PDA

View Full Version : OLD 1911


hammered54
March 14, 2012, 03:16 PM
Dad left me an old 1911 that he had for many years, story go's that he picked it up after returning home from over sea's at a Hudson's store.
seems as back then they sold off a bunch of surplus, it was on a table with a bunch of other stuff...it was pretty rusty and after cleaning it up there was no ser.# to be seen, not a big deal back then I guess.

fast forward to "today" I though I'd try a little of this stuff we use on nickels to bring the date up...and low and behold a number shows up !! yeah

now there are many questions as to what to do with this gun as far as registration is concerned, but what I'd like to know is how to find out just how old it really is?
#1558XXX is the number ...can't tell who made it as most of the other lettering is still to fant, I could use the stuff but it does eat the bluing off and I'm not ready to go there quite yet.

any help would be cool.

Matt.

Chris_B
March 14, 2012, 04:22 PM
for the sake of discussion, is it a 1911, or is it a 1911A1

Winchester_73
March 14, 2012, 04:34 PM
for the sake of discussion, is it a 1911, or is it a 1911A1

Judging by the SN, 7 digits, 1.5 million, it cannot be a 1911, if that SN is correct. It would most likely be a 1944 1911A1 but it could have been made by Colt, Remington Rand or Ithaca. That SN would eliminate both Singer and US & S.

It may be impossible to tell who made it unless we get a clear pic of the SN. The slide and other parts could be from all different makers. All I can say is that it is definitely WWII era and definitely a 1911A1 given the SN.

Remington Rand was assigned the 1.5 million serial number block. Perhaps that was the maker.

Chris_B
March 14, 2012, 05:30 PM
assuming that's the full or correct s/n :) which I'm not prepared to assume

kraigwy
March 14, 2012, 06:41 PM
It's a 1911a1, made in 1944 by Remington Rand

Serial Numbers 1,471,431 to 1,609,528 were assigned to Remington Rand.

Chris_B
March 15, 2012, 05:18 AM
I can read the charts as well as anyone ;) but we're here making assumptions

Winchester_73
March 15, 2012, 06:59 AM
I can read the charts as well as anyone but we're here making assumptions

There's also no proof that hes wrong and no reason to assume that he wrote the SN down incorrectly. As for me and Kraig, if the gun's SN is right, we are not assuming anything. A pic would help, but most questions about guns are answered on here without pics of SNs. They may picture the gun, but not the SN. In this case, the SN narrows its identity down considerably.

Along the same lines of "making assumptions" based on a given SN, how do we even know that its a 1911 or variant or even a pistol itself? From now on, everything is wrong until proven otherwise!

hammered54
March 15, 2012, 07:46 AM
yes the Ser# is correct......faint but still readable, and yes its a 1911A1 ( has the bump on the back of the grip) and you can faintly see the "A" where the model # is / was.

I believe you are correct in that it is a " Remington Rand" along with the year "1944" ....that's really all I needed to know.

thanks for the info.
Matt.

Winchester_73
March 15, 2012, 08:52 AM
and yes its a 1911A1 ( has the bump on the back of the grip)

Just so you know, this can be changed around. This is referred to as the mainspring housing. It is curved on a 1911A1 but all parts are interchangeable between 1911 and 1911a1

Here is a chart that details all of the differences:

http://www.sightm1911.com/1911pix/historic/diffs1911-1911a1.gif

gyvel
March 15, 2012, 09:44 AM
I'm surprised nobody has brought up the point about "altered or defaced" serial numbers.

I assume you used the tried and true method of acid to bring the numbers back up? If the number is just worn off, that's one thing, but if it was deliberately made illegible, that's another, and you have a Federal felony on your hands.

James K
March 15, 2012, 10:56 AM
Oh my! I am the one usually accused of worrying about altered/erased serial numbers, but if it is readable (and it is), then there is no concern.

Frankly, this whole thread is not up to the usual TFL standards. Some assumptions were made, but they seem to be perfectly valid ones based on the information available.

The OP has received the information he wanted. Now enough.

Jim