Colt 2nd gen vs 3rd gen?

[Capnball]

After having owned many Ubertis, Piettas, ASMs, and etc I came into a Colt 3rd Gen Walker recently. I love it! I love the bone color case, and the markings- except for the signature on the backstrap which I will be taking off as soon as I figure out how I'll get it re-blued.

Anyways, I've decided to sell off a couple Uberti and Pietta guns and reinvest in another Colt, an 1860. Other than the signature, is there any real appreciable differences between 2nd gen and 3rd gen? Oh, and these are gonna get shot and carried a LOT. I plan to get Mike Brackett at Goons Gunworks to work them over for me mechanically.

Also, as far as the markings and such go, how close are the 2nd and 3rd generation Colt percussion revolvers to 1st gen originals?

[Ron The Old Reb]

If you alter the 3rd generation Walker you'll destroy it's value. I wouldn't do it.

[Maillemaker]

Here is a good thread that describes the history of Colt 2nd generation revolvers:

https://forums.sassnet.com/index.php?/topic/316177-second-vs-third-generation-colt-reproduction-cap-ball-revolvers/

(https://forums.sassnet.com/index.php?/topic/316177-second-vs-third-generation-colt-reproduction-cap-ball-revolvers/)From The Blue Book Of Modern Blackpowder Arms:

COLT?S MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. Current firearms manufacturer with headquarters located in West Hartford, CT.
Colt?s Manufacturing Company, Inc. is the previous manufacturer of 2nd Generation Colt percussion revolvers located in Hartford, CT. Colt used subcontractors to supply rough castings for the manufacture of these black powder pistols. Throughout the production years 1971-1982, these rough castings were produced in Italy and the reproductions were completed in the United States. Initially, Val Forgett and Navy Arms provided these parts/components during 1971-73. Lou Imperato supplied these parts from 1974-76. In both instances, these revolvers were assembled and finished in Colt?s facilities in Connecticut. Finally, from 1978-1982, Colt subcontracted both parts procurement and final production to Lou Imperato and Iver Johnson Arms in Middlesex, NJ. Colt percussion revolvers produced by Iver Johnson had frames, center pins, nipples, and screws manufactured in the United States. In all instances, these revolvers were manufactured in accordance with Colt?s strict specifications and quality control. Additionally, Colt?s performed final inspection for all models. All percussion models manufactured from 1971 through 1982, either by Colt or its subcontractor, are regarded as authentic Colt pistols and not Italian replicas.
The Colt Custom Shop also produced a limited number of special editions through the early 1990s from 2nd Generation production inventory. (Colt 2nd Generation models in the white are still known to exist.)

And the Third Gen info from the same source:

COLT BLACKPOWDER ARMS CO. Previous manufacturer and retailer of 3rd Generation Colt Black Powder pistols and muskets located in Brooklyn, NY 1994-2002.
All 3rd Generation Colt blackpowder models are also referred to as Signature Series Models.
A reprise of the original Colt Blackpowder line, along with historic models not offered in the 2nd Generation, and a new series of Commemoratives, each model (with the exception of the Heirloom Tiffany 1860 Army and 1842 Texas Paterson) bears the Sam Colt signature on the backstrap. These 3rd Generation models were manufactured under an authorized licensing agreement with Colt Firearms by Colt Blackpowder Arms Company ? the same company (and many of the same craftsmen) responsible for the 2nd Generation Colt revolvers. Although parts for the Signature Series were cast in Italy, they were fully assembled and hand finished in the United States using the proprietary Colt formulas for bluing and color case hardening.
Colt Blackpowder Arms Company Signature Series revolvers are regarded as authentic Colt pistols. The 3rd Generation models have original Colt markings, including the barrel address and serial number stampings. There are no foreign proof marks on these authentic Colt models.

3rd Generation (Signature Series) are generally not regarded as being as desirable as 2nd Generation ones, but I would not go grinding off the signature as 3rd Gens are still more desirable than modern reproductions.

Steve

[Don Dixon]

But you have to defarb it don't you? :)

[Lou Lou Lou]

If you defarb it, isn?t it illegal for N-SSA use?

[Capnball]

Thanks for the info as usual, guys! As far as "ruining" the value of the signature series by taking the signature off, the Walker was already scratched and dinged when I got it, and will be even more in the moderate to heavy use I plan to subject it to. With the wear it is likely to get, removing the signature is not going to make a difference. My goal is to have a very authentic looking shooter, not a safe queen, and not an investment (beyond that of any of my other shooters). In fact, I have absolutely zero plans for future resale.

I know this is strange to a lot of y'all since these guns are held in a sort of reverence by us, but then I am a person of unusual taste.

I am curious about the removal of the signature making the piece illegal for NSSA use. That seems really strange, as it doesn't alter the manufacturer name or serial number.

[Lou Lou Lou]

Defarbing usually means removing all of the modern stampings to make it look original. Removing only the signature should be legit

[Maillemaker]

If you defarb it, isn?t it illegal for N-SSA use?

Could you cite the rule here? I don't recall seeing this before.

Steve

[Don Dixon]

See N-SSA:

19.6 IDENTIFICATION OF REPRODUCTIONSa. In the interest of preserving the identity of original arms and parts, and in order todiscourage counterfeiting of originals, the use on reproductions of original names,markings, and dates of their prototypes is discouraged.b. Manufacturers of reproduction arms are required to mark their arms with their ownnames, trademarks or symbols in such a manner as to be visible on the completedfirearm to distinguish these from the originals.

Its my understanding that "defarbed" guns have to be run through the Inspector General and an approval card issued. Removing the Colt signature presumably (?) wouldn't apply, but why do it. If Congress, in its infinite wisdom, ever puts muzzleloading weapons under the National Firearms Act, as amended, then removing original manufacturer's marks would buy you a felony. Some states already forbid it.

Regards,
Don Dixon

[Maillemaker]

Rule (a) is meaningless:

a. In the interest of preserving the identity of original arms and parts, and in order to discourage counterfeiting of originals, the use on reproductions of original names,markings, and dates of their prototypes is discouraged.

"Discouraged" holds no force of prohibition. Basically it means, "It's allowed, but we don't like it." Besides, just about every commercial reproduction today uses original names, markings, and dates.

b. Manufacturers of reproduction arms are required to mark their arms with their own names, trademarks or symbols in such a manner as to be visible on the completed firearm to distinguish these from the originals.

I think all manufacturers do this. At least, I'm not aware of any that don't.

Steve

[Capnball]

Thanks. So far, I actually don't shoot with the N-SSA, though I would love to. But I am building a couple guns from scratch, and there is no way I am putting modern markings on them that are easily visible. I plan to mark the underside of the barrel thoroughly, and probably a few other places that are hidden as well, so there is no way it would ever be mistaken for original with any kind of an inspection. If this doesn't satisfy the SAC when I get around to going to some shoots, then I will get some other guns to shoot. I'm not trying to build fakes, but for my own enjoyment I want the absolute most authentic exterior on a reproduction gun as I can get. And I am going to thoroughly enjoy shooting them, hunting with them, and maybe even doing some reenacting with them if I ever get back into that.

I'm a little confused as to why there aren't more guys chiming in here that feel the same way. I mean, I absolutely love the guns that folks like Lodgewood build that are historically accurate to the nines externally.

As to the Colt, I don't see just removing the signature on the backstrap ever being considered a felony even if muzzleloaders are re-classified as firearms. But if it is, I'll pretend I swapped the backstrap out. :-D Which reminds me- I'm open to just swapping the part out if I can find a replacement that fits.

[Capnball]

Rule (a) is meaningless:

a. In the interest of preserving the identity of original arms and parts, and in order to discourage counterfeiting of originals, the use on reproductions of original names,markings, and dates of their prototypes is discouraged.

"Discouraged" holds no force of prohibition. Basically it means, "It's allowed, but we don't like it." Besides, just about every commercial reproduction today uses original names, markings, and dates.

b. Manufacturers of reproduction arms are required to mark their arms with their own names, trademarks or symbols in such a manner as to be visible on the completed firearm to distinguish these from the originals.

I think all manufacturers do this. At least, I'm not aware of any that don't.

Steve

So, I've heard of tons of scratch-built guns here on the forum, and Lodgewood has built a lot of mighty fine reproductions with only original style markings visible. I wonder if the SAC always requires visible modern markings, or if they allow some guns with modern markings under the barrel and etc?

[Eggman]

Custom built be sure to get SAC inspection criteria ahead of time so yer right on the money and don't have to go back and fix. They'll be glad to provide. No concern about any engraving or stamping you do or don't put on a gun you build -- very adverse to rubbing mfg stamps off.

[Capnball]

Custom built be sure to get SAC inspection criteria ahead of time so yer right on the money and don't have to go back and fix. They'll be glad to provide. No concern about any engraving or stamping you do or don't put on a gun you build -- very adverse to rubbing mfg stamps off.

Thank you. That is really helpful. Hope they don't think taking the backstrap signature off a 3rd gen Colt is bad- cause that's what I'm about to do that everyone is a little disturbed by. The manufacturer's name is still right there on the barrel.:-D

As to the scratch built guns, I'm following the SAC's spec sheets on them.

[Eggman]

Just so you know Jordan, the N-SSA has a separate parking lot for people that take backstrap signatures off.

[Capnball]

Just so you know Jordan, the N-SSA has a separate parking lot for people that take backstrap signatures off.

:D bwahaha! I'm used to being treated "special". Too contrarian. :razz:

[hawkeye2]

The manufacturer's name must remain on the firearm. I had a Bernadelli Mississippi that I handed to Zimmerman to defarb and restamp with instructions leave the manufacturer's name on the barrel. When I got it back the brand name was gone and I had to get an individual approval from the SAC. The only way I got that was the inspector recognized the breech. The manufacturer's name tells the world if the barrel is an approved one or not, at least on long guns.

[Capnball]

The manufacturer's name must remain on the firearm. I had a Bernadelli Mississippi that I handed to Zimmerman to defarb and restamp with instructions leave the manufacturer's name on the barrel. When I got it back the brand name was gone and I had to get an individual approval from the SAC. The only way I got that was the inspector recognized the breech. The manufacturer's name tells the world if the barrel is an approved one or not, at least on long guns.

I won't be touching the colt address on the barrel. One of the reasons I want 2nd or 3rd gen guns in the first place. I just hate that dumb signature on the backstrap.

[Hal]

I may be wrong here as I didn't go back a RE-read the thread in it's entirety, but I think there may be some confusion over the use of the word 'legal'. I think that some posters may have been referring to what violates the rules of the N-SSA, and others may be referring to what actually violates the law.

Or I may be wrong, but that's the way I took it.