1851 confederate navy from taylors

Status
Not open for further replies.
KK

In point of fact, my new job is just up the road from you. I am a department Chair for Saint Leo University. I will be staying in Virginia with an office here but will travel to Saint Leo about once per month. Have an office in the School of Business in FL as well.

We are looking for property too.
 
I've bought a few guns on this thread and anyone that bought from me got a fair deal. I hope!?

OK, in 1985 I saw an ad for an American Flyer train set. I had one and it was all packed away w/tracks and all /perfect almost/ The buyer asked me if I had my original box. Well-no. He didn't want it:barf:

Since Pietta is selling so many guns--the guns w/Pietta box will be in more demand. I almost guarantee unless our country keeps going like its going and not somehow rescued:mad

WBH
 
Schneider & Glassick replica

The brass frame revolver that Taylor's & Co. has (as long as they last) for $160 is made by Pietta. They are a special run in .36cal. since Pietta usually only makes these in .44cal. with a rebated cylinder. This .36cal. with a plain cylinder is a very accurate replica of the Confederate Schneider & Glassick. If you are interested in collecting replica revolvers this is the best deal I have seen in several years, and probably the only replica Schneider & Glassick available on the new market today.

The Schneider & Glassick is a very interesting revolver, both the originals and the replicas. I am posting an article about this revolver on the RPRCA web site later this week. Collectors might find it interesting.
 
I would love to shoot by-myself. The stuff I could do. Most..., all the time I go shooting with friends. That means I have to look out for them, and hope they don't shoot somebody. If I can shoot by-myself, then I can get some long-range in, like 500 yards with a 22LR.

Kat: I used to live in Largo........all those years ago.
 
You are right BP

And, no, you can't shoot a box except the gun it came in.

Pietta box #1/ Traditions box #2 Cabella box#3

I think I'm gonna get that special 36 for 160 Taylors is offering.

WBH
 
Better make your move on that $160 deal at Taylor's and Co., Inc. if you're ever going to. It's been on sale a long time. Can't last forever. The extra cylinder makes it not just a great deal, but an incredible one, particularly in view of the following:.

It turns out that this $160 deal that Taylor's & Co., Inc. is running is of a historically accurate Pietta 36. cal. replica of a Confederate revolver built by Schneider & Glassick in Memphis TN during the Civil War, based on Sam Colt's .36 cal. 1851Navy model design.

It has a brass frame like the better known Griswold & Gunnison (G&G )Confederate version of the .36 cal. 1851 Colt Navy, but it differs from the G&G version in that it has an octagonal barrel instead of a round one. In this, the Schneider c& Glassick gun was closer to the original Colt Navy Model than the G&G gun, because the original Colt Navy's had octagonal barrels too. In fact the gun Taylor's & Co. is selling is just like the original 1851 Colt Navy model except it has a brass frame and no naval battle scene roll marked on the cylinder. That is exactly what the Schenider & Glassick version of this revolver looked like.
It doesn't make any practical difference. I bought my gun to shoot it, but lots of folks need historical accuracy for reenactments, etc., and the fact that this Pietta replica is provably an accurate reproduction of a weapon manufactured during the Civil War and used by the Confederacy may make it a lot more desirable to some folks.
 
the fact that this Pietta replica is provably an accurate reproduction of a weapon manufactured during the Civil War and used by the Confederacy may make it a lot more desirable to some folks.
Click to expand...

One of the rarest of the rare. I think there's three known and one has an iron frame. They weren't put into production.
 
"Rare" yes, and it is correct that there are only 3 known to still exist, but "not put into production", no.

According to the "Official Website" for Gun Mart Magazine, What Gun?, and Shooting Sports magazine -for whatever that's worth - the firm of Schneider & Glassick, of 20 Jefferson Street, Memphis, it's line of trade being shown as guns, pistols, etc. was listed as a business in the Memphis, Tn. City Directory in 1860.

According to the same source, the firm was given a glowing testimonial in the Memphis Daily Appeal newspaper in December 1861 where the pistol it produced was said to be a beautiful weapon, not inferior to Colt's in any particular. (But it had a brass frame). Four months later in March 1862, Memphis fell to Federal forces and Schneider and Glassick was out of business.

I don't know how long before the 1860 City Directory came out that the Schneider & Glassick firm was manufacturing pistols, but it hadcertainly begun manufacturing them no later than that date, and it was certainly still manufacturing them as late as December 1861, and it was probably producing them right up until March 1862, this being a time during which every gun that could be built in the South could be sold.

The same article I've quoted above states that "no production figures for Schneider & Glassick are known"; not that the gun never went into production.

Given the fact that they are known to have been in business producing guns and pistols for a minimum of 14 months and possibly as long as 26 months - or longer if they were inbusiness before 1860, I wouldn't be surprised if they actually produced four or five hundred pistols, although I'm sure they didn't produce near as many as G&G did.
 
I haven't done much research on them but what sources I found say they were "supposedly" made in Memphis. Not saying you're wrong but if they made several hundred there should be more than three still around.
 
I respect your opinion HH, and I can understand it, since only three surviving examples are known. It may be that I'm overestimating the production of S&G revolvers, but I've got a reasonable basis for my opinion,which is that that S&G apparently produced a quality product and managed to stay in business producing it from 1860 (or earlier) to 1862, during a period of high demand for weapons. But bottom line, with no production figures availiable, there's no way to know how many were made. They were never a threat to Colt, that's for sure.
 
Don't let the name fool ya

I must be one of the lucky ones because I have bought six of the eight revolvers from Cabela's and have found none of the problems that you speak of. All my revolvers are tight as can be. And shoot just find. I was reading post #6 by DG45 and have to agree with him when it comes to the 1858 New Army revolvers. I had a $20 rebate for June and bought another 1858 New Army for $218.94 shipped right to the door. I have a 20 yr. old target model and the 5.5" model so I wanted the 8" model that didn't have the target sights on it. Its a well built revolver. I don't believe Uberti could have done a better job as far as fit or finish. The handles on the two 1860 models I have are longer than the ones on my two 1851s. One of the 1851s I bought here at the gun shop in town is the brass frame .44 models, and its one of the best little shooters I have. It puts all six rounds in 1/2" holes all day long with 20grs of fff powder. I wanted a .36 cal 51 steel frames just to see what all the fuss was about fired three cylinders with it and it is a sweet little shooter also. Its the only .36 I have, so I don't have another to compare it to. I was going to buy the 1858 New Army Police in .36 cal but thats out for now. I bought a Uberti .44 Walker a while back and that is one heck of a hand cannon. Love that revolver. The first time I took it out in the back yard to shoot the hammer spring broke after the third cylinder. A cap went down in the inside and caused the problem. Out of all these revolvers I have to say I like the 58 New Armys the best. They hit where you point them and you can put a little more powder in them if you wish. I wouldn't be afraid to carry one for defense if I wanted to. Make me hafta hunt something and brake out my walker and hunt it. I've been making my own 200gr bullets for it with the lee double mold and they pack a heck of a wallop. Try it some time you'll love it. All my revolvers are .44 cals but the one 51 Navy. All are Piettas but the Walker. When I buy them I don't do all the stuff about making them smooth. I take them apart, clean them put them back together and shoot them they will do all that other on there own. My first 1858 target model is smooth as a baby's behind, and it still looks good. with the target sights you can shoot out there a good long ways. There's no one around to shoot with so I have to shoot by myself also. The two fellows I know shoot BP rifles Hawkens and Inlines and they're not around most of the time. :p
 
Last edited:
dang...

after reading up on the history you guys posted of this fine replica I feel pretty stupid...

...I just bought it to shoot!:o
 
Schneider and Glassick never manufactured any pistols. There is no evidence that they ever did.

From "Firearms of the Confederacy" Fuller & Steuart, page 237: "The south had many fine gunsmiths, but they devoted their time and talents to the manufacture of sporting rifles, fowling pieces and dueling pistols. Also in the South before the war were many firms which sold guns and pistols. They were importers and repairers, rather than manufacturers. Both British and Northern arms makers were accustomed to make guns and pistols for these dealers and stamp them with the dealers names. That expolains the large number of tranter and Adams revolvers and Allen single shot pistols made in the North bearing the names of Southern firms.
Among the better known of these Southern firms, which should be classed as military goods importers rather than gunsmiths, were Samuel Sutherland, Mitchell and Tyler and Kent,...........Schneider and Glassick, Memphis, Tenn; .......... .

"Confederate Revolvers " by William A. Gary, 1987, relegates the Schneider and Glassick to the category of "Confederate Associated Revolvers" because there is no evidence many were produced. Messrs Schneider and Glassick showed their revolver on Dec 8 1861. On March 15th Memphis fell to the North. If they were just showing the revolver on Dec 8, I doubt they had been makin gthem since 1860, and they couldn't have completed many by 15 March.

"Confederate Handguns" by Albaugh, Bennet, and Simmons, 1963, surmises that somewhere between 15 and 55 might have been completed.

"Civil War Guns" by Wiliam B. Edwards, 1962. In the Chapter - Sidearms for Southrons, Other Producers, refers to S&G as follows: "Two partners in Memphis need to be mentioned here though their productivity was nil, their influence on the war nothing, so far as military arms are concerned. Two revolvers of Colt 1851 type exist, identified as output of this partnership."

