1860 Army, Replica Arms Inc Marietta, OH

[expat_alaska]

I FOUND THE THREAD ABOUT THE FIRST C&B REPRODUCTIONS:
The Gun That Started It All -->>> https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/the-gun-that-started-it-all.845902/

That would be my thread from a while back.

I'm going out on a limb by saying that IMO the date code is at least XVIII which would make it 1962 or later.
My reason is because part of the left side of the PN is missing, and also part of the left side of the proof mark to the left of the PN. It wasn't stamped evenly in more than one spot, very possibly including the proof date code.

This is why I am leaning toward it being an ASM revolver. ASM has been noted for light/not squarely-stamped proofs and datecodes, especially in the later models where all of the info was on the bottom of the frame next to the barrel lug.

And also because 1952 seems a bit too early for me.

Exactly, as seen in your first quote on this post.

We can see the letter "A" in the photo. Uberti also used alpha prefixes.

That is how ASM prefixed their revolvers nearly all of the time.

That seems to be a very low serial number and whether it was made by GU or ASM, if it's one of the 1st 2,000 or so 1860's made, then you have an early production gun. Maybe it's an early enough production that the company trademark stamp hadn't even been made yet.

More on that later.

Gregorelli & Uberti made revolvers for Navy Arms (stamped as such) from 1959-1962 and also made revolvers for their own sale stamped G.U. on the right side of the barrel lug during that same time period. All were versions of the 1851 Navy .36, with both steel and brass frames and octagon and part round/part octagon barrels, respectively (think 1851 Navy and 1863 Griswold & Gunnison). Gregorelli had the Italian manufacturer license and Uberti had the factory. In 1963 Uberti secured a manufacturer license in 1962-1963 and they parted ways.

Replica Arms started up (1963-1964) in El Paso Texas, and those revolvers were marked as such on the left side of the barrel lug. They imported ASM 1848/1849 Colt Pocket pistols, but the revolvers had no ASM markings. Around 1965, the owner of Replica Arms sold the business and the name to another outfit in Marietta Ohio, moved to either AZ or NM, and eventually created Cimarron Firearms using Uberti revolvers. Replica Arms Marietta used both ASM (early) and Uberti (late) revolvers, and was bought out by Navy Arms around 1972. Navy Arms continued to mark the R.A. guns with a stylized RA on the left side of the frame, and afterward substituted Navy Arms in place of it.

This is a Replica Arms El Paso 1848 Pocket Pistol (XIX/1963) with no ASM stamps I acquired in 2015 from a GB auction. I posted it on a forum (THR I think) inquiring as to the manufacturer and got a reply from Dr. Jim L. Davis stating that it was an ASM first-year of manufacture. (Arcticap, look it up: you are good at this sort of thing!). Doing more research about it on my own, it is plainly an ASM gun due to the very slight shoulders on the trigger guard and the style of the load-lever at the rammer pivot.



Since it is an 1860 Army, insofar as the datecode is concerned, I am leaning toward it being XXVIII/1972. Uberti was never this sloppy with any stamps.

At any rate EF, I hope you enjoy your "new" slicked-up revolver. I have read about the Kid's work from others on this forum and two others, and have never heard anything derogatory about his work nor the fantastic turnaround time. His price for the work shows he is trying to establish a good rapport with folks and establish a base.

Regards,

Jim

 

[Malachi Leviticus Blue]

...I am leaning toward it being XXVIII/1972...

In my opinion the characters are too short if what I believe to be an "X" is actually a "V" compared to the other proof marks (same with the three Is being too short)
I'm convinced we can see XIII and that the most logical answer is that the faint marks to the left are another "X"

 

[expat_alaska]

In my opinion the characters are too short if what I believe to be an "X" is actually a "V" compared to the other proof marks (same with the three Is being too short)
I'm convinced we can see XIII and that the most logical answer is that the faint marks to the left are another "X"

That would make it XXIII/1967 which would fit nicely with the Replica Arms Marietta timeline. That said, it could easily be either an ASM or an Uberti. That is the next challenge. I would like to hear from anyone who is familiar with distinct characteristics of either manufacturer from that time period concerning their respective versions of the 1860 Army.

Regards,

Jim

 

[electricfactory]

Jim, are serial #'s a reliable way of dating these import revolvers ?

That would make it XXIII/1967 which would fit nicely with the Replica Arms Marietta timeline. That said, it could easily be either an ASM or an Uberti. That is the next challenge. I would like to hear from anyone who is familiar with distinct characteristics of either manufacturer from that time period concerning their respective versions of the 1860 Army.

