1851 Colt Navy 1st Gen.

bixbysales · December 11, 2014, 02:20 PM

Hey everyone! I have an 1851 Colt Navy in my shop right now and im trying to get some info on it. Ive been researching quite a bit and as it turns out the serial number is a 4 digit number. After contacting Colt and looking online it says that the serial number is a 1st generation. Also all of the parts have a matching serial number as well and being that this gun is over 150 years old the over all condition is really good. So my question is, does anyone know much about these that could maybe tell me what the value would be?

sgms · December 11, 2014, 08:33 PM

To big a question to answer with what you have given. If you can post some clear pictures from several angles that will make it a lot easier. Any finish left? When cocked does everything rotate and lock up correctly? Is it military marked or a civilian model? Condition is everything in determining a value.

NateKirk · December 11, 2014, 09:45 PM

I'd say for the best results, ask the guys who frequent the black powder section of the forum. Alot of them are fans of the old colts and would probably know more. What I can tell you though is go to the library or bookstore; most have books on current gun values.

jackmoser65 · December 11, 2014, 10:26 PM

Need more info. Condition is EVERYTHING. It could be a $1000 relic and it could be worth tens of thousands.

bixbysales · December 12, 2014, 04:43 PM

Hey guys! Thanks for the response. Im going to post some pictures to help find the answers. again thanks for your help

bixbysales · December 12, 2014, 04:59 PM

here are some

bixbysales · December 12, 2014, 05:00 PM

and more

Mk VII · December 12, 2014, 05:01 PM

There is no shortage of these guns, which range from rusty relics to bureau drawer queens that were never fired.
Condition is everything with this model, and while some variations are scarcer than others a good specimen is more desirable than a poor specimen of a rare version.
The standard works are Nathan L. Swayze, '51 Colt Navies and Joseph G. Rosa, Colonel Colt London

James K · December 12, 2014, 08:32 PM

At first, I thought that was a Second Model squareback, and in pretty good condition. But there are a couple of things that don't look right, and if I were considering investing in it, I would want to check it out very closely or have an expert look at it.

One is the hammer, which has a shape I have never seen on a '51 Navy; also the barrel lug shape and its wedge slot position don't look right. Some things about the frame don't look right, either.

I have a strong suspicion that the gun is a repro that has been "humped" to give it an antique appearance and the numbers put on using a set of stamps made in the old font.

Jim

Buzzcook · December 13, 2014, 12:03 AM

I can't say that this picture is of an original though it is advertised as a first model

http://www.gunsinternational.com/RAR...130E11A04614C5

James K · December 13, 2014, 12:36 AM

Hi, Buzzcook,

That is the First Model, easily identified because of the wedge screw below the wedge. Those guns didn't have the base pin slot cut through the center of the base pin, they had it cut out of the top, so the wedge sat higher up. It has every appearance of being original. Also, the barrel lug profile (at the point where it joins the frame) is like that of the Third Model Dragoon being produced at the same time. The profile became more rounded on both guns later on.

Jim

spacecoast · December 13, 2014, 08:03 AM

Here's a picture of #2870 (2nd model squareback) from Wilson's TBCF, showing the distinctly different hammer shape.

I knew there was something else about the revolver that didn't look right, and it's the curvature and position of the trigger (as if the hammer is cocked). The position could just be an issue with the action.

It would be helpful to see a picture of the other side, as well as the top marking on the barrel.

bixbysales · December 13, 2014, 12:25 PM

Here are more pictures

spacecoast · December 13, 2014, 01:22 PM

According to Wilson, the standard top mark should be

--- ADDRESS SAML COLT NEW-YORK CITY --- (with the L smaller and underlined) for serials 1-74,000

I can't see whether or not the "CITY" is present, but the authentic top mark that may match the pattern you show above is

--- ADDRESS COL. SAML COLT NEW-YORK U.S. AMERICA --- , which applies to serials 101000 to 215348, not this gun

It's an interesting gun with a good amount of finish and a decent cylinder scene. Presumably the other partial serials present elsewhere on the gun also match. If genuine, I would think it's worth easily $3-5,000 being such an early serial, but the issues with the hammer and the barrel marking would certainly need to be explained. I am with James K (skeptical at this time).

Added - I would also note that the cylinder serial number, although not easy to see, appears to be out of position and the COLT'S PATENT No letters preceding it not large enough or arranged serially as they should be. They almost appear to be in two lines.

Here's what think it should look like, although on a much later gun

bixbysales · December 13, 2014, 04:10 PM

got some more for you guys. Thank you for all the feedback im getting. Its really helpful

bixbysales · December 13, 2014, 04:11 PM

more here

bixbysales · December 13, 2014, 04:13 PM

I have a few more pictures left. sorry for posting so many but i want to be sure it is real or a replica

bixbysales · December 13, 2014, 04:14 PM

last of the pictures

spacecoast · December 13, 2014, 04:30 PM

In my opinion (interested to hear others) the cylinder is definitely wrong. The Colts Patent stamp looks like the same one used on the left side of the frame, and I have never seen it in that format on the cylinder.

The top marking is definitely that of a later gun. At this point I would say Replica, although I am certainly open to more learned opinions. I only got into the Colt Percussions about a year ago when I purchased 5 of them from a relative.

Mk VII · December 13, 2014, 05:22 PM

The Ormsby cylinder engraving looks crude compared to the real thing.

James K · December 13, 2014, 11:01 PM

The correct barrel address for that serial number would be " - ADDRESS SAML COLT NEW YORK CITY -", and it would be smaller letters and shorter than that one. The hammer knurling would be hand cut cross-hatching, not lines. The caliber marking was done with a single stamp, not individual letters, etc., etc.

Sorry, but the gun is a fake, pure and simple. I hope no one has any significant amount of money in it, since its true value is actually less than that of an honest reproduction in good condition.

Jim

bixbysales · December 16, 2014, 01:14 PM

Hey guys! Thanks for the feedback, I guess that the general answer is that it is indeed a repo. Thanks for the help. anyone know what to value this at?

spacecoast · December 16, 2014, 01:34 PM

A modern shootable clone from Pietta or Uberti goes for ~ $200-250 at Cabelas. This is not marked as to who really made it, so it could be valued at even less per James K. I'm not sure I'd even want to try to fire it. Maybe someone would want it who was into CW reenactments, as it does (from a distance) look like the real thing.

Model12Win · December 16, 2014, 01:40 PM

I was about to make a joke about "it's not worth much send it to me for proper disposal" but after reading the thread... well... I think I'd make sure it was a safe shooter before firing it and it might be best as a nice wall hanger.

James K · December 16, 2014, 04:00 PM

Let me be clear about one thing. That gun is NOT a repro as we understand the term. Reproduction guns are made like the originals, but with modern markings and changes that would prevent them from being passed as antiques. That gun may have started as a repro, but it has been altered in order to be passed off as an antique gun. It is a deliberate, conscious fake, made to look old and with fake markings put on; it can have no other purpose but to defraud a purchaser who thinks he is buying an original and valuable antique revolver.

Jim

December 11, 2014, 02:20 PM	#1
bixbysales Junior Member Join Date: December 11, 2014 Location: bixby Oklahoma Posts: 11	1851 Colt Navy 1st Gen. Hey everyone! I have an 1851 Colt Navy in my shop right now and im trying to get some info on it. Ive been researching quite a bit and as it turns out the serial number is a 4 digit number. After contacting Colt and looking online it says that the serial number is a 1st generation. Also all of the parts have a matching serial number as well and being that this gun is over 150 years old the over all condition is really good. So my question is, does anyone know much about these that could maybe tell me what the value would be?

December 11, 2014, 09:45 PM	#3
NateKirk Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2013 Location: Detroit Posts: 435	I'd say for the best results, ask the guys who frequent the black powder section of the forum. Alot of them are fans of the old colts and would probably know more. What I can tell you though is go to the library or bookstore; most have books on current gun values. __________________ “Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading".” ― --Thomas Jefferson

December 13, 2014, 08:03 AM	#12
spacecoast Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2009 Location: Sunshine and Keystone States Posts: 4,461	Here's a picture of #2870 (2nd model squareback) from Wilson's TBCF, showing the distinctly different hammer shape. I knew there was something else about the revolver that didn't look right, and it's the curvature and position of the trigger (as if the hammer is cocked). The position could just be an issue with the action. It would be helpful to see a picture of the other side, as well as the top marking on the barrel. Last edited by spacecoast; December 13, 2014 at 08:09 AM.

December 13, 2014, 01:22 PM	#14
spacecoast Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2009 Location: Sunshine and Keystone States Posts: 4,461	According to Wilson, the standard top mark should be --- ADDRESS SAML COLT NEW-YORK CITY --- (with the L smaller and underlined) for serials 1-74,000 I can't see whether or not the "CITY" is present, but the authentic top mark that may match the pattern you show above is --- ADDRESS COL. SAML COLT NEW-YORK U.S. AMERICA --- , which applies to serials 101000 to 215348, not this gun It's an interesting gun with a good amount of finish and a decent cylinder scene. Presumably the other partial serials present elsewhere on the gun also match. If genuine, I would think it's worth easily $3-5,000 being such an early serial, but the issues with the hammer and the barrel marking would certainly need to be explained. I am with James K (skeptical at this time). Added - I would also note that the cylinder serial number, although not easy to see, appears to be out of position and the COLT'S PATENT No letters preceding it not large enough or arranged serially as they should be. They almost appear to be in two lines. Here's what think it should look like, although on a much later gun Last edited by spacecoast; December 13, 2014 at 01:43 PM.

December 11, 2014, 08:33 PM	#2
sgms Senior Member Join Date: May 30, 2010 Location: Arizona or Ohio depending Posts: 1,021	To big a question to answer with what you have given. If you can post some clear pictures from several angles that will make it a lot easier. Any finish left? When cocked does everything rotate and lock up correctly? Is it military marked or a civilian model? Condition is everything in determining a value.

December 11, 2014, 10:26 PM	#4
jackmoser65 Senior Member Join Date: October 11, 2014 Posts: 754	Need more info. Condition is EVERYTHING. It could be a $1000 relic and it could be worth tens of thousands.

December 12, 2014, 04:43 PM	#5
bixbysales Junior Member Join Date: December 11, 2014 Location: bixby Oklahoma Posts: 11	Hey guys! Thanks for the response. Im going to post some pictures to help find the answers. again thanks for your help

December 12, 2014, 05:01 PM	#8
Mk VII Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2000 Location: England Posts: 455	There is no shortage of these guns, which range from rusty relics to bureau drawer queens that were never fired. Condition is everything with this model, and while some variations are scarcer than others a good specimen is more desirable than a poor specimen of a rare version. The standard works are Nathan L. Swayze, '51 Colt Navies and Joseph G. Rosa, Colonel Colt London

December 12, 2014, 08:32 PM	#9
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	At first, I thought that was a Second Model squareback, and in pretty good condition. But there are a couple of things that don't look right, and if I were considering investing in it, I would want to check it out very closely or have an expert look at it. One is the hammer, which has a shape I have never seen on a '51 Navy; also the barrel lug shape and its wedge slot position don't look right. Some things about the frame don't look right, either. I have a strong suspicion that the gun is a repro that has been "humped" to give it an antique appearance and the numbers put on using a set of stamps made in the old font. Jim

December 13, 2014, 12:03 AM	#10
Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 6,126	I can't say that this picture is of an original though it is advertised as a first model http://www.gunsinternational.com/RAR...130E11A04614C5

December 13, 2014, 12:36 AM	#11
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Hi, Buzzcook, That is the First Model, easily identified because of the wedge screw below the wedge. Those guns didn't have the base pin slot cut through the center of the base pin, they had it cut out of the top, so the wedge sat higher up. It has every appearance of being original. Also, the barrel lug profile (at the point where it joins the frame) is like that of the Third Model Dragoon being produced at the same time. The profile became more rounded on both guns later on. Jim

December 13, 2014, 04:30 PM	#19
spacecoast Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2009 Location: Sunshine and Keystone States Posts: 4,461	In my opinion (interested to hear others) the cylinder is definitely wrong. The Colts Patent stamp looks like the same one used on the left side of the frame, and I have never seen it in that format on the cylinder. The top marking is definitely that of a later gun. At this point I would say Replica, although I am certainly open to more learned opinions. I only got into the Colt Percussions about a year ago when I purchased 5 of them from a relative.

December 13, 2014, 05:22 PM	#20
Mk VII Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2000 Location: England Posts: 455	The Ormsby cylinder engraving looks crude compared to the real thing.

December 13, 2014, 11:01 PM	#21
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	The correct barrel address for that serial number would be " - ADDRESS SAML COLT NEW YORK CITY -", and it would be smaller letters and shorter than that one. The hammer knurling would be hand cut cross-hatching, not lines. The caliber marking was done with a single stamp, not individual letters, etc., etc. Sorry, but the gun is a fake, pure and simple. I hope no one has any significant amount of money in it, since its true value is actually less than that of an honest reproduction in good condition. Jim

December 16, 2014, 01:14 PM	#22
bixbysales Junior Member Join Date: December 11, 2014 Location: bixby Oklahoma Posts: 11	Hey guys! Thanks for the feedback, I guess that the general answer is that it is indeed a repo. Thanks for the help. anyone know what to value this at?

December 16, 2014, 01:34 PM	#23
spacecoast Senior Member Join Date: October 14, 2009 Location: Sunshine and Keystone States Posts: 4,461	A modern shootable clone from Pietta or Uberti goes for ~ $200-250 at Cabelas. This is not marked as to who really made it, so it could be valued at even less per James K. I'm not sure I'd even want to try to fire it. Maybe someone would want it who was into CW reenactments, as it does (from a distance) look like the real thing.

December 16, 2014, 01:40 PM	#24
Model12Win Junior member Join Date: October 20, 2012 Posts: 5,854	I was about to make a joke about "it's not worth much send it to me for proper disposal" but after reading the thread... well... I think I'd make sure it was a safe shooter before firing it and it might be best as a nice wall hanger.

December 16, 2014, 04:00 PM	#25
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Let me be clear about one thing. That gun is NOT a repro as we understand the term. Reproduction guns are made like the originals, but with modern markings and changes that would prevent them from being passed as antiques. That gun may have started as a repro, but it has been altered in order to be passed off as an antique gun. It is a deliberate, conscious fake, made to look old and with fake markings put on; it can have no other purpose but to defraud a purchaser who thinks he is buying an original and valuable antique revolver. Jim