Period correct 44 Navy

[jaxenro]

I know, Colt never made a .44 Navy, but as I understand it the first batch of 1860 Armies were made up using rebated Navy frames, with Navy grips, and the new ratcheted loading lever on a 7 1/2" barrel.

So if the only difference between the Army and Navy frame is the rebating for the cylinder, if I swapped a 1851 navy grip frame for the Armies, and cut the barrel to 7 1/2, would I end up with a period correct .44 Navy (or army-navy)? The Navy grips seem to fit my hands better, plus it would be a little different from the run of the mill, and period correct.

 

[mec]

Some had old pattern ratchetless levers and navy grips. The only remaining hurdle for full legitimacy for the "44 Navies." is the barrel. I believe all the 60 armies were round. Maybe not though. There were a lot of variations, experiments and utilizaition of older parts.

 

[Cmabie]

I have never seen 44 cal. original Colt Navy revolvers. Both, the 1851 and the 1860 were 36 cal. I think the 44 caliber models are inventions of the Italian replica makers. Especially those with brass frames.
:haha:

 

[mec]

Pretty much inventions of the Italian etc...
But. colt made up 60 armies using navy sized grips and the old pattern ratchetless loading levers.

The .44 Italian replica navies lack only a round barrel for some degree of historic legitimacy.It would help if they called it an Army Instead of a Navy. The replicas I've seen have the rebated frame/cylinder and are at least a feasible 19th century arm if not a totally accurate copy of one. In any case, I don't think that somebody who has rushed out and bought one of the steel framed erzatz navies should feel that he is a turkey.

 

[Zonie]

I'm afraid I can't agree with the comment "Both, the 1851 and the 1860 were 36 cal. "

The 1860 Colt was called the Army and it was always a .44 caliber pistol.
It always had the rebated cylinder and frame. It was produced from 1860 thru 1873.
The .36 caliber Colt made during the Civil War was the 1861 Colt Navy. (Flayderman's and others)

Having read dozens of books on the Colt pistols, I have never found any documentation that any 1851 pistol frames or any other parts were used in the development of the 1860 Army.

Where might I find the documentation for the comments which say the older Colt parts were used in the development of that gun?

 

[mikelange]

The only reference I find to the grip size of 1860 Armies (the original point of this thread) is in Flayderman's. The description of the "Fluted Cylinder Army" variation reads: "Cylinders had full flutes, and thus lacked roll engraved scenes. Barrel lengths were 7 1/2" and 8", their markings either the New York or Hartford addresses. Grip sizes of the Navy (very scarce and will bring premium) or the Army configuration...."

I looked into this variation for the same reason as Jaxenro -- wanted a .44 caliber Colt that was PC, but liked the feel of the Navy grip frame -- and realized that it would take lot more than fitting an Army pistol with a Navy grip frame to achieve a copy of an actual Colt product, however rare.

And if I were Jaxenro, I'd still go ahead and fit the Army with the grip frame I preferred (and I intend to acquire a '60 Army at some point and do just that) -- but it definitely wouldn't be PC.

 

[TN.Frank]

Actually, wouldn't the correct wording be "'51 Navy of Army Caliber." for a Navy gun that's .44 cal.? Personally, my favorite Colt cap n' ball gun is the '60 Army followed by the '61 Navy. There's just something about the way that they look that is nice. As a side note, Dixie Gun Works has the old Root Revolvers in stock in .31 cal with either a 3.5" or 5.5" barrel. I like the 5.5", it just seems to look nicer. [url] http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_92_187_189&products_id=9955[/url]

 

[Cmabie]

You know, I just remembered. My 95 year old dad has a 44 caliber 1860 Army Colt in his collection that has 1851 Navy Colt grips and grip frame on it. It is hoster worn and looks like it was carried a lot. It has a non fluted cylinder with traces of rolled engraving on it. Someone may have had a small hand and modified it or perhaps it was one assembled from parts by Francis Bannerman and sold as surplus c. 100 years ago. It is the only odd ball Colt in his extensive collection.

 

[jaxenro]

As was noted, 1861 Navies had round barrel's, so I suppose barrel shape really isn't the determining factor.

So, what makes a navy a navy? If it's caliber, then I gues there really isn't a way to come up with a .44 navy. The description just excludes itself.

What I guess I am describing would be best terms a "prototype new model army revolver of 44 caliber" with navy sized grips. Just that I find the smaller grips fit my hand better.

Joel

 

[madbrad]

All Navy's were .36 cal and all Army's were .44 cal. It was not that they were exclusivly used buy only the Army or Navy it was just used as a designation to easily identify the caliber.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

So, what makes a navy a navy?

The Naval battle scene rolled onto the cylinder.
Army models were so called because they were officially adopted by the army, whether Dragoon, 1860 or 1873 single action army Colts. Some other makers referred to there revolvers as "army size" or "navy size" just as a sales gimmick.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

But the '60 Army also has the navy scene rolled into the cylinder. The Navy scene is probably why the '51 Navy was called such, but this would have become confusing once the '60 Army appeared. All Colt Navies were .36 caliber. There are '60 Armies with Navy grip frames, but they seem to be quite rare.

 

[mec]

you might want to take a look at Robert L. Wilson's book " Colt, An American Legend." On Page number 96 is a picture of three Army type revolvers. The caption reads in part, ".....Top. A prototype 1860 Army,built on the frame of the 1851 Navy: the barrel of the new style but fitted with a modernized hinged (not creeping)loading lever. Serial Number 4...."

Another from the same page: " This pistol, pictured on pages 53 and 54, has an 1851 Navy serial number and has been expanded to a .44, with the required adaptations of frame and barrel and the addition of a new cylinder."

 

[Zonie]

Thanks for the directions.
I don't know about your book, but mine fails to show the elusive SN 91868 on page 53 or 54 (unless it has a shoulder stock :rotf: )

 

[mec]

I noticed that. I suspect that they are refering to pages in the material he is citing in the colt records.