this is an AMS( ARMI SAN MARCO) COPY..
wood grip
brass trigger frame
steel case hardened frame
ships on the cylinder
8" bbl...
i cannot find any current pricing.
help
thanks
this is an AMS( ARMI SAN MARCO) COPY..
wood grip
brass trigger frame
steel case hardened frame
ships on the cylinder
8" bbl...
i cannot find any current pricing.
help
thanks
I'm no expert, but you might need to narrow down the definition. The Walker was a very large .44 from 1847. The Navy was a small frame .36 from 1851. I don't know anything about an "officer" model but again I am no expert about Colt or AMS.
If it is a Navy copy (The Ormsby engraving of ships on the cylinder seems to indicate this) and it really is an 8 inch barrel, not 7 1/2, I'm going with the theory that this is a bastardized 1851 copy. Value is not high. New guns from Pietta run under 300 bucks and used guns are commonly seen for under 200.
The title of this thread may be one of the most-confusing and mixed-up ones I've ever seen on this website... but we can work it out.
As noted, the naval-battle roll marking on the cylinder indicates a Navy model. The Walker Colts had a scene depicting a fight against Indians, so it's not a Walker.
"Eight-inch barrel" is too long for a Navy (or .44 Army, I believe). .44 Walker barrels are nine inches long in factory form. Could it be a case of mis-measurement on the barrel length?
Interesting.
8" barrels were on the 1860 Colt as was the mentioned cylinder scene. We need some better information for this one.
the bbl is EIGHT INCHES LONG..it appears original, all bluing matches
it is not a navy, but NAVY OFFICER mdl
things i have been told....i know nothing about bp...
it is a repro...so my guess it it can be anything
hi bruce!
with the stepped cylinder and the long grip. that is a 1860 colt army revolver. it is cut for a shoulder stock as most were. I don't know where the navy officers model came from never heard of it before.
it would be in .44 cal.
Interesting thread. Nice looking revolter.
the ships roll marked on the cylinder
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob208
yup, that is an 1860. I have several, and really like them. I am thinking that I may be getting old enough to start letting go of a few, and the ones I have value around 175-350.
1850 Army. I have a ASM 1861 Navy (.36) ASM that was made in the 80s for CVA. Like many Italian copies of earlier years - ASM could be "hit or miss". Mine is beautiful - great fit and finish and great wood. I"ve seen some ASMs over the years that weren't. The biggest problem with ASM is that the internals are soft. That's not to say they won't function just fine - but over time - the internals can wear. You have to hunt for spare internals as the ASM is not longer made.
Value? It all depends. If you put it next to a new Uberti or Pietta - personally, I'd pick either the Uberti or Pietta primarily because parts are available. But I'm looking at it through a shooter's eyes. Irregardless of how nice it is . . . it is still a "used" gun even if it is unfired.
My 1861 ASM Navy is unfired and has the original box it came in (nice heavy cardboard hinged box with clasps). I put it up for sale a year ago - the Navy is harder to find than the Army model. I put $300.00 and had one offer of $200 on it. And mine is a steel frame like yours. I decided to just keep it and tuck it away and may or may not shoot it at some point. I primarily have shot 1851 Navies for years and have owned a number of mfg. Currently I shoot a Uberti that I bought for $150 that was like new and never shot.
The value is all going to depend on what a willing buyer is willing to pay on a given day. You never know . . . some folks go "overboard" and buy without doing their homework and pay more for something that is used than what they can buy a new one for. Don't get me wrong, I'm not down playing your Army - it looks like a nice one and but I would think that around $200 would be tops. You could always put it on GB though and put a reserve on it for the minimum you'd take. I've seen a number of repros that have some mileage on them go for more than what a person could go to Cabellas and buy a new one for.
why do you say army, with the ships on the cylinder ???
why do you say 1850 colt ?? all that i see are short bbl 7" or less..this is 8"
looking at online pics and descriptions i would say
1860 army with buttstock capable
the 1860 was 8", 44 and case hardened frame.
the ships cylinder may simply be a repro error.....
The term Navy and Army has nothing to do with the naval battle scene I have been told, but rather caliber. .36 is a Navy, .44 is an Army. The 1860 Colt Army was built on a 1851 Colt Navy frame, but with a 44 caliber cylinder, hence the stepped barrel.Quote:
Originally Posted by mike in co
correct,Quote:
Originally Posted by seaboltm
and the 1860 army (went to thc army, specifically the cavalry ) has a 8 inch barrel, while the 1851 navy (went to the navy due to weight) has a 7 1/2. this is the terms that were used by the people of the times, just accept it.