'Pietta '60s blowout sale

[Slowhand Bob]

Guys Pieatta has the '60 models at an extremely good price right now, I think it was like perhaps $90 off?   My favorite version the 59 Navy Sheriffs 44 only got a token reduction again and I am thinking it may be due to that models popularity?  Just might be a lot of fokes dream gun.  I think Pietta has captured the minds of many amongst us with the ahhh, yes, the Tuco dream gun.  You walk into the guns shop pick out the elements from each Cot model that you prefer most and just put them all together. 

Having never gone deeper than the surface gloss of firearms history,  I did not realise that Colt actually made that dream gun so many of us wanted and Pietta came so close to providing.  It was here on one of the CAS City Forums that someone posted a few photos and a small bit of history on the first Colt Armies.  Basically the Army Model with a Navy Grip frame plus the slightly shorter barl, 7 1/2 " ,                 than was adopted.  I think it was said that the military required the changes that became standard for the '60 Model, and Pietta hasn't realized yet that there is a Historic way to get that guns so many want without constantly digging  poor Tuco out of his grave! 

I wonder if Colt ever received any orders to put Navy grips on Army pistols later?  One of the most common Army Model complaints today would be the grip size and people today are supposedly larger than our great grandfathers.  Combine this with the fact that Colt supposedly was the king of custom 'one offs' and it makes me wonder if or why?  It would have surely been one of the cheapest alterations one could have asked for?   HMMM, that idea would also apply to  Pieatta, offer a new Colt '60  with Navy grips and 7 1/2" barl and call it Colts First Model '60!  History would be on their side.

[litl rooster]

Where is this  price reduction offer at?

[Dick Dastardly]

What Rooster asked.

[Major 2]

"....One of the most common Army Model complaints today "... 

Personally, It is a feature when combined with the 8" Barrel makes the 60 Army the most pleasing design Colt produced.


People today would complain if you hung them with a NEW Rope ! 

[Texas Lawdog]

+1

[pistol1911]

I checked Cabelas,they have the 1860 Army on sale for $179.99.

[Cliff Fendley]

Need to check that out, been wanting another one.

[Forty Rod]

Personally, It is a feature when combined with the 8" Barrel makes the 60 Army the most pleasing design Colt produced.

I agree.  It rates with S&W's American / First Model Russian for pure elegance.

[litl rooster]

I agree.  It rates with S&W's American / First Model Russian for pure elegance.

Yep I agree whole heartly.

[Slowhand Bob]

AHHH the difference in personal taste.  I have seen the '62 referred to as Colts most attractive cap and ball probably more than any other one and must admit that fer pure elegance I would agree.  For the feel of a cap gun In my hand it would be the Pietta 44 Sheriffs copies.  There are those who complain about that Pietta Navy grip but I much prefer it over most others.  I dare say that the popularity of the '60 Army model was tied far more to it being a belt size pistol in 44 caliber than any desire for it grip size. It would be interesting to get the two biggies, Uberti and Pietta, to give us the production numbers for the Navy and Army size.  My thought would be that the Navy size runs double or more of the totals.  I have seen far more shooters seeking smaller grips, whether Navy size or Birdshead, for their '60s than I have ever seen looking for Army grips to put on a Navy model!

[Steel Horse Bailey]

Yes, Colt DID fill some custom orders for 1860s with Navy length grips.  And a few were custom made & shipped with birdhead grips.

These are on record as custom orders.  Like you heard, Colt -as well as Winchester- would sell about any gun&stock material&barrel length&finish&manufatured sight combination a customer could dream up.

What I am puzzled by is your reference to a "59 Sheriff's Model 44."  (44 cal., 7.5" rather than 8.0", short grip, hexagonal rather than round with old lever style, not the creeping lever)  Do I understand you correctly?  To my limited knowledge, that is a Pietta creation.

Popular - mayhaps.

Cool - yep and yep!

Fun shooter - you bet!

Authentic - nope.  I don't think that ANY production 1860 revolvers left the factory with short barrels, especially with what Pietta calls their "Sheriff's Model" with a 5.5" barrel.  7.5" vs. 8" maybe.

I DO realize you probably aren't particular (or not VERY) about authentic repros, so don't think of my questions that way.  Pietta has a bad habit of claiming that ALL their guns are totally authentic.  Kind of like the Henry Big Boy - which has very little resemblance (past the yellow receiver color) to a REAL Henry rifle or any other rifle until near or after the turn-of-the-century.  And happens to be well made and a nice shooter, some say.  But not particularly authentic.

I'm REALLY not trying to start a pi$$in' contest.

[Slowhand Bob]

SHB, I am afraid that as I get old my thoughts get caught up in an already messy typing and poor grammer situation.  The "59" sheriffs model was meant to refer to Piettas '51 Navy Sheriffs model', the current one being the 44cal in shiny finish that seems to be pretty popular.  They are my favorite SASS use cap and ball revolver that is 'as manufactured'.

Sorry if that got that confused into my talk of the original  Colt 44 Army Models that had a Navy Grip and 7 1/2" barrel.  I would have to search it out again but I saw a thread, with great photos, on here, some time back indicating that, for what ever reason, the first '60 Armies delivered were as such.  I am not sure how many of these guns were made by Colt and shipped or if they were simply prototypes for the military to test?   I think the article went on to say that it was the govt that requested Colt lengthen the barl as well as the grip frame?  Funny that they should change their mind back to Colts vision by the time the '73 SAA was procured!  I would bet that it was a popular request by those who actually used those guns? 

I do not know if the shorter barls (Sheriffs Models/ Police Models/ Avenging Angels) were ever regular production or just gunsmith whackum jobs but I do like those shorter barl lengths for competition but think the 7 1/2" is close to ideal for field use.  On the birdshead grips, I really like them but thought that their actual marriage to any of Colts belt sized revolvers came about well after the cap and bal era, even though we like to marry the combination now days and I plan to do that with some newer guns I have on the way.  If I can find the old link to that early '60 Model I will link back to it. 

[Cliff Fendley]

I don't know about that model but I do hate all these variations that pietta creates that the advertizing misleads folks into thinking they are authentic. Cabelas description of some of these models pretty much goes so far as flat out lying to the customer.

My big gripe is the misleading descriptions for the guns not the guns themselves. If they want to create these models fine, but don't mislead unknowing folks into thinking they are buying some authentic copy that never existed.

I did order another 1860 myself, they are 179 and through today Cabelas had a 20 off 150 order available right on the site so you can get the 1860 Army for 159 dollars plus shipping. I just couldn't pass up that deal.

[Slowhand Bob]

I really like the idea of calling the odd ball configurations the 'Tuco' series.  If we accept that the original Army models were shipped with Navy grips than the premise that an original Colt Army with Navy grips and a gunsmith shortened barl is an easy reach.  Much less gunsmith work than having a '51 Navy model converted to .44 and barl  shortened ( both do-able would be my guess).  What Pietta refers to as its '62 Model, I have heard described as simply a '61 model with shorter barl (also an easy gunsmith mod in the day).

Here is the link to the original Cot Armies I was refering to.  One has matching serial numbers that reach '61, a possible indication that perhaps at least that many were made in this configuration?  Scan down to the post by Mako.  This would be the accurate way for Pietta to offer a 44 with a Navy grip and the Sheriffs model would be a given as easily done by any smith or even most owners of the day.

http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,37610.msg480302.html#msg480302

[Steel Horse Bailey]

SHB - Look!  we're almost brothers, except yours is for SlowHand Bob.


Thanks for clarifying a few things.  As shown by Mako's posted photos, yes - a very few 1860 Army models DID leave the factory with Navy length grips.  You could order, and receive, nearly anything from C olt if you could pay the "toll."  No dispute there.

There IS an 1862 Colt that looks a bit like them, BUT ... the Pietta version they CALL the 1862 is simply an 1861 (Navy model; 36 cal. & a shorter grip) while the authentic 1861/1862 Colt was offered in 2 versions, the Pocket Navy and the Pocket Police.   They BOTH used the 1849 Colt frame, with a 5 shot 36 caliber cylinder to fit into the smaller receiver.  The Pocket Police had the pretty (IMHO) round barrel like the 1860 Army and 1861 Navy, while the Pocket Navy had an octagonal barrel.  There is a good piece in an old Guns & Ammo mag by Dennis Adler about the 2nd Generation Series of Colt C&B guns that were made in the 1970s & early '80s.  In it he details the various models Colt produced originally in the 1840s 'thru 1860s.
http://archives.gunsandammo.com/content/cap--ball-resurrection

Read it and you'll find out the REAL guns made back then, NOT the ones as claimed by Pietta and perhaps others.  I'm not knocking Pietta, they make nice, affordable guns, and many ARE authentic.

While a short barreled 1851 or 1860 is very nice, looks good, and handles VERY well, as YOU mentioned, Bob - they were pretty much gunsmith or blacksmith creations back then.  Of course, there were many custom guns from the factory but not in any run with large quantities.  I guess one should never say "never."  Details are important to many of us.  However, SASS allows some guns that may "fit the period" and are cool to have & shoot, but don't appeal to us "correct detail fans."

Remember to keep yer powder dry ! ! !

[Slowhand Bob]

Posting that SHB did seem funny as that is frequently how I get addressed!  I have a couple of big projects going right now on just this front but both will be bastards by the time I'm done.  I just purchased a pair of Uberti '60s that were converted to 'Avenging Angels' by shortening the barls.  I have several various Uberti SAA grip sets laying about and am considering putting some of them on as temporary measure while I think this out.  What I can go with is either the ER Gunfighter grip style or Birdsheads. both of which actually get past any claim as being possible for an early model Army.  I do not have any of the Uberti brass Navy frame sets on hand but that would be my eventual choice, that could be an easy reach historically and take care of my preference for the Navy size grip. 

My next project, already talked with the gunsmith, is to convert my Existing pair of Pietta '51Navies in .44 cal with Kirst cartridge Conversions.  These are the short barl guns that look stainless and have the shallow engraving.  Not sure on the timing until I talk with the smith one more time and see how his work log is going.  It is now closing in on my travel time, Pappy always spends Christmas in GA with the grand-ones!

Pictures and shooting reports will follow as they become available.

[Steel Horse Bailey]

Well, good luck on your projects and have  a Merry Christmas with the "Grand-Ones!"  (I like that description!  Never heard it before.)

SHB! (Who sure is slow in the hands sometimes)

[RRio]

I just picked up a 1860 with a Navy grip from Taylor's & Co. for $199 that was on a Holiday Special. It is in the top left corner.

[Noz]

My understanding for the larger grip on the 60s was that the army was afraid that the "horrific" recoil of the 44 caliber gun would be better handled by the larger grip.

[Slowhand Bob]

I read one opinion that stated it was lengthened due to the common practice of wearing gauntlets?  If I understand the grip ergonomics right, it is the same as the Navy grip but the lines extend out for a bit, just adding more length??