Picked up this salty Navy.

[pitfighter]

I wouldn't call that a scallop, it's a bevel.

Then a "Bevel" it is - !

[Len]

I noticed there's a "step" down where the barrel meets the frame. Haven't seen such a design before. Is that the effect of backing the barrel? Just curious.

[pitfighter]

I noticed there's a "step" down where the barrel meets the frame. Haven't seen such a design before. Is that the effect of backing the barrel? Just curious.

Good eye - just another peculiarity with this revolver.
It is a really snug and tight fight, contrary to the gap that appears in the photos, lol - again, it is an anachronism, and could have been hand fitted, using a file, causing the "step" -
This has been repaired since it first started going wrong, replacement screws, parts, over the years.

It was hanging over a bar in Nevada, and had been there some years when the owner bought it in the early seventies.

I do know the brass trigger guard is not a Colt original, because of the "bevel" quality - but, who knows from whence it came, maybe off an early Italian, reproduction, hand fitted to the real upper?

It's fun doing detective work on these isn't it - worth the price of admission.

*Wait until I post the first pattern Dragoon I stumbled across - we, (novice collectors here in the back-country) think it's a hand made pre-Italian replica, not a single original Colt part, but, lovingly a cloned fake, including a correct range serial number.

Have not had a chance to properly photograph it - selling off a bunch of my WW2 collection which is taking time.

[Captainkirk]

Grip frame looks Pietta to me.

[pitfighter]

Grip frame looks Pietta to me.

Yes, I agree on the OP Navy - That is what I'm thinking (I have examined the frames on Ebay: Pietta and Navy Arms and it doesn't quite match so, some other Italian replica trigger-frame possibly) - as I mentioned earlier in the thread, the "bevel" gives it away.

I've seen originals where the trigger guard get's bent or damaged, and the need to replace it occurs - no surprise revelations here - this was bought for an amount which made such information acceptable.

[Len]

And here is another:
I finally got around to test shooting my Navy today, after an extensive amount of work.
I think the barrel is a period spare, as its bore is nearly pristine.
The barrel- cylinder gap is .003". Timing and lock up are distinctive and the trigger is really smooth.

[Len]

A bore, about 160 yrs old

[sourdough]

Grip frame looks Pietta to me.

If it was a Pietta 1851 Navy I could somewhat agree but the front strap of the TG is not as curved. It may be different on the Dragoon, but I do not recall Pietta making one, only Uberti.

My fantasy Pietta 1851 Navy .36 Second Model Dragoon, but it is pre-2014 and in the 2015 and later pistols the "tail" grip profile was no longer produced. Those are repro collector items.



Dragoons had many grip profiles. I know we are talking about a replica, but many of you folks have the idea of a "perfect" grip profile, and it never happened, neither with the 1848 Dragoon, the 1851 Navy, nor the 1860 Army.

The real deal:



Jim

[Len]

Shot a couple of cylinders today with my "new" original Navy. It's a very nice revolver. Grouping just fine. Sight height is good, but had to adjust the dove tail a tiny bit left. Didn't have any cap sucking lock ups, but had to ease some fragments out in between shots. So maybe, just maybe, I wouldn't trust it in a tight situation.

[pitfighter]

I find the images of your revolver very interesting, Len,

The trigger guard is very much in the same-style as mine, missing the "scallops" - and, thereby not much like any other original Colt Navy I have seen -
Your's retains the silver plate in magnificent condition if original, or did you replace it?
I wonder if these were a later-model trigger guard (Colt places mine at 1871, which would be "late" by any standard.), or maybe it's an aftermarket replacement type?

What do you know about the trigger guard on yours?

Thanks for posting the images.

And here is another:
I finally got around to test shooting my Navy today, after an extensive amount of work.
I think the barrel is a period spare, as its bore is nearly pristine.
The barrel- cylinder gap is .003". Timing and lock up are distinctive and the trigger is really smooth.

[Len]

pitfighter
got it from an antique guns auction and the trigger guard was there. I don't know a lot about the TG, but it is iron/steel (magnetic). Don't know if the finish is silver or nickel. It's a bit pitted and the S/N says 1866.
Been trying to find some info on TG:s and it seems they came in a lot of different configurations and materials (found this collector in the Netherlands http://outlawscolts.jouwweb.nl/colt-1851    )
I'm not sure I know what you mean by "scallops"

[Dellbert]

That is one nice original Navy. I like it. Those don't show up around here that often, but when they do the prices are out of site.

[pitfighter]

pitfighter
got it from an antique guns auction and the trigger guard was there. I don't know a lot about the TG, but it is iron/steel (magnetic). Don't know if the finish is silver or nickel. It's a bit pitted and the S/N says 1866.
Been trying to find some info on TG:s and it seems they came in a lot of different configurations and materials (found this collector in the Netherlands http://outlawscolts.jouwweb.nl/colt-1851    )
I'm not sure I know what you mean by "scallops"

Hah - scallops - read back a few posts in the thread, lol.

Yes, your TG is very similar to mine - I don't think they are modern, I pulled mine off and examined interior recently (after starting this thread) - unexposed, fit and finish inside is comparable with Colt, not reproduction.  It's not an Italian replica trigger guard, not unless they were making them in 1870-80. 
I guess just a late style, and another minor variation in factory fit and finish, or a period replacement.

Both of our TGs look at though there has been some fitting required to shape to the receiver, action, so maybe a shop/general store/gun shop fix, who knows?

Thanks for posting - and thanks for all the other comments, great stuff!

[LonesomePigeon]

Len, regarding the 1851 Navy in post #20 & 25. The serial number font on the cylinder looks like it from a Colt 2nd Gen 1851 Navy. The barrel address also looks like a 2nd Gen 1851 Navy as does the overall shape of the barrel, barrel lug, loading cut out, ect.

The serial number fonts on the trigger guard look original.

The frame might be an original too. It looks like the nose has been cut back. Cutting the frame nose back would bring the forcing cone closer to the cylinder face. Indeed it does look like the forcing cone has been cut down.

I think what you may have is an original Colt Navy with a 2nd Gen barrel and cylinder, with the frame nose and forcing cone cut back so as to fit the 2nd Gen barrel to the original frame.

[Len]

Hi Lonesome P,
thanks for your observations! Very interesting.
I got the gun from a well known auction house in Denmark. Did bid unseen, just taking a chance.
In this part of the world the gun laws are tight, so what is sold as antique is antique (license free).
When I got it, I thought it must be a composition of different parts. I read somewhere that there's something called "a lunch box gun", i.e. parts not stamped, smuggled out from the factory and then put together.
The barrel is as good as new, with deep rifling and sharp edges.
Funny thing is that this is the best shooter of all my antiques, although it was the cheapest.