Interesting revolver. The numbers on the rear of the cylinder & brrel lug may be partial serial numbers. No one mentioned the possiblity of European manufacture: many colt clones were made in Europe, with or without Colt's "Brevette". I have several I picked up in Turkey. A couple are well finished, one is kinda rough.
What make of pistol?
- Thread starter Harry Dursema
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Harry Dursema
32 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2012
- Messages
- 27
- Reaction score
- 0
Fergetful Jones said:
Perhaps but due to on 01/12/2013 my house burned down and the Confederate Navy brass frame revolver in my logo photo had it's frame melt and I lost all but two of my guns, still have this .36 caliber.
I think I have a sure way if finding out if it is European or American made, when check back in when I find out for sure if it is.
Arivacain
Pulling the screws and measuring the diameter and pitch would go a long ways toward identifying it specially it it turned out to have ISO metric threads. The number of lands/groves and direction of rotation of the rifling would help too. How about a photo of the front of the trigger guard/frame where the serial number is found on most Colts and their replicas? It looks like the tip of the hammer has been filed off which is why there is no sight notch. It might be nice to find it has a Confederate provenance but I think that is very doubtful specially with all the research devoted to CSA sidearms. I'm leaning toward an Italian gun that someone took a file to after they lost interest in it. The file work on the nose of the hammer, the flats of the cylinder and the recoil shield is far cruder than the rest of the gun.
The checkering on the hammer is distinctive and crisp and shows two different patterns. The edges of the frame, once you move away from the file marks, are free of dings and wear and the grips are in good shape too, not what you would see on a used revolver from the 3rd. quarter of the 1800's. The 3rd. quarter of the 1900's would be my guess.
The inside of the plunger looks more rounded and less concave to me. What do you folks think?
I gather that this is a Pietta that's trying to go back in time.
I gather that this is a Pietta that's trying to go back in time.
The ball rammer and plunger look too good for a handgun in this condition, the brass trigger guard is not beat up enough, as with the rammer and plunger, too many clean lines, and sharp edges compared to the overall condition.
The cones are too new.
The trigger itself looks too good. One thing that really stands out, is on the hammer, the portion which strikes the nipple and caps seems nice and smooth with no nipple indentation or pitting.
My opinion, a repo that was "antiqued" for the lack of a better description.
The cones are too new.
The trigger itself looks too good. One thing that really stands out, is on the hammer, the portion which strikes the nipple and caps seems nice and smooth with no nipple indentation or pitting.
My opinion, a repo that was "antiqued" for the lack of a better description.
Sorry for so many posts, but I went and looked over my Piettas and Ubertis.
The hammer thumb portion seems to have had the horizontal pattern lines of a Pietta over which someone added a diamond pattern. Maybe some hammers were made this way, so this could be a mistake on my part.
Also from the pictures, the cylinder arbor doesn't seem to have any gas or flame cutting usually present with any bp revolver that is shot much. Maybe the pictures just don't show this.
The bottom of the cylinder arbor hole in the barrel appears to be bare, shiney and new metal, inconsistant with the overall condition, though this may be due to camera flash.
I would expect to see missing pieces of wood on the handgrips near the rear edge with a weapon that has seen this much abuse and being 150 years old. The bottom edges of the wooden grips are too intact.
There seems to be absolutely no shrinkage of the wood compared to the grip frame that sometimes accompanies original Colt handguns made in the 1800's.
The hammer thumb portion seems to have had the horizontal pattern lines of a Pietta over which someone added a diamond pattern. Maybe some hammers were made this way, so this could be a mistake on my part.
Also from the pictures, the cylinder arbor doesn't seem to have any gas or flame cutting usually present with any bp revolver that is shot much. Maybe the pictures just don't show this.
The bottom of the cylinder arbor hole in the barrel appears to be bare, shiney and new metal, inconsistant with the overall condition, though this may be due to camera flash.
I would expect to see missing pieces of wood on the handgrips near the rear edge with a weapon that has seen this much abuse and being 150 years old. The bottom edges of the wooden grips are too intact.
There seems to be absolutely no shrinkage of the wood compared to the grip frame that sometimes accompanies original Colt handguns made in the 1800's.
I gotta go with Pistoleer on this one. The nipples and trigger look too good in relation with the overall condition. From the actual placement of the filing marks, it appears the barrel may have had the edges rounded to get it's current look. The comments about checking the screws for standard or metric threads is spot on. That will tell a lot about the origin. If standard, it'll just deepen the mystery...I only hope somebody didn't try to "cutsie" up a real M.1851!
Harry Dursema
32 Cal.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2012
- Messages
- 27
- Reaction score
- 0
Wes/Tex said:
I agree! Changed out the nipples and Pietta #10 nipples fit in very well.
In my mind this ID's it as a repo.
I do remember reading that Belgium imported 1851 Colts during the war but can't remember for what side. I think it would be a stretch to think a Belgium 1851 Colt would take modern Pietta #10 nipples.
Thanks for all the input!
