Need Help on Colt's 1851 Navy
- Thread starter Resist Evil
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Resist Evil
Member
Denis, I just got off the phone with the owner and he said it came to him through the family, but he could only account for it during the last fifty years. He doesn't know how it came to be in the family originally prior to that.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
"Under our new laws, I believe there cannot be a transfer of a firearm without a background check, even for a temporary borrowing."
:banghead:
It's not a firearm... it's an antique or replica antique and is exempt from the BC laws.
Come over to the Black Powder forum and the 'pards will help ya...
Mods: You might consider moving the thread to where the experts hang out.
BTW, my guess (being a collector of these) is that it's potentially an original that has been refinished. The serial number fonts and other markings have never been properly copied by the Italians. Those are Colt font stamps. It' either a Colt or a careful defarb with correct font stamps applied.
Willie
.
:banghead:
It's not a firearm... it's an antique or replica antique and is exempt from the BC laws.
Come over to the Black Powder forum and the 'pards will help ya...
Mods: You might consider moving the thread to where the experts hang out.
BTW, my guess (being a collector of these) is that it's potentially an original that has been refinished. The serial number fonts and other markings have never been properly copied by the Italians. Those are Colt font stamps. It' either a Colt or a careful defarb with correct font stamps applied.
Willie
.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Resist Evil
Member
No, he did not.
Sorry, that gun is not only original, but all matching (in the visible numbers). As for being a repro, all I can say is that many folks today have never seen an original 1851 or know what to look for. The grip color, BTW, is either original or very close to the original. Colt grips were originally varnished and they used a reddish stain (as did the Henry/Winchester at about the same time).
Any site or book on British proof marks should show the London Gunmakers Company GP proof and view marks. Note I said the gun had London proof marks, meaning it had been sold in or imported into England. I specifically said that it was NOT MADE in London, being much too late, so it would not have the London address marking. Colt exported Hartford-made guns to England for many years, right up to the British handgun ban.
All the numbers are in the right places and more importantly in the correct font. The characteristics match the Fourth Model perfectly. (Check Swayze for the Model distinctions among those guns.)
There are clear signs that the gun was polished before bluing, probably to remove light rust, but it was not heavily buffed.
The good news for the OP is that he has an antique, original, gun in pretty good condition.
As to value, that always depends on the circumstances as well as condition. Considering the Navies that I see at shows today for $2500 (asking price) I don't think $3000 is too far out of line, but as always, value is what someone will pay for it.
Jim
Any site or book on British proof marks should show the London Gunmakers Company GP proof and view marks. Note I said the gun had London proof marks, meaning it had been sold in or imported into England. I specifically said that it was NOT MADE in London, being much too late, so it would not have the London address marking. Colt exported Hartford-made guns to England for many years, right up to the British handgun ban.
All the numbers are in the right places and more importantly in the correct font. The characteristics match the Fourth Model perfectly. (Check Swayze for the Model distinctions among those guns.)
There are clear signs that the gun was polished before bluing, probably to remove light rust, but it was not heavily buffed.
The good news for the OP is that he has an antique, original, gun in pretty good condition.
As to value, that always depends on the circumstances as well as condition. Considering the Navies that I see at shows today for $2500 (asking price) I don't think $3000 is too far out of line, but as always, value is what someone will pay for it.
Jim
Last edited:
Jim,
I'll defer to more knowledgeable Colt people, if you're convinced it's legit.
It doesn't add up for me.
I've never seen a reddish varnish on a genuine Colt.
The proofs remain a mystery.
I do understand there was a proofing system for English-made guns, and for non-English-made guns sold in the island.
I can't find that proof that Evil shows anywhere on the Internet.
Specifically, have you a source that clearly shows it as being British?
Denis
I'll defer to more knowledgeable Colt people, if you're convinced it's legit.
It doesn't add up for me.
I've never seen a reddish varnish on a genuine Colt.
The proofs remain a mystery.
I do understand there was a proofing system for English-made guns, and for non-English-made guns sold in the island.
I can't find that proof that Evil shows anywhere on the Internet.
Specifically, have you a source that clearly shows it as being British?
Denis
Fingers McGee
Member
Just saw this post and have to agree with Jim K. Characteristics match those of a late 4th model with the late New York Barrel address. From the serial number, it was made in early 1866. The proof marks look like the Birmingham proof house markings; not London.
http://www.birminghamgunmuseum.com/media/The_Crossed_Sceptres_Mark.pdf
http://www.birminghamgunmuseum.com/media/The_Crossed_Sceptres_Mark.pdf
J-Bar
Member
This is one of the most interesting threads I have ever seen! I hope the question is resolved eventually. This is better than most of the TV I have been watching!
Fingers McGee
Member
DPris, check the link in my last post (#34). If you scroll down to page 6, you will see the Birmingham proof marks. The two marks in Jim K's post #35 are London Proof marks.
I've been looking at London & Birmingham proofs this afternoon.
Still have the NRA Museum web page showing proofs from both cities up. They include what you're posting & referring to.
I can't see a crown in the stamp images Evil has provided on my screen.
Denis
Either my eyes or my screen aren't up to the job.
Still have the NRA Museum web page showing proofs from both cities up. They include what you're posting & referring to.
I can't see a crown in the stamp images Evil has provided on my screen.
Denis
Either my eyes or my screen aren't up to the job.
Last edited:
Those marks are tiny and probably filled with a hundred years of crud so the crowns are just blobs, but they are there. The cylinder markings have the crown to the front and the "V" between the scepter shafts to the rear. On the barrel, the marks also have the crown to the front (left) with the V and P to the rear.
Jim
Jim
RPRNY
Member
Is there no likelihood of this being a Belgian Centaure made by FAUL? Timing is right for owner knowing history back 50 - 60 years. If no UK proofs, possibly Belgian? I believe they marked their guns with serial numbers consecutive to the last Colt numbers? Just a thought.
I don't recall how the Centaures were marked but the proofs are definitely NOT Belgian and the last Colt serial was c. 215000.
I am a bit curious as to why so many folks want to declare that a perfectly good, original, 1851 Colt is a reproduction or a fake. I can only conclude that there are so few folks who have actually seen an original that the idea of a real one just doesn't register. Those are not rare guns; I have three myself. Colt made over 200k of them and a goodly number are still around and in serviceable condition, not counting the cased ones that have never been fired. Many more are in existence in varying degrees of condition ranging from so-so to downright junk, but they are original.
So, to be brief, I have seen hundreds of those guns, and closely examined dozens, so I really think I could spot a fake. Or, if it is a fake, and I don't detect it, then it is a darned good fake. And I don't think that one is.
Jim
I am a bit curious as to why so many folks want to declare that a perfectly good, original, 1851 Colt is a reproduction or a fake. I can only conclude that there are so few folks who have actually seen an original that the idea of a real one just doesn't register. Those are not rare guns; I have three myself. Colt made over 200k of them and a goodly number are still around and in serviceable condition, not counting the cased ones that have never been fired. Many more are in existence in varying degrees of condition ranging from so-so to downright junk, but they are original.
So, to be brief, I have seen hundreds of those guns, and closely examined dozens, so I really think I could spot a fake. Or, if it is a fake, and I don't detect it, then it is a darned good fake. And I don't think that one is.
Jim
Its just hard for me to think of it in such good condition and be that old i guess. When i look at mine that are clones they dont look much different quality wise.
I guess im just expecting it to be better quality then that for some reason.
Ive only been shooting for a year so im pretty clueless on this stuff really.
I do know that just handeling mine the brass turns really fast, the brass on that one doesnt look very old.
I guess im just expecting it to be better quality then that for some reason.
Ive only been shooting for a year so im pretty clueless on this stuff really.
I do know that just handeling mine the brass turns really fast, the brass on that one doesnt look very old.
ivankerley
Member
excellent! boy did pietta get creative with the grip, the hammer looks thicker too!top gun - original
bottom gun - Pietta
Again, check the rifling twist and screw/nipple threads
thanks for the comparison shot
Gene
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
"Is there no likelihood of this being a Belgian Centaure made by FAUL?"
Absolutely none. None of the markings or serial number fonts are close to a Centaure. The controur of the loading area is different as well.
Fingers and Jim K have it right.
Willie
.
Absolutely none. None of the markings or serial number fonts are close to a Centaure. The controur of the loading area is different as well.
Fingers and Jim K have it right.
Willie
.
- Status
