Colt 25

[eluu]

Hello all ...

Inherited this hammerless baby Colt 25 awhile back, and can't find any information on it anywhere. There are no markings on it other than the number C 129 on the right side frame. Any thoughts??

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=49678&stc=1&d=1247846488

Thanks ...

LW

[Superhouse 15]

It should have other markings. There should be a Colt horse on the slide above the safety. If there are no other markings, I strongly suspect the slide has been excessively polished and refinished. No value as a collectable, but it should be a fine shooter.

[eluu]

Thanks Superhouse ... here's the other side.
What I was thinking is this could be a "lunch box" special, one that a Colt employee thought he (or she) needed more than the company ... and walked out with it in their lunch box prior to it being finished. The serial number is suspect to me :confused:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=49691&stc=1&d=1247851515

[Bill DeShivs]

It's just a bad reblue.

[Delaware_Dan]

"lunch box" special

Thats funny, neat little gun.

[MrKTI]

I would say if the only part that says Colt are the grips, it's some kinda knockoff that someone put Colt grips on. Have you had the grips off ????

I have a baby Colt from the mid 70's I think, nothing like this. I only mention that because the grips look familiar.

John
Non expert, but can type ...

[eluu]

Bill - You think it may have been altered, and re-blued?

Dan - It is a neat little gun ... and was my grandmothers, who had a very "colorful" life back in the 20's ;) (in Hartford and Bridgeport) And it fires just fine!

MrKTI - Just took off the grips for the first time ... wood, no markings on the back of the grips, or on the frame portion covered by the grips.

:confused:

LW

[RickB]

It does appear to be a "heavily refinished" Colt Vest Pocket Model, a/k/a Model N. Maybe it was rusty, and removal of the pitting removed all of the markings, as well. That is not the original serial number, but because it does have A serial number, I don't think anyone is going to get too upset about it. Do you have any paperwork, such as a bill of sale, with the serial number listed?

[TinyDee]

It looks like a Model 1908, a very fine little pistol in my opinion.

[eluu]

RickB - I believe you're correct on the model name, aka as Model 1908. Don't have any paperwork on this one. Do have a Brown Leather Belt Holster w/ snap and cleaning rod holder w/ snap though (no cleaning rod). It doesn't appear to be "heavily refinished" to this untrained eye either, but anythings possible I suppose. Why do you say that is not the original serial number, because it doesn't fit the conventional numbering nomenclature?

TinyDee - I too share your opinion.

Do you think this could actually be a first year production, of the original 799 that were made in 1908? Probably wishful thinking ....

Thanks all ...

LW

[Bill DeShivs]

Colt didn't stamp serial numbers with individual hand stamps, nor have they ever finished a gun in the manner yours is finished.
If it were a "lunch box" gun, why would anyone bother to stamp a serial number on it? SN s were not required until 1934.
As I said-it looks like a bad reblue. But MAYBE it is one of the first ones, carried out in a lunchbox, and sold to John Dillinger, then used by Melvin Purvis, and later presented to Gen. George Patton.
Without proof, it's a (very) bad reblue.

[Microgunner]

Looks like a knock off to me too.

[oneounceload]

I have a Colt just like it, from early 20th Century. One side of the slide has engraving that has been worn almost to the point of being unreadable. Wondering if that is what happened here?

[Bill DeShivs]

No, the lettering has obviously been crudely ground off.

[RickB]

You can see how the frame has actually been distorted by hand-stamping the serial number. It's illegal to remove the serial number, and to possess a gun with the serial removed, but if you have some documentation indicating that the number on there now was there when you purchased or "received" the gun, you might be able to avoid a stay in the Big House if The Man finds out you have it.

[James K]

My take is that the gun is genuine, but that at one time it was heavily rusted. Whoever reblued the gun simply put it on a belt sander (you can see the marks) and removed the rust along with the markings. Then the highly qualified restorer probably realized that removing the serial number was not a swift idea and stamped one on. The trigger guard is bent out of shape, probably from being dropped at one time.

Technically, there is probably some kind of violation here, but I can't see any sane BATFE agent worrying about it. And who can swear that the number is NOT valid?

Now, if you want to sell it, it was a special gun carried by Gen. Patton but all the markings were ground off so it could be given to a CIA assassination team headed by Dick Cheney and assigned to knock off Hitler and Tojo. But in case Patton was captured before they could kill Hitler, the Germans would not know who he was since BATFE couldn't trace the gun. How's that for a "story"?

Jim

[Gazzmann]

Possibly a Colt Vest Pocket Model 1908 - Hammerless. Mfg. 1908 - 1946.
.25 ACP cal. 2" barrel, fixed sights, checkered hard rubber grips on early models, walnut on later, magazine disconnect added on guns made after 1916.

[powwowell]

You inherited it and it didn't cost you anything. It looks like a 1908 to me. The 1908 Colt Vest Pocket Pistol is a fine .25 auto, one of the best ever made. Your pistol has been "worked" on. Who knows, it may have been unusable at one time and someone did a crude job of restoring it?

I have one that has been re-blued and it means a lot to me. It's in great shape internally and is a fantastic shooter. The pony, on the slide is still visible, but it's mostly gone. This Colt will remain in my safe, most of the time.

Did you say you had a holster for your pistol? If so, would you be interested in selling it?

[Steve1911]

Try contacting Colt and see if they have any info on that serial number. :D

[eluu]

Steve1911 - I did contact Colt, and their historian indicated that this serial number didn't "appear" to be original ... that's all he would say.

powwowell - Really don't know it's history, other than it was my Mother's Father's second wifes .. a truly colorful character that passed back around 1992 at the ripe old age of 88 :) This also is a great shooter, and with a tremendous amount of sentimental value ... it will also stay in the safe for the remainder of my years, and then will go to my son. I do have a holster, and will post a pic of it, but am not interested in selling it ... sorry.

Gazzmann - I believe you are correct, unless it's a fine knock-off! One thing I didn't add in earlier posts is that the mag appears to be original, with the following on the bottom:
CAL 25
COLT

Jim - I hope you're correct about it's authenticity. You may also be right about the rust, and belt sanding ... don't really know. Good story :D

RickB - This big guy is NOT going to the big house ... I don't carry it, and The Man is not welcome in my home, ever. ;)

Thank you all for your comments and knowledge, it is greatly appreciated.

LW

[eluu]

Here's the holster powwowell fyi ...

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=49805&stc=1&d=1248122486
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=49806&stc=1&d=1248122486

LW

[Servant]

The serial number is on the wrong side, as I look at the one I have in front of me, probably a copy, but nice little weapon. Here's a photo of the one I have (I traded a dog for it!!):

http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=76329&stc=1&d=1323772390

[Mike Irwin]

No need to resurrect a 2.5 year old thread.

The OP hasn't been here in more than 2 years.

Closed.