Dart 50 cal. revolver
- Thread starter DUNITALL
- Start date
JACKlangrishe
New member
You're in good hands here.. Once you get those pics up they'll help decipher the roll markings and other details to identify what you have.
These guys are as good as they get.. as long as you show genuine interest, and motivation to do some of the research on your own, they'll get you through. Especially Hawg.. deep down, he's the biggest softie here.
You'll learn a lot from these guys, and that's putting it lightly.
Just keep reading and learning. Sooner or later, you might end up teaching us a thing or two!!
These guys are as good as they get.. as long as you show genuine interest, and motivation to do some of the research on your own, they'll get you through. Especially Hawg.. deep down, he's the biggest softie here.
You'll learn a lot from these guys, and that's putting it lightly.Just keep reading and learning. Sooner or later, you might end up teaching us a thing or two!!
Last edited:
JACKlangrishe
New member
hope that wasn't classified info! 
Yes. You are a go to guy when it comes to BP.
Thank you, sir. We all have to learn from folks like you.
In actuality there were many shortages of iron on the Confederate side. Otherwise, there would not have been pistols manufactured by Griswold and Gunnison with brass frames and twisted iron cylinders, and although there are only 2 original Schneider and Glassick pistols in brass frame known, and the Leech and Rigdon/Rigdon and Ansley pistols had steel frames, you must admit that the Confederacy had great problems procuring raw iron and producing steel.
It was an agrarian society with little manufacturing capabilities compared to the Union. It was a cotton based economic platform that was very unprepared for a Civil war in the long run and therefore was not ready for what was perceived early on in the war as a few skirmishes and then it was over.
We all know happened next.
I am not here to argue history.
Boy it sure does look mighty thin between chambers to me... Anybody else?
If it has been bored out to .50, and that brass frame to boot, Id be pretty freaked out about trying to fire it. Even on a steel frame the soft metal of the Italian revolvers would be mighty suspect to me, if the between chamber walls where as thin as they look to me on that second pic.
If it has been bored out to .50, and that brass frame to boot, Id be pretty freaked out about trying to fire it. Even on a steel frame the soft metal of the Italian revolvers would be mighty suspect to me, if the between chamber walls where as thin as they look to me on that second pic.
BlackPowderBen
New member
Could it be that someone took a .44 and bored it out to .50?
foolzrushn
New member
dunitall
You need to try to get some better photos. If you don't have a camera, you might try to use a magnifying lens in front of your cell phone's camera. Move the lens and phone closer together then farther apart and change the distance from the pistol to the lens, until you can see a good picture on your phone. A little more light on the subject would help too.
After experimenting with that, see if you can get closeups of any markings on the pistol. It would help greatly.
foolzrushn
You need to try to get some better photos. If you don't have a camera, you might try to use a magnifying lens in front of your cell phone's camera. Move the lens and phone closer together then farther apart and change the distance from the pistol to the lens, until you can see a good picture on your phone. A little more light on the subject would help too.
After experimenting with that, see if you can get closeups of any markings on the pistol. It would help greatly.
foolzrushn
photos
I will try to get better photos. The markings (a star over a box =made sense 1951) (star over PN =proof mark House Gardone and Brescia) (AC in a box=mfg. date 1977) This is all the marks that I could find. They may show in the photos. Thank you Beagle333 for posting the photos.
I will try to get better photos. The markings (a star over a box =made sense 1951) (star over PN =proof mark House Gardone and Brescia) (AC in a box=mfg. date 1977) This is all the marks that I could find. They may show in the photos. Thank you Beagle333 for posting the photos.
Foolish & embraced
Gentlemen; I think Mr. Hawg was right OH GEEZ I was going by what the guy that sold the gun to me told me .and just looking at the cylinder it looked large. He gave me a box or 490 round balls and said this is what he used. He had to be mistaken. Today I decided to mic it and the cylinder is.446 and the barrel is
447 so it must be a 44 cal. I am so sorry for just taking someone else's word and not checking on my own. I apologies to all of you for trying to help someone to dumb to check first. You are a good bunch of guys THANKS WALT.
Gentlemen; I think Mr. Hawg was right OH GEEZ I was going by what the guy that sold the gun to me told me .and just looking at the cylinder it looked large. He gave me a box or 490 round balls and said this is what he used. He had to be mistaken. Today I decided to mic it and the cylinder is.446 and the barrel is
447 so it must be a 44 cal. I am so sorry for just taking someone else's word and not checking on my own. I apologies to all of you for trying to help someone to dumb to check first. You are a good bunch of guys THANKS WALT.
BlackPowderBen
New member
No worries Walt, glad you got it figured out.