ASM Colt 1851 Navy

[ffuries]

ASM Colt 1851 Navy 36 caliber made in 1979. Picked this up a few months ago, looks like it was never shot, nipples, barrel and cylinder are spotless with no corrosion at all. Came with the holster, belt and extra buckle for $100.00 OTD. This is my first cap and ball gun, I'm sure as I learn more there will be many more. My collection centers around Military Surplus weapons thus far.

[Junk Yard Dog]

You know the Reb's never actually used a brass frame colt Navy copy right? They had other close designs, but that brass frame Navy was a favorite of the Italian gun makers starting sometime in the late 1950's and it remains their best seller today. More people have started in black powder shooting with that sort of brass frame '51 than any other pistol or rifle. $100 was a steal for that, especially considering it's unfired. Keep the loads light.

[ffuries]

I have been reading as much as I can, I have seen where it says to use light loads in the brass frames. Guess I will have to figure out how to measure powder and load one of these things.

Yeah I know the "Reb" thing but it makes a nice display non the less! Well didn't know when I bought the gun, but learned afterwards.

[bunkysdad]

Hey this is a sweet looking revolver. I bought a really neat and simple measure the other day. It is a Traditions clear plastic powder measure that should work for rifle or revolver.

[hudson29]

You know the Reb's never actually used a brass frame colt Navy copy right? They had other close designs, but that brass frame Navy was a favorite of the Italian gun makers starting sometime in the late 1950's and it remains their best seller today.

I'm unclear about this. These brass framed '51s in 36 cal were NOT manufactured & used by the South? Where did the story come from?

I too have a pistol very much like the one shown.

Vintage Paul

[Junk Yard Dog]

They look cool and in the 1950's when these revolvers were first hitting the US market authenticity took a back seat to cool when the Italian gunmakers were looking for a product to sell here. Brass was easy for them to work, not expensive, and not all of these were marketed as "Reb" revolvers. Very often they are in "starter " type kits sold with all the accessory's needed by a first timer looking to start black powder shooting The South did manufacture some brass frame revolvers, but a Colt Navy copy was not among them. The Dance is a good example of a southern made Colt copy, steel for revolver receivers was available, and existing gunmakers would be more likely to use materials they were familiar with.

[musketjon]

A very few of the Confederate revolvers were brass-framed. COLT, however, NEVER made a brass-framed revolver. As previously mentioned, keep the loads light or the frame can "stretch", throwing it out of time. Once that happens it's an expensive paper weight or wall hanger.
Jon

[ffuries]

Amazing what you do when you are bored and can't sleep.

Doing some reading, as I could never figure out why my ASM 1851 Navy didnt have the engraved cylinder.

Well from about a dozen different sites I've read the same story. They refer to it/them as the "Accidental" Schneider & Glassick replica. In other words they thought they were making a Colt 1851 Navy, but when they did the brass frame they inadvertantly made a Schneider & Glassick copy of the 1851 Navy.

JYD what do you say about this, I respect your knowledge and opinion.

[Junk Yard Dog]

Schneider & Glassick was one of the many tiny gun makers who sprung up in the south after 1861, and mostly faded quickly due to material shortages, or the advancing Union army. I think there are less than five or six known examples of the Schneider & Glassick existing today, if they made more than fifty, or a hundred to begin with I would be shocked. These were never mass produced in the south by anyone with brass frames, just small production runs and handmades. The Italian makers loved to make shit up, the reason they used brass had nothing to do with originality, and everything to do with economics. Brass is cheaper and easier to work than steel. They loved to call anything brass framed a " reb" revolver, in this case ASM just left off the engraving, they weren't trying to copy Schneider & Glassick even if that is how it turned out. They were trying to save money and as they made these revolvers to order for clients in the states like Navy Arms, Hawes, and others, they would make them however the client wanted. Somebody wanted a low cost Navy reproduction were originality wasn't an issue. Forget the steel frame, and engraving, we will be selling it at Service Merchandise for forty dollars. ASM had no idea what they were making resembled anything authentic to the period, but it is still a cool find , just don't go heavy on the loads. Early production, or current, any brass frame revolver can shoot loose over time, much faster when firing full loads.

[ffuries]

Schneider & Glassick was one of the many tiny gun makers who sprung up in the south after 1861, and mostly faded quickly due to material shortages, or the advancing Union army. I think there are less than five or six known examples of the Schneider & Glassick existing today, if they made more than fifty, or a hundred to begin with I would be shocked. These were never mass produced in the south by anyone with brass frames, just small production runs and handmades. The Italian makers loved to make shit up, the reason they used brass had nothing to do with originality, and everything to do with economics. Brass is cheaper and easier to work than steel. They loved to call anything brass framed a " reb" revolver, in this case ASM just left off the engraving, they weren't trying to copy Schneider & Glassick even if that is how it turned out. They were trying to save money and as they made these revolvers to order for clients in the states like Navy Arms, Hawes, and others, they would make them however the client wanted. Somebody wanted a low cost Navy reproduction were originality wasn't an issue. Forget the steel frame, and engraving, we will be selling it at Service Merchandise for forty dollars. ASM had no idea what they were making resembled anything authentic to the period, but it is still a cool find , just don't go heavy on the loads. Early production, or current, any brass frame revolver can shoot loose over time, much faster when firing full loads.

I agree, when it was made it was made as a 1851 Navy, but years later due to the lack of engraved cylinder, and although hough unintentionally, it can now be seen as a Schneider & Glassick copy.

Speaking of Civil War guns, what was the typical revolver carried by Union Cavalry Officers? My great great grandfather, who was Confederate Cavalry, carried a revolver he liberated from a Union Cavalry Officer.

[Junk Yard Dog]

Colt 1860 army was the most common among Union officers. I have handled one 1860 Army that was issued to a Union Cav officer. There were many choices for officers side arms, the Starr, Remington 1858, and the Colts being well represented. CSA had all the same revolvers, not all captured, lots of Colts and Remington's were sold in the south before the war, and smuggled south during the war, or captured. That, and the home grown stuff, and the imported LeMat.

[Sonny]

Sweet looking pistol.

[awalker1829]

The South was up a creek without a paddle before the war started. They only had one big iron works-Tredegar in Richmond, Virginia which was dedicated to production of cannons. There were a few smaller works, but they simply did not have the ability to produce sufficient quantities of iron or steel to meet essential needs. The two big needs were armaments and railroad equipment. The rails they used to armor the ironclads would have done better left on the railroad. The CSA never had an effective (much less efficient) transportation system. They were dependent on the will of the railroad owners to permit the army use of the railroads and facilities. Owners were hesitant to loan equipment to other railroads, regardless of military necessity.

The United States Army had the United States Military Railroads, which had its own equipment and supply departments and legal authority to temporarily seize and operate any railroad as military necessity dictated. It was run by career railroaders and operations were not permitted to be interfered with by local military commanders. The standing orders were that military railroad crews were not to observe any orders given by any officer other than a military railroad officer. Other officers were informed by General Order that they were not to interfere in any way with the operation of the military railroad. After a couple of incidents, word quickly got around that command was serious. In one case, Secretary of War Stanton got a report of a general who was insisting that the train crew hold his troop train until another arrived. The crew reported the delay and Stanton happened to be in the office and caught wind of the incident. He immediately sent a telegram to the general ordering him to follow the instructions of the railroad officials under pain of immediate relief of command and arrest. The train then departed that town without further delay.

[steelbuttplate]

I've been wanting one myself. Noticing the holster, the design of them did not change much in 100 yrs.