Colt SAA 45 - Clone or Real Thing

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dapster

Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
18
I'm now aware of SAA "clones" such as the STI Texican, the Uberti's, the USFA's and the Vaqueros. My question is, apart from perhaps the cost to do so, why would one purchase a clone rather than simply purchase a Colt? Or, is it really a cost issue?

I have no agenda other than really wanting to know the answer to the above questions.

Thanks in advance to those who take the time to enlighten me.
 
Blackhawks/Vaqueros are at least half the cost, and twice the quality of a Colt...with an amazing lifetime "guarantee" to back it up.
 
People don't buy STI Texicans or Turnbull Classics to save money compared to Colt.

They buy them because they think they might be getting something not offered by the Colt and, at least in my case, don't attach sufficient value to a horse rollmark or name to justify buying a Colt even at the same price or a teensy bit less.

The STI appears to be better fit and "slicker" than a Colt. I can't say this with certainty as I don't own a Colt but this isn't an outlandish notion based on reviews.

The Turnbull has a carbona finish that I prefer to the Colt (and the STI for that matter).

Both the STI and Turnbull have case colored hammers not available with the Colt.

I understand that current Colt SAAs are quite nice functionally but most still can't be checked out due to wire ties and there's enough horror stories about product from several years back I won't buy one I can't check. I just feel more confident of getting good SHOOTABLE product with STI or Turnbull.

Those buying as an investment, a safe queen or that attach value to a picture of a horse or history would probably be better served by the Colt.
 
With all the Colt bashing on this board ... and there's lots of it ... I wonder how many here, if they won or were given a Colt SAA, would turn around and sell/trade it for a pair of something else or would they keep it and enjoy it for what it was. If money were no object, I'd buy Colts over everything else in a heartbeat but that's because I like the idea of owning a revolver made in the US by the same company that patented and was making the same revolver 135 years ago. Somehow I doubt that people will be drooling over Ruger Vaqueros in a hundred years!!

:)
 
First, I do not consider Rugers clones of anything. Different design entirely. I like them for what they are - Rugers..
A clone is just like a Colt SAA, up to and including parts interchangability in some cases.
I love Colt SAAs, and therefore almost by definition, clones. I have nothing bad to say about Colts. All the horror stories of sloppy 3rd generation guns were never written by me. I had several Colts, and loved every one. The 2nd Gen models were superb. They are all gone now, because, to me, the clones capture the feel, fun, and shootability without tying up many thousands of dollars, and risking same, in shooting genuine Colts.
If I hit the lottery, I would be shooting Colts and driving a Ferrari and a Dodge Ram 2500 Mega Cab 4x4 tomorrow. In the meantime I will enjoy my Cimarrons.
Rather than arguing about which clones are "best" I would simply say that you can spend as much as you want for fit and finish, And get great fit and finish, and they are all clones.
 
With all the Colt bashing on this board ... and there's lots of it ... I wonder how many here, if they won or were given a Colt SAA, would turn around and sell/trade it for a pair of something else...
Click to expand...

There's a none too subtle distinction between bashing one product and simply preferring something else but the OP, on his first post yet, lobbed the Texican and the entirety of USFA into the mix.

So, while some posters might address replicas with a significant cost differential, the OP is asking about replicas across the board including those that don't offer a pricing incentive.

So, as a quick reality check before the real festivities commence, I'll offer the following pop quiz:
Which of the following is the least expensive?

1. Colt P1950, online, discounted

2. Texican, online, discounted

3. Turnbull, direct pricing

Given the conventional wisdom that Colt's will hold their value better, somebody will have some 'splainin' to do about how one buys alternatives strictly to save money. Especially if somebody drags Freedom Arms into the equation.

<chortle>
...just noticed DP lists the Texican as ".45 ACP". In the absence of conversion cylinders I assume their history with the Texican is recent.
:)
 
There's a none too subtle distinction between bashing one product and simply preferring something else but the OP, on his first post yet, lobbed the Texican and the entirety of USFA into the mix.

So, while some posters might address replicas with a significant cost differential, the OP is asking about replicas across the board including those that don't offer a pricing incentive.
Click to expand...

Hawk, I know where you're coming from and the point that you're trying to make ... it is plausible that someone could opt to pay MORE for a "clone" than for a Colt. If you consider USFA offerings for instance, the difference between the entry level Rodeo and a $2000 "premium grade" SAA is appearance only. The extra $1400 goes towards finishing and optional features that don't make a bit of difference in the field or at the range. I would guess the same it true for a Turnbull SAA.

That said, I would buy a Colt for $1200 to $1400 and have Jim at Long Hunter improve it for another $200 rather than spend $2000 on a USFA "premium grade" SAA, Turnbull SAA or STI SAA. I didn't even consider buying anything made by Uberti since a Rodeo can be had with Jim's "magic" for under $600.

:)
 
I think we're substantially in agreement. The Turnbull is pretty. With the STI I felt like I was paying for function but the case color is by Turnbull so that portion isn't shabby.

I do wonder what STI could do if a "Rodeo finish" was introduced but their supplier can't ship what they already catalog so I doubt we'll find out anytime soon. The STI is purported by some to function along the lines of a Colt that's gotten a really good working over but I'm not in a postition to make such a claim. I do enjoy my Turnbull and STI. I may have to add a Colt at some point just out of general principles - the recent ones I've seen seemed very nice.
 
I may have to add a Colt at some point just out of general principles - the recent ones I've seen seemed very nice.
Click to expand...

The Colt in the link you provided is a very good price (probably the lowest I've seen) and I REALLY want a pair of Colts in .44-40 ... talk about authenticity!! I've been a bit gun crazy recently so I don't think I'll be buying a pair this month. :(
 
If I was dropping $1,200 on an SAA, it would be a Freedom Arms '97 frame in 357, 4" barrel, adjustable sights, the new somewhat rounded grip frame.

Transfer bar safety, laser accurate, true sixgun. NOT a Colt clone, but a damned fine gun.

Can't afford that, so I own a Ruger NewVaq357 with sight mods and an SBH hammer.

If I wanted a handcannon I'd look at a BFR in 45-70.
 
I've owned a number of 3rd Gen Colt's made in the last year and a number of USFA guns.

I think USFA makes a near perfect SAA. Colt's are very nice but I will stick with USFA when it comes to the SA(and I'll stick with Colt when it comes to the 1911 and AR15).

You can pick up a USFA Premium SAA on Gunbroker.com from Gary Granger for around $800. Retail is now only $875.
 
Only bad thats I've heard about Colts are items such as finish, scratches, and things like that. The ones I have heard the really horrorable stories about are the Italian made clones, they fell apart. But this was years ago, and it was in a magazine report on a cowboy gun training at the thunder ranch.
I have a EAA in 45 Colt and love it. The Italian's problem talked me into the EAA, its made in Germany.
 
That said, I would buy a Colt for $1200 to $1400 and have Jim at Long Hunter improve it for another $200 rather than spend $2000 on a USFA "premium grade" SAA, Turnbull SAA or STI SAA.
Click to expand...

In other words, you can buy a Colt and send it to someone to have it fixed, or you can spend the same* amount of money to get a gun that is right from the start.

Some folks really want the name and are willing to pay for it, and that's fine. When I bought a 1911 I bought Colt for that exact reason, knowing that I could get a better gun for less from someone else. I didn't try to rationalize it, though...

*Premium grade USFA guns cost significantly less than Colts. By the time you have spent $2000 on a USFA you are getting elephant ivory grips or engraving.
 
In other words, you can buy a Colt and send it to someone to have it fixed, or you can spend the same* amount of money to get a gun that is right from the start.
Click to expand...

... assuming that it needs fixing. I just bought two USFA Rodeos from Jim at Long Hunter and he had to "fix" those although I'm not 100% sure it was necessary, but as I already mentioned in another thread, the "fixing" was free since mine came with consecutive numbers (a $100 charge if you buy from USFA).

:)
 
I am voting with my checkbook and plan to order a pair of Rodeo IIs from Long Hunter in the next couple of weeks. I have owned and shot 2nd generation Colts, Uberti clones, and Ruger OMVs. There are some folks who have purchased Rodeos and Rodeo IIs without the Long Hunter upgrades and seem to like them. I am a SASS/CAS shooter, but not all that good. I am currently using a pair of Cimarron Uberti 1872 Open Top replicas in .45 Colt. They are most naturally pointing guns I've ever used. The Rugers are built like a tank, although I had a hammer plunger spring break in one and the pawl itself break on another, albiet after 10 years, thousands of rounds, and a lot of dry fire. To the original poster, my decision is based on what I'll use the guns for.
 
"The extra $1400 goes towards finishing and optional features that don't make a bit of difference in the field or at the range."

Makes a difference to me - they look finished.

JohnitsonlymoneyBT
 
also depends on what your shooting. a colt single action clone of an 1851 can be easily purchased. An original 1851 in shooting condition is way more than i would be willing to spend. Not only that but the metal used on todays guns is a lot superior thant that of what was originally used.
 
First off, aren't they all really clones?

Everyone's using new tooling. Colt can write "Colt" on the gun, but USFA actually owns the old Colt factory AFAIK. They use a new building nearby, though, to house big CNC machines.

So a new Colt is no more "authentic" than any other SAA. You really are paying something for the name. If that's what you want, go for it. However, there are some really great guns out there for the same price range -- where you pay for the hand fitting and incredible quality (look closely at a Freedom Arms, for example).
 
Over the years I've had a Colt, old model Vaquero, an Uberti and most recently a Cimarron Pistolero.The Cimarron is the smoothest of them all.According to my micrometers it is the best built of the bunch. Admittedly it is the most recent manufacture as the other three are from ten to thirty years old.All six cylinder holes are identical, the cylinder to forcing cone measures .002. Trigger pull is less than two pounds. The Uberti model Buckhorn[not made anymore] had a spring loaded firing pin which had a tendency to come undone.A heavier spring and some locktite cured that.It was a pretty thing, case hardened and brass trimmed but was not as accurate as I would have liked.
 
Having begun this thread I'd like to thank all who contibuted with special acknowledgement to Hawk, 1858 and ArmedBear whose responses, in particular, struck a chord.
 
WDRRC?

(What Did Roy Rogers Carry)

Has more of a draw for me than I should admit. But, I also like history, and like having a real Colt. I've owned two, a 1980's 3rd generation and a recent one, and they were/are great. I know someone will chime in with there hasn't been a real Colt since (pick your favorite period of change).

It's all good. The USFA and Texican get good reviews, I'm sure they are very nice, and their owners are happy, and that's all that matters, really.

In the end we all make the choices based on our own feelings, that hopefully make us satisfied with spending our funds. We gun owners spend a lot of time splitting hairs about the best caliber/gun/holster, ad infinitum. Part of the fun, I guess. But to me, yours does not have to be bad for mine to be good.

But really, I heard Trigger would buck you off if you weren't wearing Colts.
 
I just don't see buying a non-colt that is more expensive then a colt unless it has a LOT of nice features, as the colt has a history of gaining/maintaining value.

Then agian, if I bought a Colt SAA, I would put it in the box in a Safe deposit box and let it rise in value.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Good Colt SAA Clones
Replies
18
Views
1K
Hawk
H
G
  • Locked
So why buy anything other than a Vaquero...
Replies
17
Views
1K
DonP
D
G
  • Locked
Question regarding pressure and .45 convertibles
Replies
5
Views
567
Gary A
G
Deanimator
  • Locked
SAA Clones?
2 3 4 5
Replies
106
Views
9K
Deanimator
Deanimator
M
  • Locked
Colt SAA Clone Mystery. Help!
Replies
11
Views
1K
meef
M
Back
Top