expand...

That is a VERY nice .38 Colt 1911 on a Kit frame. The kit frames were made for gunsmiths / specialty builders. I have 2 of the Giles / Colt 1911 .45 wadcutter pistols on Colt "Kit' frames. I would be very interested in yours as I have no .38 Giles, nor do I have one of Giles older Ruger .22 pistols.

Thank you for sharing. Please keep in touch with me regarding more Giles talk and our newly started South Florida Chapter meetings we are trying so hard to get going. Thank you.

Best Regards, R.S. "Sal" Raimondi, Sr. S&W CA LM#1300

Very nice gun, pics, and writeup!

Which is the more accurate, the Giles or the 52?

Great pistol!

Thanks for the write-up and the detailed pix!

I had an opportunity about 35 years ago to buy a matched pair, Colt National Match in 45 and in 38 for the sum of $500 for the pair. Naturally I didn't have the $500 so I never saw them again.

ralph7 said:

Very nice gun, pics, and writeup!

Which is the more accurate, the Giles or the 52?

Click to expand...

We've tried to figure out if anyone of accurizing fame had ever "accurized" a 52. So far amongst several of us, no one has ever seen an "accurized" 52.

We all agree that the 52 was the "best" S&W had to offer for this specific purpose, along with the model 41 in .22 LR and .22 short.

Anyone that has owned a Model 52 will agree that with no special anything ... just as the come, right out of the box ... are all tack drivers. What else would anyone possible need to be do to a 52 to make in any more accurate when it is DOB accurate, right out of the box ?

model3sw said:

We've tried to figure out if anyone of accurizing fame had ever "accurized" a 52. So far amongst several of us, no one has ever seen an "accurized" 52.

We all agree that the 52 was the "best" S&W had to offer for this specific purpose, along with the model 41 in .22 LR and .22 short.

Anyone that has owned a Model 52 will agree that with no special anything ... just as the come, right out of the box ... are all tack drivers. What else would anyone possible need to be do to a 52 to make in any more accurate when it is DOB accurate, right out of the box ?

Click to expand...

You're preaching to the choir.
I have owned my model 52 since the late eighties.

My Model 52-1 is one accurate pistol, and the only thing I've done is add a red dot sight. I found a grip type mount replacing the right stock, and I couldn't ask for more accuracy. I've fooled around a bit with various loads, but keep coming back to Bullseye and a 148gr DBWC.

I own a Giles in .45ACP, built ca. 1987. I replaced a recoil spring, and it still shoots 185gr JSWC ammo just exactly where the muzzle is pointed. It works best with 11-12 lb recoil springs, and the slide-to-frame fit is outstanding.

The only weak point, it seems, are the 6-48 screws holding on the rib. I don't dare shoot FMJ 230gr ball ammo. I'd hate to have a 'smith replace the rib's mounting screws.

Dennis The B said:

My Model 52-1 is one accurate pistol, and the only thing I've done is add a red dot sight. I found a grip type mount replacing the right stock, and I couldn't ask for more accuracy. I've fooled around a bit with various loads, but keep coming back to Bullseye and a 148gr DBWC.

I own a Giles in .45ACP, built ca. 1987. I replaced a recoil spring, and it still shoots 185gr JSWC ammo just exactly where the muzzle is pointed. It works best with 11-12 lb recoil springs, and the slide-to-frame fit is outstanding.

The only weak point, it seems, are the 6-48 screws holding on the rib. I don't dare shoot FMJ 230gr ball ammo. I'd hate to have a 'smith replace the rib's mounting screws.

Click to expand...

Dennis, I admire that you protected your 52-1's originality by using the grip plate type adapter for the scope you tried out. What a shame it is when you might happen upon a 52 or even a 41 drilled & tapped with a scope mounting plate atop but we must remember, back in the day these were special purpose guns or "tools" that no one knew would become as seriously collectible as they have become, naturally, the more original the more protected the value.

Next is something I noticed over the years. The first Giles I ever purchased was very old, very well used and the seller didn't know what it was but it had a broken hammer spur and the hammer drop half way if you don't keep your finger tightly back until it cycles ( a common wear problem on all 1911's just not Giles). I concluded that this Giles likely went through a few hands who did not know what it was thus fired it with full factory loads. This is how I feel the hammer spur broke. I found others with the same, broke, hammer spur.

The base Giles load is a 200 grain SWC #68 Hensley & Gibb (or similar style mold) lubed, cast bullet with 3.8 grains of bullseye. Most Giles shooters either load their own or have it loaded either exactly as listed or very near. If you've ever seen a Giles test target, he includes the bullet / load information.

The hotter or factory loads really put a beating on the frame and parts that were not intended with this configuration. To fire factory loads, you'd need a set of factory "commercial" springs to avoid any undue beating or wear to the components but you'd be defeating the purpose of having a Giles to shoot factory loads.

PS: Several years back I happened on a Springfield Armory M-1911A1, a Match Model, with a red dot sight drilled and tapped into the slide, with the name "G. Madore" engraved into the slide. I didn't have the benefit of being able to research it more so had to make a decision. I paid a very fair price based upon the seller and I both thought this was an awful thing to do to a 1911 ( I still have one of those grip plate type cast metal devices that add a sight rail above the slide ).

