Please help...what is it?

[Capt Billy]

The proof marks show Uberti 1974, but my question is: replica of what?
It's .44, no longer made, Pietta offered similar ones through 2009 (but no more).
I've "narrowed" it down to three choices, but would be happy to be educated.
a.) Leech Rigdon
b.) Griswold & Gunnison
c.) Schneider & Glassic
C'mon all you of vast knowledge, help me out here.

[Capt Billy]

P.S.
There is NO notch for a shoulder stock on it...(there are on my 3 Piettas)

[hawkeye2]

     With a rebatred >44 caliber cylinder (and a 5" barrel) it is not a replica of anything that ever existed but it ought to be fun to shoot.

[Shotgun Franklin]

It's a copy of the prototype 'Capt Billy Special' made by Wish&Dream. They never were able to get funding and closed their doors shortly after this one prototype was made. Anyway, that's the story I'd tell if I were the owner. 

[Mako]

The proof marks show Uberti 1974, but my question is: replica of what?
It's .44, no longer made, Pietta offered similar ones through 2009 (but no more).
I've "narrowed" it down to three choices, but would be happy to be educated.
a.) Leech Rigdon
b.) Griswold & Gunnison
c.) Schneider & Glassic
C'mon all you of vast knowledge, help me out here.

Capt. Billy,

It's a "replica" from one of  'Alchimista's' (Alessandro Pietta) day dreams.  There was no such animal with either an iron frame, gun metal (bronze) or even brass until invented by Pietta.

As Hawkeye says it is fun to shoot, but it is not a clone or replica of anything.  It is just a brass frame cut for an Army model cylinder (.44 caliber) 'a la the 1860 with a 1848 Colt's Holster Pistol (Dragoon) half octagonal barrel and the older pre-1860 loading lever, smaller Navy grips and all brass grip frame.

None of the Confederate copies or any other copies of the Colt's pattern revolvers made a .44 rebated cylinder like that.  Now the Leech & Rigdon and several other Confederate copies used that style barrel, but they were either Navy model frames in .36 caliber or the larger 1848 frame in .44 caliber.  Guns were produced with bronze frames because of the shortage of iron, they would have relegated the caliber to .36 to keep it safe.  Some of the frames weren't even a faithful bronze alloy they were mixtures of whatever brass/bronze mixtures were scrounged.  Some churches even donated bells to the war effort.

Your frame is probably brass and not bronze, but I don't believe Pietta just comes out and says what the material actually is.  Even Uberti according to their literature is using brass instead the stronger bronze (gun metal) for their Henry and 1866 frames.  There are many different alloys of modern brass and it appears both Pietta and Uberti have decided it is strong enough to use instead of the original bronze.  Having a softer ductile material like brass allows them to get away with going to the lower tensile strength material because it will stretch long before it fails.  19th century brass was usually too soft and had too many impurities to  allow its use for frames.

~Mako

[Fingers McGee]

What Mako said +1

Fingers

[Capt Billy]

My other 3 are Piettas, the one in the picture is from Uberti...Mako? As you seem to be one of the better educators on here, could you help me gain some knowledge as to what is meant by the term "rebated cylinder"?
I'm guessing I'm building quite a collection of "fantasy" weapons: 4 of the ones in question, 1 Man With No Name...at least I can save up for conversions of my matched Pietta steel 51 Navies.
Thanks again for all of the things I'm learning here...I'm more of a reenactor and not so much a shooter, so my guns wind up being eye catching "props".

[Mako]

Capt. Billy,
I'm confused as to why you keep calling it a Uberti.  That pistol was made for Navy Arms by Pietta.  You can buy one right now on the Dixie Gun Works site:

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=949

Uberti didn't make those .44 caliber pistols on the brass frames, that's a Pietta trait.  I might be wrong, and someone please correct me if I am, But I don't believe they ever made any.  That is a dangerous thing to say when talking about replicas (saying they never made one of something that is...).  What is the manufacturers mark that lead you to believe it was a Uberti?  And what is the date code that leads you believe it was produced in 1974?

