On the Gun Reviews section of this board I asked the age old question, USFA or Colt and one of the posters there indicated that the USFA bolt is not a true copy of the Colt, but a copy of the Uberti part. The original Colt part, to me at least, looks a bit fragile and the USFA and Uberti part looks stronger. The poster claims the original Colt part makes the action smoother, but I have not found this to be the case with my guns. Here is the link:
http://www.gunfighter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3309
PS: I know that USFA has beefed up the cylinder for more safety which is not a bad thing or makes it too heavy to have a smooth action. Seems like more Colt-aholic Kool Aide to me! ;D
Opinions and or additional facts please....
This will be interesting. ;)
Here is some additional propaganda that is being made at the GunfighterZone about how much better Colt is: (Note USF is supposed to be USFA)
Yes the Colt is mechanically superior to the Uberti & the USF & so is the AWA,one of the reasons is the Colt bolt &AWA bolt is a better design is because of the way it passes over the cam when cocking the gun,it has a more gradual degree on the bolt tine radius & passes over the cam w/less pressure & the cam is a replaceable if it wears because of hard use or ill fit parts.The Uberti & USF use the very same bolt in their guns & the degree on the bolt tine radius is more radical so as it passes over the cam the radius being the degree that it is goes over the cam a little harder & will tend to wear quicker & the cam on the hammer isn't replaceable in either gun as it should be.The Vaquero is a strong gun & will take quite a bit of hard use but I'm prejudiced because I don't like any SA w/a transfer bar.I have built Colts & AWA's to be used in fast draw & they seem to be working in that sport,& the cyl. notches are holding up under use,but I don't think the USF or Uberti bolt would holdup in fast draw,Cowboy fast draw is a whole different story they are working in that sport but regular fast draw is much harder on the guns.The quality control on the Ubertis isn't very good & most of the time the parts aren't fit very good because the assemblers @ the factory are on "piecework" the more guns they build in a day the more money they make,do the math.The Uberti springs are not the best quality,the USF's have good springs now that they've quit using Uberti springs & their quality control is not bad,but then Colt's quality control has dropped some from what it used to be,AWA's quality control has come way up from what it was several years ago when the guns were assembled in Italy,now they're assembled in Florida,the metal in all these guns is pretty close to being the same but the heat treating can vary,a good rule of thumb when buying a SA is you're going to get what u pay for,the cheaper the price the cheaper quality of the gun.
*sigh*
I wondered how long it would take for this discussion to migrate over here. This topic recently got so hot on the SASS wire that the 'discussion' devolved into name calling and the moderators pulled it.
The cooler heads (and the ones I happen to agree with) stated that its not the overall shape of the bolt that matter, but rather the bearing surfaces. As long as the bearing surfaces have the same geometry the bolt could be shaped like my aunt fanny and it wouldn't make a dang bit of difference.
But some colt bigots feel a strange need to justify the extra dollars spent on their sixguns and/or denigrate what they see as a 'lesser' brand.
I say shoot what you want and love what you shoot. Can't we all just get along?
— Lash Batson
I was unfrotunatly a part of that fiasco, but a point was made just before the thread was pulled by a person whose name I forgot, but appeared to be an expert on smithing. The picture in question was not clear,and he said it was a moot point as all those parts are made "oversize" in order to be essenitally ground down to an individual fit.
I agree, buy what you want, and can afford and shoot what you like. I like Great Westerns.
Thats my story and I am stickin with it
Curley
The gunsmith was probably Nate Kiowa Jones, a real standup fella it seems. He SLAMMED some Colt "expert" in a SASS Wire thread a while back!! Actually, he OWNED him!! :o ;) As I believe Pettifogger stated in another thread here, BOTH have their merits and it's simply a matter of personal preference. The best summation IMO is that if you're going to leave it in a box and then live another hundred years then buy the Colt from an investment standpoint. If you want beauty, quality, appreciate craftsmanship AND want to hit what you shoot at then buy the USFA. ;)
I thought that the lack of responses to that bolt post on the Gunfighters forum meant that people had realized how silly the subject is.
That photo is hopelessly poor. There was a link posted to that pulled fiasco thread that showed various Colt bolts through the years; some of which looked exactly like the poorly photographed USFA bolt.
There is a small but Very Vocal minority out there that are not doing Colt any favors.
Here is my take on the sillyness of this whole thing.
First, I think it is hilarious that some person decided that the BOLT is where the final comparison separates ways. If they would open their eyes they would clearly see that USFA SAA's are of a wholesome beauty that we could only dream about until USFA came along since no one has made the fit and feel with the kind of American quality that was witnessed in the 1st gen. Colts.
