Engraved 1865 Colt Navy
Auction # 248905756
Has anyone seen this? Does the seller have delusions of grandure about this gun?
IMO this gun never saw the Gustav Young shop.......and then there are the buggered screws.
Has anyone seen this? Does the seller have delusions of grandure about this gun?
IMO this gun never saw the Gustav Young shop.......and then there are the buggered screws.
0
-
There are so many misguided fools and outright crooks on the auctions that CAVEAT EMPTOR has to be in your mind any time you bid on something. 0 -
I have to ask, what is "caveat emptor and what does it mean? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Garth
I have to ask, what is "caveat emptor and what does it mean?Caveat Emptor is Latin for "Let the buyer beware".0 -
Wow look at all of his items every thing he has listed has some serious questionable statements . I think I will PASS on anything this guy has for sale[:(]. He either does not have a clue OR is running a number of SCAMS 0 -
quote:Originally posted by steg
Auction # 248905756
Has anyone seen this? Does the seller have delusions of grandure about this gun?
IMO this gun never saw the Gustav Young shop.......and then there are the buggered screws.
Notice he didn't say anything about Gustav Young - who never stamped his name on guns like that - but just "Young". It could have been Charlie, Harry or Dick Young. Gustav did much more quality work.0 -
It very well may be correct! If you read the book Colt Engraving they show pictures of early Colt engraved guns. The engraving quality borders on crude just like this. Young did not personally engrave most guns, apprentices did and he signed. If you read the book you will see that it may be correct. A Colt letter will tell of course. My question is why doesn't he have a letter? 0 -
Phony or big error - five shot Navy?, five digit S/N in 1865? Whether it was engraved in the 1860s or not, it must have taken Mr. Young (Mrs ?) all morning to do it.
Interesting, too, that the S/Ns are engraved, not stamped.0 -
For CJS10: With due respect to the book by "He whose name is not mentioned in polite society", you can't tell much about the engraving on the guns. As per the gun under discussion, apart from the crudeness of the design and its execution, notice the dots in the background of the design. Many overlap one another. This was never, ever found in Colt factory engraving, and never, ever, ever, ever done by the Young workshop. Had something like this happened by an apprentice of the time, the apprentice would quickly be looking for another line of work and the gun would have been scrapped. No "lunchbox" examples here.
This gun is clearly an attempt to defraud.0 -
I've never seen an engraver, once placing their name somewhere on their work, to have a roll-stamp of his name on the barrel, far from the engraving.
And, the Colt's patent on the cylinder..shouldn't that be the registered patent number, and not the firearm's SerNo?
$99 Uberti, in all probability.
....the plot thickens.0 -
quote:Originally posted by givette
I've never seen an engraver, once placing their name somewhere on their work, to have a roll-stamp of his name on the barrel, far from the engraving.
And, the Colt's patent on the cylinder..shouldn't that be the registered patent number, and not the firearm's SerNo?
$99 Uberti, in all probability.
....the plot thickens.
The serial number and the patent number are the same thing on the cylinder. It doesn't mean patent number. It means "Colt's Patent" and then the "No." is the serial number. If it was the actual patent number, it would never match the numbers on the frame, trigger guard, etc., as it should.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments