Colt Forum banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi everyone

I just inherited this Colt from my grandfather. I have been doing some research on it to try to prove that it is in fact authentic, and I came across this chat form. I am curious if you guys think I should purchase a Kopec letter to prove it. There are no military inspection stamps and it’s a 44-40 so I’m assuming its a civilian model.

Here is what I know about it:
Caliber: 44-40 WCF
Barrel length: 4 3/4”
Serial number: 86051 or 6051
3 line patented date
44CF stamped on left front side of trigger guard.
Small H stamped below rear sight under the hammer.
No markings on the cylinder.
4333 serial# on ejector cover
It is not the original grips.


I think the first digit of the serial number was removed on the trigger guard and handle, and partially removed on the frame to make it look like a Custer gun serial number. I think the bluing was also redone, the finish is a different color under the ejector cover.

Any information or advice would be much appreciated

Thanks


744686
744687
744688
744689
744690
744691
744692
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,171 Posts
Hi everyone

I just inherited this Colt from my grandfather. I have been doing some research on it to try to prove that it is in fact authentic, and I came across this chat form. I am curious if you guys think I should purchase a Kopec letter to prove it. There are no military inspection stamps and it’s a 44-40 so I’m assuming its a civilian model.

Here is what I know about it:
Caliber: 44-40 WCF
Barrel length: 4 3/4”
Serial number: 86051 or 6051
3 line patented date
44CF stamped on left front side of trigger guard.
Small H stamped below rear sight under the hammer.
No markings on the cylinder.
4333 serial# on ejector cover
It is not the original grips.


I think the first digit of the serial number was removed on the trigger guard and handle, and partially removed on the frame to make it look like a Custer gun serial number. I think the bluing was also redone, the finish is a different color under the ejector cover.

Any information or advice would be much appreciated

Thanks


View attachment 744686 View attachment 744687 View attachment 744688 View attachment 744689 View attachment 744690 View attachment 744691 View attachment 744692
First, I would not send that one to Kopec, since it was not military issue. The military bought 45 Colt SAA's.

The 1st digit of the SN was simply removed while polishing prior to rebluing.

The 4333 is a gate assembly number, which should match another number on the bottom of frame (under trigger guard).

The barrel has been cut (likely from 7-1/2") to 4-3/4", as evidenced by the one line Hartford address.

If the cylinder has no number, then likely the barrel (under ejector housing) also has no number? Is that correct?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
First, I would not send that one to Kopec, since it was not military issue. The military bought 45 Colt SAA's.

The 1st digit of the SN was simply removed while polishing prior to rebluing.

The 4333 is a gate assembly number, which should match another number on the bottom of frame (under trigger guard).

The barrel has been cut (likely from 7-1/2") to 4-3/4", as evidenced by the one line Hartford address.

If the cylinder has no number, then likely the barrel (under ejector housing) also has no number? Is that correct?
Gate assembly number? That is interesting I will have to take it apart and confirm that. No I have been a little timid to disassemble the gun yet. I want to make sure I do I right. I will look under the ejector housing and trigger and get back to you
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Gun has been heavily buffed and reblued. I do like the way the re-finisher kept nice square edges instead of rounding them off like most people do. The address on top of the barrel has been poorly re-cut. Gun in that condition is probably worth about $1200-1500.
What makes you think it has been recut? Is the font different or something?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Made in 1883. I agree with the others. Heavily buffed and refinished. Do not try to shoot modern ammo through it. Black powder only.
Thanks for confirming the year, 1883 was when I thought it was manufactured as well. I shot it once maybe 8 years ago with black powder ammo that we reloaded, after the first shot or two the front sight fell off. So we decided not to shoot it anymore.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,171 Posts
Gun has been heavily buffed and reblued. I do like the way the re-finisher kept nice square edges instead of rounding them off like most people do. The address on top of the barrel has been poorly re-cut. Gun in that condition is probably worth about $1200-1500.
That barrel address has been crudely recut! I didn't pay attention to that, because most rebluers would never take the time to recut an address.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wes Terner

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
What makes you think it has been recut? Is the font different or something?
Compare these two barrels. Notice how the lettering is straight and the same height on the top example.

744704


Notice how the lettering on your barrel is not straight or the same height. The top example looks mechanically done. The bottom example looks hand-cut.

744705
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
I believe the barrel should have had an acid-etched panel with the words Frontier Six Shooter. Unfortunately, that has been buffed away and covered with bluing.
This is what it would have looked like:

744706


Here is a great thread to study and compare your example with:

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,171 Posts
Compare these two barrels. Notice how the lettering is straight and the same height on the top example.

View attachment 744704

Notice how the lettering on your barrel is not straight or the same height. The top example looks mechanically done. The bottom example looks hand-cut.

View attachment 744705
You are right! The Top of every crossed T and F is slanted downward. At least they were consistent?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Csimm, welcome to the colt forum. You certainly brought your questions about grandfathers revolver to the right place, I too am new to these amazing pieces of workmanship and history. Every time someone like yourself gets information about their saa I learn something. Do you know how long your grandfather owned it? I hope you enjoy it for a long time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,171 Posts
I agree there are many negative alterations on my gun, but do you still think it is an authentic Colt pistol?
Thanks for posting your questions along with great detailed pictures of your grandfather's Colt SAA. We all learn from these pictures and discussions, whether the guns are totally original or reworked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Csimm

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Compare these two barrels. Notice how the lettering is straight and the same height on the top example.

View attachment 744704

Notice how the lettering on your barrel is not straight or the same height. The top example looks mechanically done. The bottom example looks hand-cut.

View attachment 744705
Oh wow your right. Thank you for the comparison
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top