1861 (1860?) Navy Arms Richards Type II conversion?

[Mean Bob Mean]

Saw a Navy Arms (assuming ASM?) .38 special Type II conversion with a navy grip.  Had rear sites on the conversion ring.  Also came with silver trigger guard and strap.  Can anyone tell me what the deal-i-o is with this revolver?  Guy offered it to me for what appears to be a reasonable price, does anyone want to take a stab at what the going price would be for one?

[Major 2]

Welp    that is a conundrum....

My guess it is a Navy/Arms ASM.... there were some that were OK and more that were NOT !
Pretty much the ones that were not, is what caused Navy Arms & Cimarron eat a lot of them...Many wound up at Sportsman's Warehouse or Traditions at discounts....

ASM was capable... but the  Sportsman's Warehouse or Traditions were forcing the cut rate and Q/C was the scapegoat.

Dave Anderson & AWA had some very nice one's ( see Adler's book )

But to your question- value , examine the gun in question if it seems to function well, and fit & finish is good in your  eyes , and the price is less than $300.00,  I'd say ask to shoot it .... only after that would I suggest you consider it.

Some may say " Run away " ..."forget it"  however you might just get an exception to the Q/C issue    maybe  

Know this....parts are non existent...   in the end, your call ...but look it over well and then decide.

[Mean Bob Mean]

Thanks Major.  Looking around the net and these boards it does appear to be as described "a gun that never was".  Action is smooth and tight, some wear on finish.

We are shooting next week, maybe I can try it.  The whole parts issue is troubling.  I reckon a smith could fit some parts, but at what cost?  Likely more than the gun is worth. 

The help is much appreciated. 

[Fingers McGee]

While I've not had the pleasure of owning one (or two) of these; I do know a few people that have them & love them.  I have had the opportunity of trying a couple out over the years and found then a joy to shoot.  I'd love to find a couple for my collection.  If it was made in the mid 90s; it's probably a good one. 

[Mean Bob Mean]

I'd love to find a couple for my collection. 

Good to know thanks!

[Abilene]

Saw a Navy Arms (assuming ASM?) .38 special Type II conversion with a navy grip.  Had rear sites on the conversion ring...

Just FYI, that would be a Richards conversion (Type I), not a Type II. 

[Coffinmaker]

Well, it's pretty well been said already, so I'm just piling on.  What your looking at is an "almost" Type 1 Richards conversion, made by Armi San Marco.  ASM quality control was poor to non existent.  A shame really.  Only about one in seven of the conversions worked properly and All those that imported the guns ate most of them under warranty.
At one time, they were the only game in a affordable conversion and I've had and still have several.  Probably the most accurate .38s I've ever shot.  This was all the good news.  Now for the bad ........
Parts are non-existent.  If one of these guns breaks, repair will cost more than the gun is worth.  Shoot before you buy.  As mentioned by M2, the value isn't that high.  At the high end  maybe 300, I personally wouldn't go that high.  Some of these guns included a spacer between the cylinder and barrel lug, if you shoot BP thru the gun  tag the spacer and take it out of the gun.  The spacer is smokeless only.

Coffinmaker

[Major 2]

Just FYI, that would be a Richards conversion (Type I), not a Type II. 

Good catch ... I glanced right over that ... Uberti's Richard Type II is sweet

[Mean Bob Mean]

Just FYI, that would be a Richards conversion (Type I), not a Type II.  

This gun has Transition model outlines.  It's an anomaly:  a "Navy" grip on a Richards Type II frame in .38.  It is most definitely not Type I.  It's a "gun that never was" if you will.

There are ASM 1851 type I conversions, different fish entirely.  In fact, there is one now on GB the guy is asking 450.00 for as a "collectable" item.  

This one in the shop the gent wants 350.00 for (not the shop, they knew nothing about it), I demurred as I told him what has been confirmed by all of you:  it is an ASM, an anomalous model, and has unknown potential/issues and is a crap shoot to purchase.  My biggest issue was the parts problem.  having a competent smith machine new or modify existing parts to fit would make it a losing proposition.  I am sticking with my Cimarrons.  I told him he should auction it on GB, he knows not how so he is coming over today and I am setting it up for him.

[Abilene]

This gun has Transition model outlines.  It's an anomaly:  a "Navy" grip on a Richards Type II frame in .38.  It is most definitely not Type I.  It's a "gun that never was" if you will.

Some of the ASM conversions have non-historic features, as you mention.  Same with Uberti (.38 Spcl 1860 conversions, for example).  But the ASM guns were all based on Type I.  The firing pin and rear sight being on the conversion ring make it a Type I.  The Type II conversions are the same as the Richards-Mason (firing pin and rear sight on hammer) except for the barrel/ejector assembly, which is the same as Type I.

[Mean Bob Mean]

Some of the ASM conversions have non-historic features, as you mention.  Same with Uberti (.38 Spcl 1860 conversions, for example).  But the ASM guns were all based on Type I.  The firing pin and rear sight being on the conversion ring make it a Type I.  The Type II conversions are the same as the Richards-Mason (firing pin and rear sight on hammer) except for the barrel/ejector assembly, which is the same as Type I.

How many Type Is were produced with the Transition frame?

[pakm]

mean bob! where are you shooting? I 'm shooting in Columbus TExas, ,  I have one C. MaSON IN .38 special one in .44 special. two 1871-2's in .44 special and just got in an 1860 capand ball in .44,
Dirty MacPill

[Coffinmaker]

Hi Bob,
You may be confused.  The ASM guns were not produced on Transitions frames.  The guns were all built on an 1851 frame, just as originals, but there the authenticity ends.  The breach ring and hammer are Type one, the ejector assembly is part type 1 and type type 2.   The popularity of the guns started because they looked good from 3 feet.  As an example, the difference in an ASM 1861 and an ASM 1860 was the grip length.  The frame, cylinder and barrel were exactly the same.  The 1851 by ASM also used the same frame and cylinder with short '51 grip and octagonal barrel.  They wern't an accurate copy of anything.  The closest ASM came was the 1851.  Inaccuracies live there as well.
As far as anyone selling an ASM as a collectors item, well ........ BARF.  I just hope no one is foolish enough to step into that hole.
Back to your question, none.  No ASM conversion was ever built as a "Transition."  They were all built as a Type 1.  They could have been great guns even with inaccuracies had ASM exercised basic quality control.  The guns that worked were sweet.  It's a shame the vast majority were at best paper weights.

Coffinmaker

[Four-Eyed Buck]

When EMF had some out, I lusted after an 1861 that my favorite shop had.  Another shooter bought it before I could. It was a beauty to look at, but as a shooter, it was junk. I've seen some at matches that other shooters had, most were problems

[Mean Bob Mean]

mean bob! where are you shooting? I 'm shooting in Columbus TExas, ,  I have one C. MaSON IN .38 special one in .44 special. two 1871-2's in .44 special and just got in an 1860 capand ball in .44,
Dirty MacPill

Dirty my man, I love your taste!

I am shooting in North Florida and thereabouts.  Had my first shoot recently.  As you know there are lots of ribbons and being a newbie they made sure I got "Best ugly and gimpy first time shooter named Mean Bob" type of award.  I have 3 .44 Colt 1860s and an 1851 man with no name conversion.  Looking for some long nosed Schofield OTs, think that might be a nice addition, although I'd settle for .45 caliber Richards Transition models . . .

[Mean Bob Mean]

Hi Bob,
You may be confused.  The ASM guns were not produced on Transitions frames. 

This one has a Transition frame, one of their models did.  They made another 1851 that had the octagonal barrel, etc.   If you look at photos you can tell them apart rather easily.  That "Bull Nose" shaping on the Transition is hard to mistake. 

[Graveyard Jack]

I don't know what a "transition frame" is but if it has the Type I conversion ring with the rear sight and floating firing pin, I would consider it a Type I.

[Mean Bob Mean]

I don't know what a "transition frame" is but if it has the Type I conversion ring with the rear sight and floating firing pin, I would consider it a Type I.

Yeah, I don't consider it either one because it is neither. For sake of selling it on Gunbroker I listed it as it was sold by the manufacturer (1861) and pointed out in the description that it had aspects of the army and navy models both. 

Cheers and thanks all for the help and insights. 

[Coffinmaker]

Well Bob,
You got me.  What "Bull Nose" are we talking about??  Just to clarify, a "Transition" frame has the firing pin mounted in the hammer nose and secured with cross pins.  The rear sight is a notch in the hammer nose.  The breach ring has a hole thru it for the firing pin to pass thru.  A Richards frame has the firing pin mounted IN the breach ring with the rear sight as part of the breach ring.  The hammer has a flat face with a hardened striker mounted thru the hammer (ASM).
Now, if you have an ASM Conversion and it works and your happy with it it really doesn't matter what type of conversion it isn't.  Just understand, if it breaks ..................

Coffinmaker

[Coffinmaker]

Hi Bob.
Never mind.  Found your gun on Gunbroker and ogled the pictures.  It's an ASM built First Model Richards.

Coffinmaker