Asking for a friend - really! Dragoon model - 1850s?

[ISCS Yoda]

Curious if anyone knows anything about this gun and if it has any value.

 

[StrawHat]

If that is a brass frame, it is a replica. It appears to be a copy of the Model 1851 but with a brass frame.

Colts never made a brass framed open top revolver.

Kevin

 

[Wyo]

Looks like an inexpensive, brass-framed replica of an 1851 Navy. Probably Italian made. My guess would be Pietta rather than Uberti. Value would be minimal. I certainly wouldn't give $100 for it.

 

[GypsmJim]

I was under the impression that during the civil war the Confederacy had a shortage of revolvers. One or more southern companies began making copies of Colt 1851 Navy revolvers. Due to shortages of some metals, they substituted brass for some parts. Thus a brass framed "Colt" was truly a production item.

Obviously, "fake" reproductions are abundant today. Most are foreign made.

I have a matched pair made in Italy and imported by Navy Arms back in the 1970's. They are clearly marked such that it is clearly a reproduction. (the display case is homemade)

Regardless, I would guess it is possible that an "original" Confederate model can still be found. The proof marks should tell the story.

 

[GypsmJim]

Looks like an inexpensive, brass-framed replica of an 1851 Navy. Probably Italian made. My guess would be Pietta rather than Uberti. Value would be minimal. I certainly wouldn't give $100 for it.

Eons ago I came across a deal in the Dixie Arms catalog. Five of these for 100 bucks. I kept the 2 that had consecutive serial numbers, gave one to my Dad for Father's Day, and sold the other 2 for $50 a piece.

I have shot both of mine with Dad using black powder and actually they shoot very nicely.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

I'll ask for proof marks.

 

[desi2358]

Even without seeing the proof marks I can say that is a modern reproduction. The are certain features, mainly the grip shape and wood used along with the hammer that indicate it's a modern repro. Manufacturer stamps are usually on the bottom of the barrel (hidden by the loading lever) or the bottom of the grip frame. Sometimes on the side of the barrel but that's less common.

They made a lot of these pseudo-Confederate revolvers, brass was cheaper to work than steel and being cheaper they sold very well. This one appears to be in .36 caliber which is at least correct (many are in .44 caliber, never made by the Confederates) but it has a full octagon barrel. The main Confederate "brass" frame revolvers had the front part of the barrel turned round. Only the Schneider & Glassick had a full octagon barrel among the various Colt clones made for the south. Also the frames of original Confederate revolvers were primarily made of bronze and have a distinctive color difference from the yellow brass used by later reproduction manufacturers.

One final note, quite a few of these were sold as kits so there may be no markings left in exposed areas. I built a few of those kits back in the 70's and by the time I finished polishing the metal and bluing the barrel and cylinder most of the markings were largely gone.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

TVIH-The Version I Heard-is that brass frames are not as durable as steel ones and will not hold up to heavy shooting.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Looks like a gun typically found overpriced at a local pawn shop.

 

[alwslate]

Looks like it would be a good desk ornament or paper weight.

 

[Birdhunter6]

I had a pair of the .36 Navy arms imports in the early 80s, while under the influence of Josey Wales.

Big smelly fun. We fought "duels" with them. 2 guys side by side, 10 rards from 2 bowling pins, muzzles up. On a verbal command we'd open fire. First pin down won. Go home and watch a western.

 

[GypsmJim]

Lot of bad vibes here. Seem that it's OK to buy a modern Uberti smokeless powder reproduction , but the old stuff is just junk.

Personally, if it doesn't say Ruger or S&W, and/or it's less than 500 bucks I wouldn't buy it anyway. But, that's just me and that's just now.

For 100 bucks the OP could have a revolver that was useful as intended. The condition of the original pics looks pretty bad, but a little TLC could make it into a nice looking piece.

Back in the day I also bought one as a kit, and it was a fun project. The timing and fit and finish was great, and the amount of polishing needed didn't even come close to obliterating the proof marks.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

The OP, me, is not interested in that revolver. As noted, I was asking for a friend. Literally. And I am going to follow up with him to see if we can fit that gun into the modern era as written above.

Speaking of paperweights or decoration, this is modern and gorgeous and my kind of display-never-to-be-shot toy. It sits on a bookcase in my house.

 

[GypsmJim]

Here's an interesting follow-up to the thread.

I just got the recent issue of Guns And Ammo and there was a very similar question posted. The poster had 2 Navy style revolvers, one a Confederate copy and the other a Colt. The "expert" writer of the column confirmed that both were Italian reproductions, and estimated the value of each to be $200 to $275.

 

[walnutred]

Last fall I sold a brass framed percussion Remington style revolver at a local show for $175. Last month I bought 2 brass framed 51 Navy copies for $110 each. The only reason I bought the brassies is that it was a package deal with four revolvers @ $440 and I wanted the two steel frame revolvers. That's a ball park of what I think they are worth.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

The owner claims there are no proof marks. I can't believe he doesn't see proof marks, a serial number if it is a modern reproduction or a manufacturer's name but I'll go with it until and unless I see the gun.

 

[StrawHat]

The owner claims there are no proof marks. I can't believe he doesn't see proof marks, a serial number if it is a modern reproduction or a manufacturer's name but I'll go with it until and unless I see the gun.

If it is built from a kit, there will be no proof marks. Of course a Colt won’t have any either.

Kevin