I took a magnifying glass to the numbers and for certain, the trigger guard serial was stamped (all numbers) with a different set of stamps than the other areas just as you noted Jeff. The wedge serial numbers font matches the trigger guard font exactly. The barrel, frame, and butt are all identical and were the same stamps (every number) when you look under a magnifying glass. So, trigger guard and wedge used one set of stamps and frame, butt, and barrel used a different set of stamps (all numbers).Without having this in hand, it is difficult to know what it is. One thing is certain - that's not an old Colt cylinder - the old ones do not have those strong, deep approaches to the cylinder stops.
The barrel address is soft, as if buffed / polished before being bluing.
The font (shape and size) of the serials on the iron metal is not identical to that on the brass trigger guard.
Charles Pate wrote that he believes the frames were serial numbered at one central station, and then the (un-serialed) other parts were fitted to that frame, and then the rest of the serial were stamped, those numbers were all stamped at the same time by the same man who laid the put-together revolver down side up in a cradle, took a number stamp "1", and stamped the four exposed locations (butt, guard, barrel) with that stamp - bang, bang, bang - without putting that stamp down or moving the revolver and then took the next stamp in hand and did the same with it.
Look at the "2"s and you can see they are not the same. The "8"s are fatter on the iron compared to the thinner 8 on the guard.
This is the very point I wanted to make. If it's a genuine Colt 2nd generation, as many here state it is, then it is not a reproduction. It is a genuine Colt. It just happens to be a re-issue or modern generation and not an antique. But it is not the same as an Italian reproduction. Yours is a Colt! I think you have a nice piece!but it is still a Colt, which counts for something.
As crazy as this sounds, i really focused in on the cylinder serial numbers and they are stamped with the same stamp as the barrel, frame, and butt. Agree the notches in the cylinder are well pronounced and a picture of another 1860 Army were more shallow. Just can't wrap my head around how anyone would have made this gun and used old serial numbers from 1867 if it is a repro. This is quite the mystery.
Good eye, Robert. Somebody don't want you exceeding something. This could solve part of the mystery.
Can you say Rogers & Spencer?"Pleasing to the eye to some people" sounds like an opinion, MY opinion. Cost has nothing to do with what I find appealing. Just like you find color case hardening attractive.(and so do I, by the way) I find most firearms to be a attractive. Not all mind you, some are almost as ugly as sin itself.
It is - for some reason, instead of continuing to use the cylinder scene showing Dragoons fighting Indians that had been on the Colt Dragoon - which the M.1860 Army replaced - Colt for some reason decided to instead copy the scene from their M.1850 Navy which depicted a naval engagement between ships of the Republic of Texas and Mexican navies; this inscription is the date of that battle.Here is a pic of what it says. I think it is supposed to say Engaged but either they spelled it wrong or the plate didn't stamp the rest of the "G" very well and it says "ENGACED". I think I read this was a part of the original scene.
Also have a pic of the serial number from the cylinder.
I am trying to work through this logically to piece together what it could be and eliminate what it can't be:
1) If it is a legitimate Colt Gen 2 or Gen 3, it sounds like it would be impossible to have the serial number it has since those started around 200k and one has to assume Colt would not use identical serial numbers on the exact same model guns. At least the frame, barrel, and butt (who all appear to have exact same stamps) can't be Colt Gen 2 or Gen 3. Any issues with that reasoning?
2) If it is a repro, I don't believe any of those outfits were re-using Colt serial numbers from the past but is that possible? In order for the frame, butt, and barrel to be repro, they would have to be reusing serials and if they were, mystery is solved - this has to be a repro.
3) If neither 1 or 2, the frame, barrel, and butt must be original 1867 manufactured parts and then someone has built or bought parts (trigger guard and wedge) without serial numbers and stamped them themselves to make things match. Is that possible or likely (does anyone sell these trigger guards without serial numbers?
This is going to drive me nuts
It is - for some reason, instead of continuing to use the cylinder scene showing Dragoons fighting Indians that had been on the Colt Dragoon - which the M.1860 Army replaced - Colt for some reason decided to instead copy the scene from their M.1850 Navy which depicted a naval engagement between ships of the Republic of Texas and Mexican navies; this inscription is the date of that battle.
The serial # on the original cylinder and wedge were on 4 digits. This one has 5 which is another tell tel of a reproduction. On an original Colt the serial # is in 7 places. As I stated originally this is NOT an original Colt and there are NO parts on it that are original.The sn on the cylinder is missing the first number
I could follow you around all day at a gun show! Good eyes.The serial # on the original cylinder and wedge were on 4 digits. This one has 5 which is another tell tel of a reproduction. On an original Colt the serial # is in 7 places. As I stated originally this is NOT an original Colt and there are NO parts on it that are original.
|R||Colt 1860 Army Revolver Fluted Cylinder||Small Arms & Edged Weapons||4|
|R||Colt 1860 with cut off barrel||Small Arms & Edged Weapons||21|
|K||Handguns Firearms Specialties 1860 .44 Colt||Small Arms & Edged Weapons||5|
|Round or conical more common War time colt usage.||Small Arms & Edged Weapons||3|
|Recent Find Colt powder flask engraving||Uniforms & Relics||25|