- Joined
- Jul 24, 2018
- Messages
- 4,497
- Reaction score
- 5,647
Quote - 'The "Old West " finish offered by Cimarron does , in my opinion, try too hard to "make them look original" End quote.
Originally they would have looked brand new. Which is what they were.
Semantics are screwing up this thread. You are just trying to make a revolver look well-used, right? Cimarron are trying to make it look as though it has endured 150+ years of hard-won existence.
How long do you think weapons "looked new " in the period
You were in the military , you've seen what service and use does to firearms. It ages them quick, especially in the hands of young Joe's who don't own them.
3 years of daily carry in the leather, in all kinds of conditions, would make a Colt 1860 Army look pretty rough. I made 1 video with my brand new Dragoon, doing lots of drawing from the leather , and the blue on the high points is getting thin.
I realize the confusion here of "why do reenactors want guns that look 150 years old " but antiquing them with vinegar just adds a few years of service wear .
The Old West finish I believe, goes as far as to ding the guns up and beat the grips. That will happen naturally if you use it.
I've seen "unmentionable " pistols in the Army that were in the white after a deployment or two. They looked pretty much like the modern equivalent of an "Old West Finish " . Pistols are fired little, beat very hard under field conditions. Nothing is staying new.
Also, not to muddy the waters but removing blue can be historically necessary for a repro, in the case of a Walker , which those left Colt with white cylinders. Or the age old debate of reenactors removing blue from Enfields to simulate wear from cleaning and hand wear from years of carry.