Colt Forum banner

New guy with a Patterson

8K views 97 replies 27 participants last post by  mrcvs 
#1 ·
I'm having a little trouble following the forum and posts, however I posted pictures of the #5 Texas patterson ser#700 I bought . In reply to Paterson ,I'm sure it's real as it had been in the family for 120 years, 3 generations, in Tennessee, where I bought it. It has never been offered for sale and never been shown, until now
 

Attachments

See less See more
8
#3 ·
Hello and welcome to the Colt Forum from West Virginia. Glad you have joined us all here. Fine looking Patterson. Thanks for sharing it with us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: victorio1sw
#4 ·
Henry,

Please don't shoot the messenger, but the best way to determine if a revolver is fake or original is to compare to known originals, and the bast source of photographs of (mostly) known originals is to use R L Wilson's The Paterson Colt Book. Now even this book has a few fakes that were intentionally or unintentionally included in this book (Wilson was a convicted felon and some of his dealings and publications were shady as part of an elaborate ruse). I generally eschew coffee table books, but this book is useful in comparing mostly known original examples with ones such as yours, especially because of the curviness of this model and because the curves of known originals are essentially "boilerplate" and fakes deviate from the curvature in many ways due to the difficulty of identical replication.

First, as already pointed out, your barrel address does appear to be a pantograph or at least deviates from the more subtle original script.

The profile of the wedge differs from most displayed in the book, but this might be a later replacement, which would be acceptable.

The curvature of the three "steps" of the barrel deviates from known original examples in that the depth of the ogee of yours is less flowing at the first step in the forward part of the the barrel and the angle of yours is less than known examples. the second "step" of yours is less graceful or refined; the third "step" of yours leading to the interface between the frame and the barrel is steeper on yours than on originals.

Likewise, the ogee of the three curves of the frame differs from originals in that the depth of the first two on yours is greater than on known originals and also the frame surrounding the end of the screw encircles this screw in a more rounder fashion than yours does. The arc of the third curve on your frame is deeper and if were used to create a circle, the circumference of the circle corresponding to the arc of your revolver would be less than that of known originals.

The curvature of the intersection of the top of the stocks and the frame is more upright than originals, as originals contain a stock that, at its intersection with the frame, points more forward than upwards.

The profile of the handle of the ramrod deviates extensively from know originals. Especially quantifiable is the length of the "hook" extending downwards and its curvature in the vicinity of the screw. On yours, the "hook" extends further down, beyond the midpoint of the screw, whereas originals contain a "hook" that barely ends in a horizontal line coincident with the center of the screw/screw hole.

The second, or rearmost, decorative band of your cylinder is deeper than known originals.

The curvature of your revolver is less refined or graceful when compared to known originals.

These are some more noticeable deviations from normal. With the revolver in hand, I'm sure others would become evident.

Putting this all together, it is virtually impossible that your Paterson is an original No 5 Texas Model Paterson.

Again, I hate to be the bearer of bad news. Is a refund available if it is determined that this is not an original example, as I have essentially done?
 
#6 ·
Henry,

Please don't shoot the messenger, but the best way to determine if a revolver is fake or original is to compare to known originals, and the bast source of photographs of (mostly) known originals is to use R L Wilson's The Paterson Colt Book. Now even this book has a few fakes that were intentionally or unintentionally included in this book (Wilson was a convicted felon and some of his dealings and publications were shady as part of an elaborate ruse). I generally eschew coffee table books, but this book is useful in comparing mostly known original examples with ones such as yours, especially because of the curviness of this model and because the curves of known originals are essentially "boilerplate" and fakes deviate from the curvature in many ways due to the difficulty of identical replication.

First, as already pointed out, your barrel address does appear to be a pantograph or at least deviates from the more subtle original script.

The profile of the wedge differs from most displayed in the book, but this might be a later replacement, which would be acceptable.

The curvature of the three "steps" of the barrel deviates from known original examples in that the depth of the ogee of yours is less flowing at the first step in the forward part of the the barrel and the angle of yours is less than known examples. the second "step" of yours is less graceful or refined; the third "step" of yours leading to the interface between the frame and the barrel is steeper on yours than on originals.

Likewise, the ogee of the three curves of the frame differs from originals in that the depth of the first two on yours is greater than on known originals and also the frame surrounding the end of the screw encircles this screw in a more rounder fashion than yours does. The arc of the third curve on your frame is deeper and if were used to create a circle, the circumference of the circle corresponding to the arc of your revolver would be less than that of known originals.

The curvature of the intersection of the top of the stocks and the frame is more upright than originals, as originals contain a stock that, at its intersection with the frame, points more forward than upwards.

The profile of the handle of the ramrod deviates extensively from know originals. Especially quantifiable is the length of the "hook" extending downwards and its curvature in the vicinity of the screw. On yours, the "hook" extends further down, beyond the midpoint of the screw, whereas originals contain a "hook" that barely ends in a horizontal line coincident with the center of the screw/screw hole.

The second, or rearmost, decorative band of your cylinder is deeper than known originals.

The curvature of your revolver is less refined or graceful when compared to known originals.

These are some more noticeable deviations from normal. With the revolver in hand, I'm sure others would become evident.

Putting this all together, it is virtually impossible that your Paterson is an original No 5 Texas Model Paterson.

Again, I hate to be the bearer of bad news. Is a refund available if it is determined that this is not an original example, as I have essentially done?
hello, mrcvs; that is a good critique. a couple of points; the patersons assembled by uncle ehler and called no. 4 (four) by dealers as a convenience back in the 1940s was not a colt designation. the 1847 (walker) model was the no. five. (this from many conversations between a. j. fjestad and myself in the early 2000s). the platinum bands on the cylinders of original patersons were to provide assistance in expansion of the cylinders if needed. these bands were installed on other high grade weapons before colt put them on his cylinders.
regards, bro
 
#5 ·
Also, compare the cylinder scene of yours with an original example.

Let's look at the man holding a pistol and the side by side horses. The pistol contains a wider barrel than yours and extends well beyond the front of the leg, whereas yours does not; the horse contains squarer front hooves whereas yours is triangular; the girth strap of the original is wider than yours. This is enough to prove the cylinder scenes are not identical.

 
#7 ·
The gun is a fake and now you have been informed it is a fake, if you try to sell it as original, you will be committing a crime. I suggest that you return it.
 
#26 · (Edited)
GRI -No offense but this post is unnecessary and harsh. The best way for anyone to determine it is a fake is aways hands on. The OP has a decision to make. He is new to the forum and is asking for help. Let's give it to him in a good way. Years ago I was at the Colt Collectors meeting. There was a 1911 USP SN#4 for sale. This one had history and with common sense it labeled as real. Fact is there is another #4 that was video reviewed by NRA as authentic. Are there two? Which one is the real thing? There are several technically astute members who have given their analysis here. Is the gun authentic? If I read the posts and BTW I am not an expert with these Colts it is probably a copy. I think the gun deserves a hands on inspection by an expert to authentic it one way or the other. OP - you should have professional authenticate the gun prior to purchase. I agree given feedback it should not be represented as original. These posts for anyone who is serious will be seen by a potential future buyer one way or the other. OP H -mrcvs is an expert you should take his input for what it is. Best not getting overly upset when you ask a question even if the answer is not what you want to hear.
 
#8 · (Edited)
Return it? I'd say it depends on how much you paid for it. If you thought it was a real treasure and paid proportionally what the treasure was worth, or if you paid the price of a higher priced replica. If you paid the latter, then consider it and acknowledge it as a replica. It may very well be three generations old. As far as replica's go, it's a very nice looking one.
 
#10 ·
MRCVS I do respect and value Your opinions and observances and will do some further research, I'm just not seeing the nuances Your pointing out. I am standing here with the gun in hand and the Philips/Wilson book in the other along with the magnifying glass. CNR , not that it's anyones business but I bought it as an original and paid accordingly. GRI I gotta ask how many Pattersons have You observed to make such a statement and also ask if You are a lawyer to inform Me of what I must do. Constructive criticism is always welcome, uninformed opinions are not.
 
#12 ·
If anything, look at the cylinder scene on yours and compare it to the one in the link I posted. You can see they are clearly not identical.

I was hoping you have return privileges on this one and this is why time might be of the utmost importance.

I might show my posts to the seller and see what they say.
 
#13 ·
People like you pop up on the Forum from time to time. They are always here for validation of their firearm. You never hear from them again, especially if they fail to get that validation. They usually pay little for their firearm compared to what would be the actual value. I doubt you paid $100k or more for this gun. The firearms eventually show up again on the internet, a fake is a joy forever. How many Patterson’s have you owned? None.
 
#16 ·
I see many differences in the horses. They did not come from the same roll stamp.

View attachment 751635

View attachment 751636
hello, it is interesting to investigate thedifferences between a fake or reproduction and an original paterson, 1847, dragoon, navy and et c. where the rubber meets the road is in i - r non destructive spectroscopic analysis. if a forger can beat this test, his product is as good as an original for all practical purposes and could be considered as one.
regards, bro
 
#20 ·
I see many differences in the horses. They did not come from the same roll stamp.

View attachment 751635

View attachment 751636
I pointed out a few discrepancies between Henry’s Paterson and the real Paterson when it comes to the roll engraving. All it takes is one unexplainable discrepancy to rule out authentic vs fake.

Now I like to get a Colt revolver at a bargain basement price, or even, in this case, where something might be offered to me without competing offers, sales tax, commissions, etc. But, the field of Colt Paterson and Colt Walker collecting REQUIRES vetting by a national expert any prospective purchase, if not done so already. The stakes are just too high! Yes, you are unlikely to get a bargain, but at least you have the “real deal” which hopefully appreciates over time. As compared to a fake for which one might be out six figures for a $200 revolver.

Fakes abound when it comes to Paterson and Walker revolvers and 99 times out of 100 what is perceived to be authentic is a fake, clever or otherwise.
 
#18 ·
Agarbers; Thanks for the detail pics I do see the difference You are talking about. Now I'm probably in for a hard time to get My money refunded. Mrcvs thanks again for Your time and effort. GRI of course I'm on this forum to validate the authenticity, or not, of this gun, it is the "COLT" forum. Just wondering for future posts if You always make uninformed comments on subject matters or are You just being rude.
 
#21 · (Edited)
Did your seller provide you with any written provenance or professional authentication or did he just claim the family history and correctness?
With regards to Paterson and Walker revolvers, 99.9999% of the survivors are well known by collectors and have proven provenance going back many years. It's HIGHLY unlikely that an unknown gun just comes out of nowhere. For the seller trying to perpetrate fraud the lack of provenance or authentication is the standard, "oh, it's been in the same family for 150 years so it's never been seen."
If this unscrupulous fellow refuses a refund I'd suggest taking him to court to recover your money. DO NOT disassemble the gun! Should it come to this (and I hope not) post his name so this won't happen to any other unwary customers.
 
#19 ·
Your personal attacks aside, you are welcome to prove me wrong. Stay on the Forum for a year and post at least 10 of your guns. It seems you called me out for being “uniformed” for early on calling your gun a fake. Now it seems you’re admitting it is.
 
#23 ·
Yes agreed.

I wish that I had picked your Paterson apart over on the Winchester forum when you posted it on 21 Aug. Not to be a jerk, but rather, to point out deficiencies when you might have had return privileges.

I would think this thread, where MULTIPLE folks have pointed out the problems with this Paterson, if presented to the seller, might make an honorable seller give you a full refund.

This saga is a reminder to buy the gun, not the story.
 
#24 ·
First, I would not have had a clue where to look if it wasn't for MRCVS and JohnnyP. The barrel script did look off from the start and JohnnnP confirmed what I felt. Kudos to them and it's great to have folks like them around.
Second, while I am not a lawyer, it sure seems like this would be violating some sort of US Federal law to commit fraud across an international boundary. I am pretty sure there are folks on this board to can speak to that. I think I would bring that up to the guy in Tennessee.
 
#27 · (Edited)
Hello Agarbers

You bring up a good point.

I've been married twice both to attorneys. Don;' say it I already know. Beyond the fact there will not be a third X Mrs. BigL1911, I learned a very important life lesson getting beating up during my last divorce. The reason I was suffering has nothing to do with Mrs. soon to be X Mrs. BigL, it was my fault for saying I do with her in the first place. This is about accountability. The Op needs to take accountability for his move - it is simple.
 
#25 ·
I will keep You posted of the outcome, but it's probably going to be a very expensive Gun purchase experience , 1st one in 55 years. The gentleman I bought it from ,(James Neikirk), of Elora Tennessee inherited it from his father in 1982 and He from His father in 1952, so it had to be made sometime previous to that. I did have an expert look at the pictures before I bought it and He sais it looked good,(by the pictures) to Him. It's really difficult moving these items back and forth across the border , so when the border opens I guess I'' be going to Tennessee. Thanks again for all the helpful comments, and to all those other smart ass comments, well I just won't go there. I posted this subject for some help, which I got , not to be ridiculed.
 
#29 · (Edited)
First, let me start out by saying that I am no expert on the Patersons. I have viewed several over the years and I have a good friend that owns more than a dozen. I have handled them many times while visiting his gun room. The first thing that struck me when I viewed the OP's photos was the script on the top of the barrel. It seems to be larger than the lettering that I have viewed. I do remember that many years ago several fake Patersons entered our country from Spain I believe. Here is a few known original Patersons to view that may help you assess your gun.





I know that you are in Canada and it may not be possible to attend the Colt Collectors Show the first weekend of October but my friend will have the following Patersons there on display:

Pocket Paterson S/N 13

Paterson S/N 22

Texas Paterson S/N 23

#3 Paterson S/N 46

Pocket Paterson S/N 49

If you would like me to take any photos while I am there I would be glad to do so as our displays will be side by side and we will be visiting most of the weekend.

I am sorry for your misfortune and sincerely hope the seller will make restitution to you.

Cam.
 
#30 ·
Thanks for the responses. I walked in to this deal , eyes wide open I took the sellers description as true,and take full responsibility for My ignorance and trusting nature, however that does not excuse the seller. If the situation were reversed His money would be refunded with a huge apology. Over the years I have taken guns back that were unsatisfactory to the buyer and I've done that without question,
 
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