Should I have them redone? Colt SAAs

Status
Not open for further replies.

superc_1

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
18
I have purchased 2 1st gen Colt 1873s (at a good price). Both mechanically work just fine. Both are 4 3/4" barrels. One has the old type black powder frame while the other is early 1900s. My issue is both weapons have been 'beautified' by an unknown bubba who polished off many markings (while ignoring some pitting) before giving one an amateur bluing while the other one may have been nickle plated in someone's garage. These deeds happened long ago, possibly in the mid 20th century. Someone stuck a white plastic stock on one and the older one (of still not yet positively identified caliber) now has a smooth 2 piece walnut grip of unknowb origin.

My temptation is to get a Colt letter on both so as to know the original configurations, then have the lettering restored, the metal polished and appropriate finish (and or re-barreling) re-done and fit grips of the correct type.

My thought is who ever the bubba was, whenever he (probably) did his 'improvements' he already destroyed much of the collector value. They remain shootablel Colts, but, er, not pretty ones. Would restoring them as much as possible to their original appearance be a good thing, or a bad thing?
 
Seeing how the value is destroyed, this is your call.

Personally, yes, I'd do it.
(as long as it's not taking necessities away from the family)
 
old frame.jpg

I am sorely tempted. This is onw of them. The rebluing was so long ago it is turning brown. A true shame the clumsy polish job took off most of the writing.
 
I'm with JeeperCreeper: refinish one of them and keep the other one as is. Don't know how much can be done with the one that was reblued (or how expensive it might get to fix it up). Hope they can be factory lettered and that you can learn more about them.
 
Turnbull will charge you a bomb if he will even work on something that rough. If they were Grandpa's Guns and you wanted them to look good, cost no object, OK. But for a couple of recent purchases, the restoration money would buy nicer examples. Or one really nice example.

There are other shops, some proudly showing really rough guns made to look pretty good. Google them up and start calling.
 
Wow, the one in the picture is in very rough shape. I doubt anyone will be able to remove the pitting and still have enough metal to be safe. Is the other one better? If the other is better have it worked on and keep this one as a range gun.

If you send them anywhere I would choose Colt for the work. They will at least apply the correct bluing for a Colt.
 
You will not get "correct bluing" for a period gun from Colt. They just don't do that any more.
I saw a 1911 that had been sent to Colt for "restoration." It was the polish and color of a new G.M., indistinguishable from current production except by reading the markings.
 
Colt doesn't do restorations like that. You're looking at A LOT of expensive metalwork to make that thing right. Not just polishing but continuous welding and filing, welding and filing. It would cost less to sell them and buy a really nice one. It would have to go to a shop like Turnbull, Classic Arms, Alan Harton or that other guy whose name I won't mention.


You will not get "correct bluing" for a period gun from Colt. They just don't do that any more.
I saw a 1911 that had been sent to Colt for "restoration." It was the polish and color of a new G.M., indistinguishable from current production except by reading the markings.
They do but they farm it out to Turnbull. ;)
 
Some thoughts. Both were pretty cheap as authentic Colts go, much less 1st gen guns. In the ballpark of a used Uberti.

I am checking my Kuhnhausen and note a lot of parts interchangeability between 1st and 2nd gen Colts so replacing the pitted cylinder won't be that hard. Indeed, since this a type 1 BP iron frame, there is little downside to replacing an iron cylinder with a modern steel one. The old cylinder can just go in a bag with any other replaced parts, so if someday I want to sell it to some purist who insists on original parts, well, here is the bag of original parts. Curreently the orig cylinder is soaking in WD40 so I can get the bushing out. Experience with 1878s has already taught me a stuck bushing is probably BP corrosion welded and that will need replacement no matter what.. There is no readable caliber marking remaining on the barrel, just a 4.. After I get the bushing out I will play with that. Choices probable, 44 American, .44 Russian, .44 Ely, 44 WCF (aka .44-40), .45 Colt. Checking, yes I can get cylinders, although if it turns out the original from Colt was any of the first 3 a simple .44 Special cylinder of modern steel will suffice. Similar with the barrel. I am not convinced that in the early days the 4.75 lenght was common yet. This could be a barrel switch gun. Time will tell.