When I did research on G. Madore, it was George Madore, a noted 1911 accurizer up in the New England area. I ventured to shoot it just as it was. I ran 100 rounds though it to find it was DEADLY accurate ... AND ... the internal Red Dot sight did not even slightly change position nor loosen up from the beating of the slide banging it back and forth.

It is still the ONLY accurized 1911 I ever saw with a scope mounted to the slide.

Allen-frame said:

.........
Kind of a shame about the early commercial frame having this
aggressive stippling, but this is a Giles signature .......

Click to expand...

Allen-frame,
Absolutely fantastic. Thanks for sharing. I think the aggressive stippling looks great and fits the overall theme of the gun.

Amazing pistol and story, thanks for sharing it.

I'm not one of those "older is better" guys when it comes to guns; I like 'em old, new, cheap or expensive.

But I sure wish manufacturers could still do roll marks like those.

model3sw said:

........and our newly started South Florida Chapter meetings we are trying so hard to get going.....

Best Regards, R.S. "Sal" Raimondi, Sr. S&W CA LM#1300

Click to expand...

I found this thread, while trying to find out more information about the Giles guns.

This started when I was trying to find a Model 52 that I can buy to shoot with, not collect.

Is this South Florida group still around? I'm in Miami, which I guess might count as South Florida...

mikemyers said:

I found this thread, while trying to find out more information about the Giles guns.

This started when I was trying to find a Model 52 that I can buy to shoot with, not collect.

Is this South Florida group still around? I'm in Miami, which I guess might count as South Florida...

Click to expand...

Hi, Mike. I'm one of the Giles collectors here in S.Florida. Send me an email (not a private message) from this forum so we can make contact.

Gil Hebard used to sell the 38 Special kits as well as 38 AMU kits and yes I've seen them. Giles was one of a handfull of the best Colt builders back when I used to shoot bullseye in the N Florida Police PIstol league in Deland. Well before I made the move west. Clark, Dinan, Shockey, and Bradley were others that built for people back then. I myself shot a Bradley. They were all good guns. Clark was the specialist in converting 38 supers to .38 Special.

I'm getting pretty old and have asked this question of BE shooters for decades and have never gotten an answer. Since the mandate for BE is .22, centerfire, and .45. Why was it necessary to convert Super 38s to 38 Special. Why not just use the Super 38s with full wad loads just like the 38s and forgo all that work? Anxious to see answers. State Champions and regular Camp Perry shooters have never known exactly why this came about. At least the ones I know.

Lee's Landing Billy said:

I'm getting pretty old and have asked this question of BE shooters for decades and have never gotten an answer. Since the mandate for BE is .22, centerfire, and .45. Why was it necessary to convert Super 38s to 38 Special. Why not just use the Super 38s with full wad loads just like the 38s and forgo all that work? Anxious to see answers. State Champions and regular Camp Perry shooters have never known exactly why this came about. At least the ones I know.

Click to expand...

The early .38 Supers were not known for great accuracy. The .38 Super is a semi rimmed round and the Colt Gov't Models headspaced on that semi rim. It wasn't until gunsmiths started headspacing the .38 Super ammo on the case mouth that accuracy improved. Plus, a lot of developement had been spent on producing really good .38 special loads.

g8rb8 said:

Allen-frame,
Absolutely fantastic. Thanks for sharing. I think the aggressive stippling looks great and fits the overall theme of the gun.

Click to expand...

The stippling was an extra at least on the .45 wadcutter guns. I bought one in the early 70's and the "extras", if I remember correctly, included the stippling as well as a chrome steel barrel. There may have been more but I don't remember. John Giles did include a target showing a shot grouping and the load data he used. The gun is definitely not a hardball gun and not meant for anything higher than a mid range load. The accuracy is superb and the gun fitting is so tight it can be difficult to disassemble, at least mine is. I really wanted to get the .38 from him but mney was tight at the time. I did buy his .22 that was built on a high standard frame. Super accurate gun as well.

Since I couldn't get his .38, I located and purchased n S&W Model 52-1 in the early 80's. Paid $400 for that one and I agree, nothing needs to be done to that gun at all. Right out of the box and you quickly find out what a great gun you have.

Thanks Muley, it does seem like a lot of work instead of working on accurate loads for a platform that already worked. Man, there's a lot of work to get 38 wads to run through a 1911 platform. Clark certainly whipped the process and cornered the early market for these guns. I'm just lazy I guess, looks like it would have been much easier from a functioning point to use a proven platform and go from there for accuracy.

model3sw said:

We've tried to figure out if anyone of accurizing fame had ever "accurized" a 52. So far amongst several of us, no one has ever seen an "accurized" 52.

We all agree that the 52 was the "best" S&W had to offer for this specific purpose, along with the model 41 in .22 LR and .22 short.

Anyone that has owned a Model 52 will agree that with no special anything ... just as the come, right out of the box ... are all tack drivers. What else would anyone possible need to be do to a 52 to make in any more accurate when it is DOB accurate, right out of the box ?

Click to expand...

Actually Jerry Kieffer is currently working on accurizing a S&W model 52, with a barrel of a different twist and other changes which don't come to mind. The model 52 is not considered that accurate at 50 yards by serious bullseye pistol shooters.