Colt 1860 Army

[sirgilligan]

A good friend showed me his Colt 1860 Army. It was his grand father's and has been handed down. He is going to give it to one of his children soon and asked what it was worth. I said I don't know but I would ask around. One of his boys made a display box and put a note in it on what they know about the firearm.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Very nice revolver, and nice job on the display case.

Do you happen to know if the barrel is still the original .451 groove diameter? Those conversions used a .44 Colt cartridge that's different from what is sold as ".44 Colt" today. The originals used a heeled bullet with an OD of .451". What they sell today is a .430" bullet that's really a .44 Special, not a .44 Colt.

I'd like to find a source for the proper .44 Colt ammunition -- or a source for the correct, heeled bullets to load it.

 

[sirgilligan]

Very nice revolver, and nice job on the display case.

Do you happen to know if the barrel is still the original .451 groove diameter? Those conversions used a .44 Colt cartridge that's different from what is sold as ".44 Colt" today. The originals used a heeled bullet with an OD of .451". What they sell today is a .430" bullet that's really a .44 Special, not a .44 Colt.

I'd like to find a source for the proper .44 Colt ammunition -- or a source for the correct, heeled bullets to load it.

I personally do not know about the barrel, but according to my friend it has not been modified and so that would be whatever barrel was on it or if the Mason conversion changed the barrel it would be that barrel.

 

[JT-AR-MG42]

That pistol is in really! nice shape.

The serial number on the barrel is located directly above the frame number.
Bet that barrel is original to the gun, as that gun looks absolutely straight to me.

Thanks to you and your pal for sharing the gun and photos.

JT

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

The note about that revolver is incorrect. It is not a Richards-Mason Conversion, it is a Richards Conversion. The Richards Conversion came before the Richards-Mason Conversion. The Richards-Mason Conversion was a further refinement of the Richards Conversion. Admittedly it can be confusing correctly identifying these old conversions. And technically, Charles B. Richards and William Mason were engineers who worked for Colt. So the gun was not 'converted by Richards-Mason' which implies they were a separate company. It was converted at the Colt factory by Colt employees.

For detailed photos and descriptions of a Richards Conversion, see post #10 in this thread:

https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=587661

I have also included a few notes on how to tell the Richards Conversion apart from the Richards-Mason Conversion.

As for value, it is difficult to determine without an in person examination by a knowledgeable expert. As they say, it is worth what someone is willing to pay. Generally speaking, the more original finish is on it, the higher the value. And if the gun does not function properly anymore, that will lower the value.

Based on what I can see in the photo, I'll make a wild a$$ed guess that is worth about $2500.

Do not hold me to that.

 

[sirgilligan]

Thank you all. I will tell him what I have learned.

P.S.

I found this:

https://www.rockislandauction.com/d...l-1860-army-richards-mason-cartridge-revolver

Description The serial number dates to 1871. The ejector appears to be a left over from the Richards conversions. Matching serial numbers are found throughout including "5425" on the loading gate. The wedge and grip are not numbered. It has a mix of percussion era markings and cartridge markings, including the 1871 and 1872 markings stamped over the original patent marking.


My friend's example doesn't have the rear sight. I need to look at the hammer and firing pin.

 

[highpower3006]

What a great revolver and a great piece of family history for your friend.

I do have one little observation though. The description says that it was made in 1871, but there is a July 1872 patent date on the frame.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I do have one little observation though. The description says that it was made in 1871, but there is a July 1872 patent date on the frame.

I did not attempt to correct the date of manufacture of this particular example. It would take more study. Some were 1860 model C&B revolvers that were returned to the factory at a later date for conversion. Some were made up from parts already in inventory. It would take more study to determine exactly which version this one is and when it left the factory.

 

[sirgilligan]

I noticed that, but what I read it was stamped over the original.

 

[sirgilligan]

So, I told my friend what I had learned and took some more pictures now that I know where to look for certain things. I also cocked the hammer this time and lowered it, the springs are very very strong, I was surprised and impressed.

 

[jackmoser65]

Driftwood is right, not a Richards-Mason conversion. The percussion barrel and rear sight notch in the hammer, rather than the conversion ring, denotes a Richards Type II or "Transition" model. Should be a 44 Colt centerfire.

 

[sirgilligan]

Is a Type 2 rarer than a Type 1?

Also, on the picture of the bottom side of the trigger guard with the serial numbers, there is two scratches/dents/impressions that look uniform like a number II almost. Could be two dents, but could those be some kind of stamp to indicate something?

 

[Aguila Blanca]

My friend's example doesn't have the rear sight. I need to look at the hammer and firing pin.

Yes, it does. As someone else already mentioned, the rear sight is the notch at the front of the hammer.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy Again

Dispatch from the Learn Something New Every Day Department.

I was not aware of the Richards Transitional model, even though I have the McDowell book on conversions, the most authoritative book on the subject. Just did not take the time to read the entire chapter on Richards Conversions. Mea Culpa.

According to 'A Study of Colt Conversions and Other Percussion Revolvers', by R. Bruce McDowell, "All Second Model Richards are rare because of the limited number produced". I have not found a chart anywhere in the book that says exactly how many were made, but one can assume they are more rare than the 1st Model. Hence, ignore my earlier $2500 statement, I have no idea what it is worth.

However, beware that counterfeiting rare guns has always been a profitable business. Have it checked out in person by an expert before trying to determine the value.

Regarding Patent Markings: McDowell says " The two line patent dates,-PAT.JULY.25.1871-/-PAT.JULY.2.1872- is the predominant frame stamping for this particular model....These patent dates are sometimes over an earlier COLTS/PATENT stamping....The two-line patent dates are sometimes stamped with dashes at the beginning and end of each line and other times without dashes."

For reference only, this is the patent stamping on my 1st Model Richards Conversion.

That's the best I can do.

P.S. In the future please size your photos down before posting them. They are so big that one has to scroll back and forth to view them.

Too bad somebody gouged the dickens out of the pair of screw holes on the backstrap.

 

[sirgilligan]

This can not be a counterfeit, my friend is old enough to remember his grand father having it and that it was passed to his father and then to him.

The pictures are on my website and those are just links using the tags [ img ]. I will look and see if the tag can have a size specified.