Second, if Colt was concerned about improving on the age old deisign of the SAA, they would have more than likely made the same type of improvements that todays manufacturers have made. Example, beefed up cylinder, better metallurgy on springs, and todays machinery with more consistent tolerances for just a few. Remember, Bill Ruger not only knew the SAA had a market demand, but he also knew it needed some improvements.
Third, how do we know that proposed USFA Bolt in the picture wasn't an early USFA Bolt that was made by Uberti. I know for a fact that all of the parts are now manufactured here in the USA, but to get off the ground USFA did have parts made by Uberti and then custom assembled and finished them here, much like the Second gen. Black Powder Colts. Anybody can go to the factory and ask Gary for a tour.
Finally, the real beauty of the SAA is after the machining, it is in its hand craftsmanship that makes each gun a custom fitted firearm. To trim metal in the right places for that custom fit, there needs to be metal there to begin with.
As far as I am concerned, USFA SAA's are not Colt Clones. USFA SAA's are custom American made Single Action Firearms with the kind of quality our Grandfathers grew up with, and they blow anything in its Class away, including the Colt itself.
I am entitled to that opinion, and I will exercise my right to display my opinion by buying USFA SAA's, lots of them!
Quote from: Fox Creek Kid on January 23, 2008, 06:42:40 PM
The gunsmith was probably Nate Kiowa Jones, a real standup fella it seems. He SLAMMED some Colt "expert" in a SASS Wire thread a while back!! Actually, he OWNED him!! :o ;) As I believe Pettifogger stated in another thread here, BOTH have their merits and it's simply a matter of personal preference. The best summation IMO is that if you're going to leave it in a box and then live another hundred years then buy the Colt from an investment standpoint. If you want beauty, quality, appreciate craftsmanship AND want to hit what you shoot at then buy the USFA. ;)
No, it wasn't NKJ, it was another guy a "Colt Speicalist" who I didn't know (but then I don't know everyone!) but he listed his credentials and sounded smart...but he did state the facts as they were.. I let my "temper" get the best of me when I was name called twice, and then I even got emails at home to continue the "discussion" from the same fool., which did not please me one bit...anyways it was interesting...and I wish I could remenber that guys name..I may have to look for that info..
Curley
What did the name caller think, because he was angry USFA should stop making their guns better than others, including Colt?
I'm just glad we are more civilized here on the USFA SASS board. ;D I pretty much guessed that would be the real skinny on this, the bolts if fit correctly would make no difference in smoothness with a beefed up design. Again, to me it looks like the Uberti design (USFA USA Made Copy too) is beefier and an improvement on the old design, so how the heck can that be bad? I am still amused how Colt-aholics are confounded and frustrated by the superior quality and authenticity that USFA has brought to the SAA market. :D BTW, we all know Colt seriously modified the SAA design with the 3rd generation Colts, so they must be even less authentic when compared to a 1st generation Colt or a USFA for that matter. There was also some talk about Colt having better metallurgy, but I have yet to see any credible evidence of that. 4130 or 4140 steel is just that no matter who makes it. USFA's steel is probably as good or better than Colt's. Just my 2 cents.
I'm just as big a Colt fan as anyone, I'm just not a fan-atic. I own several Colts and have let several more go over the years. I've only purchased one Colt SAA and while it may be over thirty years old it's a good one and a keeper. I've also been involved with firearms, both professionally and as a hobby, for a long time. While I'd love to be able to say Colt makes the best single-action hands down it just isn't the case. Anyone who is totally objective can't help but admit that USFA is currently making the finest single-action of the Colt type, it's obvious when comparing the two side by side. Anyone who claims differently either has an agenda or is simply putting too much emotional investment in their "stuff".
Quote from: Trooper224 on January 24, 2008, 03:48:52 PM
I'm just as big a Colt fan as anyone, I'm just not a fan-atic. I own several Colts and have let several more go over the years. I've only purchased one Colt SAA and while it may be over thirty years old it's a good one and a keeper. I've also been involved with firearms, both professionally and as a hobby, for a long time. While I'd love to be able to say Colt makes the best single-action hands down it just isn't the case. Anyone who is totally objective can't help but admit that USFA is currently making the finest single-action of the Colt type, it's obvious when comparing the two side by side. Anyone who claims differently either has an agenda or is simply putting too much emotional investment in their "stuff".
As I have said before, Colt would be wise to let USFA make their SAA for them. ;D
I wonder, how do you categorize Dennis Keyes, "Colt Cloner". He is currently USFA's Master Engraver but worked on Colts for many years.
I guess the proof is in the pudding for me, as they say. I am a Colt Collector, and a USFA collector and shooter. That says one thing.
Also, I currently own 54 Colts of different models and 30 USFAs of different models, but the USFA number is growing at a faster rate than the Colt number. That says the final thing!
I own lots of Colts too and they are collectable, but I still shoot them from time to time. My hands down favorites are my USFA guns as they are so well made and even nicer to shoot than the Colts. I refuse to waste my money on a new Colt since quality and authenticity went out the window a long time ago. As far as parts authenticity, if USFA copied a Uberti bolt that is oversized and more robust, that is a small departure from the original design, unlike Colt 3rd generations that until recently used swaged in cylinder bushings, incorrect threads on the barrel and different hand configuration. To me the USFA is way closer to a 1st generation Colt than the current third generation is by a mile.
One would have to wonder what Colt would do if they lost their military contracts because they are so lacking in the commercial market. Other companies are alive and well because they carry a good balance of firearms to please a wide variety of people, and a military contract is the bonus instead of the lifeline. Colt seems to be riding with most of their eggs in one basket, and having only one real lifeline is never a good thing.
It seems they lost the full contract for the M-16 to FN Herstal years ago and are only making M4s for the military right now. I agree, with the sloppy quality for the money you pay for a SAA, 1911 type or even an AR-15 it is amazing they can keep the commercial doors open. Then again, there are legions of Colt-aholic lemmings that will insist that a Colt 3rd generation is as good or better than a USFA or other clone, harping the collectability/value/nostalgia factor that are willing to hand over their hard earned dollars to a bloated union shop like Colt. Having one contract keeping you going is a walking the plank position and it is a shame that Colt will not do what its competitors do to win over new business in the commercial sector. BTW, this weekend we took out a friends new in the box Colt SAA that he got in his Uncle's estate settlement, let's just say I could throw rocks more accurately. We think it was built sometime in the late 1980s. He is going to see about having it extensively tuned by a gunsmith that really knows SAAs to try to turn a sow's ear into a purse. ::)
Well now, according to the new Forum-a-holic book of etiquette, if the bolt is authentic collectors will pay a premium, just don't pay attention to those grips that move when handling the gun.
This discussion was going Ok, but it's turning into Colt bashing. I don't think there's any need for that. USFA pistols stand on their own merits.
Sorry you see it that way, but sometimes the truth is ugly...at least for Colt. No flame, just the facts. They have lost market share and continue to barely survive off of a reputation of their products of yesteryear. They claim so much authenticity, when in fact the 3rd generation guns are so different in so many ways, the only real thing they have in common with a 1st generation is the little pony stamped on the side. True, USFA stands on its own merits and the true quality that has become the standard by which all SAAs today are judged.
And another thing, it seems just fine when Colt people slam USFA for one thing or another. For example, the myth that they are still made of Italian parts or have soft parts that will somehow wear down, just like the Uberti bolt design somehow being inferior to the old Colt design. These things are never seen as a flame by some Colt folks eventhough they have proven to be not true by USFA staff, yet the rumors continue.
People, BOTH have their merits and some of the biggest supporters of USFA also own Colts as well. There can never be enough gun companies! ;D The macro-problems with Colt as a company is IMO beyond the scope of this forum. Remember, Remington has lost money for the last six years. ;) Colt certainly has no monopoly there. I think the wise retailer would simply smile and sell the customer which of the two he/she wants. Remember, in the end it's about the MONEY. You can't make guns for long if you're not making money. Very few products can stand on their own in a free market if the quality is missing and the customers will ultimately decide which to buy. ;)
Reluctantly I chime in...
Fox Creek Kid has it right, BOTH have their merits. This whole string is beginning to sound like the old school yard taunt, "My dad can beat up your dad."
Just another point. If I were the marketing rep. for USFA I would want to know what the Colt customer is looking for & market to that niche, i.e, I would want to know why a loyal Colt buyer was that way and try to market something to lure him/her away. Granted, there is always going to be a certain percentage that would buy a Glock if you stamped Colt on it, but not all Colt buyers are idiots (think Colt Cowboy ::) ) and more importantly, they have disposable income. I think USFA did this very masterfully with the Custer Model as Colt has not marketed a gun like that since the Centennial in 1973. Good marketing move. If I were the "brain trust" at USFA I would make a limited run of the 1877 Lightning and maybe a real "thin plate" '58 Remington conversion (since they are already working in conjunction w/ Remington now). A lot of "ahhhhhhhh" factor with exclusivity & quality sells. ;)
Quote from: Fox Creek Kid on January 28, 2008, 06:12:15 PM
Just another point. If I were the marketing rep. for USFA I would want to know what the Colt customer is looking for & market to that niche, i.e, I would want to know why a loyal Colt buyer was that way and try to market something to lure him/her away.
That was pretty much the case with my second USFA. I had the money for a Colt, was leaning toward Colt, but... ...Colt's cylinder did not have the bevel on it like I wanted, and it had the pressed in cylinder pin bushing that I did not want, and at the time, I did not want to wait a year. The USFAs had everything I wanted and only had to wait the length of time that it took to come from Gary to AZ.
Plain and simple, Colt could not deliver what I wanted, USFA could.
OK! I believe that VG and I both are of the opinion that we only wish Colt the company would step up to the plate and produce firearms that are of the quality they used to be known for, and that non-USFA fans would atleast stop making unfounded statements about USFA products. Instead of saying USFA isn't, they should be asking why isn't Colt!
As far as Marketing goes, Quality, Availability, Pricing, and Customer Service will maintain growth in market share. I believe USFA is has high marks in all of these areas.
Well, my Dad is really starting to beat up their Dad! ;D Just kidding, I will say though since quality is not job one at Colt, the only reason they are in business is the fact they can stamp the little pony on the gun. Colt have merits? I guess that is very subjective and the only REAL factor I can think of is collector value.
Quote from: Doc Sunrise on January 29, 2008, 04:07:19 AM
OK! I believe that VG and I both are of the opinion that we only wish Colt the company would step up to the plate and produce firearms that are of the quality they used to be known for, and that non-USFA fans would atleast stop making unfounded statements about USFA products. Instead of saying USFA isn't, they should be asking why isn't Colt!
As far as Marketing goes, Quality, Availability, Pricing, and Customer Service will maintain growth in market share. I believe USFA is has high marks in all of these areas.
Doc: This is all true and why USFA is capturing more market share every year and quite a bit from re-habed Colt-aholics like me. :o
Quote from: Doc Sunrise on January 29, 2008, 04:07:19 AM
OK! I believe that VG and I both are of the opinion that we only wish Colt the company would step up to the plate and produce firearms that are of the quality they used to be known for, and that non-USFA fans would atleast stop making unfounded statements about USFA products. Instead of saying USFA isn't, they should be asking why isn't Colt!
I started getting interested in SASS/CAS in '95 or'96.
I said
then, if Colt's marketing was smart, they could
own the SASS/CAS market and none of the imported replicas would stand a chance. I also said the same thing about Winchester, at that time.
The thing that I really cannot understand is why Colt does not just produce an exact replica of their 1st generation SAA, contour for contour; And mark them exactly the same. That is what people really want ...
Is it that they just do not have the passion or dedication to change over to this? Of course I realize it would take some time and money to re-tool from the modern design they now use, but it would make sense and money in the long run, I would think.
There is no question that the Cowboy hobby is here to stay, and will continue to grow for generations.
If you have a passion for 1st Generation authenticity with a desire to shoot and play with the gun, really, the USFA is the best option for that quality, other than using an original 1st generation SAA, which is an Icon and shouldn't be abused in my opinion.
Colt should be able to do better than it is, heck, they dont even use authentic style markings!
I just do not understand it... ???
Just my opinion.
It really is too bad Colt and Winchester especially could not capture the market share they should have. Winchester could have had Uberti make the rifle parts for them and assemble them here with the Winchester trademark and they could have sold them by the truckload. Smith and Wesson could have come out with a better Schofield, or have the Uberti factory make them for them and put the S&W trademark on the guns and they would still be selling them. It seems these companies missed the boat and are letting USFA, STI and the Uberti/Pietta importers eat their lunch.
Quote from: Walker 1847 on January 29, 2008, 02:09:13 PM
The thing that I really cannot understand is why Colt does not just produce an exact replica of their 1st generation SAA, contour for contour; And mark them exactly the same. That is what people really want ...
Is it that they just do not have the passion or dedication to change over to this? Of course I realize it would take some time and money to re-tool from the modern design they now use, but it would make sense and money in the long run, I would think.
There is no question that the Cowboy hobby is here to stay, and will continue to grow for generations.
If you have a passion for 1st Generation authenticity with a desire to shoot and play with the gun, really, the USFA is the best option for that quality, other than using an original 1st generation SAA, which is an Icon and shouldn't be abused in my opinion.
Colt should be able to do better than it is, heck, they dont even use authentic style markings!
I just do not understand it... ???
Just my opinion.
IMHO, Colt really does not care what the people want. (see my post above) :-\
This is true, try calling their customer service sometime and see how much they want to help you with a problem you are having with one of their guns. I speak from multiple personal experiences with Colt. USFA on the otherhand, couldn't be more helpful and eventhough my problem was cosmetic, it was fixed to perfection. :)