Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns A very rare Colt SAA

You made your point, it's just that your point made no sense because once again, you think you know a lot more than you know.

I don't see any reason for the hostility.

Gungeek: "The one red flag is the rifling issue. 1- being nearly perfect. 2- If it's truly unique from anything else that Colt had at that time, that is suspect; but there can be a good reason.
The rifling should match other .38 revolvers they made at that time because it's not real logical for this one revolver to have a completely unique barrel from other .38 revolvers Colt's made. If they have .38 barrels/barrel-stock around, it makes sense they'd use that and not something unique (unless they were experimenting).

But I don't have a clue off the top of my head if Colt's made any other .38 revolvers that time. 1875 was the year they designed the cartridge, so they obviously had something they were working with, but I don't recall off the top of my head if anything was actually offered to the public that early (I wanna say they didn't have any .38's of any model back then, but I don't trust my memory). If there weren't any others, that really complicates authentication because you have really only have one good source for authentication...the other .38.

The obvious would be to reach out to the owner of the one known and authenticated to see if the barrel rifling matches, as well as everything else."

According to a well respected Colt SAA authority: "The rifling is of the early style, equal distant lands and grooves, but most of those early 38 barrels were left over percussion navies, turned and used on the model 1877 double action."

[u][/u][i][/i]

Okay, if that makes you feel better...I don't know chit...you can just ignore everything if that makes you feel better.

That's a helluva piece regardless of whether you ever find out the story behind it!!!

Regardless of what has been posted and who wants to argue with who, I like your Colt.
Best of luck on your continuing research and please keep us posted on your progress.
Thanks for posting and, especially all the pictures.

Ernie

Typically I ignore quite a bit of your drivel but it doesn't make me feel anything one way or the other. Just some clarification for you.

I expect you don't. Your registration is 2013. Some good advice would be to tread lightly and not jump into [bleep] you don't know anything about. Thus far you come off as pretty knowledgeable about some handgun issues. You've agreed with me on some stuff, and that's a good start. On this, you summed it up when you said you didn't see. When you don't see, maybe it's best to watch until you do.

I didn't "jump into [bleep]" and my registration date is irrelevant. I really don't give a damn what history you guys have. My point, is that there is no reason to pollute THIS thread with whatever personal bullshit you guys have going on. It's juvenile to pollute every unrelated thread with your personal garbage. If you don't like people commenting on your little spat, don't do it or relegate it to PM's. Just like your comments to me. Call someone out for all to see and it has nowhere to go but downward.

I might've only registered HERE last year but I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I know bullshit when I smell it.

I know a little about a lot of things. I know a lot about very few things. I mention what little experience with fakes because I thought it was interesting. I know when I was shown fakes, good fakes that someone spent a good deal of time and money to create (and ruined otherwise very collectible guns); I found it interesting the lengths that otherwise talented gunsmiths would go to make a very dishonest buck. Ethan doesn't appreciate what I've shared, okay fine. He thinks I'm FOS; fine. Everyone can judge for themselves.

I still say that job one would be to get the gun authenticated if you can. There are some guns that are never fully authenticated because the collectors world become divided.

Mind your own damn business and GFY.

Edited to say: I mean seriously, you come in here and are talking to guys who have been here forever when you've been here a year and start moralizing and telling everybody how to behave. Take that [bleep] to some metrosexual clothing site or something. Nobody here GAF.

Like I said, petty and juvenile. If it's posted on the open forum for all to see, it's everybody's business. I'm sure the OP appreciates you running his thread into the gutter with your utter stupidity.

This place needs a friggin' enema.

This revolver can be authenticated by the Colt archive department, correct?



Travis

I think the OP has a cool gun and I am enjoying the information and speculation that people are bringing to the table. I would not expect a 135 year old gun to have never been upgraded or worked upon, so piecing together the history is not an exact science.

I don't have any insight to add except for the condition of the screws.

For whatever reason, the nitre blue on the old Colt screws seems to hold its color and gloss.

This New Police from 1905 has lost much of its finish, but the screw heads still maintain a glossy blue finish,.....much better than it appears in the pic.

The OP said "no" to that.

That's a nice piece Bristoe.

If you don't like it, leave. You're talking about cluttering the place up but yet you've made two or three off-topic posts. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out...or do.

I missed that.



Travis