1851 london navy

Status
Not open for further replies.
ZVP improperly mentioned that his gun was 'an Uberti' and I tried to educate the 'unwashed' masses like yourself who obviously don't give a crap about the English language and it's uses! Then you all tried to dump on me. Shame on you.
 
Nobody cares about your self rightous BS. If ZVP wants to call it a GOAT, that's up to him. It's none of your business how he writes. You're an arrogant person.
 
Last edited:
Man, this has descended into something strange.

If it makes any difference, I fired an email off to one of my coworkers at our Italian subsidiary and asked how "Uberti" was pronounced. He replied that the "u" vowel sound is almost exclusively sounded out as as soft "u", as in moon.

He said that the video pronounces "Uberti" incorrectly.

Buona giornata!

To steer this every so slightly back to topicality, he also mentioned that he's terribly jealous that Uberti and Pietta make some really great firearms that he's not allowed to own!
 
Hey mykeal, apparently YOU are the problem with this country. What have you got to say for yourself, mister?
To quote an American icon, who himself often dismembered the language to great acclaim:
Popeye said:
I yam what I yam an' tha's all what I yam! (chorus)
 
Unbelievable.

One would think that since this discussion was about a London vs. an American Colt, the language issues would have been about the difference in pronounciation of those two guns in the Queen's English vs. a Southern drawl.

C'mon Y'all... git wit thuh prohgraam!
 
Returning to the original subject matter:

The Colt London factory was in operation from Jan 1853 through Dec 1856. There are three basic London Models with the following characteristics:

Early Londons - Revolvers that were made from parts shipped over from Hartford to begin training fitters and polishers and start production while the factory was gearing up for full production. These revolvers had the standard Hartford characteristics - brass BS/TG.

London-Londons - Revolvers fully produced in England with the usual London characteristics - Iron backstraps, large rounded iron trigger guard, high rounded screw heads.

Hartford-Londons - Revolvers that had the usual London characteristics; but, were produced in the Hartford factory for sale on the London market.

Throughout the run of the 1851 Navy - as well as other models - revolvers could be ordered with shorter or longer barrels; brass, silver plated, or blued iron backstraps & trigger guards; Square backed or rounded triggerguards; cut for shoulder stock; and all manner of engraving and accessories.

There were some Dragoons made in the London factory in 1853 - probably from Hartford parts - as well as numerous Pocket Models throughout the '51 Navy run. Colt models made after 1856 with London barrel addresses were made in Hartford for the London trade and were proofed and marked accordingly.

Hellgate said:
Don't the London models also have the square backed trigger guard on the '51s?
Some Early London's did. As a rule though; the use of the squareback triggerguard ended at serial number 4200 in 1852.
 
Last edited:
I did mispeak!

I am SO sorry!
I meant to say an Italian Clonegun!
I was just over on an Airgun Forum writing about Gamo's and had "Spanish cloneguns" on my mind...
An Uberti is a thing, a gun named after a man's family.
He, on the other hand is a Uberti, a man named after his relatives.
So sorry to have caused any confusion 'round here.
I seem to have a lot of people trying to educate me lately, like I am where I am not wanted or somthing! At my age education might take a while, LOL!
ZVP
 
So, AN Irishman is a thing but A Ugandan isn't? Or is it A Irishman and AN Ugandan? I'm confused. Maybe they are both OK to say as normal variations. But, I always did think that AN Uberti sounded weird even though I have written it that way a gazillion times..
 
Junkman 01 wrote:
This is not a grammar forum, you are correct. But you are using the English language to communicate on it and since you are, you should use it correctly. Any time an issue about spelling or grammar is brought up by ANYONE, they are labeled a grammar Nazi or a three year old. If you don't give a sh!t fine, I do give a sh!t.

AND.....

Junkman 01 wrote:
BTW, I don't care WHO wants to call me a 'grammar Nazi', improper use of the English language bugs me.

I could not believe the bi-polaresque, missed my meds, multiple condescending posts of yours at this thread that I was reading Junkman 01. We should be more concerned with helping people rather than indignantly correcting their grammar when it makes no difference to the subject matter at hand.

