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.

Colt Lightning /Thunder Cont

v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
edited November 2007 in Ask the Experts
It's a fake.
Bbl & frame patent date markings are wrong, grips are wrong, cylinder lockup is wrong, making frame & mechanism wrong for 1877 & 1878.
Frame on Lightnings is separate from from grip and trigger guard, like SAA Colts & unlike yours on which frame and grip frame are one piece.
I once bought a Lightning hammer that was from a fake so I am aware Lightnings and Thunders were faked.
Having the Colt markings make it an interesting fake and worth what you paid for it.

Comments

  • robert574robert574 Member Posts: 223 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    So, I have never been in this position before.

    There is also a market for interesting fakes? hmmm...

    As a fake what is it worth? Would you try to take it back or keep it?

    ***************************
    HawkCarse replied on the last thread:

    http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=271685

    "late model copies he showed me that I thought he said came from Uberti."

    "The only Uberti "Lightnings" and "Thunderers" that I have seen were just SAAs with butts shaped like the 1877. Mechanics were still strictly single action."
    ***************************

    I did a search and found the Cimmaron/Uberti revolvers he is talking about. Seems like I would rather have the real deal or a copy that shoots than a fake.

    http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/2,287.htm

    On a separte note, do you know how they locked up the cylinder on the original lightning?
  • perry shooterperry shooter Member Posts: 17,105 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hey Robert I will give you $151.00 and let you make a profit[^][:p][:o)][;)][}:)][:I] Attention this is not an offer to buy as we can't do it on this forum Sorry Bert H, Capt and no nonsence I could not resist my BAD
  • v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    This is an antique, faked in the day of the Lightning/ Thunder.
    Cylinder lockup on the 1877 is in the rear of the cylinder. Cutouts are located between chambers just below the outside of the cylinder.
    The cylinder locking bolt is actuated by a stud on the trigger.
    I don't believe there is a repro of the 1877 on this small frame.
    Both calibers in the 1877 are obsolete heel bullet cartridges.
    The 41 can be reloaded because there is new brass for it.
    Some specialty reloaders have offered fresh ammo.
    I don't know about availability of the obsolete 38 Colt Lightning ammo or brass.
  • robert574robert574 Member Posts: 223 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I spoke to to a representative at a major firearm museum. After some research in their library and looking at these pictures, he believes that the Colt cylinder was changed during the last production models to the outside notches similar to the later army models.

    Three of their many Colt Lightning/Thunderer models (sealed in a glass cabinet) have a similar cylinder to this copy. There is no way to get to their revolvers on display.

    I'll withhold the name of the Museum. I appreciate his efforts. Thanks.

    The markings on the barrel of my revolver however are not correct and it appears to be a copy never intended to ever enter the US market.
  • givettegivette Member Posts: 10,886
    edited November -1
    Seems that this "unnamed" firearms expert was able to gratify you with his expertise. Aren't you glad you were able to get to the bottom of this to your satisfaction?

    All that really matters, in the long run. Is that you are satisfied.

    If you ever need/want to sell it, you may want to approach this same person, to see if he/she may be willing to issue a letter of authenticity (essentialy what he/she told you verbally). That also would mean a lot to a prospective buyer. Otherwise, a prospective buyer will regard everything you say as undocumented. Not good. Best to you, Joe
  • robert574robert574 Member Posts: 223 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I didn't name him because the situation is still not clear to me about Colt (keep in mind that mine is still a fake) and I don't want to put him under any pressure and hope he is still interested in the issue.

    What if the three revolvers on their display are just like mine and in all these years no one has ever questioned them? There is no way to get to them to examine them since they are sealed.

    I'll give it a few days and talk with him again to see if he can give me a reference to the use about Colt's actual use of the different cylinder.

    Whatever I find out that is "documentable" I will add to the end of this for the next person that goes down this road.

    Thanks for everyone's help.
  • v35v35 Member Posts: 12,710 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The patent dates are still wrong, the factory address is wrong, the frame is two piece where the Lightning frame is three piece & the grips should have a Rampant Colt on them.
    The address alone disqualifies your gun. Colt's only address in New England was Hartford, Conn.
    What is the serial number?
    Belgium made Colts were purchased by the Union Army so Colts have been
    repro'ed for a long time before the 1877 Lightning.
    If your's is a Belgium gun there should be Belgium proof marks on it,
    most likely under the barrel.
  • robert574robert574 Member Posts: 223 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It's a 2 digit serial number in the 70's.

    It appears stamped under the rear of the barrel just in front of the cylinder pin, on the frame just at the end of the trigger gaurd, on the rear of the cylinder and on the right side of the hammer near the frame. (at least the numbers match)

    I don't see any proof markings on the barrel.

    I removed the grips and there were no markings inside or on the grips. From the inside, both the revolver and the grips appear to be quite old.

    I agree, it's not a Colt.

    Edit - The guns in the museum are in a large sealed case with thick glass. They cannot get to them without doing some serious work. They said there is no practical way to view them up close. I tried to call back today. No luck, but will try again tomorrow. Perhaps he can compare what he sees on those three to the rest using the information in these previous posts (grips, frames, etc.)
  • Hawk CarseHawk Carse Member Posts: 4,383 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It would be interesting to get in touch with the curator of that museum and get a close look at the three guns in that case. Anybody who tooled up for a copy of a complicated gun like a Lightning was not likely to stop with one... or 71, and they had to end up somewhere.

    A lack of proof marks suggests a Spanish source.
  • CHGOTHNDERCHGOTHNDER Member Posts: 8,936 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Bottom line here.....Call Kathy at Colt and she will tell you to send pics and a letter documenting it and they will take it from there. Or you can contact R.L. Wilson and he can screw you over pretty well and tell you fantastic story's about it. Lock it up here Capt.
Sign In or Register to comment.