• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Refinishing the 1847 Walker and percussion pistols

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Here's an update to my original post, I now realize it might've been a little mis-leading; I didn't intend to 'refinish' the Walker as much as to patina it. I'm mostly an old flintlock and percussion rifle shooter with an occasional daliance into percussion pistols. Am not a re-enactor though I respect living history. I have several antique arms and am pretty sure I'll never be able to aquire an original 1847 Colt Walker. Fiddling with this reproduction is more fun than I'd expected.

For me, old guns are never as attractive as when they've seen a bit of robust field use. In my furniture and in my arms collecting, I love old wood and old metal with a little patina.

It's with this in mind that I approached a mild facelift of the Uberti Walker, the pictures below chronicle some of the things I did. I'm still in process on the project with more barrel/ frame attention to come. I have a good start but have decided to mellow it out a bit more.
--------------------------------------------------------------
#1 Rather than remove the blue at once with a chemical remover I used a Lead Away cloth to gently take the finish down a little where it would've seen holster or carry wear, leaving bright blue in place receiving less wear. Uberti's charcoal blue finish is delicate to begin with so it didn't take much;

xQmfYEFh.jpg


sV4CRkOh.jpg


giUvtoth.jpg


mL2CxoS.jpg



#2 I used the white viegar and salt technique to make the brass a more mustard-yellow vs the bright and shiny brass of a new gun, for me an improvement;

9iRGp1ih.jpg


zTxgN6A.jpg


ddVKynm.jpg



#3 I did not chemically remove the varnish from the grips but rather used a fine steel wool to slowly remove the heavy, shiny Italian varnish. This took a long time, hours of steel wooling and cloth polishing and the results for me are mixed. I definitely like them more but stripping the varnish revealed that the grips are not walnut. I lwould prefer real walnut grips to True Oil but haven't had any luck finding a pair so far. These too are a work in progress;

zTxgN6Ah.jpg


87l5NgDh.jpg


Wr9v3vih.jpg


8J5mxjOh.jpg
 
Last edited:
I would Imagine that is one of Capt. Walkers troops showed up with a brand new revolver that looked like it had spent a bad weekend in the bottom of a cow lot, they would have been severely disciplined.
That is far too handsome a piece to be "antiqued" sorry but that is my opinion, and, like belly buttons, every body has one.
But it is yours do what you think best
Bunk
 
Thanks for your opinion, agree about differing slants on what beauty is.
I don't know whether or not you're a musician but there's an interesting corollary to the aging of new guns that your remarks bring to mind. That being something called 'relicing', the purposeful aging of certain new guitars to emulate their 1950's and 1960's made predecessors which some argue are more asthetically beautiful. This process is done by aging the guitar finish ( wear, patina), hardware etc until it resembles a well worn original. Original '50's and '60's guitars are priced far beyond the means of the average player at five and six figures, and they're also exceedingly rare. The average guy/ gal would probably never get the chance to even play an original Fender Straotcaster made in 1950, never mind own one. And so relic'd guitars have established a niche amoung many players. For some reason this ifuriates those who feel the relicing of new guitars is somehow- I don't know, unacceptable. Anyway the lines of demarcation are drawn over this issue at various music forums. They are passionately held and as far as I can see a function of what being human is.
Anyway and interesting corollary.

I would Imagine that is one of Capt. Walkers troops showed up with a brand new revolver that looked like it had spent a bad weekend in the bottom of a cow lot, they would have been severely disciplined.
That is far too handsome a piece to be "antiqued" sorry but that is my opinion, and, like belly buttons, every body has one.
But it is yours do what you think best
Bunk
 
jonathan butcher, that gun and accessories look great! You did a great job on the gun and grips.

Uberti uses a varnish with pigment in it, which is almost like thick paint. On top of that, it is in a gaudy color that does not belong on a gun like this. I think the grips look great just the way you have them, but you coud make the grips look more like American walnut by stripping off the finish, then staining with dark brown stain or leather dye, then a very few coats of tung oil.

I suggest NOT mixing stain with the finish. That is just a shortcut to get the job done fast, but it does not end up looking right.
 
Thanks B P Arn, I did strip about 50% of the varnish but now I think I’ll go all the way. I have some dark brown leather dye on hand. I used light steel wool but as you might imagine is slow. What grit sand paper would you go with to use along side the fine steel wool ?

jonathan butcher, that gun and accessories look great! You did a great job on the gun and grips.

Uberti uses a varnish with pigment in it, which is almost like thick paint. On top of that, it is in a gaudy color that does not belong on a gun like this. I think the grips look great just the way you have them, but you coud make the grips look more like American walnut by stripping off the finish, then staining with dark brown stain or leather dye, then a very few coats of tung oil.

I suggest NOT mixing stain with the finish. That is just a shortcut to get the job done fast, but it does not end up looking right.
 
For what it is worth, here are "before" and "after" pictures of a revolver (1965 date code) of which I re-finished the grips. Note the thick, high gloss finish, and bland, pale color of the wood in the "before" picture.

I stripped off the finish by soaking them in lacquer thinner for about an hour. Then I used a stiff nylon bristle brush to remove any residual finish. After they were dry, I smoothed them with steel wool, being very careful not to round the edges. No sandpaper. Then I stained them with dark brown leather dye. Finally I gave them one coat of tung oil. Done.

PS. I believe the grips on my gun are made of walnut (of unknown origin), but definitely not American Black Walnut.

100_6630.JPG
100_6693.JPG
 
Thanks B P Arn, I did strip about 50% of the varnish but now I think I’ll go all the way. I have some dark brown leather dye on hand. I used light steel wool but as you might imagine is slow. What grit sand paper would you go with to use along side the fine steel wool ?
You should be ale to remove the original finish with lacquer thinner, or acetone. If not, paint remover should make a quick job of it. I would not use sandpaper unless you are wanting to remove wood, which is exactly what will happen.

If you insist on using sandpaper, use 320 grit to mitigate the damage that will be done. Then polish with fine steel wool. Again, stay away from the edges.
 
For what it is worth, here are "before" and "after" pictures of a revolver (1965 date code) of which I re-finished the grips. Note the thick, high gloss finish, and bland, pale color of the wood in the "before" picture.

I stripped off the finish by soaking them in lacquer thinner for about an hour. Then I used a stiff nylon bristle brush to remove any residual finish. After they were dry, I smoothed them with steel wool, being very careful not to round the edges. No sandpaper. Then I stained them with dark brown leather dye. Finally I gave them one coat of tung oil. Done.

PS. I believe the grips on my gun are made of walnut (of unknown origin), but definitely not American Black Walnut.

View attachment 42152View attachment 42153

That is a really nice looking replica Griswold & Gunnison. If it is of 1965 manufacture it should have an XXI datecode on it somewhere. Back then most were on the right side of the frame, but I don't see it in your photos. I would like to know who the manufacturer is/was. It would be great if you could take a few photos of the bottom of the frame at the barrel lug, the bottom of the backstrap, and the left side of the frame.

Back then it was considered "in vogue" (if you will) to produce revolvers with blonde wood, all of the way to the late 80's. You did a very nice job darkening/refinishing the wood (which has some figure rather than quarter-sawn straight grain normally encountered), but if it is a fairly rare repro you just took it out of that repro collector market. With that datecode it could be an Armi San Marco, an Armi San Paolo, a C.O.M., or other minor Italian producers, which are no longer in business.

I have a Pietta 1851 Navy 4-screw CFS (AZ/1990) that I acquired in a trade that has the blonde wood, even at that late date. While I am not fond of blonde wood it is period for that revolver.



Regards,

Jim
 
I love what you did with your grips, always prefer darker colored TruOil finished grips. To me they look vintage and just..right.


For what it is worth, here are "before" and "after" pictures of a revolver (1965 date code) of which I re-finished the grips. Note the thick, high gloss finish, and bland, pale color of the wood in the "before" picture.