Junkman 01 I have had you on my "ignore" list for exactly that reason for quite some time now, because of how rude you were to me for no good reason when I first started posting at this black powder forum. But I happened to read this thread without signing in first and when I do that, your posts become visible to me. Since I had to be subjected to the silly condescending pettiness of your statements one of which was...."improper use of the English language bugs me"....THEN LET'S ANALYZE AND EXPLORE THAT.

In your first above post that I copied and pasted exactly as you wrote it, I highlighted the words "Any" and "time" in red to bring your attention to them. When you wrote this sentence....."Any time an issue about spelling or grammar is brought up by ANYONE, they are labeled a grammar Nazi or a three year old."......the separated words you used of "Any" and "time" to describe a situation of "Whenever"....(as can be seen in the explanation below), were used by you incorrectly and should have instead been put together as the single word of "Anytime". I say you used those words in the context of "Whenever" because your sentence context would have been the same if you had said...."Whenever an issue about spelling or grammer is brought up...."

Explanation.....

Any amount of time = any time.

Do you have any time to review this piece?
We spent hardly any time in Dallas.
He doesn't have any time for us now that he has a girlfriend.

Whenever, at any time = anytime.

Call me anytime.
Anytime this happens, let me know.
I can meet anytime on Friday.

The correct choice after the preposition at is always the two-word form. Or leave out the preposition and use the one-word form. (Leaving out the at seems to be an American habit.)

I can meet with you at any time. (Compare: I can meet with you anytime.)
Did you talk with him at any time? (Compare: Did you talk with him anytime?)
I am free at any time between 1 and 4 p.m. (Compare: I am free anytime between 1 and 4 p.m.)

In case you are spending any time wondering whether I made up these distinctions, I didn't. I checked Garner's Modern American Usage, Fowler's Modern English Usage (Revised Third Edition by R.W. Burchfield), and The Gregg Reference Manual.


Again, your use of the two separated words of "Any" and "time" was used in the context of "Whenever" in your sentence. As we have seen from my above explanation, when you are using "any" and "time" to denote or in the context of, or in replacement of "Whenever"....the two words should be joined together as one word, I.E. "Anytime"....NOT "Any" and "time".

Again.....Whenever, at any time = anytime.


All of which proves you posted and used the English language improperly Junkman 01. Exactly as you unnecessarily and off topic accused others of doing. According to your previous posts....that must really bug you. How can you live with yourself after this? Oh the horror....the horror! :D

How does the old saying go?...."Physician heal thyself".

What a complete waste of time and effort both your multiple posts regarding this and my one post here are Junkman 01. But I trust I've made my point and the only reason I engaged in this silliness WAS to make a point. This is not English 101 and grammar is immaterial here. Most importantly your barking condescendingly to people about their grammar is not the way to win friends and influence people. Junkman 01, I turned your own words back on you to make the point to you, that petty, condescending, grammar correction is immaterial here. I did not do it to be petty. That's not my style.

What is material here is helping people, learning and sharing knowledge regarding black powder and cowboy action shooting firearms, and not upsetting people over insignificant grammatical details.

To all the other folks at this thread, I apologize for this post of mine that deviated from the original subject matter. But considering the situation, I just couldn't resist :D.

The old axiom of "Measure twice cut once"....can be extended to "Think twice before writing and finding fault with others". Or..."People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks". Or we can take it straight from the Bible as...."Let he that hath no sin cast the first stone". Next time you want to accuse another member of not using correct English grammar it might help if you did it without using improper English grammar yourself in your accusation! Lol.

In my best southern accent Forrest Gump voice...."That's all I have to say about that".



.
 
Last edited:
Akins,

Thank you for correcting MY grammar. I do not mind at all. I always strive to get things correct. This all started out with the usage of the the indefinite article a/an used in front of the name Uberti, which is a well used name on any black powder forum, and therefore relevant. BTW, How is the 'Accelerator' thing going?:D So much hatred! I think it is you who needs meds.
 
Yeah ... well .. regarding all this argument about the proper use of Uberti ... I say, "irregardless" ... "howsomeever" and "you trying to be fameful or sumpin?"
:rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top