What does defarbed mean? (N/T)
- Thread starter ZVP
- Start date
Bishop Creek
New member
It generally means that the proof and date marks along with the manufactuers name have been filed off of an Italian black powder gun. Many do it to make them look more authentic.
Thankyou!
I love the english language! Words can be made up so easilly!
OK now I see!
I've learned to just look past the Proof and Mfg marks I consider them aq nasty necessity. I just wish they'd move thebaqrrel markings under the bbl as Ruger has done! It cleans up the gun a LOT!
Thanks a lot for explaining that!
ZVP
I love the english language! Words can be made up so easilly!
OK now I see!
I've learned to just look past the Proof and Mfg marks I consider them aq nasty necessity. I just wish they'd move thebaqrrel markings under the bbl as Ruger has done! It cleans up the gun a LOT!
Thanks a lot for explaining that!
ZVP
No extra value. Some people, the dishonest ones, do it for profit to fool the unsuspecting who thinks they are getting a gen-u-wine Civil War or Revolutionary War gun.
Yep, it is just a matter of looking past the cransilstats and fibilities and you can extragragitate anything you want to in the English language.
The Doc is out now.
In essence the word defarb is to reverse or undue something that is considered to be farby or farb.
To defarb is to make something acceptable that to some folks is considered to be unacceptable.
Part of the definition of the word farb:
Part of the definition of the pre-fix de:
To defarb is to make something acceptable that to some folks is considered to be unacceptable.
Part of the definition of the word farb:
Part of the definition of the pre-fix de:
Last edited:
madcratebuilder
New member
DrLaw said:
You well only fool a fool by simply removing the marking from a Italian made revolver. The dishonesty is when the revolver is remarked like a original and then represented as an original. This is not a defarbed revolver, it's a counterfeit revolver. Some people have become very adapt at aging and remarking guns but a close examination well normally reveal the truth. Things like the thread pitch of screws is a dead giveaway.
I know of at least one gunsmith that specializes in defarbing and remarking civil war period fire arms. It's very well done, very expensive and is marked as a defarb. These fire arms can command a price manyl times higher than the MSRP.
I've sold a few of the revolvers I have defarbed, advertised as defarbed I received about twice what a non defrab would have brought.
Some people just do not like the bill board appearance and are willing to pay extra for a defarb. Uberti has got better at putting most of the bill board on the bottom of the revolver, major improvement in appearance.
maillemaker
New member
The term "farb" is now ancient among reenactors. It comes from the statement that goes, "Far be it for me to comment on someone else's equipment, but..."
"Far be" = Farby. Something is said to be "farby" if it is inauthentic. To de-farb something is to make it appear more authentic.
Steve
"Far be" = Farby. Something is said to be "farby" if it is inauthentic. To de-farb something is to make it appear more authentic.
Steve
Fingers McGee
New member
Here are a couple of my defarbed revolvers:
To the uninitiated, they appear to be originals - but to the knowledgeable, they are far from it
To the uninitiated, they appear to be originals - but to the knowledgeable, they are far from it
Jim Watson
New member
I don't study the field but even so, I have seen two rather obvious fakes being passed off as originals. One sold high at an auction. The other was on a gun show table.
The expert's defarb is the amateur's fake.
I was once told that if I did not know enough to sort out the fakes and reworks, I should save my money. The collectors and speculators see no reason for the seller to accurately describe his merchandise.
The expert's defarb is the amateur's fake.
I was once told that if I did not know enough to sort out the fakes and reworks, I should save my money. The collectors and speculators see no reason for the seller to accurately describe his merchandise.
"Farby" also means historically inaccurate. For example, using a Zouave rifle.
Although they are period, there is NO evidence they were ever issued to anybody. And yes, polyester or at least non-wool uniforms, "kepis" with shiny brims, post Civil War insignia, etc. At one RevWar I kidded one reenactor, he did a pretty good rifleman's impression but he had a percussion cap rifle.
Although they are period, there is NO evidence they were ever issued to anybody. And yes, polyester or at least non-wool uniforms, "kepis" with shiny brims, post Civil War insignia, etc. At one RevWar I kidded one reenactor, he did a pretty good rifleman's impression but he had a percussion cap rifle.
The difficulties of reenacting make real life simple and easy, sort of. I've often wondered if reenactors feel the urge to "progress," in the sense that the original people did. In other words, the world in 1865 was not the same world as 1861, no more than 1945 being the same as 1940. Things change, including fads and fashions, equipment, and so on.
While I doubt there is particular collector interest in replicas that have had importer's marks removed, there is some interest in replica firearms. Remember, the first guns that might be called replicas appeared in the 1950s, well before the Civil War thing. Great Western was producing Single Action Army revolver copies with some improvements quite early. There were rumors of updated Remington double derringers, too, but I don't know if any of them ever made it to market. This was at a time when a lot of things we weep for now were still available down at the local gun emporium, if you could afford them and if they actually had any. Things like Colt revolvers, all those S&W large frame revolvers, Winchester lever actions (all pre-64, too) and even Savage lever actions.
Gun magazines (which were a new thing) had occasional articles about someone producing copies of Civil War revolvers and how collectors would beg them not to. So concerns about fakes have been around as there have been collectors, if not before. Beware of imitations and copyright infringements.
While I doubt there is particular collector interest in replicas that have had importer's marks removed, there is some interest in replica firearms. Remember, the first guns that might be called replicas appeared in the 1950s, well before the Civil War thing. Great Western was producing Single Action Army revolver copies with some improvements quite early. There were rumors of updated Remington double derringers, too, but I don't know if any of them ever made it to market. This was at a time when a lot of things we weep for now were still available down at the local gun emporium, if you could afford them and if they actually had any. Things like Colt revolvers, all those S&W large frame revolvers, Winchester lever actions (all pre-64, too) and even Savage lever actions.
Gun magazines (which were a new thing) had occasional articles about someone producing copies of Civil War revolvers and how collectors would beg them not to. So concerns about fakes have been around as there have been collectors, if not before. Beware of imitations and copyright infringements.
Part of the fun of reenacting-for me at least-is getting the details right.
A fellow RevWar reenactor pointed out to me that some of the "hardcore" types who go shoeless and wrap their feet in burlap are farbs because burlap wasn't introduced until 1840 or so. WWII uniforms changed rather markedly in
4-5 years-look at a photo of troops in field uniforms from 1941 and compare it with one in 1945. They changed very markedly when I was in the Army 1967-1971. When I enlisted in 1967 the long sleeved khaki shirt worn with a tie and shoulder patches had just been declared obsolete, we wore short sleeved khaki shirts with no shoulder patches. My BCT cycle still had the black and gold US Army over the left pocket but subdued name tapes over the right, some of the cadre just back from Vietnam proudly wore their sundbued insignias including chevron on the sleeves, when I got there we wore pin on rank insignia on our collars-and not when we were in the field. By 1969 subdued insignia and patches were Army wide standard.
In the case of Civil War reenacting, getting correct New York State buttons-i.e. Civil War and not later vintage- brought gladness to the hearts of reenactors who did New York impressions.
And those of us who have served know that in the military you use what they issue and not what you'dlike to have.
A fellow RevWar reenactor pointed out to me that some of the "hardcore" types who go shoeless and wrap their feet in burlap are farbs because burlap wasn't introduced until 1840 or so. WWII uniforms changed rather markedly in
4-5 years-look at a photo of troops in field uniforms from 1941 and compare it with one in 1945. They changed very markedly when I was in the Army 1967-1971. When I enlisted in 1967 the long sleeved khaki shirt worn with a tie and shoulder patches had just been declared obsolete, we wore short sleeved khaki shirts with no shoulder patches. My BCT cycle still had the black and gold US Army over the left pocket but subdued name tapes over the right, some of the cadre just back from Vietnam proudly wore their sundbued insignias including chevron on the sleeves, when I got there we wore pin on rank insignia on our collars-and not when we were in the field. By 1969 subdued insignia and patches were Army wide standard.
In the case of Civil War reenacting, getting correct New York State buttons-i.e. Civil War and not later vintage- brought gladness to the hearts of reenactors who did New York impressions.
And those of us who have served know that in the military you use what they issue and not what you'dlike to have.
SainthoodDenied
New member
I started reenacting back in 84, did many time periods since then, I haven't done any reenacting in a little over 7 years now. I'll take de-farbing serious when the "gotta have it perfect" and the "those stampings ruin my experience" crowd tell the ATF to kiss their a** and defarb their Uberti 1860 Henrys for civil war reenacting and 1873 Winchesters for CAS 
. I mean if it really is that big a deal then why stop with a 58 caliber 1863 Springfield, I mean the model 1860 Henry is actually an older more antiquated model, by 3 years anyway LOL
I do know the legality here but I'm just saying, I bought my first Uberti Henry in 88 or 89 and potrayed the 7th Ill who came thru and fought all over my area. The Uberti was serial number 00035 and if it had been legal I still wouldn't have paid someone to grind off the factory markings.
. I mean if it really is that big a deal then why stop with a 58 caliber 1863 Springfield, I mean the model 1860 Henry is actually an older more antiquated model, by 3 years anyway LOLI do know the legality here but I'm just saying, I bought my first Uberti Henry in 88 or 89 and potrayed the 7th Ill who came thru and fought all over my area. The Uberti was serial number 00035 and if it had been legal I still wouldn't have paid someone to grind off the factory markings.