Colt Forum banner
21 - 40 of 46 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
I've seen Mr. Ware's writings on "variations" but this seems to be a strange one. Gun serial # is 142XX, with additional # 118 on left side of frame & both grip panels. Early gun with assembly #s, or were the additional #s added later? Reason for question. There are NO caliber markings on gun, which gave me cause to suspect 44 Rem. caliber. Not so. 44WCF drops right in. Visibly, gun has the lanyard ring, pinched post front sight & non-rebated frame. Supposedly, one of these with no caliber markings on frame or trigger guard bow, is going to be 44 Rem. but if it left factory as 44-40, a "44" would be on left side of frame in front of cylinder. Traces of original blue in protected areas. Can find no marks on cylinder. Thought of removing trigger guard & ejector assembly to look for marks but after encountering resistance, I stopped for fear of twisting off a screw head, no matter how well the screw-driver fits. Any input, especially as to year, would be welcome. THANKS! View attachment 754470
This is the earliest M1875 that I have ever had, #806. Probably made in 1875, if that is when Rem began marketing them. In 44 Rem caliber. Flat firing pin. The odd method of attaching the ivory grips is notable. Rather than trying to "tuck" the upper part of each grip under the frame, a small additional backstrap pin was inserted. Of course, there is no way to know if Rem did this, or some New York engraver.

And that is another reason why I quit RSA -- I sent many pictures and details of this gun to the RSA editor -- and NOTHING ever was printed in that magazine. I truly believe that they do not want a book on the 1875-88-90 series published.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
Round. Cone shaped.
I suspect that what you have is a very early batch numbered M1875. I could be wrong too! Again, there is a real need for a book on this subject. It would not require a genious to take a nationwide/worldwide survey on these 1875-88-90 Remingtons. That survey could then lay out the progression of changes from 1875 to 1890's.

I have a data sheet too for gathering such information. Yep, I made one up to document my own guns inside and out about 20 years ago. It is a 8-1/2" x 11" sheet in MS Word, made for a ring binder. It is much like the sheet that I made up for the Colt SAA 52 years ago.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,052 Posts
That is the 1888 (aka Transition) Model. It reads "E. Remington...etc" on the barrel. It has wood grips. The ejector housing was trimmed down, as were the M1890's at a later time. If the ejector housing is removed, there is an assembly number on both the barrel and top of housing. That same number may also be under the grips.
Thanks Victorio, I had been told that by a friend in Hampton, VA who had a huge collection of Remington SA's. HIs collection was on display at a local museum back around 2000. He was in his mid 90's at that time. He had tremendous knowledge of those SA's. I wish I had paid better attention to him and made notes when he discussed them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
This is my other 1890/88. Neither of these guns have visible caliber markings. View attachment 754612 View attachment 754613 View attachment 754614 View attachment 754615 View attachment 754616
Another one with "E. Remington...etc" on the barrel, but rolled backwards. Or are the others backwards?

On the COLT SAA's we saw the one-line address rolled in reverse at about SN 30xxx. It wasn't just one gun, but apparently a factory worker rolled a number of 45 x 7-1/2" barrels in reverse. I haven't seen one of those in a long time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintclair

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
So which address is reversed? The engraved one or the first 1888 saintclair posted? Mine is like the engraved one. Except mine is an 1875 and the engraved one is an 1888.
A model 1888 used left over 1875 barrels. So barrels should be the same on both. Marcus Hartley bought the failing E. Remington & Sons company, and reduced the "web" on the ejector.

As for E. Remington barrel addresses, I may have seen as many reading toward the frame, as reading away from the frame. The two that I have pics of right now, both read away from the frame. The 1st pictured here is my engraved #809, and the 2nd pic is that of #5709. Both are earlier guns with serial (not batch) numbers.

