Pietta History (some what)

[CVA Enthusiast]

Mainly for the new guys, and yes being in less than 5 or so years, That is ME also, However sharing research on my findings if at all possible one wants to avoid the earlier date codes. For actual shooting. As I was told, as others said the pre 2000 date codes (could have ended earlier in the 1980`s) to give to caution pre 2000 were for the reenactors these were noise makers had no real pressures intended for cylinders or barrels. These were over built cap guns folks would play civil war, gun town mountain, days of the old west revisited. "Costume Guns" be a great collector item or conversation piece. However running real loads would often end in exploding cylinders/barrels. For the new guys purchasing second hand, sellers could not know it is just a Costume or Show Gun.

 

[Dude]

That doesn't sound right to me. From what I've heard, the main difference between the early guns and post 2000 were the use of CNC machinery to produce them - Pietta and Uberti particularly. However, for a while after the conversion to CNC, the factories, in cost saving practice, cut the highest paid employees (the real skilled guys) so quality suffered for a while. CNC doesn't eliminate all of the attention needed in building something, imagine that.

Guns built prior to 2000 may need more work fitting new parts since tolerances weren't as tight.

Other than that, they all are equally strong. Some companies built stronger/better firearms than others, but that's another subject. I've read that it's a good idea to steer clear of Spanish black powder guns. But it's not true that the early ones are just toys and noise makers - good-looking pieces to fondle but not load and shoot.

 

[user 48702]

My head hurts after trying to read that. That's BS, I have owned and sold both early Pietta and Uberti revolvers, and I'll choose Pietta over Uberti any day. Both suffered quality issues in the early guns, but have gotten better over the years. As far as quality today, Pietta is running circles around Uberti when it comes to percussion revolvers.

 

[bluemule66]

I guess I will have to throw my 1851 away before it blows up?

 

[William Lincoln]

Early Piettas were built for export to a lower price point. I have an early Uberti that
looks like it is made from a silvery pot metal material. When Navy got involved, as
well as other importers, the quality went up because of competition. Also ,real top
firearms experts became involved in the reproduction market. I also liked ASM and
Euroarms revolvers. Pietta makes great guns--as does Uberti-Beretta. While, there
were differences in final finishing in the early days, today they are both finely
finished. As pointed out, they are today made on CNC computer machines.
The interesting variations are noteworthy. Pietta and Pedersoli have versions for
match shooting featuring progressive rifling like the original Remingtons. I have had
several odd balls over the years. A Palmetto 1858 NMA with casting flaws but a great
shooter. And a Spanish made 1858 NMA that was a wonderfully reliable accurate
match grade shooting revolver. Over the years, I bought ,sold, traded and gave away
some great pieces. til I'm now down to two. AND I'm still wanting several new items,
the Ace by Pietta and a ROA to replace my last one I gave to a loved one. The
Piettas are revolvers to cherish and the equal of any out there. You can use the
target Piettas to win medals as many have done- they seem to be more accurate.
Whatever, you have ,enjoy it and take a young person into the fun of it. We are
fortunate to live in a Country that allows the pursuit of this tradition and sport.

 

[Trot]

Not sure where you got your information from CVA, but I would find another source! I've been doing this a long time, and have never heard of a Pietta "exploding" because of poor quality. I've got some early revolvers that are still plugging along just fine, and they have always been used as real shooters, not "costume guns". Piettas are now, and always have been made for live fire.

 

[1950DAVE]

I guess I will have to throw my 1851 away before it blows up?

Please throw it my way. I ain't skeered.
Dave

 

[Old Hawkeye]

View attachment 101514 Mainly for the new guys, and yes being in less than 5 or so years, That is ME also, However sharing research on my findings if at all possible one wants to avoid the earlier date codes. For actual shooting. As I was told, as others said the pre 2000 date codes (could have ended earlier in the 1980`s) to give to caution pre 2000 were for the reenactors these were noise makers had no real pressures intended for cylinders or barrels. These were over built cap guns folks would play civil war, gun town mountain, days of the old west revisited. "Costume Guns" be a great collector item or conversation piece. However running real loads would often end in exploding cylinders/barrels. For the new guys purchasing second hand, sellers could not know it is just a Costume or Show Gun.

Another post by someone that has no clue, but yet feels the need to "warn" all of us. So for 60 years all of these guns were merely "toys" & were constantly blowing up. Did you not notice they all have the CIP proof mark showing they have been safety tested? Absolutely absurd!!

 

[springfield art]

View attachment 101514 Mainly for the new guys, and yes being in less than 5 or so years, That is ME also, However sharing research on my findings if at all possible one wants to avoid the earlier date codes. For actual shooting. As I was told, as others said the pre 2000 date codes (could have ended earlier in the 1980`s) to give to caution pre 2000 were for the reenactors these were noise makers had no real pressures intended for cylinders or barrels. These were over built cap guns folks would play civil war, gun town mountain, days of the old west revisited. "Costume Guns" be a great collector item or conversation piece. However running real loads would often end in exploding cylinders/barrels. For the new guys purchasing second hand, sellers could not know it is just a Costume or Show Gun.

Wow! Thanks for publishing this. I only could find date charts up to a certain point, and thought they had stopped using them. I will print this out and save. Great service.

 

[springfield art]

Another post by someone that has no clue, but yet feels the need to "warn" all of us. So for 60 years all of these guns were merely "toys" & were constantly blowing up. Did you not notice they all have the CIP proof mark showing they have been safety tested? Absolutely absurd!!

You are correct, but I find the chart useful if it's OK.

 

[springfield art]

Early Piettas were built for export to a lower price point. I have an early Uberti that
looks like it is made from a silvery pot metal material. When Navy got involved, as
well as other importers, the quality went up because of competition. Also ,real top
firearms experts became involved in the reproduction market. I also liked ASM and
Euroarms revolvers. Pietta makes great guns--as does Uberti-Beretta. While, there
were differences in final finishing in the early days, today they are both finely
finished. As pointed out, they are today made on CNC computer machines.
The interesting variations are noteworthy. Pietta and Pedersoli have versions for
match shooting featuring progressive rifling like the original Remingtons. I have had
several odd balls over the years. A Palmetto 1858 NMA with casting flaws but a great
shooter. And a Spanish made 1858 NMA that was a wonderfully reliable accurate
match grade shooting revolver. Over the years, I bought ,sold, traded and gave away
some great pieces. til I'm now down to two. AND I'm still wanting several new items,
the Ace by Pietta and a ROA to replace my last one I gave to a loved one. The
Piettas are revolvers to cherish and the equal of any out there. You can use the
target Piettas to win medals as many have done- they seem to be more accurate.
Whatever, you have ,enjoy it and take a young person into the fun of it. We are
fortunate to live in a Country that allows the pursuit of this tradition and sport.

Your comments are nice to read. I have nice Pietta and Uberti guns. My ASM 1851 & 1860 are super guns for the price I paid in the mid-90's, (about $135 but that's more in today's dollars). This whole repro thing, I recall when the earliest "Navy" came out of Navy Arms, I had a $1 flyer catalog announcing them, and was enthralled as a kid. Wish I still kept the flyer! Plus a buck would buy several comic books at the corner pharmacy!

 

[Whughett]

I flunked grammar in high school, heck I quit high school after the 9th grade. I do however recall little things like sentence structure and punctuation. Some times it’s hard to read some of the stuff posted here. Could be my advanced age however.

 

[springfield art]

I flunked grammar in high school, heck I quit high school after the 9th grade. I do however recall little things like sentence structure and punctuation. Some times it’s hard to read some of the stuff posted here. Could be my advanced age however.

Hey, I noticed that, too! But people get offended if you say anything. Good for you! I never got into diagramming sentences but extensive reading over the years has served me well. Best regards.

 

[mushka]

I was a terrible grammar student. Never could diagram a sentence correctly, barely know the difference between a noun and a verb, but I have an 1851 Pietta in .36 cal. and an 1860 Uberti in .44cal. Both made in the late twenty teens and both are fantastic revolvers. I can't fault the workmanship or operation of either one.

