Quote:
Originally Posted by monsai52
About the closest thing I know to a true "Letter of Authenticity" for any gun, would be a Kopec letter on a Colt Cavalry or Artillery SAA.
Best regards,
|
Yes, my sentiments, exactly. Kopec seems to be "the" man on the Colt SAAs, especially the U.S. models. He requires a physical inspection even if it is one he had previously authenticated at some time in the past.
In the past I had send my early 1860 Colt Army to Herb Glass, Sr. to have him authenticate it (at that time in the mid 1990s) as it lettered shipped to Governor's Island Arsenal NYC, early 1861 (less than 2 weeks after the attack on Fort Sumter) but was void of any US Markings and, it was period nickeled (or "tinned" as Herb Glass stated). The revolver presented in outstanding condition and had no evidence of U.S. markings being removed.
Both Herb Glass and Col Pate affirmed that the first 2 US Orders of the 1860 Army, were not U.S. Marked only subsequently orders were Inspector marked. Herb also affirmed the "tinning" process was likely done at one of the N.Y.C.'s many qualified gunsmiths / gun stores (e.g. SH&G, MWR, etc.) and was usually done for Officers (as the enlisted man could usually not afford this) for the function of a protective coating as opposed to an embellishment for cosmetic purposes. NYC, at that time, was the hub of the gun industry in regard to craftsman and outlets to purchase and / or enhance (engrave / plate, etc).
He further explained that the Colt Factory (at that time) when rebuilding after a major fire, did not yet have the means or equipment to perform the plating process.
Was well worth the money I spent sending it to Herb to eliminate the doubt or conjecture of why it was "not" U.S. marked.
Mind, this was in the pre-internet days when data was not available at the touch of a button and any books on Colt 1860s I bought and read did not address this topic.