Tell me about Whitney Wolverine

BoogieMan · March 1, 2017, 09:58 PM

Came across one on Instagram. Very unique looking pistol and come to find out can be at had ato very reasonable $$. We're these quality handguns or more of aa die cast potmetal gun? Accurate? Reliable?

Scorch · March 2, 2017, 01:51 AM

Are you talking about the NEW Whitney Wolverines made by Olympic? Or the originals?

The originals were good guns, some of the people I knew who had owned them didn't like the extreme rake to the grip, but they shot well. They are a period piece, definitely have that late 1950's "tail fins and space ships" look to them(kinda like the Nylon 66). They were very high quality investment castings, since all that aircraft fabrication equipment was left over after WW2.

Olympic Arms makes and sell a polymer framed version, but it doesn't really look like the originals at all. And with Olympic going out of business, it may be challenging finding parts for them in the near future.

BoogieMan · March 2, 2017, 10:26 AM

@Scorch- The old WW. You say investment cast. Steel, aluminum? Sounds like more of a plinker than a quality handgun.

Jim Watson · March 2, 2017, 05:39 PM

Aluminum. Plinker for sure, it is not as fine a gun as contemporary Colt or High Standard target pistols.

lamarw · March 2, 2017, 07:17 PM

A year or so ago, I started bidding on an original Wolverine with box and papers at a nearby live auction. I stopped bidding at $875.00. I saw the same serial numbered pistol at the Rock Island auction a few months later. It seemed someone was looking for well over a grand for it.

James K · March 2, 2017, 10:38 PM

The originals have become serious collectors items. They were not bad pistols but the shooting world is pretty conservative and the looks just weren't everyone's idea of what a gun should look like. They are very light but fairly large. They have a serious problem. If you decide to strip one and don't have the manual or don't take notes, you can have the old "leftover parts" problem, not a good place to be.

They were made with a black anodized finish and also nickel plated, the latter being rarer, only c. 900 guns vs 13,000 black. The company was in business from c. 1955-1962..

Still, the problems were not so much with the gun but with the finance end, not the guns themselves.

Jim

g.willikers · March 3, 2017, 06:39 PM

What no pictures.
And they are so neat, too.
Here's the original:
https://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/...wolverine.html
Here's the Olympic version:
http://www.olyarms.com/shop/pistols/...hitney/ww.html
Pretty cool, either one.

BoogieMan · March 4, 2017, 08:00 AM

IMHO the newer Beretta NEOS looks very similar. I wouldn't mind a WW but I don't think it's a gun I'm going to go searching for beyond this thread.

OcelotZ3 · March 7, 2017, 12:19 AM

Stumbled across one at a gun show a number of years ago for $300. I snatched it up and it's a very interesting gun. Also bought a used Olympic Arms one too. It seems to have magazine feeding problems as the original WW mags work fine in the new OA one.

the possum · March 9, 2017, 01:11 PM

I got one a couple years back because I always loved the way the grip feels in my hand. It points very naturally for me, and is a joy to plink with. It's like I don't even have to use the sights.

These have a reputation for needing full powered ammo to function, and that's true for mine. Most cheap bulk pack ammo doesn't have enough power to reliably cycle the action. It will give failures to eject, or doesn't push the slide back far enough to strip a new round from the mag. So far, Rem Thunderbolts (oddly enough) are about the only bulk ammo I've found that works well. High velocity Winchesters & CCI work great though. It also seems to like running wet, with plenty of lube.

I've never really tried to bench mine for target accuracy yet. It shoots better than I do offhand; pretty much like any other .22 pistol in my hands.
They are a full sized gun, but so light they feel like a toy. I'd consider them a well made plinker.

Some features were common for their era, but are considered less desirable now. I.E., they have a heel magazine catch, mag disconnect safety, no bolt hold-open, and "backwards" thumb safety (up to fire, down for safe). These quirks don't bother me, but may be a deal breaker for some.

I read all kinds of bad stuff about field stripping them too, but I think it's way overblown. Just unscrew the barrel nut, and all the "guts" come out the back. Never yet had any issue putting it back together.

Most of the small parts interchange with the new Olympic Arms remakes. I bought a new hammer spring, firing pin, & its retaining clip thingie for mine. Get 'em while you can. However, the new magazines do not work in the old guns- the feed lips are shaped differently. I found an original extra mag for mine on Numrich. The mag follower has a hole so you can insert a .22 round or casing, to push the follower down for easy loading.

spacecoast · March 12, 2017, 08:27 AM

This thread needs some pictures:

Original:

Olympic Arms version:

March 1, 2017, 09:58 PM	#1
BoogieMan Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2012 Location: South Jersey Posts: 2,217	Tell me about Whitney Wolverine Came across one on Instagram. Very unique looking pistol and come to find out can be at had ato very reasonable $$. We're these quality handguns or more of aa die cast potmetal gun? Accurate? Reliable? __________________ Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it. Milton Freidman "If you find yourself in a fair fight,,, Your tactics suck"- Unknown

March 2, 2017, 01:51 AM	#2
Scorch Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2006 Location: Washington state Posts: 15,248	Are you talking about the NEW Whitney Wolverines made by Olympic? Or the originals? The originals were good guns, some of the people I knew who had owned them didn't like the extreme rake to the grip, but they shot well. They are a period piece, definitely have that late 1950's "tail fins and space ships" look to them(kinda like the Nylon 66). They were very high quality investment castings, since all that aircraft fabrication equipment was left over after WW2. Olympic Arms makes and sell a polymer framed version, but it doesn't really look like the originals at all. And with Olympic going out of business, it may be challenging finding parts for them in the near future. __________________ Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs. But what do I know? Summit Arms Services

March 2, 2017, 10:26 AM	#3
BoogieMan Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2012 Location: South Jersey Posts: 2,217	@Scorch- The old WW. You say investment cast. Steel, aluminum? Sounds like more of a plinker than a quality handgun. __________________ Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it. Milton Freidman "If you find yourself in a fair fight,,, Your tactics suck"- Unknown Last edited by BoogieMan; March 2, 2017 at 10:46 AM.

March 3, 2017, 06:39 PM	#7
g.willikers Senior Member Join Date: September 28, 2008 Posts: 10,442	What no pictures. And they are so neat, too. Here's the original: https://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/...wolverine.html Here's the Olympic version: http://www.olyarms.com/shop/pistols/...hitney/ww.html Pretty cool, either one. __________________ Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez: “Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.”

March 4, 2017, 08:00 AM	#8
BoogieMan Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 2012 Location: South Jersey Posts: 2,217	IMHO the newer Beretta NEOS looks very similar. I wouldn't mind a WW but I don't think it's a gun I'm going to go searching for beyond this thread. __________________ Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it. Milton Freidman "If you find yourself in a fair fight,,, Your tactics suck"- Unknown

March 2, 2017, 05:39 PM	#4
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,542	Aluminum. Plinker for sure, it is not as fine a gun as contemporary Colt or High Standard target pistols.

March 2, 2017, 07:17 PM	#5
lamarw Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2010 Location: Lake Martin, AL Posts: 3,311	A year or so ago, I started bidding on an original Wolverine with box and papers at a nearby live auction. I stopped bidding at $875.00. I saw the same serial numbered pistol at the Rock Island auction a few months later. It seemed someone was looking for well over a grand for it.

March 2, 2017, 10:38 PM	#6
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	The originals have become serious collectors items. They were not bad pistols but the shooting world is pretty conservative and the looks just weren't everyone's idea of what a gun should look like. They are very light but fairly large. They have a serious problem. If you decide to strip one and don't have the manual or don't take notes, you can have the old "leftover parts" problem, not a good place to be. They were made with a black anodized finish and also nickel plated, the latter being rarer, only c. 900 guns vs 13,000 black. The company was in business from c. 1955-1962.. Still, the problems were not so much with the gun but with the finance end, not the guns themselves. Jim

March 7, 2017, 12:19 AM	#9
OcelotZ3 Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 2008 Posts: 229	Stumbled across one at a gun show a number of years ago for $300. I snatched it up and it's a very interesting gun. Also bought a used Olympic Arms one too. It seems to have magazine feeding problems as the original WW mags work fine in the new OA one.

March 9, 2017, 01:11 PM	#10
the possum Senior Member Join Date: November 6, 2004 Location: Southern Illinois Posts: 555	I got one a couple years back because I always loved the way the grip feels in my hand. It points very naturally for me, and is a joy to plink with. It's like I don't even have to use the sights. These have a reputation for needing full powered ammo to function, and that's true for mine. Most cheap bulk pack ammo doesn't have enough power to reliably cycle the action. It will give failures to eject, or doesn't push the slide back far enough to strip a new round from the mag. So far, Rem Thunderbolts (oddly enough) are about the only bulk ammo I've found that works well. High velocity Winchesters & CCI work great though. It also seems to like running wet, with plenty of lube. I've never really tried to bench mine for target accuracy yet. It shoots better than I do offhand; pretty much like any other .22 pistol in my hands. They are a full sized gun, but so light they feel like a toy. I'd consider them a well made plinker. Some features were common for their era, but are considered less desirable now. I.E., they have a heel magazine catch, mag disconnect safety, no bolt hold-open, and "backwards" thumb safety (up to fire, down for safe). These quirks don't bother me, but may be a deal breaker for some. I read all kinds of bad stuff about field stripping them too, but I think it's way overblown. Just unscrew the barrel nut, and all the "guts" come out the back. Never yet had any issue putting it back together. Most of the small parts interchange with the new Olympic Arms remakes. I bought a new hammer spring, firing pin, & its retaining clip thingie for mine. Get 'em while you can. However, the new magazines do not work in the old guns- the feed lips are shaped differently. I found an original extra mag for mine on Numrich. The mag follower has a hole so you can insert a .22 round or casing, to push the follower down for easy loading.

March 12, 2017, 08:27 AM	#11
spacecoast Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2009 Location: Sunshine and Keystone States Posts: 4,461	This thread needs some pictures: Original: Olympic Arms version: