|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
September 24, 2010, 10:29 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: September 16, 2010
Posts: 68
|
Amazing original Colt 1860 Army
From another forum.....http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=18855
I can't believe how new it looks - I first thought it was a repro. Huge price difference from the reproductions though! Went for almost 100K where you can get a strikingly similar colt series that looks almost identical for $500 range. Its nice to see this because it sort of authenticates the reproductions in terms of appearance of blueing, grips, and finish. |
September 24, 2010, 10:31 AM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: September 16, 2010
Posts: 68
|
another cool thing
I love the cap guide groove too which I have not seen on a reproduction.
|
September 24, 2010, 12:50 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Naples, Fl
Posts: 5,440
|
Cap Groove
My Belgian Centaure, (SN 952) and my Colt second gen, 1861 have cap grooves. My others including ASP, ASM, Pietta, Navy Arms, Euroarms, and Traditions don't.
__________________
Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath. |
September 24, 2010, 02:04 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 25, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,309
|
The top, 1860 model, just looks too good to be true.
And, I note, the serial number is right in the middle of the series of the Colt-Colt reissues of the mid-1970s. I sold some out of my shop and had a personal 1851. The reissues (at least the '51) had squared trigger guards. Not saying with any authority it isn't original. But, if I had the one hundred bigs to plop down, it would get examined by, at least, three experts first. Color me skeptical. |
September 24, 2010, 02:11 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 643
|
Just curious. If the gun is in the condition stated, why is there only a trace of the silver plating on the trigger guard?
At best a re-finished gun. |
September 24, 2010, 06:58 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2009
Posts: 477
|
I'm a bit suspicious myself.
I thought there were only 2 Springfield pistols made? Apparently they have one of 50? http://www.gregmartinauctions.com/Au...px?LotID=23563 |
September 24, 2010, 09:33 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2009
Posts: 727
|
Oh, come on!
Did Colt's really change the patent number on each individual gun? Look at the patent number on the cylinder of the revolver (supposedly) having serial number 152329 (the pristine one)- it shows "Patent No. 2329" on its cylinder. Then check out the second 1860 with serial number 92346. It just happens to have "Patent No. 2346" stamped on its cylinder. Yeah, right. Or, am I all wet about the serial/patent numbers matching? Last edited by Model-P; September 24, 2010 at 10:38 PM. |
September 24, 2010, 10:23 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
|
The numbers on cylinders match serial numbers. If you see an original with a different number on the cylinder that cylinder doesn't belong to that gun.
|
September 24, 2010, 10:29 PM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2009
Posts: 727
|
Quote:
Edit: Well, I'll be! I don't understand the "why" of it, but you are sure right. I just did a quick check on GunBroker and sure enough the so-called patent numbers on the cylinders match the serial numbers. Why would they call it the patent number? Strange! I just learned something new. Thanks! Last edited by Model-P; September 24, 2010 at 10:41 PM. |
|
September 25, 2010, 12:26 AM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 9, 2010
Location: Irmo, SC
Posts: 263
|
Originals
Great looking original. I'd love to have one. But a second mortgage I don't need. That's a real Safe Queen.
|
September 25, 2010, 01:14 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2009
Posts: 727
|
Cap groove
My Pietta has a cap groove, FWIW.
As for the "Patent No." on the cylinder, it just dawned on me that "COLT'S PANTENT No. ****" should not be understood as one phrase. Instead, it should be read as "COLT'S PATENT",,, "No.****". |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|