December 7, 2012, 10:58 AM | #1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 19, 2012
Location: CT
Posts: 10
|
US Army Model 1842?
Hey guys, found an interesting specimen for $50.00. The date of 1854 and the eagle on the side is what caught my eye. Under the barrel it reads FS 73 and i noticed an H, E, and a P or F on the back of the barrel near the recoil plate. Maybe a .54cal? Appears to be missing a barrel band and a knob on the butt of the grip. Also its got what appears to be trench art inscribed on the barrel. Any info would be great, thank you.
Rob |
December 7, 2012, 03:23 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Naples, Fl
Posts: 5,440
|
Some info as requested
IMNSHO.....It is easily worth the fifty bucks.
__________________
Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath. |
December 7, 2012, 05:59 PM | #3 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
|
The lockplate may be for an 1842, but I really don't think the rest of the gun is.
1842s had the captured rammer, the shape of the stock is quite a bit off, and the trigger guard doesn't look at all correct. How about a picture of the other side, and straight on pictures of both sides (not the acute angle that it's being shown at). Any evidence of an inspector's cartouche? It looks like someone did a couple of file cuts through the maker's name, and it also looks like the Federal eagle is in the wrong spot. In fact... did the US even put Federal eagles on the handguns? I didn't think they did in this time frame.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. Last edited by Mike Irwin; December 7, 2012 at 06:07 PM. |
December 7, 2012, 06:27 PM | #4 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 19, 2012
Location: CT
Posts: 10
|
Mike, thanks for the info! I noticed the rammer was not captured by anything and I can't find any accurate comparison anywhere for the stock. I do not have the piece in front of me, but I did not notice any inspectors cartouches on the stock. Heres a couple more photos I took yesterday.
|
December 7, 2012, 06:29 PM | #5 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 19, 2012
Location: CT
Posts: 10
|
..more pictures
|
December 7, 2012, 11:18 PM | #6 |
Staff
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,824
|
Without going to my library
The wood either is a replacement or reworked extensively. Too many thimbles (pipes). The entry thimble (pipe) is too fancy for a military gun.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe! |
December 8, 2012, 03:12 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 19, 2009
Posts: 3,283
|
+1 to what Gary says . . .
This looks like a "marriage" of various parts - the ramrod thimbles aren't correct . . . . Regardless . . . the price is right!
__________________
If a pair of '51 Navies were good enough for Billy Hickok, then a single Navy on my right hip is good enough for me . . . besides . . . I'm probably only half as good as he was anyways. Hiram's Rangers Badge #63 |
December 8, 2012, 04:49 PM | #8 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 19, 2012
Location: CT
Posts: 10
|
Thanks guys! Anyone want to have a stab at her and give an idea of what's she's worth? I know it's one of those what someone is willing to pay, but I really don't have to much info on where to start with something like this.
|
December 10, 2012, 06:28 AM | #9 |
Staff
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
|
I'd say the price is probably about what you paid for it, maybe a bit more.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|