Brass SAA grip frames

[Galloway]

I was told Colt never made brass frames for the SAA. If this is true why do so many replicas have them? It doesnt seem like they would save that much money. Do some people like they way they look?

[St. George]

You were told right...

See "The Book of Colt Firearms" by Sutherland - and "A Study of the Colt Single Action Army" - by Graham, Kopec and Moore - as well as Wilkerson's various books.
These are the premier publications dealing with "real" Colts.

This can devolve into one of those "woulda if they coulda" arguments that go nowhere and delight the Devil's Advocates - but the truth of the matter is that steel frames were common by late Civil War - and were judged to be stronger than brass.

Men of that time wanted strong, reliable revolvers - not something pretty for their SASS matches...

For the hell of it - I re-checked Colt reference books by:
Wilson
Sutherland
Graham, Kopec and Moore
Wilkerson
Rywell

Plus - some material from both "The Gun Report" and "Arms Gazette" dealing with Colts and provenance and rarities.

Nothing whatsoever indictates that Colt ever put brass triggerguards and backstraps on any of their Model P revolvers.
Had that been done - they'd've qualified as rarities.
Locating one would have made the two major collector's magazines immediately - as all of the big-money boys wanted their guns to be featured and their prices to rise.

"Custom" work - during the time frame - generally involved engraving and plating - and not the substitution of an inferior metal component.

What one man does to a revolver doesn't make it a Colt factory product - a shame, in some cases - but for the best in others.

As an example - Elmer Keith ruined numerous Model P's by adding various backstraps and triggerguards from M1860's and Dragoons and Bisleys - but that didn't make them a factory product - custom or otherwise.
Keith turned 'em out, shot 'em - destroyed more than a few - and if he liked them - usually had them engraved and plated.
All this eventually led to the Ruger Bisley - a revolver that was the culmination of a Keith project and not anything that Colt began.

As to Bass Outlaw - who had an 'unusual' SAA - this from "Firearms of the American West 1866 - 1894" - by Garavaglia and Worman - page 290.

"Colt Single Action .44-40 (frame #42870) modified for fast close range shooting by fanning the hammer.  The original backstrap and triggerguard were replaced with those from a Colt M1872 .44 "Open top" and the cylinder is held in place by a special base pin secured with a thumb screw.  The trigger has been removed and the trigger slot welded closed, with most of the guard discarded.  The barrel has been cut to only three inches.  The weapon was given in lieu of cash to the undertaker who buried ex-Texas Ranger Bass Outlaw, who was shot to death in El Paso by Constable John Selman in 1894.(Courtesy El Paso Historical Society via Robert E. McNellis, Jr.)"

A gun actually associated with Outlaw's ownership was a Merwin, Hulbert .44 Pocket Army, taken from him when he flourished it "in a manner calculated to disturb the inhabitants of said public place" in an El Paso, Texas, Saloon on October 15, 1892.
That's on page 328 of the same publication.

There's an article in the magazine 'Guns of the Old West' that refers to the Colt - but I didn't read it, as I've found little historical accuracy and more B-Movie writing than needed, but if you read the above and if you can mentally 'picture' the revolver - the work is typical of a blacksmith/gunsmith cobbled-up gun, and nowhere is it attributed to actually "belonging" to Bass Outlaw - but rather to John Selman - who used it in place of cash for a burial - indicating that Selman didn't place that much value on it.

Was it his?
Hard to say - given the fact that Bass Outlaw was pretty well-known and his personal guns would fetch more money if sold by Selman - as were many famous guns by lawmen to supplement meager pay..
Even more were sold by telling someone they belonged to famous folks - Frank James' selling Jesse's guns comes to mind - he kept them out in a barrel - out by an outbuilding - and sold them to the curious.

During the Civil War - Colt was already using Iron backstraps - especially on the Model 1860 Army.

They were using Brass triggerguards in combination.

Earlier examples were sometimes Silver-plated - very common to the Model 1849 and Model 1851 - not so with others.
You'll see the vestiges of that plating in the 'protected' places - but sometimes, over-zealous cleaning eliminated it, as it was never all that thickly applied.

The 'Colt' references I've cited can sometimes be located in your Library's 'Reference Section'.

Usually - if they're in there - your reading's confined to staying put and reading at one of the tables.
They're 'highly-pilferable', and most Libraries have already learned 'that' lesson.


Scouts Out!

[Cantona]

Although this original post is somewhat "old" I came across it in a search for info on brass SAA frames. The suppositions and implications of the original post gave me reason to respond. Hope this is helpful.

The question, at bottom, seems to be whether SAA's with brass frames existed in the days of the "Old West." In regard to what weapons can be considered "authentic" in terms of cowboy action shooting, the answer cannot lie solely in the records of the Colt factory or the assertions of firearms historians. Knowing what the Colt factory produced does not answer the question of what cowboys carried. It is probably more helpful to think in terms of what is possible, and what is likely, given the realities of life in the 1800s. Given the fact that the "Old West" was maybe 2500 miles from the Colt factory and that there were many brass-frame guns in circulation, is it reasonable to assume that sometimes, when iron frames got broken, or steel frames got bent or otherwise damaged, that repairs could have been made by the simple expedient of replacing it with the brass frame off an old gun? Further, given the fact that in the first years of production nearly 100% of the SAA's went to the Army, and Army use would have resulted in many guns being damaged, and the Army armorers had a lot of brass frame guns on hand, I think such a scenario is so reasonable that the possibility of its occurrence rises to near-certainty. Lacking a color photograph of certain provenance showing a soldier or cowboy of the 1870s holding such a weapon, we cannot say for certain. (Of course, color photography did not yet exist at the time, so that's out.) Having an actual gun of the period with a brass frame would not help either. "Experts" would label such an arm as "not authentic"since Colt never made them that way, which would probably result in the owner having an iron or steel frame fitted – with the end result being a gun that was actually less – not more – "authentic."

So, did SAA's with brass frames exist in the Old West? Seems to me more likely than not. Can anyone say with certainty? I don't think so. Bottom line: if you like a brass frame, or if for whatever reason that's what you happen to have, shoot it and enjoy it. But that's just my two-cents worth and truth be told, it's probably worth less than that.

[The Elderly Kid]

Way back in the mid-60s I had a "Dakota" .45 that had the infamous brass backstrap. It was made by an Italian company, but I don't know which and at the time was not knowledgeable enough to say how accurate a copy it was, but I was very pleased with it, having become a big fan of Eastwood's spaghetti westerns. I suspect that the Italian firm was cutting corners and saving a few lire by using the same brass grip frames they used on their '51 clones.

[Curley Cole]

I had 2 EMF Dakotas from the early '80s. Both made by Jager. One I special ordered to have the steel backstrap. The other was the Californian "kit". I put it together and finished it to look old. Came with the brass backstrap. I hated it for about 25 some odd years. Never could find a replacement. Finally EMF was selling out ASM backstraps/triggerguard/grips. (actually they were still brass, but they were black nickel plated) I got one and it fit. Sold the brass one with a pair of one piece polyivory grips and have never looked back. (to make the arrangement actually work, had to order a longer mainspring. and the action is smoother then it ever has been.)

cc

[deucedaddyj]

The only reason I could think they would make one, is for use at sea. From what I know, brass doesn't corrode as bad as most metals when your on a ship. That's why it's used on a lot of old ship furniture and such.

[St. George]

Then why a brass grip frame on an otherwise all-iron revolver?

The nautical use of brass means an all-brass article - to obviate the known rusting of iron when exposed to corrosive salt water.

These brass grip frames have always been a replica thing - probably the using of available parts as has been suggested, with a bit of marketing thrown in for 'pretty'.

Colt certainly never made any for their Model P revolvers - and as I'd mentioned - should something be 'proven' to be a factory-made-and-installed piece - it'd bring a pretty penny.

This can devolve into one of those "woulda if they coulda" arguments that go nowhere and delight the Devil's Advocates - but the truth of the matter is that steel frames were common by late Civil War - and were judged to be stronger than brass.

Men of that time wanted strong, reliable revolvers - not something pretty for their SASS matches...

Wishing it were so doesn't count for much, when the available references are available with an Inter-Library Loan.

Scouts Out!

[deucedaddyj]

I was just saying, that would be the only semi-logical explanation I could come up with, and even it would be pretty unlikely.

[deadwood]

i may have the "explanation"............

no, colt did not produce them. and the brass thing came about towards the start of
the civil war. the SOUTH knew they could not get there hands on enough colts
and of course, many wanted them. so, they started producing replicas and many of
those had brass frames, trigger guards, etc....

the 51 navy copies of the south were just about all brass from what i remember
from fladermans guide to antique american firearms!!

and they look great!!

i think when you see them now as reproductions, the manufacturers are just
providing a piece of history and playing towards those knock off guns, not
indicating that they were manufactured or offered by colt firearms of that
time period.

__________________________________________________________

SUPPORT THE COUNTRY.

SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT.

DEFEAT TERRORISM!!

[DJ]

A brass pistol frame for seafaring use makes sense even if the rest of the gun is iron or steel, because wood grips tend to absorb and/or hold moisture against the metal grip frame, where it's difficult to wipe off without some disassembly. 

[St. George]

Those Confederate revolver frames were 'cast from the church bells of Macon, Georgia'...

At least the ones produced by the Macon Asenal were - other 'brass-framed' revolvers like the Cofer and Dance got their metal elsewhere.

For more on the firearms manufacturing capacities of the South - see:

'The Confederate Brass-Framed Colt & Whitney' - Albaugh
'Confederate Handguns' - Albaugh
'Dance and Brothers:  Texas Gunmakers to the Confederacy' - Wiggins

They were a wartime expedient for the time - bell metal being of a different composition than 'regular' brass, and somewhat stronger.

At the time of manufacture - in the middle of the Civil War - brass components were used by both sides for trigger guards and early backstraps.

Colt, by that time, had decided that harsh service warranted stronger components - and soon, the only brass piece to be found was the trigger guard.

The 'explanation' for the profusion of brass-framed replicas is due in large part to the ease of construction and casting to which brass lends itself - and it's easier on machine tools, as well.

The Civil War Centennial was the beginning of the tide that would sweep the newly-awakened interest in cap and ball weapons.
A properly-made replica was more expensive than a brass-framed one - so manufacturers supplied both, so as to satisfy various wallets and counted their money.

As to the 'nautical' use - the design features a huge 'hole' at the hammer - all the small steel parts critical to operation of the piece are located just under the opening that the seawater's splashing into - on its way to corroding the piece, aided by the black powder fouling...

Had there been a legitimate 'Naval' use for brass frames - they'd've specified them and continued issue - but they didn't...

The Navy - on both sides - issued pretty much what their respective land forces did - iron-framed revolvers that may or may not feature a brass trigger guard.

Scouts Out!