Problem with a Colt 1860 Army Signature Series

C

Conrad67

Inactive
Several months ago, I purchased a third generation Colt 1860 Army 'Signature Series' revolver.

I was told the revolver was fired a few times in the past, but the revolver does not show any signs of it. I intended to shoot the gun.

While trying to disassemble the barrel from the frame, I needed to use a rubber mallet to tap the loading lever. Then, I had to use the rubber mallet to reassemble the barrel onto the frame. I tried some grease and oil. But, the two pieces did not fit correctly and they were binding.

I called Colt, explained the situation, and shipped the revolver to them for service. They returned my revolver without any work being done.

They claim that my Signature Series Colt is "a replica and not a Colt".

I called Colt Customer Service for an explanation. I was told that the Signature Series were produced by a licensee of Colt. And, eventhough they are stamped Colt with a Colt serial number, Colt does not consider them 'real Colts' and therefore will not warrantee them.

I am disappointed with this 'pass the buck' attitude by Colt. Has this happened to anyone else? Has anyone else had a similar experience?

Now, I don't know if the gun is safe to shoot. If I would have known, I would have bought a new Uberti. :mad:
 
so is the cylinder binding when its reassembled?
You said loading lever, did you mean the wedge needed to be tapped out?
On my Uberti 1860 its a snug fit and you have to tap the barrel on by hand to seat it all the way to the frame, but the cylinder shouldnt bind at all. The wedge shouldnt need to be hammered in to violently if at all either
Did it function before you broke it down? Anything binding then?
I believe Uberti had a hand in one of the generations of the colt runs, to what extent im not sure
sorry to hear of your experience, best of luck
Gene
 
Yep ...Series Colts are 100% Uberti made revolvers...you can get the same exact thing from Cimarron, Buffalo Arms, and Cabelas for less than 1/3 the cost...just no horse'y :rolleyes:

They just assembled them in the states and added $500-$1200 to there pockets for the little horse icon:D By assembling them in the states the frames did not require nor receive the eurpean proof house stamps.
 
Yep ...Series Colts are 100% Uberti made revolvers...
Click to expand...

Not exactly. The second gens were assembled and finished by Colt in the Colt factory from forgings supplied by Uberti. The third gens were assembled and finished by the Colt Black Powder Arms Co in the old Iver Johnson factory which had no affiliation with Colt other than to purchase the license to make them. They were made from forgings supplied by Uberti and some of the small parts were made here. Colt warranted/repaired and will letter the second gens but not the third since they had no part in the manufacture of them.
 
I own a 51 Navy with Address Saml Colt New York City on the barrel with no proof marks visible and a nickeled or silver grip frame. I sent this shooter to have the cylinder pin, arbor?, fixed to a gunsmith who did a cracker jack job, but lost one of the frame/barrel pins. While trying to find a new pin on line I was advised that the gun was made by Armi San Marcos, and I would have to make a pin because the company folded some years ago. This info came from the parts company that is all initials that I can't remember.
 
Uberti subcontracted ASM to supply barrels for the second gens and ASM got stuck with a lot of them when production ceased. ASM used them on their own guns and Colt sued them.
 
Colt Black Powder Arms Co was owned by Lou Imperato who went on to found Henry Repeating Arms. The Henry .22 rifle is a reworked Emma that he had acquired the rights to through his ownership of Iver Johnson. Another piece of trivia that 97% of people could care less about. You could make the argument that 3rd generation Colt BP guns are actually Henry's.
 
Gentlemen,

Thank you for your input. Perhaps I am just venting a little, but humor me. I am both frustrated and disappointed.

Actually, a lot of force is required to separate the barrel from the frame and vis-versa. When the barrel assembly tries to ride the pins on the bottom of the water table, a missalignment causes the cylinder rod to flex down. It is though my barrel assembly needs an extra 1mm of space to align the table pins and the cylinder pin.

The factory cylinder does not bind, but I tried to install a Howell conversion cylinder (which is fraction larger) and it would not even turn because of binding.

Howell Conversions (who have been spectacular) said that it was an original machining issue and it could not be fixed.

I feel that Colt has passed the buck. Am I right? Even if it was produced by a licensee, it has a Colt serial number and the Colt name on it. I feel that Colt has some responsibility.

Installing the wedge is the least of my worries. The wedge is not the problem.

At this point, I don't know if the gun is okay to shoot cap-and-ball blackpowder. I know it can't shoot with the Howell conversion cylinder.

Thanks.
 
I feel that Colt has passed the buck. Am I right? Even if it was produced by a licensee, it has a Colt serial number and the Colt name on it. I feel that Colt has some responsibility.
Click to expand...

Not in my opinion.
 
Quote:
I feel that Colt has passed the buck. Am I right? Even if it was produced by a licensee, it has a Colt serial number and the Colt name on it. I feel that Colt has some responsibility.

<<<<<<<>>>>>
Not in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Hawg,

I am curious to know why you don't think Colt has responsibility for a Colt-branded product?

In the modern era, one cpuld say that Walther shares no obligation for the P22 because it is made by Umarex.

Now, just to prove I am willing to contradict myself, Walther DOES disavow any responsibility for Smith PPKs, which were made under license by Smith...
 
Actually, a lot of force is required to separate the barrel from the frame and vis-versa. When the barrel assembly tries to ride the pins on the bottom of the water table, a missalignment causes the cylinder rod to flex down. It is though my barrel assembly needs an extra 1mm of space to align the table pins and the cylinder pin.
Click to expand...
wow, so the arbor flexes down? thats not the usual Uberti short arbor syndrome... Im new to all this wish i could help more
Gene
 
I have two Sig series 2nd Gen Colt Dragoons.
I was fully aware of the sig series not being true Colts well before I bought them but want my Pony with no Italian marks. Vanity on my part pure and simple.

I was able to hand both an Italian clone and the sig siries side by side and I have to say there was a world if difference in the feel when operating the works. The sig series was far superior (in this comparison) and I payed about $150 more for and didn't regret it.

I also have a "tight" frame to barrel fit. When I take it down after about 50 shots fired, I have to slap my hand on the loading lever (between cylinders) to separate the barrel from the frame. I also bring along a small rubber mallet to drive the wedge out and back in. Not a lot of force is needed for either, it's just handy.

After cleaning, the barrel comes off far easier and no slapping is required.

I'm thinking, you got a a piece that was hardly fired or broke down. If the gun goes together and operates you should be fine. If the cylinder gap goes away when you cock the gun (no light or very little when views sideways) it should be good to go.

If you can post of picture of your consern about the cylinder or arbor issue we could give you some better advice.

Personally, I love both of my Signature Series (fake) Colts just fine. And I shoot the heck out of them regularly.

 
Hawg,

I am curious to know why you don't think Colt has responsibility for a Colt-branded product?
Click to expand...

They didn't do anything but sell the right to use their name and logo. Its not like they went out looking for somebody to make guns for them.
 
They didn't do anything but sell the right to use their name and logo. Its not like they went out looking for somebody to make guns for them.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying, but when you put your name on something, it kind of puts your reputation behind it, and especially if you are profiting from it, one might expect them to support the product.

Steve
 
.

In your opinion, Steve - To which you are fully permitted to have.

I'm of the same opinion as Hawg.



.
 
Last edited:
They didn't do anything but sell the right to use their name and logo. Its not like they went out looking for somebody to make guns for them.
Click to expand...

Hmmm....I see your point, but to the casual user, if one sees a Colt logo on a gun, it is reasonable to assume that it was mfg by Colt, or at least FOR Colt.

The idea that Colt would sell their name and logo with no concern or involvement doesn't make sense to me.
 
Would you have expected Colt to repair/warranty the Sistemas? Same thing except the Sistemas were made on Colt equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top