The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 29, 2011, 09:51 PM   #1
Michael Ruggiero
Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Location: Eagleville, TN
Posts: 50
Fair price?

I have a like new, never fired Traditions 1851 44 cal Colt Navy pistol with leather holster. 7 1/2" blued barrel, brass frame with walnut grip. Can anyone tell me how much I can expect to get for it
Michael Ruggiero is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 10:04 PM   #2
American Eagle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2009
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 265
Around $150 probably. If it had been a steel frame you could have asked for more, maybe around $170-$180.
__________________
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. ----THOMAS JEFFERSON
American Eagle is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 10:08 PM   #3
Michael Ruggiero
Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Location: Eagleville, TN
Posts: 50
Navy Colt

Thanks for the response!
Michael Ruggiero is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 10:42 PM   #4
American Eagle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2009
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 265
Michael, depending on how good the leather holster is, there might be some money in that too. I just quoted you what i think a decent price on the gun itself might be, if sold on the sales forum (you might always get lucky and ask for and get a little more --worth the try.)

Post some pictures of the leather holster if you can.
__________________
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. ----THOMAS JEFFERSON
American Eagle is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 08:25 AM   #5
Michael Ruggiero
Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Location: Eagleville, TN
Posts: 50
Neos

I was thinking the same thing American Eagle. Thanks again!
Michael Ruggiero is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 01:10 PM   #6
DiCarnage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2010
Location: Southern Oregon.
Posts: 105
Also...

Being a .44 makes it the Army Model. The navy version is .36 calibre.
Just might help when you go to list it.
DiCarnage is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 01:48 PM   #7
Billy Shears
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2011
Posts: 604
Quote:
Being a .44 makes it the Army Model. The navy version is .36 calibre.
Just might help when you go to list it.
Not necessarily.

Traditions makes [markets] a Pietta .44 caliber BP revolver that is actually an 1851 Navy, [octagon barrel and all] with the rebated clinder from the 1860 Army. A purely fantasy creation, no doubt, but in my mind one of the coolest "shouldabeen" revolvers out there.

Sportsman's Warehouse has them [steel frame] NIB for $209. Both the box they come in and the label in the display case describe it as an 1851 Navy.
Billy Shears is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 08:45 PM   #8
bigminnow
Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2011
Posts: 98
Cabela's has Pietta 1851 Confederate 44 cal Navy (brass frame) for $139. Buy $11 more stuff and get free shipping on orders $150 or more...
Brass frame or not, that's not a bad deal IMO...
bigminnow is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 09:06 PM   #9
mykeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,757
Quote:
Not necessarily.
Yes, necessarily. The marketing aspirations of contemporary money changers in creating fantasy pieces does not alter the fact that .44 caliber revolvers were designated Army caliber and .36 caliber revolvers were designated Navy caliber. In no manner, shape or form is Pietta's .44 caliber revolver built on a MODIFIED Colt holster pistol frame a Navy revolver, regardless of what label is affixed to the box it came in. I suppose if I were to paste a label on the box that said it was a Ford you'd claim it as such also?
mykeal is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 09:32 PM   #10
Billy Shears
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2011
Posts: 604
Quote:
I suppose if I were to paste a label on the box that said it was a Ford you'd claim it as such also?
Absolutely. If you created a product that never existed in the first place, I figure, barring any copyright infringements, you could pretty much market it under any name you wanted.

If there never was such a thing as a .44 caliber 1851 in the first place and some 150 years after the fact someone makes a revolver that looks and feels like an 1851 revolver in almost every respect except for the big hole at the pointy end, what does it matter what they call it? And more importantly, if it never existed in the first place, how can naming it whatever pleases their fancy be either right or wrong?

If Pietta wants to call this particular creation an 1851 Navy who cares? If they want to call it an 1865 Rebel War Blaster, who cares? It's a fictional piece anyway.

[Edit] Reading back over this, I think I'm not being entirely clear. Let me try one more time. This time, let's stick to your Ford analogy. Let's assume that some century and a half from now--long after you and I and all our great-grandchildren are dead and gone--some company decides to build an automobile. They do a pretty darn good job of replicating the 1968 Mustang, down to the very last detail, but for whatever reason, they change the engine. Instead of a 302 cubic inch V-8, they stick in a 2.3 liter turbocharged 4-banger. Obviously not correct for this vehicle, although it was an engine Ford used in thousands of later Mustangs, but--assuming we could visit from the underworld and were allowed to voice our opinions--and assuming the vehicle was in most other respects a faithful and accurate copy of the original '68 even though this combination of engine and chassis never actually existed, would you really be all that upset if they gave it the name "1968 Mustang"?

That's all I'm trying to say. It's no big deal. They aren't selling these things to museums. They're selling them to guys like us who would rather spend an afternoon at the range making smoke than just about anything else. [/edit]

Let's just shoot em and have fun.

Last edited by Billy Shears; August 30, 2011 at 10:33 PM.
Billy Shears is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 10:53 PM   #11
mykeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,757
Quote:
would you really be all that upset if they gave it the name "1968 Mustang"?
Nope. And I'm not 'all that upset' that Pietta builds lies, any more than I'm 'all that upset' that Thompson Center builds plains style rifles they call Hawkens. I own more than one example of all of the above, so I can't claim to be all that holy about this. Like you said, they can call them anything they want.

But when someone attempts to help a member by suggesting he use the correct terminology, and you call him out on it with incorrect information, well, it's time to add 2 cents to the mix.
mykeal is offline  
Old August 30, 2011, 11:45 PM   #12
Michael Ruggiero
Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Location: Eagleville, TN
Posts: 50
Traditions 1851 Navy Revolver

Just for the record, I'm looking at the original box my pistol came in. serial # 999198 It is definitely a 1851 Colt Navy 44 cal percussion pistol. whether it is an historcally accurate piece or not, it is still a beauty!. I really do appreciate all of the responses to my question since I am new to this site and clearly have a lot to learn about black powder pistols. I do plan on selling this unfired pistol in its original box along with my Lyman Great Plains 50 cal rifle, also a beauty, when my "waiting time" and post requirements are met. Thanks again, hope I didn't stir up a hornets nest

Last edited by Michael Ruggiero; August 30, 2011 at 11:58 PM. Reason: Colt Navy revolver
Michael Ruggiero is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 04:46 AM   #13
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 11,686
I'm with Mykeal on this one.
Hawg is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 05:28 AM   #14
zullo74
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
I vote for threedogdad.

Suppose it was named '1851 Navy Style in .44 caliber'? Would that satisfy the purists?
zullo74 is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 06:09 AM   #15
mykeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by zullo74
Suppose it was named '1851 Navy Style in .44 caliber'? Would that satisfy the purists?
I don't know - can't speak for others, but my view is that telling the truth would be a major improvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by threedogdad
a revolver that looks and feels like an 1851 revolver in almost every respect except for the big hole at the pointy end
There's quite a bit more wrong about that gun than the size of the bore. A bit of research about the subject would be appropriate before foot consumption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Ruggiero
I'm looking at the original box my pistol came in. serial # 999198 It is definitely a 1851 Colt Navy 44 cal percussion pistol.
No, it isn't. It's a .44 caliber 1851 Colt Navy design (or style) revolver in a mis-labeled box.

There's no hornet's nest here. The truth is the truth - it's an absolute. Slapping a false label on something doesn't alter that, it just makes the person, or company, that affixes the label a (name I'd rather not use).
mykeal is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 08:13 AM   #16
Billy Shears
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2011
Posts: 604
Quote:
There's quite a bit more wrong about that gun than the size of the bore. A bit of research about the subject would be appropriate before foot consumption.
No, there's not. By definition, there's nothing "wrong" with a product that never existed in the first place. If it's all just make believe, why is it so bothersome [or a "lie" as you called it] that they give it a name of their choosing?

John Browning never put a light rail, aluminum frame, ambidextrous safety or a 9mm barrel on his 1911s either, but that doesn't mean Kimber and Springfield are "liars" for calling their creations 1911s. If it means anything at all, it means only that firearm names are very fluid and flexible. This is not taxonomy, it's marketing.

Secondly, why do you appear to be taking this so personally? I don't recall insulting you in any way and if I did I sincerely apologize.

Finally, I reiterate what I said before...we aren't museum curators. We're shooters...21st century shooters.
Quote:
Just shoot em and have fun.

Last edited by Billy Shears; August 31, 2011 at 08:22 AM.
Billy Shears is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 08:58 AM   #17
Michael Ruggiero
Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Location: Eagleville, TN
Posts: 50
1851 Navy Colt

Thought you guys might like to see what all the discussion has been about
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_2440.jpg (259.9 KB, 20 views)
Michael Ruggiero is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 09:05 AM   #18
Billy Shears
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2011
Posts: 604
Very nice revolver, Michael. The wood grips have a very nice grain, certainly nicer than mine.
Billy Shears is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 09:30 AM   #19
Tanker6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 193
Ok, I've read through the thread and I now have a desire to "get smart." I've known about these "fantasy" guns for awhile, but let me ask you guys a question or two that may help put things in perspective for me (at least)....

We have before us the discussed "1851 .44 cal Navy" manufactured by Pietta. Now, we all know that the "original" 1851 was in .36 caliber and this "fantasy gun" is not. I also can look at this "fantasy gun" and see that the grip appears to be 1851 Navy, the barrel is octagon like the 1851 Navy, and the lever appears to be like the 1851 Navy.

However, I'm smart enough (I think? ) to know, however, that you can't just drop the .44 cylinder on the '51 frame, bore out the barrel and sell it. My belief is that the frame is going to be closer to the 1860 Army.

So, this "fantasy gun" ends up like Frankenstein (in a good way ) with

1. Navy grip
2. Navy lever
3. Navy octagon barrel

but with

4. Army frame
5. Army cylinder

Does this sound right? I'd appreciate an education on this. I'm almost to the point that I'm going to decide on some cap and ball pistols to start shooting Frontiersman in SASS. I'd like to know.

Thanks in advance!
Tanker6 is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 09:45 AM   #20
Michael Ruggiero
Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2011
Location: Eagleville, TN
Posts: 50
45 cal pistol

Wow! and to think this all began with a simple "what's it worth" question. This has really been a learning experience for me. This may be cheating a bit but is anyone out there interested in this "frankenstein, in a good way" pistol?
Michael Ruggiero is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 10:54 AM   #21
zullo74
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
Tanker6,

You got it exactly right.
zullo74 is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 11:07 AM   #22
maillemaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2010
Posts: 1,010
My understanding is that the .44 caliber brass-framed "1851 Navy" revolver that Pietta sells never existed.



My understanding is that this firearm should be .36 caliber to be historically correct as an 1851 Navy.

As it is manufactured, it is an 1851 Navy in .44 caliber.
maillemaker is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 11:33 AM   #23
zullo74
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 374
Nothing escapes YOUR keen eye!
zullo74 is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 01:28 PM   #24
mykeal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 2,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by threedogdad
By definition, there's nothing "wrong" with a product that never existed in the first place.
Is that by any chance a Berra quote?

I suppose that one could argue that the only thing 'wrong' is the name, and in one sense I'd probably have to agree with that. But if, by using that name, one intends to claim that it is indeed an 1851 Navy in every respect except the caliber of the bore and chambers, well, then it's necessary to explain that there is much more about the design execution that's not true to an original 1851 Navy, and thus, simply put, wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by threedogdad
why do you appear to be taking this so personally? I don't recall insulting you in any way
The appearance of a personal interest on my part is simply an unjustified inference on your part. You are correct in that you did not insult me, nor did I claim that you did. In fact, I'm quite amused. No apology is expected nor necessary.

Michael Ruggiero - It is an attractive revolver, which is really why Pietta makes it. To my eye, however, the GPR in the background is much more attractive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maillemaker
As it is manufactured, it is an 1851 Navy in .44 caliber.
Uh, no. Tanker6 provided a much better description.

Tanker6 - I have one exception. The barrel is octagon, which indeed is the 1851 Navy external shape, but the bore is wrong, of course, so it's not an 1851 Navy barrel. It's also not an 1860 Army barrel, nor any barrel produced by Colt.
mykeal is offline  
Old August 31, 2011, 02:00 PM   #25
Billy Shears
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2011
Posts: 604
Quote:
You are correct in that you did not insult me, nor did I claim that you did. In fact, I'm quite amused. No apology is expected nor necessary.


Fair enough. I think we have beaten this poor dead horse [Colt? ] enough.

It's been good talking to you/debating with you/whatever it was. See you on the range sometime.
Billy Shears is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13486 seconds with 8 queries