1851 Navy .44?

Scooch · May 17, 2011, 04:11 PM

I thought the 1851 Navy was .36 only. I see that Pietta makes a .44 that they say is the "Civil" version. The marketing wording reads as if it was by popular demand but is not specific as to whether that was demand at the time of original manufacture or modern consumer demand on Pietta.

Did Colt make a Navy in .44 during the era of that gun's manufacture?

Thanks.

Hardcase · May 17, 2011, 04:48 PM

This is one of those things that's been discussed and chuckled about quite a bit.

No, there was never an 1851 .44. The "Navy" revolvers were all in .36 caliber. But artistic license allows the creation of things that might have been, even if they never were. And popular demand is, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder.

Scooch · May 17, 2011, 05:50 PM

As I find myself becoming addicted to these BP revolvers, accuracy of my collection becomes a concern. I'll most likely never own a real one of these historic guns but I'd like my replicas to be as authentic as possible.

That '51 Navy handles and shoots so well too. It seems a shame to muscle it up to a .44 (never thought I'd say that, I love almost anything in .44/.45).

Thanks for the confirmation.

alpinex · May 17, 2011, 09:19 PM

Pietta "makes up" alot of models of BP guns. Uberti only makes reproductions of actual models. I'm to the point of considering selling off all my Pietta's and going Uberti (except for my LeMat, one of the Pietta made guns I own of exceptional quality).

I've become addicted to BP guns as well... to the point of considering selling off some of my C&R rifle collection to fill out my BP pistol collection. Several benefits, including ease of buying online from Cabelas or Midway, and they take up less room than a safe full of C&R rifles. I just bought an Uberti London Navy and a Uberti 1st model Dragoon in the last week (thanks to Midway $30 off $300+ promo code).

A Paterson and 1862 Pocket are next on my list.

Hardy · May 17, 2011, 09:22 PM

The only authenic 44 navy's were made by the south in Georgia during that war. They are now called navy confederates. If you find one; pure luck because most are gone . I had one in 1974 and sold it for $100.00. It had Gunnison stamped on frame and C.S.A. on top of barrel. It was a dark brass frame. There was an X marking on the hammer hand? I have crs but I think that hammer hand was brass. Sure wish I still had it . But I do think it was a 36 but was told they made 44's too. Sam Colt never made a 44c Navy.

WBH

Hardy · May 17, 2011, 09:28 PM

By the way Alpinex

I have a 1862 2nd gen colt pocket 36 police--w box and papers if you want it. It has been fired and screw holding wedge is gone but that can be easily replaced.

The cylinder has a thin turn line but everything else is great.

Fingers McGee · May 17, 2011, 10:43 PM

Hardy, .44 caliber Navies are not authentic. The South did not make any .44 caliber Navies. The Spiller and Burr, Cofer, Griswold & Gunnison, Leech and Rigdon, and Augusta revolvers were all .36 caliber, as was the illusive (there weren't any production models, only samples) Schneider and Glassick. The only .44s made in the south were the Dance & Park and the Tucker & Sherrard Dragoon sized revolvers.

Hawg · May 18, 2011, 03:54 AM

There were no brass frame anythings put in production in .44

Noz · May 18, 2011, 08:48 AM

Alpinex, when you get ready to junk your Piettas, let me know. I sold all of my Ubertis and now own only Piettas.

Foto Joe · May 18, 2011, 09:29 AM

Wanting authenticity is fine but in reality about the only way to really get authenticity is to find a real '51 in somebodies basement.

Repro's generally aren't collectables. If you buy one right, you might get your money back out of it, but turning a profit wouldn't be a good reason to "collect" reproduction 19th Century hardware.

The 1851 44's (I call 'em Fake '51's) that Pietta sells may not be historically accurate but...They shoot extremely well, especially with light charges and they allow folks who otherwise might not be able to afford to get into this past-time to do so.

I've got one of the brass Fakes and it really is my favorite gun. There just isn't a better feeling than when one of your buddies is lining up on a tangerine at 50 feet with his trusty plastic Glock and can't hit the thing with an entire magazine, as he reaches for another mag of expensive ammo the Fake '51 makes that tangerine disappear with one shot.

Don't rule out at particular gun simply because the Italian Marketers made it up. They sell 'em for a reason, the market is there.

Scooch · May 18, 2011, 11:09 AM

I'll probably not sell these replica guns. I tend to keep things so resale value is of no concern to me. But as I said in a earlier post, I appreciate authenticity of my replicas if for nothing else but that they are in fact replicas of real guns of that era.

Hawg · May 18, 2011, 12:09 PM

The G&G had a round barrel. The Schneider and Glassic was a true 1851 copy except no cylinder scene.

Doc Hoy · May 18, 2011, 12:25 PM

You are like me.

In the last four years I have allowed myself to get rid of exactly two revolvers and I regret both decisions.

pohill · May 18, 2011, 06:40 PM

check this out: now that's an oddball gun
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=229574371

Hawg · May 18, 2011, 06:49 PM

Yeah but this makes it suspect. Disclaimer: This collectible is an antique or antique reproduction.

Fingers McGee · May 18, 2011, 06:56 PM

And it's just as fake as it can get. The seller even admits it may not be real. Quote: "This collectible is an antique or antique reproduction. " Stamping are too fresh in a pitted barrel surface and the unpitted cylinder doesnt match the barrel condition.

Fingers McGee · May 18, 2011, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hawg hagan

The Schneider and Glassic was a true 1851 copy except no cylinder scene.

The Schneider and Glassick never existed except for a few "Salesman Samples" shown to CSA authorities in Memphis. There are only 3 known examples, none of the three have the same parts in them, and one of them has an iron frame.

Hardcase · May 18, 2011, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Stamping are too fresh in a pitted barrel surface

That grabbed my eye quicker than a shiny nugget in a muddy stream.

Foto Joe · May 18, 2011, 07:06 PM

I find it interesting that a GB seller with an A+ rating would hang his/her reputation/rating on the line with a questionable gun. It only takes one bad review to hammer your sales on these online auctions.

But on the other hand, the opening bid is way too rich for my blood anyway.

Bill Akins · May 18, 2011, 07:09 PM

+1 to what Fingers, Hawg and Hardcase said.

Just like Fingers and Hardcase noticed, the first thing I noticed too was that the metal surface surrounding the stampings was pitted but the edges of the stampings as well as WITHIN the stampings were not. If the revolver was authentic the edges of the stampings as well as WITHIN the stampings would be as pitted as the rest of the surface. Whoever made this fake sure wasn't thinking. Obviously they weathered the surfaces FIRST and then stamped the stampings. If they had been thinking they would have stamped it first and then weathered it.

Or it could be that the gun is actually a period piece but either the original markings were removed or being Confederate it may not have had any markings. Then they put a repro fluted cylinder on it and then re-stamped it hoping to suck someone in to believing it was that special collectible version. So it may be an authentic period piece but with a weathered repro fluted cylinder and fake stampings.

I'll bet this seller knows this too or else why would he have that disclaimer worded like he does?

"Caveat Emptor"......BIG TIME.

.

Hardy · May 18, 2011, 07:19 PM

Fingers

I thought the south made some 44's in the navy style. But I guess you're right cause the one I had was a 36. Are you sure? You know, some of those factories made a lot of stuff in desparation. But I guess Pietta made the 44 c navy Confederate revolvers

WBH

pohill · May 18, 2011, 08:53 PM

Look at the seller's other auctions. He puts that disclaimer on all of his antiques (at least the ones I looked at).

Fingers McGee · May 18, 2011, 10:58 PM

Hardy, I'm as positive as the half dozen books I have on Confederate revolvers are. There were no .44 caliber Navies made by the Confederate (or Union either for that matter) gunmakers.

madcratebuilder · May 19, 2011, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawg hagan
The Schneider and Glassic was a true 1851 copy except no cylinder scene.
The Schneider and Glassick never existed except for a few "Salesman Samples" shown to CSA authorities in Memphis. There are only 3 known examples, none of the three have the same parts in them, and one of them has an iron frame.

Dang right. All the CSA cone makers only made enough revolvers to keep the .gov money flowing to their bank accounts.

Shotput79 · May 19, 2011, 05:46 PM

Please keep the brass frame and enjoy it. No the south didn't make .44 brass anything. Like others have said buy the real deal, or buy Uberti, or Pitta, and be a happy person. Chance's are after you pass on, nobody will care about them like you do anyway. If you want a real 1858 Remington, send me $1600.00 dollars, and I'll go up the street, and buy you one. I have about six Pitta revolvers, and one of them is the brass frame .44 cal you don't like. That is one of the sweetest shooting revolvers I've ever had. You take care of it, and it will probably out last you. If you do want to sell out your revolver's keep me in mine. I'll buy second hand Pietta any day of the week. I been buying them for over 20 years now, and I don't see any reason to stop now. Have a good day.

May 17, 2011, 04:11 PM	#1
Scooch Member Join Date: April 20, 2011 Location: Texas Y'all Posts: 29	1851 Navy .44? I thought the 1851 Navy was .36 only. I see that Pietta makes a .44 that they say is the "Civil" version. The marketing wording reads as if it was by popular demand but is not specific as to whether that was demand at the time of original manufacture or modern consumer demand on Pietta. Did Colt make a Navy in .44 during the era of that gun's manufacture? Thanks.

May 17, 2011, 04:48 PM	#2
Hardcase Senior Member Join Date: April 14, 2009 Location: Sunny Southern Idaho Posts: 1,909	This is one of those things that's been discussed and chuckled about quite a bit. No, there was never an 1851 .44. The "Navy" revolvers were all in .36 caliber. But artistic license allows the creation of things that might have been, even if they never were. And popular demand is, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder. __________________ Well we don't rent pigs and I figure it's better to say it right out front because a man that does like to rent pigs is... he's hard to stop - Gus McCrae

May 17, 2011, 10:43 PM	#7
Fingers McGee Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2008 Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks Posts: 2,113	Hardy, .44 caliber Navies are not authentic. The South did not make any .44 caliber Navies. The Spiller and Burr, Cofer, Griswold & Gunnison, Leech and Rigdon, and Augusta revolvers were all .36 caliber, as was the illusive (there weren't any production models, only samples) Schneider and Glassick. The only .44s made in the south were the Dance & Park and the Tucker & Sherrard Dragoon sized revolvers. __________________ Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce

May 18, 2011, 09:29 AM	#10
Foto Joe Senior Member Join Date: November 25, 2010 Location: Cody, Wyoming Posts: 111	Wanting authenticity is fine but in reality about the only way to really get authenticity is to find a real '51 in somebodies basement. Repro's generally aren't collectables. If you buy one right, you might get your money back out of it, but turning a profit wouldn't be a good reason to "collect" reproduction 19th Century hardware. The 1851 44's (I call 'em Fake '51's) that Pietta sells may not be historically accurate but...They shoot extremely well, especially with light charges and they allow folks who otherwise might not be able to afford to get into this past-time to do so. I've got one of the brass Fakes and it really is my favorite gun. There just isn't a better feeling than when one of your buddies is lining up on a tangerine at 50 feet with his trusty plastic Glock and can't hit the thing with an entire magazine, as he reaches for another mag of expensive ammo the Fake '51 makes that tangerine disappear with one shot. Don't rule out at particular gun simply because the Italian Marketers made it up. They sell 'em for a reason, the market is there. __________________ Foto Joe

May 18, 2011, 11:09 AM	#11
Scooch Member Join Date: April 20, 2011 Location: Texas Y'all Posts: 29	I'll probably not sell these replica guns. I tend to keep things so resale value is of no concern to me. But as I said in a earlier post, I appreciate authenticity of my replicas if for nothing else but that they are in fact replicas of real guns of that era. Last edited by Scooch; May 19, 2011 at 07:00 PM.

May 17, 2011, 05:50 PM	#3
Scooch Member Join Date: April 20, 2011 Location: Texas Y'all Posts: 29	As I find myself becoming addicted to these BP revolvers, accuracy of my collection becomes a concern. I'll most likely never own a real one of these historic guns but I'd like my replicas to be as authentic as possible. That '51 Navy handles and shoots so well too. It seems a shame to muscle it up to a .44 (never thought I'd say that, I love almost anything in .44/.45). Thanks for the confirmation.

May 17, 2011, 09:19 PM	#4
alpinex Junior Member Join Date: May 14, 2009 Location: Northern California Posts: 14	Pietta "makes up" alot of models of BP guns. Uberti only makes reproductions of actual models. I'm to the point of considering selling off all my Pietta's and going Uberti (except for my LeMat, one of the Pietta made guns I own of exceptional quality). I've become addicted to BP guns as well... to the point of considering selling off some of my C&R rifle collection to fill out my BP pistol collection. Several benefits, including ease of buying online from Cabelas or Midway, and they take up less room than a safe full of C&R rifles. I just bought an Uberti London Navy and a Uberti 1st model Dragoon in the last week (thanks to Midway $30 off $300+ promo code). A Paterson and 1862 Pocket are next on my list.

May 17, 2011, 09:22 PM	#5
Hardy Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: South Carolina Posts: 709	The only authenic 44 navy's were made by the south in Georgia during that war. They are now called navy confederates. If you find one; pure luck because most are gone . I had one in 1974 and sold it for $100.00. It had Gunnison stamped on frame and C.S.A. on top of barrel. It was a dark brass frame. There was an X marking on the hammer hand? I have crs but I think that hammer hand was brass. Sure wish I still had it . But I do think it was a 36 but was told they made 44's too. Sam Colt never made a 44c Navy. WBH

May 17, 2011, 09:28 PM	#6
Hardy Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: South Carolina Posts: 709	By the way Alpinex I have a 1862 2nd gen colt pocket 36 police--w box and papers if you want it. It has been fired and screw holding wedge is gone but that can be easily replaced. The cylinder has a thin turn line but everything else is great.

May 18, 2011, 03:54 AM	#8
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,195	There were no brass frame anythings put in production in .44

May 18, 2011, 08:48 AM	#9
Noz Senior Member Join Date: February 25, 2009 Posts: 643	Alpinex, when you get ready to junk your Piettas, let me know. I sold all of my Ubertis and now own only Piettas.

May 18, 2011, 12:09 PM	#12
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,195	The G&G had a round barrel. The Schneider and Glassic was a true 1851 copy except no cylinder scene.

May 18, 2011, 12:25 PM	#13
Doc Hoy Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Naples, Fl Posts: 5,440	Scooch You are like me. In the last four years I have allowed myself to get rid of exactly two revolvers and I regret both decisions. __________________ Seek truth. Relax. Take a breath.

May 18, 2011, 06:40 PM	#14
pohill Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2005 Location: northeast Posts: 521	check this out: now that's an oddball gun http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=229574371

May 18, 2011, 06:49 PM	#15
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,195	Yeah but this makes it suspect. Disclaimer: This collectible is an antique or antique reproduction.

May 18, 2011, 06:56 PM	#16
Fingers McGee Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2008 Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks Posts: 2,113	And it's just as fake as it can get. The seller even admits it may not be real. Quote: "This collectible is an antique or antique reproduction. " Stamping are too fresh in a pitted barrel surface and the unpitted cylinder doesnt match the barrel condition. __________________ Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce

May 18, 2011, 07:06 PM	#19
Foto Joe Senior Member Join Date: November 25, 2010 Location: Cody, Wyoming Posts: 111	I find it interesting that a GB seller with an A+ rating would hang his/her reputation/rating on the line with a questionable gun. It only takes one bad review to hammer your sales on these online auctions. But on the other hand, the opening bid is way too rich for my blood anyway. __________________ Foto Joe

May 18, 2011, 07:09 PM	#20
Bill Akins Senior Member Join Date: August 28, 2007 Location: Hudson, Florida Posts: 1,135	+1 to what Fingers, Hawg and Hardcase said. Just like Fingers and Hardcase noticed, the first thing I noticed too was that the metal surface surrounding the stampings was pitted but the edges of the stampings as well as WITHIN the stampings were not. If the revolver was authentic the edges of the stampings as well as WITHIN the stampings would be as pitted as the rest of the surface. Whoever made this fake sure wasn't thinking. Obviously they weathered the surfaces FIRST and then stamped the stampings. If they had been thinking they would have stamped it first and then weathered it. Or it could be that the gun is actually a period piece but either the original markings were removed or being Confederate it may not have had any markings. Then they put a repro fluted cylinder on it and then re-stamped it hoping to suck someone in to believing it was that special collectible version. So it may be an authentic period piece but with a weathered repro fluted cylinder and fake stampings. I'll bet this seller knows this too or else why would he have that disclaimer worded like he does? "Caveat Emptor"......BIG TIME. . __________________ "This is my Remy and this is my Colt. Remy loads easy and topstrap strong, Colt balances better and never feels wrong. A repro black powder revolver gun, they smoke and shoot lead and give me much fun. I can't figure out which one I like better, they're both fine revolvers that fit in my leather". "To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target". Last edited by Bill Akins; May 18, 2011 at 07:17 PM.

May 18, 2011, 07:19 PM	#21
Hardy Senior Member Join Date: August 6, 2009 Location: South Carolina Posts: 709	Fingers I thought the south made some 44's in the navy style. But I guess you're right cause the one I had was a 36. Are you sure? You know, some of those factories made a lot of stuff in desparation. But I guess Pietta made the 44 c navy Confederate revolvers WBH

May 18, 2011, 08:53 PM	#22
pohill Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2005 Location: northeast Posts: 521	Look at the seller's other auctions. He puts that disclaimer on all of his antiques (at least the ones I looked at).

May 18, 2011, 10:58 PM	#23
Fingers McGee Senior Member Join Date: March 19, 2008 Location: High & Dry in Missouri Ozarks Posts: 2,113	Hardy, I'm as positive as the half dozen books I have on Confederate revolvers are. There were no .44 caliber Navies made by the Confederate (or Union either for that matter) gunmakers. __________________ Fingers (Show Me MO smoke) McGee - AKA Man of Many Colts - Alter ego of Diabolical Ken; SASS Regulator 28564-L-TG; Rangemaster and stage writer extraordinaire; Frontiersman, Pistoleer, NRA Endowment Life, NMLRA, SAF, CCRKBA, STORM 327, SV115; Charter member, Central Ozarks Western Shooters Cynic: A blackguard whose faulty vision see things as they are, not as they should be. Ambrose Bierce

May 19, 2011, 05:46 PM	#25
Shotput79 Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 2011 Location: NC Posts: 186	How Many More!!! Please keep the brass frame and enjoy it. No the south didn't make .44 brass anything. Like others have said buy the real deal, or buy Uberti, or Pitta, and be a happy person. Chance's are after you pass on, nobody will care about them like you do anyway. If you want a real 1858 Remington, send me $1600.00 dollars, and I'll go up the street, and buy you one. I have about six Pitta revolvers, and one of them is the brass frame .44 cal you don't like. That is one of the sweetest shooting revolvers I've ever had. You take care of it, and it will probably out last you. If you do want to sell out your revolver's keep me in mine. I'll buy second hand Pietta any day of the week. I been buying them for over 20 years now, and I don't see any reason to stop now. Have a good day.