Colt Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
794 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

I went to your webpage, very nice! Your Commando Special is priced competitively and I doubt you should have any trouble selling it. However I do take exception with you saying on your website "Grips look original and are excellent." (This is not intended to hammer you.)

The Commando Special would have come with black rubber grips that are smooth with silver medallions and a little pinky notch. These described grips were only used on the Commando Special.

Where the wood stocks you have on the gun do indeed look excellent, they are not original to the gun. I must admit that I like the look of the wood stocks better than the smooth rubber.

The Commando Special was a poor mans Detective Special. An attempt to cut costs. Rubber is cheaper than wood and that is why the gun did not come with checkered wood.

[This message has been edited by WS23 (edited 01-19-2005).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,483 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

The few Commando Specials that I saw when new,hade wooden grips,but smooth,no checkering,and Colt medallion. Bud
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WS23:
I went to your webpage, very nice! Your Commando Special is priced competitively and I doubt you should have any trouble selling it. However I do take exception with you saying on your website "Grips look original and are excellent." (This is not intended to hammer you.)

The Commando Special would have come with black rubber grips that are smooth with silver medallions and a little pinky notch. These described grips were only used on the Commando Special.

Where the wood stocks you have on the gun do indeed look excellent, they are not original to the gun. I must admit that I like the look of the wood stocks better than the smooth rubber.

The Commando Special was a poor mans Detective Special. An attempt to cut costs. Rubber is cheaper than wood and that is why the gun did not come with checkered wood.

[This message has been edited by WS23 (edited 01-19-2005).]
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I wondered about the grip isue too. At the risk of sounding like a weasel, I said they 'look original' rather than 'are original'.


In my research I found that the usual sources list the Commando Special as coming with rubber grips. Thie grips on this gun, however, just seem right. They are in the same condition as the gun, fit it perfectly, and there is no wear pattern that would suggest it ever wore any others.

While it is entirely possible they are replacement grips, I'm wondering if they migtht be original. Perhaps towards the end of producton Colt started to run low on the rbber one's and substituted what was on hand. All the makers can be rather frugal when it comes to using up stuff on hand.

Either way, it's a nifty little gun and definitely one you don't see every day.

As for it being the poor man's Detective Special,.....well, whatever it was, it didn't work (from a marketing standpoint).

Best,
RMV
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
794 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Sounds to me from the consensus of responses they may indeed be original. I agree that Colt probably did do a lot of using the parts on hand.

I can only speak to what I know 1st hand about this model. Every one I have seen and know for a fact to be brand new/original came like the one I picture here. Bought brand new by me in the mid 80's.

I may go out and look for a wood set like yours (knowing they are likely correct) as I really think the rubber look cheap.



[This message has been edited by WS23 (edited 01-20-2005).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
571 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Guys: I bought a NIB Colt Commando Special when they were still in production. It had the same checkered, medallioned wooden grips that are shown in Bob's photo. Proof once more that Colt was rather inconsistent in its methods over time. Of course, that is the kind of thing that we collectors like!

Charlie Flick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,483 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

The "Commando Special" that I saw was one of the first to come out in 1984. They were made 1984-86.Colt advertised them as a no frills,economy steel framed snub that could handle +P ammo,vs. the alloy framed Agent that had better finish.(as a sidelight,the one RM shows is glossier and better looking with the checkered grips compared to the one I examined at my dealers over 20 years ago.) It had smooth grips,with wood best fit for kindling! How much $$$ the bean counters figured they'd save not machine checkering the grips,I don't know,and the parkerizing looked liked gray primer! Colt had cut exterior finish costs,to try and sell more at a lower price,and both the dealer and I thought that the action and fit was excellent. Yet,they didnt sell!! Another nail in Colt's coffin! While the gun is as ugly as sin,compared to earlier Detective Specials,it is functional,and will probably be a "sleeper" in the future for collectors due to the small number made. My "guess",as some have mentioned,is that plain,checkered,and rubber grips were installed,from what was available in the supply bin. My dealer still had the gun,in late 1987 and I could've got it for $165.00 OTD!! Bud
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,464 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

I just checked my catalog file and find that the D-frame Commando was introduced in 1984 with "Rubber Combat Stocks." Each year thereafter through 1986, the Commando was pictured with rubber stocks. The 1987 catalog did not picture the Commando, nor was it on the price lists.

The D-frame Agent produced during the same time frame had the "Wood Combat Stocks," which were uncheckered wood.

While it is hard to argue with people who bought them new, if they still do not have them, it is possible to forget what was on the revolver decades later. Every one I have seen had rubber stocks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

I absolutely HATE the RM Vivas website!

Because this Kalifornian can't have any of the nice guns he has for sale


------------------
Ask the Chief!

[This message has been edited by SnWnMe (edited 01-20-2005).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,383 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JudgeColt:
I just checked my catalog file and find that the D-frame Commando was introduced in 1984 with "Rubber Combat Stocks." Each year thereafter through 1986, the Commando was pictured with rubber stocks. The 1987 catalog did not picture the Commando, nor was it on the price lists.

The D-frame Agent produced during the same time frame had the "Wood Combat Stocks," which were uncheckered wood.