Here are a pair like yours made by Pietta for sale on the Ruger forum:

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=112311&sid=288cb74ee5d57f3db16a0bc161ba6bb1

http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt358/Mako_CAS/Odds%20and%20Ends/CB004.jpg




As for rebated cylinders, it is pretty simple. Rebated means diminished or reduced.  The major diameter on an 1860 cylinder in .44 caliber was "rebated" at the rear to allow it to fit on a Navy model frame and still use the lock work of the Navy model.  Otherwise they would have had to redesign the bolt stop, etc.

This shows both the straight cylinder Navy model in .36 caliber on top and the .44 Caliber "Rebated" 1860 cylinder on the bottom:

http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt358/Mako_CAS/Navy%20Model/NavyandArmy.png

The only difference in the frames is the clearance cut for the larger diameter on the forward portion of the .44 caliber cylinder, highlighted in red below:

http://i627.photobucket.com/albums/tt358/Mako_CAS/1860/516160frames.png

The rebated cylinder allowed Colt's to put a .44 caliber cylinder on a frame originally designed for .36 caliber.

So to recap, there were never any original revolvers made with brass frames (or bronze) in .44 caliber.  All of the Confederate "Navy" model pistols were in .36 caliber.  The only .44 caliber pistols produced by the Confederacy os in the Confederacy were the Dance revolvers in .44 or the Dragoon copies.  There was no Army Model copy or pistols made with the rebated .44 caliber cylinder.

Colt's made three rebated percussion revolvers, the 1860 Army model in .44 Caliber and the 1862 pocket pistols.  The 1862 Pocket Navy which had a rebated cylinder just like the Army model and the 1862 Pocket Police which had flutes in addition to the rebated cylinder.  Both of those pistols were in .36 caliber and had 5 shot cylinders.  The rebated cylinder allowed them to put a 5 shot .36 caliber on a frame designed for .31 caliber.

Regards,
Mako

[Capt Billy]

The proof marks that I used crashed with my last computer...but thank heavens for macro lenses!

One is under the loading lever, the other, on frame at the left of the cylinder...none of the other proof marks are in question.

None of the 3 Piettas share either of these marks.

Now, maybe I can finally answer these questions. and thanks in advance

[Mako]

Capt. Billy,
The top mark is a variant of the FAP logo Pietta uses.  The bottom is the Navy Arms logo.

You usually see the FAP inside of a flattened diamond, but I have seen other marks, usually on guns built for importers such as Navy Arms, Traditions or other large importers.  I have read they are no longer doing special markings and are using the diamond FAP.  I haven't corroborated this.

What is the date code and where was it on the revolver?   There will be two proof marks beside it, or it will be between them.  The date code should be in a box.

Regards,
Mako

[Capt Billy]

First...thanks a million...I'll take side by sides of the new and the older gun and post them before tonight.
The date code on the old one, is on the right side of the frame...no box, just XXX, then to the left of that are the 2 other proof marks.
On the newer ones it goes, box, (CD),  THEN proof marks. The diamond and F.LLI Pietta Made in Italy, are on the right side of the barrel...no  markings on the left of the frame.
I promise the pictures will show s/n, proof marks, and every marking I can find...MAN these Italians are making it confusing to this poor old cowboy!
It's 2:00am here right now, but I WILL have the pix up when I wake.
Billy
(proud owner of a Cap'n Billy prototype .44...4 of them even!)

[Capt Billy]

Rather than rambling on, I'll let the pictures speak my thousand words.

[Capt Billy]

Sorry, I forgot the barrels.

[Fingers McGee]

First...thanks a million...I'll take side by sides of the new and the older gun and post them before tonight.
The date code on the old one, is on the right side of the frame...no box, just XXX, then to the left of that are the 2 other proof marks.
On the newer ones it goes, box, (CD),  THEN proof marks. The diamond and F.LLI Pietta Made in Italy, are on the right side of the barrel...no  markings on the left of the frame.
I promise the pictures will show s/n, proof marks, and every marking I can find...MAN these Italians are making it confusing to this poor old cowboy!
It's 2:00am here right now, but I WILL have the pix up when I wake.
Billy
(proud owner of a Cap'n Billy prototype .44...4 of them even!)

XXX is 1974 and CD is 2009.  They're both Piettas.

[Mako]

Fingers,
I couldn't blow the picture up enough to see the "XXX."  I was afraid to say anything because I had no idea Pietta had been making them for over 37 years.  I thought the .44 caliber cylinders on brass frames and "Navy" style configurations (read that as octagonal barrels, pre-1860 style loading levers, Navy size grip or combinations of those) was a 1990s and later phenomenon.

You probably know better than anyone, do you know when Pietta started making those kinds of combinations?

~Mako

[Fingers McGee]

Mako,

If I understand his pictures correctly, the old one with the XXX date code is the one he had the picture of the RAG (Navy Arms) and FAP without the diamond markings in post 8.  If that's not the case, I may have to reevaluate my response.

I don't know when Pietta started making repros.

[Mako]

Fingers,
You have it right. 

I know Pietta has been making reproductions for a while, I was just wondering when they stated making the more "fanciful" "reproductions."  I think their earliest ones were faithful reproductions of '51s and '60s. For some reason I was under the impression they began making their "Confederate" series of pistols and the .44 caliber '51s in the 90s.  I haven't ever owned any of those, I always stuck with reproductions of Colt's and Remington models.  I have had Piettas as far back as the '80s and  probably a few manufactured for importers in the late '70s.  I even had some Lyman and Palmetto pistols years ago,  I still have some ASMs.  My first non-original Colt pattern pistol was a '49 I built from a kit in the '70s.

I'm straying from my question though,  I really haven't followed the history of the Piettas like I have Ubertis.  It seems like just recently I have seen a torrent of the brass framed pistols, but I know that's not entirely true because I have old gun magazines with mail order houses advertising them.  I was just looking for a rough date they introduced the brass and not quite historically accurate pistols we see a lot of now being sold through places like Cabela's, etc.

~Mako

[Fingers McGee]

One of the side effects of the current economy is the number of firearms that are appearing on the auction sites; both modern and antique.  I've manages to pick up quite a few C&B repros from the 70s lately and got a pair of 1960 brass framed G&Gs.  There's a lot of stuff coming out of the woodwork that hasn't been seen or documented before.

[Long Johns Wolf]

IMHO one should never say never when it comes to replica revolvers. Uberti was involved in the making of these brass framed "Navy-Army" C&B revolvers...at least they were during the early 1970s.
My first C&B revolver in 1973 or 1974 was such a brasser in .44 cal. with rebated cylinder and a square/round barrel with the hinged loading lever. Mine had the long tube, I think 7,5". And yes, she was an Uberti.
Long Johns Wolf

[Mako]

IMHO one should never say never when it comes to replica revolvers. Uberti was involved in the making of these brass framed "Navy-Army" C&B revolvers...at least they were during the early 1970s.
My first C&B revolver in 1973 or 1974 was such a brasser in .44 cal. with rebated cylinder and a square/round barrel with the hinged loading lever. Mine had the long tube, I think 7,5". And yes, she was an Uberti.
Long Johns Wolf

Haaaaaa!!!! yep, I knew there would be an exception which is why I invited the other greybeards who have been doing this full time for thirty years to chime in and correct me:

...Uberti didn't make those .44 caliber pistols on the brass frames, that's a Pietta trait.  I might be wrong, and someone please correct me if I am, But I don't believe they ever made any.  That is a dangerous thing to say when talking about replicas (saying they never made one of something that is...)...

In the '70s and '80s I was active military too busy shooting IPSC to pay attention to the finer things in life like shoot more real gunpowder pistols.  I had some in my collection, but they were just part of my overall firearms hobby activities.

Wolf, thank you once again for adding to the narrative.  You and several others on here are a wealth of experience and historical perspective.

Thank you,
Mako