1860 Army large screws for shoulder stock

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Anyone else hate those protruding shoulder stock side screws on most of the 1860 Army replicas?

Snoot
Yes! They look ugly and they are unnecessary, and @Snooterpup 's "fix" is very neatly done. I also saw his later post with some of the production numbers, and these suggest not all that many of the old Colts were of the four-screw variety. In my opinion, the "Military" (four screw) versus "Civilian" (three screw) distinction is probably a modern "collector" term.

I was researching late military use of the M1860 Colt on the western frontier, and found there were actually a lot of them being reissued even after cartridge revolvers were being phased in. The only real complaint was with the paper cartridges, which tended to break open in the troopers' ammo pouches. A quantity of heavily used M1860 revolvers were sent to the arsenals at Leavenworth and St. Louis to be "cleaned and refurbished." The guns were disassembled, exteriors were buffed, barrels were very slightly shortened, they were cleaned up and then reassembled with mixed serial numbers. These have US stamped in front of the trigger guard. A bunch of these were famously issued to the Buffalo Soldiers of the 10th Cavalry, and were so marked. This is an example of a 10th Cavalry "C&R" (cleaned & refurbished, not "curio and relic") revolver:

Colt M1860 C&R 10th Cavalry Revolver.png
I've seen several of these for sale on the auction sites over the past couple of years. None that I have seen have the four-screw frames. So, that "civilian" designation for the three-screw revolvers is not necessarily accurate. Lots of the military guns were like that.

I'm thinking of getting an 1860. If I do, it will go to @45D for a tuneup, and if it has those big-headed screws for the shoulder stock, I expect I'll have him take care of those, too. His "fix" was also very nicely done.

Best regards,

Notchy Bob
 
Yes! They look ugly and they are unnecessary, and @Snooterpup 's "fix" is very neatly done. I also saw his later post with some of the production numbers, and these suggest not all that many of the old Colts were of the four-screw variety. In my opinion, the "Military" (four screw) versus "Civilian" (three screw) distinction is probably a modern "collector" term.

I was researching late military use of the M1860 Colt on the western frontier, and found there were actually a lot of them being reissued even after cartridge revolvers were being phased in. The only real complaint was with the paper cartridges, which tended to break open in the troopers' ammo pouches. A quantity of heavily used M1860 revolvers were sent to the arsenals at Leavenworth and St. Louis to be "cleaned and refurbished." The guns were disassembled, exteriors were buffed, barrels were very slightly shortened, they were cleaned up and then reassembled with mixed serial numbers. These have US stamped in front of the trigger guard. A bunch of these were famously issued to the Buffalo Soldiers of the 10th Cavalry, and were so marked. This is an example of a 10th Cavalry "C&R" (cleaned & refurbished, not "curio and relic") revolver:

View attachment 325419
I've seen several of these for sale on the auction sites over the past couple of years. None that I have seen have the four-screw frames. So, that "civilian" designation for the three-screw revolvers is not necessarily accurate. Lots of the military guns were like that.

I'm thinking of getting an 1860. If I do, it will go to @45D for a tuneup, and if it has those big-headed screws for the shoulder stock, I expect I'll have him take care of those, too. His "fix" was also very nicely done.

Best regards,

Notchy Bob

I appreciate that Notchy Bob!!
 
For those that have the shoulder stock, is it legal to use it on this handgun? Asked at the local gun store and was told no. At the same time he was selling an original with matching stock.
 
For those that have the shoulder stock, is it legal to use it on this handgun? Asked at the local gun store and was told no. At the same time he was selling an original with matching stock.
Gun store people should keep their mouths shut when they don't know what they are talking about.
 
What is a water table in regards to these?

Take this for what its worth. I think its correct but YRMV. As long as its not assembled, its not in violation.

I do shoot a gun that is a possible violation if it has the wrong parts in it. I make sure those parts stay at home.

Also, keep in mind, the Feds have to use definitions. Otherwise legally for them, its an issue to enforce.

So for legal sake a BP gun is not a gun. I am sure tens of thousands (undress of thousands?) of dead and wounded from the Civil War would disagree.

Dang, its not a gun so I am not dead, well then reality rears its ugly head.

Rose Bowl parade? Who with any sense sits in front of a TV and watches a stupid PARADE?!?!?

I would rather paint. Now if its Tractors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
If you own a BP gun converted to cartridge and own a shoulder stock that will fit it one is in violation whether assembled or not. As far as I know the Mauser C96 is the only pistol you can legally own with a shoulder stock without having registered it and paid the $200 tax. A percussion gun with a shoulder stock is perfectly legal (under Federal Law). The ATF does not accept "it's not assembled" or "I left it home" as a defense, they have no sense of humor.
 
Back
Top