Number 2 Army with Holster

[Niner19]

I picked this up last week from a pawn shop in the area. After reading about it over at the Model2Project I have found that it is most likely made early 1862, most likely was in the Civil War and is a Type 3.

The bore is bright and beautiful, the action has a very slight wobble, the cylinder lock up and timing is perfect. All matching as well. The flaw is the fine scratches put in by someone who cleaned it a long time ago.

If there is anything else you can tell me that would be great. I figure the value with the holster is about $1200. Am I far off on that?

But my main question is about the holster. Is there anyway to tell if it is Civil War period? Thanks.

 

[Niner19]

Two more pics

 

[gmborkovic]

That is one handsome looking #2, early too. the holster is a winner also. The stitching looks nice and white and new although re-done.

 

[JSR III]

Sorry that I cannot add much to your story. All I can say is that is a very neat model 2 and the holster is cool too. Maybe one of our resident leather experts can give you more details about the holster. To my eye the holster looks like an older style, especially the way that the belt attachment is done on the back.

Like all things, condition is everything. I see what you are saying about the fine scratches. Folks trying to remove the rust or corrosion sometimes get a little too aggressive and remove the patina that collectors don't really mind.

Without having the gun in hand for a close up inspection it is hard to judge condition and therefore value. I don't think that with the holster, $1,200 is too far off.

 

[mrcvs]

I cannot comment about the holster, but I can provide a value for your revolver. At antique arms shows, you may see these early ones being offered with an asking price of $1800 to $2000 plus, but they don't ever sell for that. Unfortunately, yours has been cleaned. I have one I bought a few years ago and it has considerable bright blue finish and has not been cleaned. I paid $1200 for it. I should think, based on that, and the finish yours contains relative to mine (I thought I had photographs somewhere, but apparently not), a fair price for the revolver alone might be $850 +/- $50. Unless mine was a screaming deal, I should think that this would be a fair price. With a serial number of 4697, yours is slightly more than 100 numbers higher than mine, and mine shipped May of 1862. Yours may have shipped then as well. These were often the personal sidearms of Civil War soldiers.

 

[mmaher94087]

Those light scratches might be from steel wool used to remove surface rust caused from storage in the holster. Please do not store the revolver in the holster because the Tannins in the leather will remove the finish and promote rust. As far as the holster; Black Rock is a good brand of preservative for the leather of the holster.

 

[Niner19]

I cannot comment about the holster, but I can provide a value for your revolver. At antique arms shows, you may see these early ones being offered with an asking price of $1800 to $2000 plus, but they don't ever sell for that. Unfortunately, yours has been cleaned. I have one I bought a few years ago and it has considerable bright blue finish and has not been cleaned. I paid $1200 for it. I should think, based on that, and the finish yours contains relative to mine (I thought I had photographs somewhere, but apparently not), a fair price for the revolver alone might be $850 +/- $50. Unless mine was a screaming deal, I should think that this would be a fair price. With a serial number of 4697, yours is slightly more than 100 numbers higher than mine, and mine shipped May of 1862. Yours may have shipped then as well. These were often the personal sidearms of Civil War soldiers.

Thanks for the info and I agree with you. I figure probably around $900 for the pistol and am guessing 300 for the holster if it is CW era.

 

[opoefc]

You have an early "3 pin" version made in approx. 1862 era. I would agree with the above comments and value estimates. I doubt the gun was ever used in military service by it's owner due to its fine condition today. The holsters style is of the type seen in the Civil War era and it also has survived in almost untouched condition. Very unusual, so it may be of later manufacture, copying the CW style. If the thread stitching is not cotton, that's a clue of later manufacture. Very nice rig, congrats on your find. Ed.

 

[Niner19]

Thanks for the info... any easy trick to tell if the thread is cotton?

You have an early "3 pin" version made in approx. 1862 era. I would agree with the above comments and value estimates. I doubt the gun was ever used in military service by it's owner due to its fine condition today. The holsters style is of the type seen in the Civil War era and it also has survived in almost untouched condition. Very unusual, so it may be of later manufacture, copying the CW style. If the thread stitching is not cotton, that's a clue of later manufacture. Very nice rig, congrats on your find. Ed.

 

[mmaher94087]

Singe an end. If it smells like plastic; it's nylon. Plus nylon melts before it burns.

 

[Niner19]

Thank you for all the help. I could not find a loose strand of the thread that I could burn so I read some more on line how to tell the difference. Using a small amount of bleach on a small thread hump I was able to discern that the thread is cotton. Under magnification I also could not find any evidence in the way of marks or unused space that this was rethreaded. So I feel safe to go with an original CW holster at least until I can find evidence to the contrary. Thanks again for the help.

 

[JSR III]

Nylon thread will usually have a shine to it where cotton is typically dull. Not sure if holsters are stained before being stitched or after. With your holster, the thread is so white, it would have to be either before or the holster was restitched.

Either way, it is a very cool combo and one any collector would want to have in their collection.

 

[Niner19]

I will try and post some marco shots of the thread for a better determination. Looking at the photos I posted, the thread looks whiter in them than in real life. Under magnification they are pretty dirty and brown. But better photos will help and I look forward to hear what you think.

Edit: Here are some macro pics of the thread and stitches. Would be interested if this sheds any light on the subject. Thanks.

 

[Niner19]

More Pics of the thread and stitches.

 

[mmaher94087]

It's hard to tell but the thread looks like 6-cord Flax. Flax has been used for centuries to stitch leather products. Boots and shoes are good examples of Flax use. It's not a far stretch to include holsters, scabbards and saddles.

 

[SkipD1]

Being an experienced photographer, I don't find it all unreasonable that the really bright thread in the original images was nothing more than a mild overexposure of the thread in the images. That could make the thread appear brighter in the images than in reality.

 

[moosedog]

Nice number 2 revolver. My vote would be that that the holster is much newer than the gun by the design of it, especially the belt loop.

 

[H Richard]

Beautiful gun. The one thing I noticed about the holster is the fitted area for a trigger guard, while the #2 has just the stub trigger. That would leave me to believe it was for a later model that contained a trigger guard, possibly after 1900. If you have access to any, see if a 1902 or 1905 Hand Ejector would fit.

 

[crazyphil]

I remembered a photo I have of what was called a half-flap holding an
1851 Navy Colt. It is a reproduction by Carrico's Leatherworks, LLC.
The style is much like yours, but unfortunately no photo of the back.
The maker says it is period correct. The 1851 served in the Civil War.
They have a web page if you want a look. This is in no way a commecial
for or an endorsement of Carrico. I know nothing about them other
than the photo in my collection.
P.S. on the front of the holster, the tab that the flap goes through,
looks like a big X on it. Can you tell if that is crossed sabres, or
maybe Confederate emblem?

 

[singleshot1891]

I am in no way, shape or form an expert on this subject, other than owning a No. 2. But it is my gut feeling that the holster is period to the pistol. It simply looks correct for that era. I've certainly been wrong about these things before. Like I said, just a gut feeling.

WB