While it is hard to argue with people who bought them new, if they still do not have them, it is possible to forget what was on the revolver decades later. Every one I have seen had rubber stocks.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi,

I bought serial number 66xx from the San Francisco Gun exchange when they first came out. It had the checkered wood grips with medallion as shown in the photo... Bob Best
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
794 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Bob, I'm not questioning your recollection here. However a Commando Special should have a S/N that started with P. You list yours as 66XX. Besides starting with the letter P it should have have had 5 numerals such as PXXXXX. So something here is not right.

Do you still have the gun and can verify the S/N?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
794 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Just to be clear on the S/N issue. The Commando Special was for all intent a Detective Special. A cheap, poor mans DS knockoff. Colts did what they could to cut costs on this gun, in every possible way. Including the use of cheap rubber stocks, no pony stamped on side plate, poor metal finish/machining, etc.

In as much as it was basically a DS, it shared the same S/N range with the DS of that era, i.e. early to mid 80's.

Although my S/N data comes only from my collection, I have a good enough sample of years both before and after the run of Commando Specials to validate the P prefix.

So if indeed the Bob Best gun was accurately described as having S/N 66XX (with no P prefix), then I say it can not have been a Commando Special.

Chances are that it was either a simple typo or the Judge was 100% correct when he said: "While it is hard to argue with people who bought them new, if they still do not have them, it is possible to forget what was on the revolver decades later" including the S/N.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

I sold my Colt Commando back in 1990-worst mistake I ever made. Should have kept that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Can anybody tell me more about the Withetailer.
Is it a Python?, what is the difference with others Pythons?.

Anibal
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
794 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Anibal, I don't own a Whitetailer myself, but I can tell you it is NOT a Python based gun. Look at the position of the screw on the side. Also notice the cylinder. Look at the hammer. All these are different than the Python. It is clearly not a Python action.

But it does have a Python vent rib barrel. Notice the angle cut of the underlug. If the top strap was solid and not vented, you'd swear it was just another King Cobra. And you'd be right.

However, they dressed this one up with the 8" Python barrel, a Whitetailer (or Whitetailer II) roll mark, added a 2X scope, and put it all in a fancy aluminum case.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,464 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

WS23, great analysis of the serial number issue presented. I remain VERY skeptical that any Commando ever had wood stocks from the factory.

Having been in the gun business and hobby for more than half a century, I know there are some unusual guns and some factory errors.

However, I also know that strange things got done in the dealer's hands sometimes as well. It could be that the "wood" Commando had laid in the case too long and the dealer wanted to dress it up to help sell it, so put wood stocks on it. It attracted COLTDAGUY enough to buy it so maybe it worked!

Here is a suggestion for settling this matter. Let the "rubber guys" chip in and get a factory letter on this Commando. If it letters as wood, the "rubber guys" are out the cost of the letter. If it letters as rubber, the "wood guys" pay the "rubber guys" for the letter. If the stocks letter as "not listed," the cost is split equally. (rm vivas gets the letter free no matter what.)

Deal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

WS23:
For what it's worth, I have a Cobra that I bought new in 1993 that has the same smooth rubbers with the pinky notch as the CS in your photo. If I remember correctly (I have to dig it out) the medallions were of the 150th anniversary variety. Cheap but actually fit my hand well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
794 Posts
Re: Two not commonly seen Colt\'s

Bushwacker, this is all pretty interesting. At least to me. They made Cobras in 1993? Or in 1993 you bought a NIB Cobra made in the 80's?

As you probably know the 150 Anniversary Medallions were used for the most part in 1986 to around 1988. Colt being formed in 1836. Not always, but usually those medallions were associated with the maroon 150 Anniversary box. In other words, if you bought a brand new gun produced in the 1986 it would have come in the maroon Anniversary box and had the 150 Anniversary medallions on the stocks.

You bought your gun new in 1993, but what was the year of manufacture of your Cobra? If your gun was produced in 1993 (I wasn't aware they still built Cobras in 1993) why did they have the Anniversary medallions? A 1993 produced gun should have come in a blue plastic case.

Again something is not right or consistent.

A lot of these exceptions support lonewolf Bud's speculation that: " My "guess",as some have mentioned, is that plain,checkered, and rubber grips were installed, from what was available in the supply bin." His explanation seems to make a whole lot a sense. However....

Not trying to achieve paralysis by analysis, but the Vivas gun is an early Commando Special. Earlier than mine. Not by much but both were actually produced in 1983. (Yes I know the book says produced in 1984 to 1986, but the book is full of errors. I got my info from Colt and have been tracking S/N's myself for a long time.) So, if the Vivas gun was a very early produced gun, could it be that Colt was not yet ready supplied (from their grip vendor) with the advertised rubber stocks? So is it possible they were fitted with on-hand wooden stocks? That could make sense.

As for the Cobra having stocks associated with Commando Special (and having the Anniversary medallions), either Bud's theory or the Judge's theory (" that strange things got done in the dealer's hands ") could be correct. What I find real odd is how could a gun such as this Cobra (made in 1993?) be using parts cleaned up from a gun (CS) that went out of production 6 years earlier? Sounds like a lot of extra CS smooth rubber stocks laying around.

And I'm not sure about Cobras being made as late as 1993. I can't find any reference to Cobras being made that late. How about digging out your gun and checking the S/N. Also verify what box or plastic case it came in. I have some S/N data in the 90's for D-frame guns that could help.

So far everything has led to more questions than answers!
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top