I am well aware of the heavy advertising pushing Turnbull and I fully concur they do brilliant work. However, so do many other not as heavily advertised craftsmen shops where the same kind of work can be done far cheaper. I have someone I have used before, who did superlative work on an old 1903 someone had possibly soaked in ocean water before I got it. He is fully capable of restoring the lettering and giving proper colors (once Colt tells me what the original was). I don't see spending thousands to restore the gun. That's silly and results from using mainstream shops while ignoring the many craftsmen who only had a few gun rags show their work once or twice a decade or so ago. LoL to those who think having work you do appear in multiple magazines is always done for free.

I am undecided about the 2 piece wood grips. I am not an SAA expert, but I thought the choices available in the first frame SAAs were one piece wood (or ivory) and 2 piece black rubber. Somehow I had been of the impression 2 piece smooth Walnut grips were a post WWI invention. I may be wrong. Does anyone know of any 1870s specimens with factory original 2 piece smooth wood grips?

I mourn the loss of Kathleen Hoyt as a Colt history resource. She spent way more effort researching Colt guns and generating information than her replacements do. Many current Colt history letters have blocks that say unknown. That didn't happen very often when she ran that shop. But as C. Bartocci has noted repeatedly,,Colt has changed.

.
 
Last edited:
Yes, replacing the barrel, cylinder and ejector would be an improvement and save much metal work.

I'm highly suspicious of claims that any shop would do such a restoration "far cheaper". I imagine any job that would be "far cheaper" would be all done at the buffing wheel and the result would look like a gun that spent an hour in a forge. Sorry but any restoration that is worth the trouble is going to be expensive, regardless of who does it or how much they spend on advertising. Of course, one shop's version of a restoration may be another's idea of polishing a turd. I've seen both extremes and you usually get what you pay for. A good job costs a lot of money because it's a lot of work. I don't see ANY gunsmiths getting rich off of such work. Hell, it's a lot of work just to get a best grade finish out of a new production gun.
 
I spent a number of years a while back, collecting and shooting 1st Generation Colt SAAs. Mine were all fired with hand loaded, black powder cartridges. That was because I did a good bit of research on the subject and everything I read convinced me not to shoot smokeless in BP framed Colts. And that applied to those with newer replacement barrels and cylinders.

I freely admit there are people who disagree with this. There are also people who have blown up or other wise ruined old Colts because they thought they could get away with it.

YMMV,
Dave
 
I don't see spending thousands to restore the gun.

Assuming that the master craftsman with the skills and equipment to restore that gun is only charging $30/hour ... and I've no idea why such a master would charge so little ... $1,000 is only 30 hours of work. Less than four standard days. I'm not sure it's realistic to expect a restoration job to take such little time.


But please keep us posted about what you have done and what the costs turn out to be.
 
If they were mine I think I would get the letters from Colt first. That will help you decide the next step.
Then call Turnbull or your favorite smith and see how they want to proceed with an estimate.
For instance, send either the guns or extensive quality photographs.
Then the choice will be yours and your wallet.
 
I honestly would not pay for a Colt letter for guns in that condition. It's not going to add anything to the value of the guns.
 
Are you planning on shooting these?

I would not waste the money on restoring the one that is pictured. Anyone is going to have to work some serious magic to get rid of all that rust and not looked heavily buffed. You'll end up spending more money restoring it than it'll be worth. If you've got thousands to spend, you should just buy whatever it is you are looking for that doesn't need to be restored.
 
I mean, they are really rough so you can go the other way... Keep that batteworn patina that people are going for nowadays. Maybe fix them up to be antique and rough in an artful way
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top