[mrcvs]

How about a Lot 5 trigger guard?

 

[mrcvs]

Nice. Looks to have a well-preserved finish.

A few more photographs of this revolver.

 

[mrcvs]

Those fonts are too small for 1874 production and they have a modern design stamped too unevenly. I believe a spurious marking but that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
JP

Agreed! They looked suspicious but I didn’t want to commit to this without seeing the rest of the revolver.

Can the OP provide photographs of the rest of the revolver?

 

[mrcvs]

With new screws and hard rubber grips, it’s difficult to prove these component parts have been together since circa 1895 to 1903, as an Artillery Model revolver or if this revolver was reassembled later from component parts. Is there an “A” on the backstrap just rear of the hammer or under the 4039 of the trigger guard? The resolution of the photograph cannot prove or disprove the latter. Any markings on the cylinder and under the ejector housing of the barrel?

 

[mrcvs]

I’m unsure about any Ainsworth marks. There is the A. Kind “K” on the (unnumbered) cylinder, as well as an “H.”
I’ll check, again, for the “A” in the aforementioned places. I should add that I have scrutinized the trigger guard for an inspector’s mark, but don’t recall looking closely at the upper backstrap.
View attachment 837164
View attachment 837163

I meant any markings along the side of the cylinder, not the face of the cylinder? Not necessarily an “A”, might be an “R.A.C.”, “D.F.C.”, etc. And often a 4 digit number, the second digit of which is often in the turn line.

I’m extremely suspicious of this being a made up revolver. The numbers look suspicious. Also, when an Artillery Model revolver contains a frame, backstrap, and trigger guard with 3 and 4 digit numbers, it certainly is possible, but does raise eyebrows.

Can you post a photograph of the underside of the barrel under the ejector housing close to the frame and also the barrel address?

 

[mrcvs]

Mine is pretty close. View attachment 837357 View attachment 837358 View attachment 837359 View attachment 837360 View attachment 837361 View attachment 837362

Your Kopec letter states the backstrap serial number was crudely restamped when refurbished just before 13 December 1900. I would expect the same occurred with regards to the backstrap of the OPs revolver and explains the curious appearance.

Thank you for posting your Kopec letter.