I have one other M1875 #556, which has a batch number, and I am almost certain that it reads toward the frame.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
So which address is reversed? The engraved one or the first 1888 saintclair posted? Mine is like the engraved one. Except mine is an 1875 and the engraved one is an 1888.
A model 1888 used left over 1875 barrels. So barrels should be the same on both. Marcus Hartley bought the failing E. Remington & Sons company, and reduced the "web" on the ejector.
Thanks for the info on the 44 Rem! Today using my inertia puller on a live 44-40 round, I discover that on my digital caliper, the bullet measures .425. Next, I measure both guns (the nickel one marked "44" and the blue one with zero markings to discover that they both measure .420 at the muzzle. Don't know if the caliper is accurate but my point is both guns measure the same. Since my blue gun has no caliber marking on the left side of the frame, I'm suspicious that once upon a time "in the west", it may have had it on that left grip which has enough wear that it would be long gone. Both cylinder's chambers measure the same at both ends. So. What conclusion can be made other than wear on the grip obliterating the "44" or the remote possibility that it left Remington originally as a 44 Rem & was returned to be both re-barreled & perhaps a new cylinder which might explain the extra #s on the inside of the grips & the left side of the frame, next to the serial #? I believe I'll go with the wear factor. Thanks again!
I commented earlier that "Your two guns probably have 5 lands and grooves". What I was trying to point out is that maybe you measured from a groove to a land. If so, you may be able to measure the groove depth in some manner. Then a theoretical groove to groove bore diameter can be calculated. And it will be larger than 0.420".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Discussion Starter · #31 ·
FOUND. Caliper #2. New numbers. As to the Nickle gun (ivory grips, serial 421, blade front sight, no lanyard, rebated frame with "44" on left side). The largest measurement at the muzzle that I can get is .425 (groove to groove). Chambers at front of cylinder are .448. Rear of cylinder chambers I come up with .467. As to the blue gun (serial 14,241 , pinched post front sight, secondary # on both grip panels & frame #118, non-rebated frame, no visible caliber markings) . Measurement @ muzzle (groove to groove) .430. Chambers at front of cylinder .460. Rear of cylinder chambers measure .466. Both guns have what appears to be 5 lands & grooves. Still a Chinese digital caliper. Maybe I need a dial type. Even under magnification, if there ever was a "44" on the left grip panel, it's long gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,118 Posts
FOUND. Caliper #2. New numbers. As to the Nickle gun (ivory grips, serial 421, blade front sight, no lanyard, rebated frame with "44" on left side). The largest measurement at the muzzle that I can get is .425 (groove to groove). Chambers at front of cylinder are .448. Rear of cylinder chambers I come up with .467. As to the blue gun (serial 14,241 , pinched post front sight, secondary # on both grip panels & frame #118, non-rebated frame, no visible caliber markings) . Measurement @ muzzle (groove to groove) .430. Chambers at front of cylinder .460. Rear of cylinder chambers measure .466. Both guns have what appears to be 5 lands & grooves. Still a Chinese digital caliper. Maybe I need a dial type. Even under magnification, if there ever was a "44" on the left grip panel, it's long gone.
FYI I took some measurements of mine.
*Five land barrel with the lands and grooves about equal width. Calipers measure the muzzle at .430".
*A loaded .44-40 round will enter the muzzle up to the case mouth. The loaded bullet's exposed projectile measures .423".
*A loaded .44 Remington will not enter the muzzle. The loaded bullet's exposed projectile measures .443".
*The chambers at the rear of the cylinder measure .467" and at the front of the cylinder .447".
*A loaded .44 Remington case measures .450" at the base and .446" at the crimp.
*A loaded .44-40 case measures .466" at the base and .440" at the crimp.

*Measurements can probably be a +/- a couple thousandths.
*The .44-40's may, of may not be, reloads? I used three different headstamps and tried to average them.
*The .44 Remington loaded cartridge and the .44-40 loaded cartridges both will chamber and probably will go "BANG". However, how each load will address the bore is another question.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
FYI I took some measurements of mine.
*Five land barrel with the lands and grooves about equal width. Calipers measure the muzzle at .430".
*A loaded .44-40 round will enter the muzzle up to the case mouth. The loaded bullet's exposed projectile measures .423".
*A loaded .44 Remington will not enter the muzzle. The loaded bullet's exposed projectile measures .443".
*The chambers at the rear of the cylinder measure .467" and at the front of the cylinder .447".
*A loaded .44 Remington case measures .450" at the base and .446" at the crimp.
*A loaded .44-40 case measures .466" at the base and .440" at the crimp.

*Measurements can probably be a +/- a couple thousandths.
*The .44-40's may, of may not be, reloads? I used three different headstamps and tried to average them.
*The .44 Remington loaded cartridge and the .44-40 loaded cartridges both will chamber and probably will go "BANG". However, how each load will address the bore is another question.
This may be ruled as an "overkill" of data, but attached are measurements from a 44 Rem M1875 several years ago. This 44 Rem was serial numbered and intended for the Egyptian contract of 10,000. It had the FR inspector's stamp on the left grip, the Star on barrel, and R's on frame and cylinder.

You can see that the rear of chambers measured an average of 0.454" dia. The front end of these chambers measured an average of 0.453".

The 44 Rem cartridge that I pictured in post #4 dropped right into five chambers with no wiggle, front or rear.

Yep, some idiot tried to ream one chamfer to 45 Colt. They used an unpiloted 45 reamer (or short-piloted) and ran off course (left the chamber centerline). Then too was the small problem with a 45 Colt being a tad too long for a 44 Rem cylinder!! This is what we call a FusterCluck!

And this is why I always question chamber sizes on any early M1875. I have seen them reamed out, drilled out, and rat-tail filed out. I am serious about the latter, as have seen this crudely-done filing on many makes and models of antique obsolete-caliber revolvers.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
THANKS FOR SHARING! I can see the round-top hammer also. Just like both of mine. As to my nickel one, I can hear a safety notch but it doesn't hold. Don't hear or feel it on my blue one. Not going to go inside of either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
sure no problem, I remember seeing a photo comparison of the different hammers - it had 4 types and the bevel on the sides of mine where the firing pin meets the hammer body was of significance.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,813 Posts
THANKS FOR SHARING! I can see the round-top hammer also. Just like both of mine. As to my nickel one, I can hear a safety notch but it doesn't hold. Don't hear or feel it on my blue one. Not going to go inside of either.
Fewer parts than an SAA
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
THANKS FOR SHARING! I can see the round-top hammer also. Just like both of mine. As to my nickel one, I can hear a safety notch but it doesn't hold. Don't hear or feel it on my blue one. Not going to go inside of either.
The early M1875's didn't have a safety notch. Maybe Remington was thinking that like with the New Model Army 44 percussion, that the user could carry the loaded gun with the hammer down between chambers. Or just load 5, and leave the hammer down on an empty chamber.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,270 Posts
I've seen Mr. Ware's writings on "variations" but this seems to be a strange one. Gun serial # is 142XX, with additional # 118 on left side of frame & both grip panels. Early gun with assembly #s, or were the additional #s added later? Reason for question. There are NO caliber markings on gun, which gave me cause to suspect 44 Rem. caliber. Not so. 44WCF drops right in. Visibly, gun has the lanyard ring, pinched post front sight & non-rebated frame. Supposedly, one of these with no caliber markings on frame or trigger guard bow, is going to be 44 Rem. but if it left factory as 44-40, a "44" would be on left side of frame in front of cylinder. Traces of original blue in protected areas. Can find no marks on cylinder. Thought of removing trigger guard & ejector assembly to look for marks but after encountering resistance, I stopped for fear of twisting off a screw head, no matter how well the screw-driver fits. Any input, especially as to year, would be welcome. THANKS! View attachment 754470
Not sure if I have shown this one before. This is a later 44-40 with conical firing pin and lanyard ring. Stamped "44" on rear left TG. Batch #556. Just an average old M1875, with maybe 30% original nickel and the remainder smooth brown. A puzzling thing is the butt marking: "U.S. Earl. Flora.". The die stamp types certainly look old. Could this be an Indian Policeman?
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: Username

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Discussion Starter · #40 ·
Reminds me of a nickel 1875, recent sale on "Broker". STRANGE markings on top of barrel & butt, beautiful ivories. I managed to contact buyer. He is as clueless as I am as to the markings so was the seller. Top of barrel stamped B.C.A.C. & more stuff on the butt. Don Ware's article seems to Indicate that the only Indian Police guns that were marked were Pine Ridge. I googled myself silly for a week trying to link some entity to " B.C.A.C." (ranch, bank, express co., RR., tribal, etc.) Still a mystery. I believe the barrel marks are still viewable on "Broker" but I failed to save them.
Tool Wood Jewellery Cable Audio equipment
Tool Wood Jewellery Cable Audio equipment
 
21 - 40 of 46 Posts
Top