The Firearms Forum banner

Griswold & Gunnison

8K views 13 replies 8 participants last post by  gdmoody 
#1 ·
I bought this old revolver at an estate auction. It was not part of a collection. It does look authentic to me but I don't know much about Civil War era firearms. Date stamped is 1865. I think it is a 36 cal.
Per internet info G&G factory was destroyed in 1864 but assembly continued in Richmond until 1865.
The short loading lever does not match other revolvers of the type I have found on web.
Any clues on what I may have and what it could be worth?
Firearm Gun Trigger Revolver Gun accessory
Firearm Gun Revolver Trigger Gun accessory
Gun Firearm Trigger Revolver Metal
Gun Firearm Revolver Trigger Starting pistol
 
See less See more
4
#2 · (Edited)
Congrats on your purchase. I hope you didn't pay a lot. I've only seen a couple of these in real life and that was so long ago and I was so shocked to see them that I really don't remember a lot. In this case I'm more than a little skeptical. First, as you mention there is the problem with the loading leaver. However, we may be able to explain that based on your pictures. If you look closely at the point where the barrel meets the chamber block, you'll see that the finishes do not match. Another hint that the barrel and loading lever have been changed is the fact that the wear on the screw heads is not consistent. The two screw heads for the loading lever are not nearly as worn as the one above the wedge pin. Another problem I'm having is the wear on the edges of the brass--there isn't any. One of the big contemporary problems with brass frame revolvers was that they just weren't as strong as their steel/iron frame relatives. Look at any brass frame firearm from with period and you'll see that all the sharp edges are worn pretty extensively. In this case it looks like the iron/steel parts are more worn than the brass parts. Yes, someone could have polished the brass, but regardless of how much polishing was done, if the edges of the brass had been worn, they would still show signs of that wear. Finally, there is that name/inscription on the side of the chamber block. Beyond the fact that the wear on the inscription doesn't seem to match the wear on the rest of the gun, t don't think you will find that on any original G&G. And I can't quite see somebody having that stamped on an original G&G just to remind them of what they had. But then again… I've been wrong before. Best of luck!
 
#3 ·
Thank you for your expertise. As I said I don't know much about old firearms and I bought it more because I thought it was interesting than because I thought it had any value. Yes it was very affordable... but at a local estate auction in the country in Europe.
I was mostly confused by the fact that many parts appear old which does not seem to fit the standard "replica" versions. To me it has to be either a old firearm or one that has deliberately been worked on to make it look old... Of course if the originals were not stamped with the G&G name it is obvious this is a replica.:)
 
#6 ·
I'll check with a caliper but I am quite sure it's not .44 cal. I have both .44 and .357 modern revolvers so I doubt I would have misjudged this one but I only gauged it "visually".
This is not an argument for it being authentic, you have quite convinced me it is a fake.
 
#9 ·
The only way that is going to be a six shot .36 is if it was built on the smaller police frame which is based on the 1849 pocket frame which was .31 caliber. The cylinder had to be enlarged to make room for the extra chamber. G&G only made full size revolvers in .36 caliber with a straight sided cylinder. The markings on it are reminiscent of the High Standard G&G clone but aren't exact and if memory serves me those were not made in .44 either.
 
#10 ·
The frame is rather small... Would this also explain the short loading lever? I always thought that short loading levers were only used on short barrel revolvers... Maybe a small frame/short barrel 1849 replica modified to receive a long barrel .36 + rebated cylinder? I don't have the revolver here so I cannot gauge it right now. Was the 1849 .31 a brass frame revolver? Looks like I have a very messy modified replica of something that was never made :)
 
#12 ·
The frame is rather small... Would this also explain the short loading lever? I always thought that short loading levers were only used on short barrel revolvers... Maybe a small frame/short barrel 1849 replica modified to receive a long barrel .36 + rebated cylinder? I don't have the revolver here so I cannot gauge it right now. Was the 1849 .31 a brass frame revolver? Looks like I have a very messy modified replica of something that was never made :)
Short levers were used on short barrels, long levers on long barrels. The original 1849 was a wrought iron frame as were all Colt revolvers up until the smokeless age. Mikebiker has it right, there were/are a lot of fantasy pieces that never were coming out of Italy. Pietta is the worst, they have no desire to replicate history(even the grip shape on their 51 Colt navy is wrong). They just churn out crap to make money with no regard to facts. Uberti made some fantasy pieces early on but are now more historically correct.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top