In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Hey COLT guys....need help

GuvamintCheeseGuvamintCheese Member Posts: 38,932
edited November 2008 in General Discussion
Does this old Colt look original to you? Whats it worth 5 years from now if it is original?

http://v4.beta.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=116972989

Comments

  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    It does look original, and I believe the description given by the seller. in one picture the extractor houseing appears to angle upward which could only be caused by tightening the barrel ?
  • Old-ColtsOld-Colts Member Posts: 22,697 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Based on the serial number of the Single Action the firing pin has been replaced, so that part is not original to the gun. Also, the ejector rod may have been replaced. The front sight appears to have been filed on top. The trigger guard bow has a rounding appearance that wasn't present until much later (around 1896). Also, I'm not sure of the barrel address stamping for that period of gun. The stamping of the serial number on the trigger guard and grip frame as compared to the frame looks suspicious!

    There are a number of things that cause me to be skeptical and without access to some of my reference books I really can't comment any further. These are just my impressions, some fact, some speculative, and some are just a feeling; so Caveat Emptor even at a bargain basement price of $2900.

    Other than the firing pin and filed sight it might be right, but I would pass!

    If you can't feel the music; it's only pink noise!

  • GuvamintCheeseGuvamintCheese Member Posts: 38,932
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Old-Colts
    Based on the serial number of the Single Action the firing pin has been replaced, so that part is not original to the gun. Also, the ejector rod may have been replaced. The front sight appears to have been filed on top. The trigger guard bow has a rounding appearance that wasn't present until much later (around 1896). Also, I'm not sure of the barrel address stamping for that period of gun. The stamping of the serial number on the trigger guard and grip frame as compared to the frame looks suspicious!

    There are a number of things that cause me to be skeptical and without access to some of my reference books I really can't comment any further. These are just my impressions, some fact, some speculative, and some are just a feeling; so Caveat Emptor even at a bargain basement price of $2900.

    Other than the firing pin and filed sight it might be right, but I would pass!
    ...and pass I will, thanks.
  • Old-ColtsOld-Colts Member Posts: 22,697 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    cartod, in this case even though I could be wrong in my some of my observation, except the firing pin and front sight, I think it is wise to pass. Here are some additional observations that I forgot to list.

    The partial serial number stamped on the cylinder appears too crisp for the wear on the cylinder and the numbers appear to match the style on the trigger guard and grip frame, which appear different from the frame. The 45 cal stamp on the left front trigger guard bow appears too pronounced. There appears to be traces of blue on some areas of the gun, such as the cylinder.

    If you can't feel the music; it's only pink noise!

  • SpartacusSpartacus Member Posts: 14,415
    edited November -1
    old colts is right.
    look closely at the serial numbers in this pic (in the original listing)
    the upper # is the only one original to this gun. look closely at the 3, 5, and 7 and you will see the difference. they used an older number die set, but not old enough!
    JMHO
    tom


    [img][/img]pix844918406zf0.th.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.