Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Colt handgun experts needed

digicamlife
I am looking for information on two Colts. A SAA and a DA 1917. Please follow the following links and look over the images.

Can anyone tell me what generation the SAA is, the history etc.

http://www.johnjlevy.com/GB/ColtSAA.htm

How about the 1917 DA? What info can you give me on the history?

http://www.johnjlevy.com/GB/Colt1917.htm

Please no comments on the html. I have had that already. Just expert opinions on the guns.

Thanks, John
0

Comments

10 comments

Date Votes
  • v35
    First generation
    Made during 1900
    First year SAAs were guaranteed for smokeless powder
    Barrel two line address correct for 4 3/4" barrel length
    Nice early style hammer and early style firing pin
    Stag grips are genuine stag but not necessarily original to gun
    Nickel is a refinish of original finish. Blue was most popular that year so It may have been blued & case hardened
    Gun heavily buffed out, washing out markings and rounding sharp edges
    Cylinder end play can be fixed with new cylinder bushing
    Cylinder rotational shake might be fixed or improved with a new properly fitted, cylinder locking bolt
    0
  • digicamlife
    V35

    Thank you very much for the information. I really appreciate it.

    John
    0
  • nmyers
    The M1917 Colts were made 1917-1919. It was originally blue, but yours has been heavily buffed. Don't believe the "expert" who told you otherwise, unless, of course, he is willing to pay you close to Blue Book value.

    Neal
    0
  • digicamlife
    quote:Originally posted by nmyers
    The M1917 Colts were made 1917-1919. It was originally blue, but yours has been heavily buffed. Don't believe the "expert" who told you otherwise, unless, of course, he is willing to pay you close to Blue Book value.

    Neal



    Hi Neal,

    I'm sorry but I will have to differ with you there. First of all the dealer who gave me my information has been in business for over 40 years and knows what he is talking about. Secondly, if you look at the link below you will find a Model 1917 that was on GB at the beginning of the month and it has the exact same finish. His pics also show the prancing colt and whatever that mark is at the top of the frame just in front of the hammer. Those marks are as sharp as the ones on my gun and I do not believe that they would look that good if someone took a wire wheel and altered the finish from factory original. The chances of finding two guns altered in the same way is too remote to even consider.

    http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=38244169

    So I think I will rely on my information as being correct.

    Thanks, John
    0
  • digicamlife
    quote:Originally posted by nmyers
    The M1917 Colts were made 1917-1919. It was originally blue, but yours has been heavily buffed. Don't believe the "expert" who told you otherwise, unless, of course, he is willing to pay you close to Blue Book value.

    Neal



    Hi again Neal,

    I found another one on GB that appears to have the exact same finish as well. If you look at picture number 6 in the series you will see the same type of anti-glare work near the front site as is on mine.

    http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=36749485

    Compare to mine here.

    http://www.johnjlevy.com/gbpics/Colt1917Pics/BarrelTopClose2-L.jpg

    Take care, John
    0
  • v35
    The 1917 looks too good with crisp, flat surfaces and sharp edges. I would believe the surface finish was a wartime cost saving one. It looks like no buffing was done and fine sanding or grinding was the final finish.
    0
  • p3skyking
    On the 1917, the grips do not look original, but the narrative covers that.

    Perhaps it's the lighting under which the photos were taken, but I see little blue. In the auction on GB you linked to, the blue on that weapon is quite evident and looks different from yours.

    I too have a 1917 in the condition like the one on GB to examine and while difficult to see the blue in strong light, it is darker on the butt and inside the triggerguard.

    From your photos the weapon looks like it has been bead blasted, i.e. markings intact, complete absence of finish.


    wings2.gif
    0
  • digicamlife
    quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
    On the 1917, the grips do not look original, but the narrative covers that.

    Perhaps it's the lighting under which the photos were taken, but I see little blue. In the auction on GB you linked to, the blue on that weapon is quite evident and looks different from yours.

    I too have a 1917 in the condition like the one on GB to examine and while difficult to see the blue in strong light, it is darker on the butt and inside the triggerguard.

    From your photos the weapon looks like it has been bead blasted, i.e. markings intact, complete absence of finish.


    wings2.gif



    I think that I should take some more pictures of the 1917. Maybe in sunlight. There really is color there but the pictures I took although crisp and in focus appear to others as if they are colorless. I see the pictures and when I look I also see the gun as I remember it so maybe my judgement of color is a bit off. The gun really has a nice blue color overall. I will see what I can do. I really hadn't given the color cast of the images much thought I was just trying to show the actual condition. I.E. scratches, blemishes etc..

    Thanks, John
    0
  • p3skyking
    John,
    If you are using a film camera, try to bracket with a couple of overexposures. Using a white background is fine as long as you realize that your meter is fooled into underexpoing the pistol.

    If you are using a digital, try for more contrast.

    As far as lighting, standard cool flouresent (sp?) is about the WORST you can use for anything.

    If you're in the darkroom, you can compensate somewhat with an amber or reddish filter to warm up the photo.

    Hope this helps.


    wings2.gif
    0
  • digicamlife
    quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
    John,
    If you are using a film camera, try to bracket with a couple of overexposures. Using a white background is fine as long as you realize that your meter is fooled into underexpoing the pistol.

    If you are using a digital, try for more contrast.

    As far as lighting, standard cool flouresent (sp?) is about the WORST you can use for anything.

    If you're in the darkroom, you can compensate somewhat with an amber or reddish filter to warm up the photo.

    Hope this helps.


    wings2.gif



    I have now posted two new photos that I shot today using better lighting. Hopefully this will show what I see when I look at the gun. We are having terrible weather on the East Coast and there hasn't been any appreciable sunlight in days. On these two photos I used 250W daylight photo flood bulbs and I ran a custom white balance to try and get it right. Let me know what you think.

    http://www.johnjlevy.com/GB/Colt1917.htm

    Thanks, John
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity