Colt Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Premium Member
all can view my website
Joined
·
1,955 Posts
I don't believe it is a cut down. I believe it is 100% correct. Take a look at the barrel address. The longer barrels abbreviated Connecticut using just the CT. Only the two-inch-barrel used CONN for Connecticut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abe Anglin

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,351 Posts
That is a very clean looking example. Also like you said his other Colts are in great condition!! I wish I had some spare change to spend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
I don't believe it is a cut down. I believe it is 100% correct. Take a look at the barrel address. The longer barrels abbreviated Connecticut using just the CT. Only the two-inch-barrel used CONN for Connecticut.
It sure looks that way but how do you explain the box and, more importantly, the letter, both of which indicate that it shipped as a 4" gun?

Regards,
Kevin Williams
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,353 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
As nice as the revolver is, it still started with a 4" barrel. The 2" barrel in my opinion does not
rate the very high starting price of 1800.00 dollars. I can't see paying that much for the revolver.
 

·
Premium Member
all can view my website
Joined
·
1,955 Posts
They didn't make a 2" box. A label marked 2 was put over the 4. I believe the letter is a mistake. I've had the pistol in my hands and I am 99.9% sure it is without a doubt correct.

randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,845 Posts
Interesting!

Fun to see one, too.


So, it may have actually been a Factory 2 Inch, but, somehow, did not 'Letter' correctly..?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,774 Posts
2" just doesnt look that good on this frame. 2 1/2 or 2 3/4" would look real good, I think. Like the snub barrel on a model 66 S&W or a Ruger Security six -just a little more length would make it look Right.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,519 Posts
The barrel is a period-correct 2-inch barrel. The letter may be a mistake, but I doubt it. One of the purposes of the letter would be to verify that the barrel is original, and, upon receipt, the letter requester certainly verified that the barrel length in the letter was no mistake. In addition, the original letter request almost certainly asked that the 2-inch barrel be verified, so the researcher would have been on notice of that issue and not likely to make a mistake.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think these giant snubs look neat. I have a Commando and Marshal with the 2-inch barrel and find them "beautiful."

In my opinion, a re-barreled 4-inch gun is not worth $1,800, no would a genuine 2-inch be worth that much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Ah, but it is lovely, whether or not someone screwed on a new 2" or cut down a 4". It's done so well that one has to admire it and if you had lots of cash, to own it would also be fun. Just to keep the experts guessing, arguing and confounded.
Let's be honest...who wouldn't want to own it?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,463 Posts
In addition, the original letter request almost certainly asked that the 2-inch barrel be verified, so the researcher would have been on notice of that issue and not likely to make a mistake.
Judge,

I don't think he is talking about the archive researcher making a mistake....he is saying that whoever wrote the details / description down in the original records when the gun was produced or shipped made a mistake. I'm sure back in the day the person doing that job never had a clue that what they were writing down would determine value to some collector 80 to 140 years later. But I've learned one thing.....when the factory letter matches a gun perfectly AND the gun appears to be unmolested that is the best scenario to hope for. Anything short of that always leaves a doubt in the minds of a lot of collectors but I know a lot of knowledgeable collectors who buy based on their experience and expertise and what the factory letter says comes second to that for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abe Anglin

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,234 Posts
My problem with this gun has nothing to do with the letter or the barrel.
Its the fact that its been offered for sale over and over, without result .....
Obviously the seller's Reserve borders on the ridiculous, somewhere north of ludicrous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,606 Posts
Judge,

I don't think he is talking about the archive researcher making a mistake....he is saying that whoever wrote the details / description down in the original records when the gun was produced or shipped made a mistake. I'm sure back in the day the person doing that job never had a clue that what they were writing down would determine value to some collector 80 to 140 years later. But I've learned one thing.....when the factory letter matches a gun perfectly AND the gun appears to be unmolested that is the best scenario to hope for. Anything short of that always leaves a doubt in the minds of a lot of collectors but I know a lot of knowledgeable collectors who buy based on their experience and expertise and what the factory letter says comes second to that for them.
My experience is different. Any gun that has to be described with an asterisk, i.e. an ultimately unsatisfactory explanation as to why the letter doesn't verify the features translates into lower value. It is not just one asterisk we have to accept on this gun, it is at least three: 1. the 2" sticker fell off without leaving a trace of residue or damaged paper on the underlying label; 2. there is an error in the shipping records and/or the transcription to the letter; 3. there were 11 of these guns shipped as 2" barrels.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,519 Posts
coltsixguns, I agree with kwill. I do not know any collector who relies on "experience and expertise" to overrule what is in the factory letter. The original record could be wrong, but, as Mr. Williams notes, then the box also has to be wrong and there have to be ELEVEN 2-inch guns in that one shipment! Lottery tickets have better odds.

Sometimes, when a gun appears to be a very desirable and rare model (like a 2-inch Official Police), it tends to foster wishful thinking that the gun is correct. In my opinion, this one is not.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,463 Posts
My experience is different. Any gun that has to be described with an asterisk, i.e. an ultimately unsatisfactory explanation as to why the letter doesn't verify the features translates into lower value. It is not just one asterisk we have to accept on this gun, it is at least three: 1. the 2" sticker fell off without leaving a trace of residue or damaged paper on the underlying label; 2. their is an error in the shipping records and/or the transcription to the letter; 3. there were 11 of these guns shipped as 2" barrels.
I understand what you are saying and I am not defending the referenced double action in question at all. My point is that there are obvious glaring errors in factory letters from time to time. It's not on the part of the factory archive researcher but rather the factory person who worked the ledgers in the past.
 

·
Premium Member
all can view my website
Joined
·
1,955 Posts
My experience is different. Any gun that has to be described with an asterisk, i.e. an ultimately unsatisfactory explanation as to why the letter doesn't verify the features translates into lower value. It is not just one asterisk we have to accept on this gun, it is at least three: 1. the 2" sticker fell off without leaving a trace of residue or damaged paper on the underlying label; 2. their is an error in the shipping records and/or the transcription to the letter; 3. there were 11 of these guns shipped as 2" barrels.
Why you would have to think all 11 pistols had the same barrel length? I have had single actions from the same shipment that were not alike.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,463 Posts
coltsixguns, I agree with kwill. I do not know any collector who relies on "experience and expertise" to overrule what is in the factory letter.
We travel in different circles Judge......because I know of 3 collectors who have spent in excess of $200,000 on one particular colt through the past 17 years that letters blue when it is actually nickel and so far no one has been able to dispute the finish. Each time it changes hands it becomes more expensive. The fellows spending the money are not fools. Letters are nice but they are not foolproof in the least. Again....I am not defending the original revolver in question but merely saying that factory letters are not without error from time to time.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top