sjohns
Member
The short answer is: I don't know.
It would mean that the cylinder is not the original, possibly, but fits and works.
It would mean that the cylinder is not the original, possibly, but fits and works.
Finally got a Remmie
- Thread starter Ferret
- Start date
- Status
The Sicilian
member
This might not help too much but it will disprove the myth that these gun makers don't make proofing or maker mark mistakes. My brand new Uberti 1849 Pocket Pistol (I bought it last week) didn't have an Uberti symbol or an Uberti stamp! They came in the mail from Taylor Arms (Two 1849's) and both of them were missing the Uberti name and Symbol. I called Taylor Arms and the gunsmith said that the Italian may have just forgot, yet why would both of the guns have been missing the makers mark? Uberti is apparently the only Maker that produces the 1849 Pocket Pistol anyway so it's difinitely an Uberti, plus, the serials match up with the Uberti Box. It was all very strange to me though.
I need to get some larger lead balls for the 1849, the .315's that Uberti recommended are too small, they almost fall out of the chambers! I need at least a .320 and I'd really like to find some .323's, they'd be perfect I bet. It shoots like **** (Accuracy) but I'm sure accuracy will improve greatly with larger bullets. I can at least put them on the target but with no consistancy, not like my 1858. That gun is awesome and very accurate, bullseye city
I saw a beautiful 1860 yesterday and fell in love! I almost broke down and bought it. I needed to resupply with a few pounds of powder and other accesories first so I'll have to go back and hope it's still there. The 1860 is a very nice looking gun and it felt very comfortable in my hand. It hade smooth, sleek lines and nice grips. I can't wait to pick one up! It will be my first full size Colt, unless I decide on an all stainless 1851. Anyone have any suggestions, does anyone own an 1860 so I could hear a little about the gun?
The Sicilian.
I need to get some larger lead balls for the 1849, the .315's that Uberti recommended are too small, they almost fall out of the chambers! I need at least a .320 and I'd really like to find some .323's, they'd be perfect I bet. It shoots like **** (Accuracy) but I'm sure accuracy will improve greatly with larger bullets. I can at least put them on the target but with no consistancy, not like my 1858. That gun is awesome and very accurate, bullseye city
I saw a beautiful 1860 yesterday and fell in love! I almost broke down and bought it. I needed to resupply with a few pounds of powder and other accesories first so I'll have to go back and hope it's still there. The 1860 is a very nice looking gun and it felt very comfortable in my hand. It hade smooth, sleek lines and nice grips. I can't wait to pick one up! It will be my first full size Colt, unless I decide on an all stainless 1851. Anyone have any suggestions, does anyone own an 1860 so I could hear a little about the gun?
The Sicilian.
Ferret
Member
I have an 1860 or two... I LOVE them.
For someone with big hands like myself, the grip is perfect, no need to curl your pinkie under the grip. In fact, I am looking for a couple of junkers so that I can steal the grip assemblies from them and put them on my SAA's.
Accuracy? Hmm, depends what your after. Duelist style (one handed), I can hit a 4" bull with all 6 chambers at 15 yards. Traditional (2 handed), I can keep that accuracy out to 25 yards. Then... when i bolt the shoulder stock on, its off to the 50 yard range to suprise most of the guys there.
Have you read Mecs book? He has all sorts of info in there on the 1860's
For someone with big hands like myself, the grip is perfect, no need to curl your pinkie under the grip. In fact, I am looking for a couple of junkers so that I can steal the grip assemblies from them and put them on my SAA's.
Accuracy? Hmm, depends what your after. Duelist style (one handed), I can hit a 4" bull with all 6 chambers at 15 yards. Traditional (2 handed), I can keep that accuracy out to 25 yards. Then... when i bolt the shoulder stock on, its off to the 50 yard range to suprise most of the guys there.
Have you read Mecs book? He has all sorts of info in there on the 1860's
The Sicilian
member
Right on! The 1860 does feel sweet to my hands (I have big hands also). As far as accuracy goes I was talking about the 1849 pocket at 15 yards. I can hit the target but I can't put the shot inside the bullseye (Once so far...dualist) with any consistancy, and I usually don't even taste the black (4" also). Now when I'm using my 1858 at 15yards (Dualist) it's bullseye city . The 1858 is an excellent gun and I really feel comfortable with with it. I only shoot with one hand because I'm a beginner. I met a target shooter who is an awesome shot and he told me since I feel comfortable shooting with one hand that when I do switch to two hands ,it should be a breeze for me to hit the bullseye. For some reason one handed shooting feels good to me. Everyone else at the range uses too hands and they don't even shoot past 30 feet!
I've only been shooting pistols (handguns) for a little over a month and I'm doing very well at 45 feet. I figure once I can pepper the black at will I'll move out to 25 yards. I'm really getting consistant at 15yards and I've only shot my 1858 five times now. It's really fun, better than sitting home at home doing nothing, that's for sure! My next gun will most likely be the 1860, or possibly the LeMat, but I don't think I'll have the cash for the LeMat so soon. :banghead: I'd like to check out mec's book but I'm short on cash right now...gun or book = gun . I think it would be wise to buy his book though, is it easy to find? I have a Barnes and Noble around my way, think they might have it?
The Sicilian.
. The 1858 is an excellent gun and I really feel comfortable with with it. I only shoot with one hand because I'm a beginner. I met a target shooter who is an awesome shot and he told me since I feel comfortable shooting with one hand that when I do switch to two hands ,it should be a breeze for me to hit the bullseye. For some reason one handed shooting feels good to me. Everyone else at the range uses too hands and they don't even shoot past 30 feet!I've only been shooting pistols (handguns) for a little over a month and I'm doing very well at 45 feet. I figure once I can pepper the black at will I'll move out to 25 yards. I'm really getting consistant at 15yards and I've only shot my 1858 five times now. It's really fun, better than sitting home at home doing nothing, that's for sure! My next gun will most likely be the 1860, or possibly the LeMat, but I don't think I'll have the cash for the LeMat so soon. :banghead: I'd like to check out mec's book but I'm short on cash right now...gun or book = gun
. I think it would be wise to buy his book though, is it easy to find? I have a Barnes and Noble around my way, think they might have it?The Sicilian.
Ferret
Member
I think its quite easy to find... its on the coffee table in the living room.
Oh.. thats not what you meant is it??
Erm.. Amazon!!
You can get it as a download pdf file here for $6
or.... you can order it in paperback here for $16.95
I got the download, and then ordered the paperback. The downloaded PDF file sits on my Palm Pilot (commonly referred to as 'Ferrets Brain' or 'Ferrets Memory') and i refer to it quite a lot.
Oh.. thats not what you meant is it??
Erm.. Amazon!!
You can get it as a download pdf file here for $6
or.... you can order it in paperback here for $16.95
I got the download, and then ordered the paperback. The downloaded PDF file sits on my Palm Pilot (commonly referred to as 'Ferrets Brain' or 'Ferrets Memory') and i refer to it quite a lot.
Ferret
Member
OK.. this is getting silly
Got my second 'used' Remmie today.... guess what???
Its got the same cylinder markings!! I am gonna strip it down tonight and see if there are any more markings elsewhere.
The guy that I got it from says that it may be a Pedersoli. This make any sense to anyone?
Got my second 'used' Remmie today.... guess what???
Its got the same cylinder markings!! I am gonna strip it down tonight and see if there are any more markings elsewhere.
The guy that I got it from says that it may be a Pedersoli. This make any sense to anyone?
The Sicilian
member
Ferret,
I wouldn't be too concerned about cylinder markings, what matters is the maker's mark on the gun itself. Pietta's mark is usually on the side of the barrel, Uberti's is usually on the underside of the barrel, underneath the loading lever. At least thats where I've seen them on the guns I've held. Maybe the older ones have their stamp somewhere else but the newer ones are definitely stamped like described above. My 1849 pocket from Uberti (Taylor Arms) wasn't even stamped Uberti!, neither was the second one that was ordered. They must be doing things a little differently now-a-days, getting lazy or something. The gunsmith from Taylor Arms asked me if I wanted to send it back and exchange it for one with a stamp but I declined, no big deal to me. Besides, I bet he would have found out that all of the newer 1849's don't have the Uberti name stamped on them, just "Black Powder Only Made in Italy" stamped on the underside of the barrel. If anyone has more info on this please post it, seems a little odd to me.
I wouldn't be too concerned about cylinder markings, what matters is the maker's mark on the gun itself. Pietta's mark is usually on the side of the barrel, Uberti's is usually on the underside of the barrel, underneath the loading lever. At least thats where I've seen them on the guns I've held. Maybe the older ones have their stamp somewhere else but the newer ones are definitely stamped like described above. My 1849 pocket from Uberti (Taylor Arms) wasn't even stamped Uberti!, neither was the second one that was ordered. They must be doing things a little differently now-a-days, getting lazy or something. The gunsmith from Taylor Arms asked me if I wanted to send it back and exchange it for one with a stamp but I declined, no big deal to me. Besides, I bet he would have found out that all of the newer 1849's don't have the Uberti name stamped on them, just "Black Powder Only Made in Italy" stamped on the underside of the barrel. If anyone has more info on this please post it, seems a little odd to me.
Ferret
Member
I think you misunderstood what I was pointing at.
The barrels dont have ANY makers mark, not even 'black powder only', in fact no writing at all. The only markings on the revolver at all are a 3 fig serial at the rear of the barrel (underside), something that looks like a crown or a knights helm at the rear of the barrel (left side) and the cylinder serial and proofs.
Oh.. and last night I found that the 3 fig serial is also on the inside of the grip frame, but no other marks there either.
The barrels dont have ANY makers mark, not even 'black powder only', in fact no writing at all. The only markings on the revolver at all are a 3 fig serial at the rear of the barrel (underside), something that looks like a crown or a knights helm at the rear of the barrel (left side) and the cylinder serial and proofs.
Oh.. and last night I found that the 3 fig serial is also on the inside of the grip frame, but no other marks there either.
Steve499
Member
Sicilian
I know Palmetto (gag) makes an 1849 also because I had one for a very, very short time. I don't recall how it was marked but I sure hope your two aren't Palmettos! Mine was a real piece of junk.
Steve
I know Palmetto (gag) makes an 1849 also because I had one for a very, very short time. I don't recall how it was marked but I sure hope your two aren't Palmettos! Mine was a real piece of junk.
Steve
sjohns
Member
I think there is a palm tree in a circle with those.
The Sicilian
member
No Steve, they are Uberti's. I hit a tiny little energy drink can at 25 yards with my little pocket pistol today. Definitely not a piece of junk. They were both from Taylor Arms, in Uberti boxes, serial numbers matched the box and they are both beautifully made. Both guns are marked BZ, so they are 2005, it could be that they stopped stamping "Uberti" on the barrels because of the small length. By law they do not have to stamp "Uberti", only "Black Powder Only...Made In Italy", at least that's what the gunsmith at Taylor Arms told me. I have no way of knowing if that is true or not but I didn't see any reason for him to lie about it. The Smithy offered to send me replacements with the Uberti name but I have a funny feeling that they all would have been the same, no Uberti stamp.
The only problem I've had is being able to get lead balls larger than .315, they are too small. A larger ball would be more accurate and would fit properly. The .315's don't shave off any lead and are loose in the chamber. I have to pound them in with a small nylon hammer and a wooden dowel, then put some grease on top of the balls so they stay put. I'll be ordering some larger balls shortly and a friend is sending me a few that should be about the right size. What I'd really like is a conical for this gun. I keep hearing conflicting information about conicals vs. round balls. One person says round balls are more accurate and another says that conicals are much more accurate and blow round balls away. Anyone have an opinion or experience that might put this little question to rest for me?
The Sicilian.
The only problem I've had is being able to get lead balls larger than .315, they are too small. A larger ball would be more accurate and would fit properly. The .315's don't shave off any lead and are loose in the chamber. I have to pound them in with a small nylon hammer and a wooden dowel, then put some grease on top of the balls so they stay put. I'll be ordering some larger balls shortly and a friend is sending me a few that should be about the right size. What I'd really like is a conical for this gun. I keep hearing conflicting information about conicals vs. round balls. One person says round balls are more accurate and another says that conicals are much more accurate and blow round balls away. Anyone have an opinion or experience that might put this little question to rest for me?
The Sicilian.
Steve499
Member
I think I can help you out on the conicals for your 1849, Sicilian. I have an original mould I bought at a farm sale. It casts a round ball and a conical for the .31 pocket Colt. They aren't the best quality, the mould is really, really old, but I'll run some lead through it and send the results to you. E-mail me your address if you are interested.
Steve
Steve
The Sicilian
member
Mec...?
just echoing Steve499s comment on the Palmettos. I bought one of their "Lincoln Derringer" kits and to call it junk would be to cast an unwarranted aspersion on junk. The stock had deep flaws in it and the metal was pot. the tip of the trigger that engaged the sear crumbled away while I was building the kit. The only people who like Palmettos seem to be the ones who don't shoot them.
Ferret
Member
Dont think that mine are Palmettos (they have a kewl web site though...)
Got another 'smith to look at them today and got another comment;
'Looks like a pair of the early Navy Arms imports'
he also mentioned that the early Navy Arms had 'sod all markings', and werent marked for date, just by the proofing house.
He also noted that the double 'lozenge' was most probably an Amadi stamp and that the old Navy Arms imports were and still are of much better quality than a lot of the more recent replicas.
His other comment was that these may have been 'defarbed' at some point, but, noting the near new condition on one of them, he doubts it.
This sounds a very reasonable explaination. Can anyone back this up?
Plus, Who, or What is Amadi?? I cant seem to find any references.
Got another 'smith to look at them today and got another comment;
'Looks like a pair of the early Navy Arms imports'
he also mentioned that the early Navy Arms had 'sod all markings', and werent marked for date, just by the proofing house.
He also noted that the double 'lozenge' was most probably an Amadi stamp and that the old Navy Arms imports were and still are of much better quality than a lot of the more recent replicas.
His other comment was that these may have been 'defarbed' at some point, but, noting the near new condition on one of them, he doubts it.
This sounds a very reasonable explaination. Can anyone back this up?
Plus, Who, or What is Amadi?? I cant seem to find any references.
- Status