|
|
02-25-2017, 03:11 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 2,331
Likes: 4,550
Liked 5,572 Times in 1,319 Posts
|
|
Colt DS I Bought It
Thanks to all the help and information I got from the Colt experts on this Forum, I bought the DS this morning for $460! I guess that little Colt on the left side that looks as sharp as an uncirculated coin tipped the scales. The gun looks unfired inside and out. Carried a bit with muzzle wear and a few blemishes. I couldn't even get any dirt out of it with a Q-Tip. . .came out white and clean every time. You can see the SN in one of the pictures. The "7" on the butt is nicely stamped. I just told my friend at the LGS that the price was too high according to the Forum experts. Then we dickered a bit. I did have to pay the sales tax this time. The gun is a whole lot nicer that my first impression yesterday. . .looks about 90% and 100% mechanically.
__________________
Dr. B
|
The Following 19 Users Like Post:
|
Absalom, amazingflapjack, Cocked & Locked, Darkenfast, Davinman, DGT, iPac, Isis1200L, LoadedRound, mj2008, mojave30cal, NCBeagle, petepeterson, Richard Simmons, RobertJ., Rock185, shouldazagged, sigp220.45, tops |
02-25-2017, 03:47 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hills of North Georgia
Posts: 5,118
Likes: 1,850
Liked 12,440 Times in 3,403 Posts
|
|
Looks like you did real well. There's just something about a snubby with that little rampant pony on the left side of the frame. My main carry is a 74 Cobra.
__________________
LIVE FROM THE DAWGHOUSE
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 04:45 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,480
Likes: 236
Liked 28,941 Times in 14,012 Posts
|
|
You did OK at $460. Although there is little uniformity in Colt DS terminology, yours would be called by most as a Second Issue. The principal changes from the pre-WWII DS is that the second has a longer extractor rod and a ramped front sight. The REALLY desirable Second Issue DSs are those chambered in .38 NP (.38 S&W). Those have a cult following. I passed up one in great condition at a good price about 4 years ago, and have been kicking myself ever since. You also will see them chambered in .32 Long, but those are also unusual but more common.
Last edited by DWalt; 02-25-2017 at 05:26 PM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 04:47 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northern NY-AdirondackMts
Posts: 7,996
Likes: 12,855
Liked 13,379 Times in 5,042 Posts
|
|
Enjoy it, looks good from here!
__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 04:49 PM
|
|
Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: PA.
Posts: 9,773
Likes: 50,901
Liked 44,476 Times in 8,620 Posts
|
|
Looks great! Nice catch!
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 04:50 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Just West of Houston
Posts: 3,468
Likes: 787
Liked 4,674 Times in 2,062 Posts
|
|
When you are happy with what you bought that is all that really counts. It does look in very good condition. I don't see near as many snubs as I do the longer barrels.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 06:37 PM
|
|
SWCA Member Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,995 Times in 8,452 Posts
|
|
A good deal at that price. The "7" was nice and evenly struck, although not quite centered; probably a department armorer. For comparison, attached is a factory-applied butt number, also from 1951, on a Colt OP (the number was listed in the letter).
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 09:20 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 2,331
Likes: 4,550
Liked 5,572 Times in 1,319 Posts
|
|
I now have seven Colt revolvers. . .just counted them. I haven't really messed with any of them until today when reconditioning this one. Compared to a Smith, they are really poorly, or should I say weakly made guns. One tiny pin holds the cylinder in when closed. Shooting +P ammunition in this gun would be tragic in a short amount of time. The engineering they used in 1951 is equal to what Smith was using in the 1890's. It is a slick/smooth action, but looks more like a toy than a real gun. What Smith & Wesson was building in 1951 (the date this Colt was made) is so far superior. Now I know why everybody says that Colts are fragile. Now I remember why I collect Smiths. Still a really pretty gun though. I also collect cap guns and a lot of them are really pretty too.
__________________
Dr. B
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 09:28 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Southwest Iowa
Posts: 10,867
Likes: 2,688
Liked 18,968 Times in 5,588 Posts
|
|
That's a beauty.
I have two; one a first series (1941) and the other a second series (1967).
Both are great shooters.
upload img
__________________
Mike
S&WCA #3065
|
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 10:25 PM
|
|
SWCA Member Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,995 Times in 8,452 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocB
...... Compared to a Smith, they are really poorly, or should I say weakly made guns. One tiny pin holds the cylinder in when closed. Shooting +P ammunition in this gun would be tragic in a short amount of time. The engineering they used in 1951 is equal to what Smith was using in the 1890's. It is a slick/smooth action, but looks more like a toy than a real gun. What Smith & Wesson was building in 1951 (the date this Colt was made) is so far superior. Now I know why everybody says that Colts are fragile. Now I remember why I collect Smiths.....
|
You have to be careful where you say such things. In some parts, you'll start a religious war like that ....
It's actually quite a complex topic. I don't shoot my guns often and hard enough to have "broken" either a Colt or S&W.
Generally, comparable fixed-sight Colts will always be more accurate than Smiths when I'm shooting against myself. I've compared civilian M&P vs. Official Police, Victory vs. Commando, Chiefs Special vs. Detective Special, Regulation Police 38 vs. Police Positive 38.... never fails.
On the other hand, I don't at all like the ergonomics of the Colt's cylinder latch and much prefer the sturdy, front-locked ejector rod of the S&W. I've always carried S&W, never Colt (except for 1911's).
As for the quality and mechanics of the two (plus the Ruger) in comparison, this old thread involving contributions from experienced gunsmiths makes interesting reading:
Pros & Cons: Ruger vs. S&W vs. Colt DA revolvers? - The Firing Line Forums
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
02-25-2017, 10:55 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,222
Likes: 3,749
Liked 3,780 Times in 1,388 Posts
|
|
Thanks for the link Absalom. That was a great read. Hopefully the O.P. reads it as well.
|
02-25-2017, 11:02 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 2,331
Likes: 4,550
Liked 5,572 Times in 1,319 Posts
|
|
That was a good article. I still wouldn't shoot +P ammo in this Colt. The most accurate guns I've ever owned were a High Standard 22 made in 1959 (still have it) and a Browning High Power 9mm made in 1972 (sold it. . .big mistake). I am beginning to appreciate the lock-up on this Colt. It is very precise and tight.
__________________
Dr. B
Last edited by DocB; 02-26-2017 at 09:52 AM.
|
02-25-2017, 11:30 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,697
Likes: 5,471
Liked 6,633 Times in 1,164 Posts
|
|
Nice one DocB. You gonna carry it? I dig it.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-26-2017, 12:27 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 3,305
Likes: 14,958
Liked 2,549 Times in 1,145 Posts
|
|
Very nice!
Congrats!
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-27-2017, 10:14 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Derby City,Ky.
Posts: 4,675
Likes: 5,277
Liked 3,503 Times in 1,680 Posts
|
|
Looks like a very good buy!
__________________
Life is short,live it fully.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-27-2017, 11:17 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,668
Likes: 1,566
Liked 6,196 Times in 2,270 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocB
I now have seven Colt revolvers. . .just counted them. I haven't really messed with any of them until today when reconditioning this one. Compared to a Smith, they are really poorly, or should I say weakly made guns. One tiny pin holds the cylinder in when closed. Shooting +P ammunition in this gun would be tragic in a short amount of time. The engineering they used in 1951 is equal to what Smith was using in the 1890's. It is a slick/smooth action, but looks more like a toy than a real gun. What Smith & Wesson was building in 1951 (the date this Colt was made) is so far superior. Now I know why everybody says that Colts are fragile. Now I remember why I collect Smiths. Still a really pretty gun though. I also collect cap guns and a lot of them are really pretty too.
|
I think you are overstating that. I have shot Colts extensively.
Is the Colt Python revolver delicate? - www.GrantCunningham.com www.GrantCunningham.com
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
02-27-2017, 02:23 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 2,331
Likes: 4,550
Liked 5,572 Times in 1,319 Posts
|
|
That's a good article. The author sort of contradicts himself when he says Colts are not more fragile. Then he starts talking about the hand and slight wear which will cause the ratchet to need replacement if you keep shooting it. . .and 4 months and $400 to get that part and get the gun fixed. The "hand" should be replaced as a part of regular maintenance. I mean. . .wow! I clean the barrels and cylinders of my Smiths as a part of regular maintenance. Now, since I also collect Rolex watches, I can really appreciate the high quality of Colt revolvers after reading several articles this week. Better metallurgy. Close tolerances of tiny parts. This really appeals to me. But, I am fixing to check the cylinder tightness of all my Colt revolvers. Lack of tightness seems to be the sign that you are fixing to wreck the gun if you don't stop shooting it. So, I will continue to pick up Colts when I find them; but, my carry and shooting will be done with Smiths. It's like my watch collection. . .the vintage Rolex watches stay in their boxes and are only worn for special functions. I wear a stainless steel Rolex from 1982 that doesn't even wind itself.
__________________
Dr. B
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|