I look forward to Dr. Davis' article on the S&G
 
I quoted the source of my information which was a website, and the sources they claimed to have gotten their information from; ie., an 1860 City Memphis City directory listing Schneider & Glassick, guns & pistols, etc., and a Memphis Daily Appeal newspaper article in December 1861 which supposedly gave the Schneider & Glassick revolver a "glowing review". Now maybe the source I quoted lied about the City directory and the newspaper article, I can't guarantee that they didn't, but short of that, I'd say that's pretty good evidence that the firm existed and did produce pistols. How many, I don't know. However both Hawg Haggen and I (who have had our disagreements on other issues) both believe that at least three Schneider & Glassick revolvers are still known to exist. I can't prove that. It's what I've read; however, unless my memory fails me, I believe I've also seen a fairly recent photo of 1 of the three guns that have been identified as an original Schneider & Glassick revolver - somewhere, sometime, online. I could be wrong. I just think I did but I took no note of it, not being particularly interested in the issue at that time. However, I do remember that the gun I saw had a brass frame, a brass triggerguard, a plain cylinder (no naval battle scene), and an octagonal barrel. No other manufacturer of whom I am aware from that day to this made a revolver of exactly that configuration (except Pietta, who produces a replia of what they appear to believe was a revolver made by Schneider & Glassick. The Pietta replica has a brass frame, brass triggerguard , a plain cylinder and an octagonal barrel).

Nevertheless, if you can convince me that the information I have posted is false, I will gladly retract it.

OOPs, my apologies. I just reread your post and I think I misunderstood your meaning the first time I read it. (My reading comprehensions not too good which is a blessing considering some of the things I've been called.) I see now that you are just saying that S&G didn't MANUFACTURE the S&G revolver by which I take it you mean they didn't do the foundry castings, etc. I trust that you do agree they assembled the parts and hand-fitted the weapon (which actually does qualify as light manufacturing but I'm not trying to argue that point. I think I understand the point you're trying to make.) I suppose they could have bought octagonal barrels from Colt or somebody who made them, and brass frames and grip frames from G&G or somebody and just assembvled assembled the weapon out of parts from several different manufacturers at 20 Jefferson St. Memphis.
 
Last edited:
I don't say the information you have printed is false. You got it off the internet, so it must be true. I do believe however that you take too much for granted from the info. S&G was listed in the Memphis business directory as "Schneider and Glassick, Guns, Pistols, etc, 20 Jefferson Street". Doesn't say anything about making revolvers. Says they were in the gun business. There was a demo of a revolver by S&G on Dec 7th of a revolver that the press apparently liked and was reported as being of their manufacture. There is no evidence - other than the three currently known examples - that any more than 25 - assuming they were assembled in SN order - were ever completed prior to March '62 when Memphis fell to the North. What I provided was excerpts from 4 books on Confederate firearms written by gentlemen very knowledgeable in their field that pretty much documents that S&G were retailers that put their name on other peoples work.
 
I don't see that we have any profound disagreement. You say G&S was a retailer; maybe so, I can't say you're wrong. I do think that the fact that 3 revolvers survive indicates that the "pistols" they manufactured, carried, or sold were revolvers. You think 25 may have been made and you could be right, but no one really knows. My guess is that more than that were made, because why not? It was a good quality product, they were in business at least 14 months, and the South needed revolvers for arming cavalry, and officers. Never saw a business yet that didn't try to supply what was in demand if they could.

Colt's 1851 Navy model probably enjoyed some sort of trademark protection in the North, but it seems to have been used as a generic pattern in the South. It could be that S&G purchased guns from another manufacturer to their own specs and retailed them, ala some unique J.C. Higgins guns which were made by other manufacturers that were not clones of other guns in that manufacturers line. I'm thinking in particular of a 22 automatic rifle with a beavetail forearm that I think was unique to Sears J.C. Higgins line, but was made by somebody like Winchester.

Anyway, the possibilities are limited because the Schneider & Glassick revolver , while clearly built on the Colt 1851 Navy pattern, is not a clone of any manufacturers gun that I'm aware of. Brass frame, brass handgrip frame, brass triggerguard. Plain steel cylinder, octagonal steel barrel. Who else made that gun or could have supplied parts for that gun?

They could have probably bought every part from G&G except the octagonal steel barrel. But the barrel came from somewhere else. G&G barrels were round or half round. Maybe they made their own barrels and purchased all other parts. I don't know, but I think they must have done some of the assembly work at least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top