1851 Navy .44?

S

Scooch

New member
I thought the 1851 Navy was .36 only. I see that Pietta makes a .44 that they say is the "Civil" version. The marketing wording reads as if it was by popular demand but is not specific as to whether that was demand at the time of original manufacture or modern consumer demand on Pietta.

Did Colt make a Navy in .44 during the era of that gun's manufacture?

Thanks.
 
This is one of those things that's been discussed and chuckled about quite a bit.

No, there was never an 1851 .44. The "Navy" revolvers were all in .36 caliber. But artistic license allows the creation of things that might have been, even if they never were. And popular demand is, I suppose, in the eye of the beholder.
 
As I find myself becoming addicted to these BP revolvers, accuracy of my collection becomes a concern. I'll most likely never own a real one of these historic guns but I'd like my replicas to be as authentic as possible.

That '51 Navy handles and shoots so well too. It seems a shame to muscle it up to a .44 (never thought I'd say that, I love almost anything in .44/.45).

Thanks for the confirmation.
 
Pietta "makes up" alot of models of BP guns. Uberti only makes reproductions of actual models. I'm to the point of considering selling off all my Pietta's and going Uberti (except for my LeMat, one of the Pietta made guns I own of exceptional quality).

I've become addicted to BP guns as well... to the point of considering selling off some of my C&R rifle collection to fill out my BP pistol collection. Several benefits, including ease of buying online from Cabelas or Midway, and they take up less room than a safe full of C&R rifles. I just bought an Uberti London Navy and a Uberti 1st model Dragoon in the last week (thanks to Midway $30 off $300+ promo code).

A Paterson and 1862 Pocket are next on my list.
 
The only authenic 44 navy's were made by the south in Georgia during that war. They are now called navy confederates. If you find one; pure luck because most are gone . I had one in 1974 and sold it for $100.00. It had Gunnison stamped on frame and C.S.A. on top of barrel. It was a dark brass frame. There was an X marking on the hammer hand? I have crs but I think that hammer hand was brass. Sure wish I still had it . But I do think it was a 36 but was told they made 44's too. Sam Colt never made a 44c Navy.

WBH
 
By the way Alpinex

I have a 1862 2nd gen colt pocket 36 police--w box and papers if you want it. It has been fired and screw holding wedge is gone but that can be easily replaced.:) The cylinder has a thin turn line but everything else is great.
 
Hardy, .44 caliber Navies are not authentic. The South did not make any .44 caliber Navies. The Spiller and Burr, Cofer, Griswold & Gunnison, Leech and Rigdon, and Augusta revolvers were all .36 caliber, as was the illusive (there weren't any production models, only samples) Schneider and Glassick. The only .44s made in the south were the Dance & Park and the Tucker & Sherrard Dragoon sized revolvers.
 
Alpinex, when you get ready to junk your Piettas, let me know. I sold all of my Ubertis and now own only Piettas.
 
Wanting authenticity is fine but in reality about the only way to really get authenticity is to find a real '51 in somebodies basement.

Repro's generally aren't collectables. If you buy one right, you might get your money back out of it, but turning a profit wouldn't be a good reason to "collect" reproduction 19th Century hardware.

The 1851 44's (I call 'em Fake '51's) that Pietta sells may not be historically accurate but...They shoot extremely well, especially with light charges and they allow folks who otherwise might not be able to afford to get into this past-time to do so.

I've got one of the brass Fakes and it really is my favorite gun. There just isn't a better feeling than when one of your buddies is lining up on a tangerine at 50 feet with his trusty plastic Glock and can't hit the thing with an entire magazine, as he reaches for another mag of expensive ammo the Fake '51 makes that tangerine disappear with one shot.

Don't rule out at particular gun simply because the Italian Marketers made it up. They sell 'em for a reason, the market is there.
 
I'll probably not sell these replica guns. I tend to keep things so resale value is of no concern to me. But as I said in a earlier post, I appreciate authenticity of my replicas if for nothing else but that they are in fact replicas of real guns of that era.
 
Last edited:
The G&G had a round barrel. The Schneider and Glassic was a true 1851 copy except no cylinder scene.
 
Scooch

You are like me.

In the last four years I have allowed myself to get rid of exactly two revolvers and I regret both decisions.
 
And it's just as fake as it can get. The seller even admits it may not be real. Quote: "This collectible is an antique or antique reproduction. " Stamping are too fresh in a pitted barrel surface and the unpitted cylinder doesnt match the barrel condition.
 
hawg hagan said:
The Schneider and Glassic was a true 1851 copy except no cylinder scene.
Click to expand...

The Schneider and Glassick never existed except for a few "Salesman Samples" shown to CSA authorities in Memphis. There are only 3 known examples, none of the three have the same parts in them, and one of them has an iron frame.
 
I find it interesting that a GB seller with an A+ rating would hang his/her reputation/rating on the line with a questionable gun. It only takes one bad review to hammer your sales on these online auctions.

But on the other hand, the opening bid is way too rich for my blood anyway.
 
+1 to what Fingers, Hawg and Hardcase said.

Just like Fingers and Hardcase noticed, the first thing I noticed too was that the metal surface surrounding the stampings was pitted but the edges of the stampings as well as WITHIN the stampings were not. If the revolver was authentic the edges of the stampings as well as WITHIN the stampings would be as pitted as the rest of the surface. Whoever made this fake sure wasn't thinking. Obviously they weathered the surfaces FIRST and then stamped the stampings. If they had been thinking they would have stamped it first and then weathered it.

Or it could be that the gun is actually a period piece but either the original markings were removed or being Confederate it may not have had any markings. Then they put a repro fluted cylinder on it and then re-stamped it hoping to suck someone in to believing it was that special collectible version. So it may be an authentic period piece but with a weathered repro fluted cylinder and fake stampings.

I'll bet this seller knows this too or else why would he have that disclaimer worded like he does?

"Caveat Emptor"......BIG TIME.


.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top