 

[desi23]

The reproduction market really got started with Navy Arms seeking out a company to make replica revolvers for the upcoming Civil War Centennial. Uberti was the first but other manufacturers soon jumped on the bandwagon as other importers wanted a piece of the action. From the start they were all making fully functional guns that had to be submitted to proof testing to be sold. Quality varied as did historical accuracy (many collectors were opposed to them being too close to originals) but no matter who made them they still had to pass proof to be sold. There have been companies (still are too) that made non-firing decorators and even blank only guns but they would not be proof marked as they were not considered real firearms and subject to proof laws and other legal restrictions.

As I stated quality varies, especially with some of the off brands, timing issues, poor fit of parts, weak springs are not unknown but the barrels and cylinders had to be strong enough to pass proof or they weren't going to make it to market. The introduction of modern CNC machines has improved the overall quality of the two main surviving companies, Uberti and Pietta, (the others mostly disappearing from the market) but there is still a bit of hand fitting involved. Ubertis still gets charged with short arbors on it's Colt type revolvers but otherwise seems to make a sound gun. Pietta seems to be producing a better fit and finished piece than they used to but their older guns were still decent. To claim that any of them were making dangerous junk in the past is a bit over the top.

 

[Dale Lilly]

I shot, often, in 1970s, a 1858 Remington repro imported by Lyman.. It was the most solidly built revolver I have ever had. I currently own two colt repos, .36 and .44, made in 'back then.' Both have been fired a bunch and they are still tight and pretty. They grace my office wall in a glass covered shadow box when not in use. Never had a ' bad' ML revolver. Dale

 

[CVA Enthusiast]

As stated what was found in research, just spare time looking into I am not stating truth or validity just what was found. As far as grammar teachers, eh well sit and spin. And looking for "Proper Structure" perhaps one should get out from behind a keyboard and monitor, NO ONE uses proper grammar since the 1990`s. Have a nice day

 

[Whughett]

I’ve gotten a little carried away in the past eight or ten years. Started with a ROA then a Pietta. (Traditions) 1860 Army, from there it’s blossomed into some 23 or so percussion revolvers. Uberti, Pietta, Armi San Marco, Armi San Palo and a couple of I don’t know who made it. Even have a carbine made by Burnside in Providence Rhode Island.
Of the all the four Ruger Old Armies are the best in fit. finish and function. But then the thread isn’t about American Made Guns.

 

[springfield art]

The reproduction market really got started with Navy Arms seeking out a company to make replica revolvers for the upcoming Civil War Centennial. Uberti was the first but other manufacturers soon jumped on the bandwagon as other importers wanted a piece of the action. From the start they were all making fully functional guns that had to be submitted to proof testing to be sold. Quality varied as did historical accuracy (many collectors were opposed to them being too close to originals) but no matter who made them they still had to pass proof to be sold. There have been companies (still are too) that made non-firing decorators and even blank only guns but they would not be proof marked as they were not considered real firearms and subject to proof laws and other legal restrictions.

As I stated quality varies, especially with some of the off brands, timing issues, poor fit of parts, weak springs are not unknown but the barrels and cylinders had to be strong enough to pass proof or they weren't going to make it to market. The introduction of modern CNC machines has improved the overall quality of the two main surviving companies, Uberti and Pietta, (the others mostly disappearing from the market) but there is still a bit of hand fitting involved. Ubertis still gets charged with short arbors on it's Colt type revolvers but otherwise seems to make a sound gun. Pietta seems to be producing a better fit and finished piece than they used to but their older guns were still decent. To claim that any of them were making dangerous junk in the past is a bit over the top.

Yup. The old-line "blue blazer" collectors were upset that someone could pass off the copies as real. This has been happening in every field of collecting since ancient times. Stamps? Coins? Antiquities? All faked going back centuries. Glad that the fans and re-enactors got to have these items to keep old time practices alive. BTW, some of the worst fakers were the very ones who objected to the repros.

 

[springfield art]

I shot, often, in 1970s, a 1858 Remington repro imported by Lyman.. It was the most solidly built revolver I have ever had. I currently own two colt repos, .36 and .44, made in 'back then.' Both have been fired a bunch and they are still tight and pretty. They grace my office wall in a glass covered shadow box when not in use. Never had a ' bad' ML revolver. Dale

Yeah, Lyman of course didn't make them, just imported and marketed, but they were great guns!