Regards,

Jim

 

[arcticap]

Posted about Replica Arms by bprevolver: --->>> See Post #19 https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...arget-model-44-remington.533091/#post-6613250

Replica Arms to Navy Arms

Short History of Replica Arms/Navy Arms

Leonard Frank Allen started Replica Arms, El Paso, TX in 1962 with the first 1847 Army replica, made by Armi San Marco. In 1965 Replica Arms was sold and moved to Marietta, OH.

Mr. Allen then started Western Arms, Santa Fe, N.M. Winchester filed an action because Western Arms was the name of their ammunition. Western Arms then was named Allen Arms, Santa Fe, N.M. In 1984 Mr. Allen entered into a joint venture with Mike Harvey and his company, Bigfoot, in importing replicas from Uberti. This turned into Old West Company of Texas Inc. and then to Cimarron Firearms, Fredericksburg, TX.

Replica Arms, Marietta, OH was purchased by Navy Arms, Ridgefield, N.J. Since Replica Arms was almost as big as Navy Arms and it’s biggest competitor, the Replica Arms name was retained and barrels were marked, “REPLICA ARMS RIDGEFIELD N.J.” This was gradually changed to, “NAVY ARMS Co. RIDGEFIELD N.J.”, on the barrel and the Replica Arms Logo on the frame. It is interesting that Navy Arms retained the Replica Arms Logo on their boxes until their move to Union City, N.J.

The gun in question is what RPRCA identifies as a “Transitional Replica Arms to Navy Arms”. In 1977 Navy Arms was using Pietta as a source of their revolver so it would have the Pietta Logo as well.

 

[arcticap]

Jim, are serial #'s a reliable way of dating these import revolvers ?

This is a highly engraved and ornate Replica Arms 1860 with serial #A1147. --->>> https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...ica-arms--marietta--ohio.cfm?gun_id=101434207
It's so decorated that it shows no proof marks or date code, but only has the Replica Arms address engraved on top of the barrel.
Had it shown a date code, it would certainly provide a context for dating your revolver.
Perhaps they lightly stamped the proof marks in the event that the company decided to have the gun engraved, possibly even in the US.
The zoom allows for super close up inspection of the frame for the proof marks which can also be opened in a new tab.

 

[electricfactory]

First of all, I find this area fascinating. Unlike Colt, who kept a comparitively straightforward system of serial number dating, the Italian imported revolver dating system is at best, imprecise. Probably due to multiple manufacturers and importers. Either way the history of these guns is fascinating and I appreciate the info gathering by guys like yourself and articap.
Here's a thought- a hundred years from now these guns will themselves be collectible antiques. The companies will probably cease to exist if past is prologue. Think of all the arms companies just since the Civil War which are now defunct.
This then makes the gathered data on these guns all the more valuable, and to my way of thinking historically important.

That would make it XXIII/1967 which would fit nicely with the Replica Arms Marietta timeline. That said, it could easily be either an ASM or an Uberti. That is the next challenge. I would like to hear from anyone who is familiar with distinct characteristics of either manufacturer from that time period concerning their respective versions of the 1860 Army.

Regards,

Jim

 

[1KPerDay]

Looks to me like XIII (1957) with the bottom half of the X and the I's cut off/buffed off/poorly struck. If they had a XIII stamp and the striker hit it angled off center to the top, it would look like VIII. If you add the other (bottom) half of the X and IIIs, the X would appear but the IIIs would look the same. Were they a going concern in 1957?

 

[expat_alaska]

Were they a going concern in 1957?

Not until 1962-63 (El Paso) and 1965 (Marietta).

Jim

 

[1KPerDay]

weird

 

[arcticap]

First of all, I find this area fascinating. Unlike Colt, who kept a comparitively straightforward system of serial number dating, the Italian imported revolver dating system is at best, imprecise. Probably due to multiple manufacturers and importers. Either way the history of these guns is fascinating and I appreciate the info gathering by guys like yourself and articap.
Here's a thought- a hundred years from now these guns will themselves be collectible antiques. The companies will probably cease to exist if past is prologue. Think of all the arms companies just since the Civil War which are now defunct.
This then makes the gathered data on these guns all the more valuable, and to my way of thinking historically important.

The whole world consists of private enterprise.
There are probably some Italian company records but they're kept secret or in storage.
Some lost, some damaged or destroyed by fires or mishaps.
The Italian proof house should have kept some kind of record of every proof test that they ever performed.
And then there's different countries involved like Belgium and Spain.

Today, Traditions probably has records of every gun that they import because of warranties.
And especially since an 11% Federal excise tax needs to be paid for these guns, that make up Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937 monies that are allocated to each state yearly based on a formula of land area and hunting licenses. --->>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittman–Robertson_Federal_Aid_in_Wildlife_Restoration_Act

Someone could spend a lifetime trying to search for info. and not be able to ever gain access to it.
And even Colt charges money to do a records authentication search.

I think that the European proof house system did a pretty good job except for the guns that have fallen through the cracks.
You have a pretty good idea of where and when your gun was made, that it came from Italy although maybe not the company that made it just yet.
There's a lesson here, that you can't have enough freedom and a limited government and then want and expect the whole world to keep a centralized system of gun production details that were never really intended to be made public information.
Colt may be an exception because of all the historical profits that they made.
But just look at all of the folks who defarb their guns and strip all of the identity off of them.
And then others wish that they could only find out more detailed info. about their guns.
Maybe the companies don't want to release information that could lead to fakes and forgeries of their guns that no longer exist.
Then they don't have to prove that the fakes weren't made by them unless they really need to defend themselves legally.

 

[expat_alaska]

And then there are guys like me who swap/create parts among Pietta 1851 Navy .36 revolvers to create Confederate revolvers that Pietta never produced, and serial number/datecode CP/2016 (if Pietta keeps records of those) will show it was shipped as an 1851 Navy (octagon barrel/engraved cylinder).

Rigdon & Ansley .36 12-stop-slot plain cylinder:



Regards,

Jim

 

[expat_alaska]

First of all, I find this area fascinating. Here's a thought: a hundred years from now these guns will themselves be collectible antiques. The companies will probably cease to exist if past is prologue. Think of all the arms companies just since the Civil War which are now defunct. This then makes the gathered data on these guns all the more valuable, and to my way of thinking historically important.

They are already collectible, as can be seen if one ever ventured to Dr. Jim L. Davis' RPRCA (Replica Percussion Revolver Collector Association) site when it was up and running on tripod.com. It no longer exists after Davis' passing in September 2019. Much of his collection was sold to October Country late last year and when word got out about it they sold like hotcakes and OC had really no clue as to what they had. There are sites dedicated to Colt 2nd Gen, 3rd Gen, Signature Series, et al. One is https://www.coltforum.com/forums/colt-percussion-revolvers.52/. In 2010 Davis requested a site be created on blackpowdersmoke to carry on his work and for others to post their finds/information, which is present to this day: https://blackpowdersmoke.com/revolvers/index.php .

Your reference above will happen no more than 25 years from now, especially because of the constraints that the current pandemic has placed upon Uberti, Pietta, and Pedersoli.

After I am dead and gone, and my revolvers are sold to whomever, they will become an anomaly wrapped in enigma (per Winston Churchill).

These are all Pietta Navy .36 derivations of my concoction.

Augusta Machine Works. I found two Pietta .36 smooth cylinders without safety pins a few years ago (for $25 each) and had my next-door neighbor retired Boeing machinist mill the extra 6 stop slots with approaches for $50/cylinder (the other one went to the R&A). It started life as a Pietta 1851 Navy .36 CP/2016.



Leech & Rigdon. It started life as a Pietta 1851 Navy .36 CS/2017 with the part round/part octagon barrel/smooth cylinder from Griswold & Gunnison parts purchased from VTI.



1851 Navy 2nd Model Dragoon .36 Belt Pistol (fantasy gun). It started life as a Pietta 1851 Navy .36 "tail" revolver CM/2014, the last year "tail" revolvers were produced. It has the part round/part octagon barrel from the Pietta G&G, better wood that I found on Ebay (European hardwood that Pietta sometimes used in that period with more figure than the original plain straight-grained quarter-sawn walnut), and a squareback trigger guard I found in 2015 from VTI. Pietta never came close to marketing this.



I always strive to find better wood for my revolvers, whether from others on different forums or Ebay.

My next concern is better wood for my Pietta G&G, but I have replaced the original backstrap with the shoulder stock aperture with one that has none that I found as a misstated part on VTI for $23.



Since Pietta went to CNC machining ~2002, their 1851 Navy "type" revolvers are like Legos, with very little to no fitting required. Not the same with the pre-CNC guns because Pietta, at that time, subcontracted parts from smaller Northern Italian manufacturers, and Pietta had to do quite a bit of fitting concerning these parts to market a finished revolver.

Case in point: Pietta has not marketed an 1851 Navy 4-screw CFS revolver since they went to CNC. This is an AZ/1990 that I got several months ago that had been fired and put up dirty. I managed to clean it up and get it very functional, but be aware that modern CNC internals are not drop-in parts for these guns, because of what I stated above.



I guess I could go on and on, so I am done for tonight.

Regards,

Jim