I stripped off the finish by soaking them in lacquer thinner for about an hour. Then I used a stiff nylon bristle brush to remove any residual finish. After they were dry, I smoothed them with steel wool, being very careful not to round the edges. No sandpaper. Then I stained them with dark brown leather dye. Finally I gave them one coat of tung oil. Done.

PS. I believe the grips on my gun are made of walnut (of unknown origin), but definitely not American Black Walnut.

View attachment 42152View attachment 42153
 
That is a really nice looking replica Griswold & Gunnison. If it is of 1965 manufacture it should have an XXI datecode on it somewhere. Back then most were on the right side of the frame, but I don't see it in your photos. I would like to know who the manufacturer is/was. It would be great if you could take a few photos of the bottom of the frame at the barrel lug, the bottom of the backstrap, and the left side of the frame.

Back then it was considered "in vogue" (if you will) to produce revolvers with blonde wood, all of the way to the late 80's. You did a very nice job darkening/refinishing the wood (which has some figure rather than quarter-sawn straight grain normally encountered), but if it is a fairly rare repro you just took it out of that repro collector market. With that datecode it could be an Armi San Marco, an Armi San Paolo, a C.O.M., or other minor Italian producers, which are no longer in business.

I have a Pietta 1851 Navy 4-screw CFS (AZ/1990) that I acquired in a trade that has the blonde wood, even at that late date. While I am not fond of blonde wood it is period for that revolver.



Regards,

Jim

No collector value there to destroy, since a previous owner already removed the caliber designation, "BLACK POWDER ONLY" warning, the manufacturer's name, or any reference to its country of origin, other than the Italian proof marks and date code (I wonder why he left those?), but thanks for your concern.

There is what appears to be a stamp on the bottom of the grip frame, bit I think that is only a flaw in the casting. There appears to be a scratch on the bottom of the grip frame, which I didn't notice until after I took the picture, but it was just a piece of wax or something that wiped off easily.

As requested, here are more photos:
100_6695.JPG
100_6696.JPG
100_6697.JPG
100_6698.JPG
100_6699.JPG
100_6700.JPG
100_6701.JPG
100_6703.JPG
 
No collector value there to destroy, since a previous owner already removed the caliber designation, "BLACK POWDER ONLY" warning, the manufacturer's name, or any reference to its country of origin, other than the Italian proof marks and date code (I wonder why he left those?), but thanks for your concern.

There is what appears to be a stamp on the bottom of the grip frame, bit I think that is only a flaw in the casting. There appears to be a scratch on the bottom of the grip frame, which I didn't notice until after I took the picture, but it was just a piece of wax or something that wiped off easily.

Thanks for the additional photos! It has definitely been defarbed (including the cylinder), but it is curious to me why the guy left the date code and proofmarks on the barrel lug, and not the frame. Barrels can be interchanged from frame to frame with fitting, and the frame is where it all happens insofar as historicity. With that date code, I am thinking it can only be an Uberti, Armi San Marco, Armi San Paolo, C.O.M., or DGG.

It is still a nice looking G&G .36. Lots of folks think that a similar one in .44 is their "representative" G&G but that is totally wrong.

I think you have a keeper/shooter. Thanks for posting it!

Regards,

Jim
 
Thank you for the info.

Yes, I forgot to mention the SN has been removed from the frame too, but not the barrel. That doesn't make sense to me.

I shot this one just yesterday. Interestingly, even with the original front sight (as far as I know) it shoots to point of impact at 20 yards. Windage and elevation are dead on, which is not always the case!

I only use 15 grains of BP in this and my brass framed Spiller & Burr replica, along with a home cast round ball. If I want more power, I'll shoot something else.

BTW, there is a similar manufacturing flaw in the frame cut-out for loading the nipples (whatever the proper name for that is) as there is in the bottom of the grip frame. "It is what it is", as they say...
100_6704.JPG
 
Back
Top