Help identify these revolvers please * lots more pics added

if it is a Confederate copy of a Remington made by T. Calhoun in 1863 it would be quite valuable, a search of the makers name came up blank but is worth further investigation.
 
Okay emailed Remington. Let's see what they have to say. Also if it is a repro what happened to the original manufacturing marks. ? How did they vanish so cleanly ? May be a dumb question but antiques are not my strong point.
 
Also my friend made the display and put both guns in there. And I found this. I guess some guns where made by other small companys to help the cause. Found this on a civil war website "Confederates also made their own revolvers, although in numbers far short of Federal production. It is estimated that less than 10,000 Confederate handguns were manufactured, mostly in Georgia. Southern arms-makers were cursed with a lack of proper materials to work with. Steel was not available, and brass and iron were often substituted. Brass was scarce, and the bells of many Southern churches were donated "for the Cause" and melted down to supply it. That brass became pistol frames in some Confederate revolvers."

It could one of these. Considering it says made in Athens ga
 
Last edited:
Has anyone been able to identify this Capt. Lee?


I'll jump on the repro band wagon (I think perhaps Smellie"s going to have to share his pie). The CSA stampings looked to be a modern font to me. Coupled with the question as to why the stampings in the first place. My understanding was that most Confederate officers purchased their arms and uniforms out of pocket. I doubt Capt. Lee would have been fond of some armourer/armorer taking steel stamps to his expensive side arm. Forgery's abound! Especially with "Rebel" stuff. Don't pay too much for those OP.
 
Some repros are sold unmarked and confederate Civil war items are some of the most sought after by collectors so fakes/counterfeits abound. Here is one link to Confederate manufacturers http://www.civilwarartillery.com/confederate_manufactures.htm , now it is probably not conclusive and a local gunsmith may have made a few guns to help the cause but with the really high number of pretty good fakes out there caution is the best way to go. Contacting some of the Civil war collectors clubs or historians might be a good starting point as well (Cabelas or other firearms museum curators etc.) Email can cover a heck of a lot of ground and most of these guys love to help especially if it is a potential lead to a new piece coming onto the market .
 
With this remark, you have established that you are NOT a cap & ball revolver shooter!

zelly said:
I think the cylinder is shiney like that becuase of the flash. But I would not even know where to take it to find out for sure. I don't think anyone at epps(closest store) would know.
Click to expand...
 
Sharps '63 said:
With this remark, you have established that you are NOT a cap & ball revolver shooter!
Click to expand...

Lol that is correct. And again thank you to everyone for contributing to find more out about this gun.

I was referring to this pic
FECC2C36-4C78-4759-93C3-C9CE418DA8E6-9089-0000025C29F36B37_zps296d336e.jpg
 
Last edited:
what is strange to me is that the recesses that form the ratchet on the cylinder look cast and I would expect them to be milled. Also as others have said there appears to be no wear on the ratchet

cheers mooncoon
 
I notice on the pic of the loading lever, the antiquing was done with the lever removed, and working the lever has scratched the color off. And yes, he is truly gone. RIP.
 
I find it hard to believe its a modern repro that has been aged. If has been aged, the job on the wood, brass and steel was phenomenal ...... orders of magnitude better than anything I've ever seen before. I could concede that the 'C.S.A.' stamps were later additions, however. The only thing that doesn't look aged at all to me are the concentric milling marks on the bottom of the cylinder chambers. My theory there is that the bottoms were originally pretty cruddy and someone mill/cleaned them out recently.
 
The bottoms of my repro cylinder chambers look the same after hundreds and hundreds of rounds downrange. I'm willing to bet that they were better finished on originals.

There are people out there who can identify fakes easily. Time to go to one of these "experts". If it is a fake, it was a reasonable attempt and it is fraudulent only if passed off as an original.
 
I was under the impression that most confederate revolvers were made of iron and the frames made of brass mixed with a bit of copper. Or at least the griswold revolver was. Is there any way to tell if its got iron in it instead of steel?
 
After a look, I would swear on a stack, that it is a Pietta. A Remington would not have been brass. A true 1858, viewed in profile, shows around 1/4" of barrel thread. This one does not. The machining on, and in, the cylinder, is too clean to be an Antique. If it were a small manufacturer from the period, using melted stock, the metal would likely have taken on some corrosion by this time, and show some manufacturing imperfections. The steel shows no corrosion or pitting, which would be expected by now, and would be normal. The cylinder notches are also longer than an 1858, and perfectly machined, with no wear. An Uberti copy is almost identical to a Pietta, but there is a subtle difference in the lengths of the cylinder notches from the two Italian companies. Check out MidwayUSA, and look at a Pietta 1858. The Uberti 1858 will also show on the margin of that page, so that you can see the difference. They are $289 new in the US, today. Expect to pay about $400 for a new one in Canada. Nothing wrong with a Pietta, unless it is being passed off as something that it is not. A good 1858 Remington Antique fetches $1400-$1900. This has been a great thread, that reminds us that everyone has an opinion. Antiques are great. If you can't prove one to 100% certainty, don't buy it. As to the stampings on this gun, let's just assume that the original owner just thought that it would be cool to mark it, the way that he wanted it. Call the CFC and register it. They gladly will. After that, send them the pics, and ask them if it is an Antique. If they think so, they will de-register it, and the case will be closed. I think that this one will stay Restricted. I am not an expert, I just watch CSI.
 
They look legit. Confederate States Armorery in Athens Georgia had the contract to make these in 1861-
Requires more research but the markings match what I've found .
I suggest you look up civil war manufacturers in Georgia , there is a lot of info out there including they're use of bronze instead of the classic yellow brass
 
I look down the twin bores of my antique howdah pistol circa 1840s, and from the breech plugs all the way to the muzzle is roughness and pitting to varying degrees.
Forget about trying to identify the rounded machining tools marks near the bottom.

That cylinder viewed from the front end, does not look like anything approaching antique era.
 
Just to stir the pot, "everybody knows" that Remingtons had iron frames. So did Thompsons.

But I had a BRASS 1928 Thompson in my hands about a year ago. Made in Turkey.

Legend is that the South sacrificed its church-bells to make pistols. Bells are not Brass: it gives too harsh a note.

They are Bronze. Copper and Tin, not Copper and Zinc.

That frame is not Brass. I would suggest a metallurgical analysis of the metal itself, and of the age of the patina.

With the equipment available today, it can be done.

If those are fakes, they are the best ones I have ever come across.

The Raisin Pie still stands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom