Too bad Pietta doesn't make an IRON G&G
- Thread starter ClemBert
- Start date
- Status
Busyhands94
Member
Could you make one out of a steel framed 1851 by rounding the barrel on a lath? As far as I can tell the Griswold and Gunnison had a round barrel and was in .36 caliber, and was a copy of the 1851 Colt Navy. Don't think I haven't toyed with the idea of rounding the barrel on a Cabela's 1851 Copy, even though it's not the right caliber.
BHP FAN
Member
couldn't you just order the .36 round barrel and cylinder from VTI Gunparts, and make your own?
Fingers McGee
Member
An iron framed Griswold and Gunnison is a Leech and Rigdon; which Pietta never made. If you want a Pietta L&R, you can swap the round barrel off of a G&G with a '51 Navy frame which will give you an S&G and an L&R. That's what I plan on doing with the sheriff's model G&G I have.
Apparently the G&G factory made due with whatever materials they had on hand. From what I've read they made the G&G with various brass alloys some of which had a high copper content giving the frames a pinkish hue. Also, they made a very limited number with iron. None of the G&G's had bluing on them.
What is the difference in appearance and construction between a L&R and an iron framed G&G?
What is the difference in appearance and construction between a L&R and an iron framed G&G?
Last edited:
makos_goods
Member
Clembert,
I know you saw the original portions of the post concerning the guns of Hell on Wheels on CAS City, what you may have missed was were I later posted pictures of actual Griswold and Ginnison and Leech and Rigdon revolvers as the discussion evolved.
Look here:
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,40582.msg513055.html#msg513055
I have a pair of reproduction Leech and Rigdon revolvers made by Uberti. There are two versions of them, the ones with the smooth unmarked cylinders (which is historically correct) and the ones that have the Colt's roll marked scene. Uberti just used the cylinders they had on hand. The engraving isn't that deep and can be removed. I can show you shots of pistols that have had the engraving removed. I can also show you shots of revolvers that have the "Leech & Rigdon CSA" stamped on the top flat of the barrel that shooters have added.
Why is it you want Pietta revolvers?
I have one last question, where did you read that Griswold and Gunnison made a limited number with Iron frames? I'd really like to know the source of that bit of information.
Thanks,
Mako
Here is one place I read about it more recently: The Griswold and Gunnison Revolver. I had heard about this years ago too but I don't remember where I came across that.
No specific reason for wanting a Pietta. Actually, I like Uberti more. I just know that Pietta makes a wider range or "reproductions" and they are available at reasonable prices.
makos_goods
Member
Clembert,
I kind of suspected you had gotten your information from a source like that.
There is no historical record or physical evidence that The Griswold and Gunnison was ever produced of anything other that Bronze, Brass, or various copper based alloys that were the result of smelting scrap materials that were available. Arsenals like G&G were producing pistols to sell to the confederate government and there is no record of them ever even intimating they had the propensity or even plans to produce the pistols out of iron.
The reason that Leech and Rigdon and the other Rigdon enterprises used iron and mild steel was that they also produced cutlery and swords. They had a supply of iron and steel and they had equipment and more experience with working it. There were no chunks of iron available to carve a frame out of, they had to be cast and then hot worked (forged), or were pieces that had been brought in by the blockade runners from mostly England.
Leech and Rigon, Rigdon and Ansley (CH Rigdon), Augusta Machine Works (some actually had octagonal barrels), Dance and a few others had iron frames. The Dance had one because it was a full size "copy" of the U.S. Model 1848, and I told you about the Rigdon connection to iron.
Griswold & Gunnison, Schneider & Glassick, , Columbus Firearm Mfg. and the others who made "copies" of '51s and Manhattan revolvers used a copper alloy for the frames because of availability and the fact the low pressure .36 caliber loads weren't a problem in the smaller caliber.
I use the term "copies" rather loosely because they almost all chose to use an 1848 style barrel assembly rather than the more difficult to manufacture '51 and Manhattan styles. But, I think you know what I mean.
Be careful what you read on some web sites and especially from individuals without any training or credentials. Feel free to question my bona fides if you wish, but don't perpetuate what hasn't been verified by good scholarship and research. Vince (the site you got that from) has put together a nice collection of odds and end "facts." Bu there is very little if any attribution or references cited.
If you want one or more Leech and Rigdon reproductions let me know. As I said earlier there are probably more available with the roll engraving than not. The smooth ones show up, I'll keep my eye out if you wish.
Texas Jack (Cimarron's retail front in Fredericksburg) has at least one in stock, but it may be (most likely) engraved.
http://www.texasjacks.com/BlkPowder/TJ-CA003-LeechRig.htm
if you are interested, then call them and make them look. Don't take their word over the phone, make them pull each one and look at it. They may tell you they are all engraved and then have one (or all) not marked or any variation thereof.
This is what you can do to "defarb" and even remove the engraving on a Uberti, and add engraving.
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,21804.msg357484.html#msg357484
And a pairfrom Fingers McGee who also haunts this forum. He has his marked as CH Rigdon arsenal guns:
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,37963.msg484685.html#msg484685
Fingers also has Leech and Rigdon reproductions and I believe he even has better pictures on some forums I saw a while back. Maybe he'll come along and post links to them.
Enjoy,
Mako
I kind of suspected you had gotten your information from a source like that.
There is no historical record or physical evidence that The Griswold and Gunnison was ever produced of anything other that Bronze, Brass, or various copper based alloys that were the result of smelting scrap materials that were available. Arsenals like G&G were producing pistols to sell to the confederate government and there is no record of them ever even intimating they had the propensity or even plans to produce the pistols out of iron.
The reason that Leech and Rigdon and the other Rigdon enterprises used iron and mild steel was that they also produced cutlery and swords. They had a supply of iron and steel and they had equipment and more experience with working it. There were no chunks of iron available to carve a frame out of, they had to be cast and then hot worked (forged), or were pieces that had been brought in by the blockade runners from mostly England.
Leech and Rigon, Rigdon and Ansley (CH Rigdon), Augusta Machine Works (some actually had octagonal barrels), Dance and a few others had iron frames. The Dance had one because it was a full size "copy" of the U.S. Model 1848, and I told you about the Rigdon connection to iron.
Griswold & Gunnison, Schneider & Glassick, , Columbus Firearm Mfg. and the others who made "copies" of '51s and Manhattan revolvers used a copper alloy for the frames because of availability and the fact the low pressure .36 caliber loads weren't a problem in the smaller caliber.
I use the term "copies" rather loosely because they almost all chose to use an 1848 style barrel assembly rather than the more difficult to manufacture '51 and Manhattan styles. But, I think you know what I mean.
Be careful what you read on some web sites and especially from individuals without any training or credentials. Feel free to question my bona fides if you wish, but don't perpetuate what hasn't been verified by good scholarship and research. Vince (the site you got that from) has put together a nice collection of odds and end "facts." Bu there is very little if any attribution or references cited.
If you want one or more Leech and Rigdon reproductions let me know. As I said earlier there are probably more available with the roll engraving than not. The smooth ones show up, I'll keep my eye out if you wish.
Texas Jack (Cimarron's retail front in Fredericksburg) has at least one in stock, but it may be (most likely) engraved.
http://www.texasjacks.com/BlkPowder/TJ-CA003-LeechRig.htm
if you are interested, then call them and make them look. Don't take their word over the phone, make them pull each one and look at it. They may tell you they are all engraved and then have one (or all) not marked or any variation thereof.
This is what you can do to "defarb" and even remove the engraving on a Uberti, and add engraving.
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,21804.msg357484.html#msg357484
And a pairfrom Fingers McGee who also haunts this forum. He has his marked as CH Rigdon arsenal guns:
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,37963.msg484685.html#msg484685
Fingers also has Leech and Rigdon reproductions and I believe he even has better pictures on some forums I saw a while back. Maybe he'll come along and post links to them.
Enjoy,
Mako
Mako,
Thanks for the lengthy response. I'll look into all your links in a bit.
Take a look at the following link.
Iron Framed Griswold & Gunnison for Sale
I can't recall the details of the iron framed G&G I heard about from years past. Maybe from a museum exhibit or maybe a book. I can't remember. It was well before I bought my first BP reproduction revolver.
Dave
Thanks for the lengthy response. I'll look into all your links in a bit.
Take a look at the following link.
Iron Framed Griswold & Gunnison for Sale
I can't recall the details of the iron framed G&G I heard about from years past. Maybe from a museum exhibit or maybe a book. I can't remember. It was well before I bought my first BP reproduction revolver.
Dave
makos_goods
Member
Clembert,
I have serious reservations...First of all if it was really a G&G iron frame it would be for sale at an auction hose like this:
http://rockislandauction.com/
Second there are no letters of authenticity from recognized experts. Brass frame G&Gs go for $25K plus and they would have had it authenticated.
They have metallurgical data to "establish authenticity" and then they make a major mistake in their claims. This is in the text:
" The Iron Frame was Poured into a Mold for the Brass Frame and Has Brass showing molded into the Iron,(see Photo of Frame)." then they proffer their metallurgical analysis report:
http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/246128000/246128412/pix571449606.jpg
Look carefully at the composition of the frame...it reads FE-100. That means 100% iron, there is no trace of Copper as they claim. Now look at the cylinder analysis they claim is "The Rockwell Hardness Test confirmed the Barrel and cylinder were made from twisted Iron." Look at the analysis again, the elements are Iron, Manganese and Chromium. Does that sound like twisted iron?
They claim they used the same molds for the iron frames as the brass frames. Do you see a problem with that? In the 19th century you rammed up a sand mold for iron, you didn't have permanent tooling that could withstand the temperature required for iron. The reality of it was the manufacturers that used iron cast blanks and then hammer forged them a bit to compress the billet.
Then the stamps...does that sans-serif "K" look a bit suspicious to you? We are used to that font style in the later 20th and 21st centuries, but look at all of the other stamping just on that frame. Now look at hundreds of other things marked in that time period and tell me if that looks normal for the time period.
Clembert, it may be the holy grail of confederate pistols, but it seems to be in an odd place for such a prize. They also allude to one other example which I nor any any source I have ever heard of references. The frames "found" at the Griswold and Gunnison site have not been mentioned anywhere except that one passage that they don't identify the source of. If anyone knows where that came from please tell me because I need to add that to my library.
You will note even the reference they posted states that an Iron frame G&G had not been found to date, just some warped frames that looked like they may have been attempts. Note once again, warped frames not warped and burned assembled pistols from the pattern room.
Regards,
Mako
I have serious reservations...First of all if it was really a G&G iron frame it would be for sale at an auction hose like this:
http://rockislandauction.com/
Second there are no letters of authenticity from recognized experts. Brass frame G&Gs go for $25K plus and they would have had it authenticated.
They have metallurgical data to "establish authenticity" and then they make a major mistake in their claims. This is in the text:
" The Iron Frame was Poured into a Mold for the Brass Frame and Has Brass showing molded into the Iron,(see Photo of Frame)." then they proffer their metallurgical analysis report:
http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/246128000/246128412/pix571449606.jpg
Look carefully at the composition of the frame...it reads FE-100. That means 100% iron, there is no trace of Copper as they claim. Now look at the cylinder analysis they claim is "The Rockwell Hardness Test confirmed the Barrel and cylinder were made from twisted Iron." Look at the analysis again, the elements are Iron, Manganese and Chromium. Does that sound like twisted iron?
They claim they used the same molds for the iron frames as the brass frames. Do you see a problem with that? In the 19th century you rammed up a sand mold for iron, you didn't have permanent tooling that could withstand the temperature required for iron. The reality of it was the manufacturers that used iron cast blanks and then hammer forged them a bit to compress the billet.
Then the stamps...does that sans-serif "K" look a bit suspicious to you? We are used to that font style in the later 20th and 21st centuries, but look at all of the other stamping just on that frame. Now look at hundreds of other things marked in that time period and tell me if that looks normal for the time period.
Clembert, it may be the holy grail of confederate pistols, but it seems to be in an odd place for such a prize. They also allude to one other example which I nor any any source I have ever heard of references. The frames "found" at the Griswold and Gunnison site have not been mentioned anywhere except that one passage that they don't identify the source of. If anyone knows where that came from please tell me because I need to add that to my library.
You will note even the reference they posted states that an Iron frame G&G had not been found to date, just some warped frames that looked like they may have been attempts. Note once again, warped frames not warped and burned assembled pistols from the pattern room.
Regards,
Mako
Berkley
Member
The text alluded to is no doubt this:
Confederate Handguns, Chapter 4, "Griswold and Gunnison", p. 37; William A. Albaugh III, Hugh Benet, Jr., Edward N. Simmons; Broadfoot Publishing Company; Washington, North Carolina; 1963, 1993; ISBN No. 1-56837-261-2
It does seem remarkable that such a great rarity would go begging for buyers on GunBroker rather than attracting well-heeled bidders at James Julia or Rock Island.
makos_goods
Member
Thanks Berkley,
Yep, there it is on page 37, well the part about the parts found at the site. The claim I was the most curious about was this from the auction verbiage, "This is one of two Known Iron Frame Griswold & Gunnison Revolvers." There is no other G&G revolver that I am aware of. Do you think they are trying to call the collection of various parts a second revolver? Even the authors of Confederate Handguns weren't willing to do that.
I think Occam's Razor applies here, if it smells a bit then there must be a reason it is not sent to an auction house where it would undergo intense scrutiny by the world of rare firearms experts.
Regards,
Mako
Yep, there it is on page 37, well the part about the parts found at the site. The claim I was the most curious about was this from the auction verbiage, "This is one of two Known Iron Frame Griswold & Gunnison Revolvers." There is no other G&G revolver that I am aware of. Do you think they are trying to call the collection of various parts a second revolver? Even the authors of Confederate Handguns weren't willing to do that.
I think Occam's Razor applies here, if it smells a bit then there must be a reason it is not sent to an auction house where it would undergo intense scrutiny by the world of rare firearms experts.
Regards,
Mako
Fingers McGee
Member
I stated in my previous response that Pietta didn't make any Leech and Rigdons. I had just gotten back from Texas and was trying to catch up on things so I made a hasty response. Pietta did in fact make Leech and Rigdon revolvers, with plain cylinders, that were sold by Navy Arms. I have one in my collection that was made in 1980. They were discontinued in 1994. They appear on the gun auctions from time to time, as do the Uberti's.
Berkley,
Maybe that is the book I originally read it in or perhaps a reference to the book. Although I've been in several military museums that had copious numbers of firearms and a private museum so I can't exactly recall the info I'm trying to retrieve.
Maybe that is the book I originally read it in or perhaps a reference to the book. Although I've been in several military museums that had copious numbers of firearms and a private museum so I can't exactly recall the info I'm trying to retrieve.
makos_goods
Member
Clembert,
Don't lose sight of the fact the authors of that book make no claim that there was ever a completed iron frame Griswold & Gunnison, in fact they specifically say they make no claim that there was any successful attempt to make a completed iron framed pistol.
The one thing that everyone keeps forgetting is that they probably had examples of Colt's and Manhattan revolvers in their plants they used as models for their efforts. It is possible these found in the debris if they were pattern shop parts. These very well could have been left when they fled the plant. They would take the completed inventory and flee.
I haven't seen pictures of the frame and parts that are written about in the book. You would think these would have been documented by now. In the world of firearms research and historical research in general, everyone publishes their finds and work, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. This isn't a bunch of "good old boys" with private collections. If the well financed collectors got any whiff of possible finds like an iron framed G&G they would be on it like a chicken on a June bug. This kind of thing doesn't go unnoticed.
There's serious money in this, for instance that best example of a Colt's U.S. Model 1847 went for $920,000 in '08 at James Julia and then last year sold at Christie's for $1.2M...There is SERIOUS money out there. If there is a kid with iron G&G parts there are collectors who would have already offered him more than he could resist.
Regards,
Mako
Don't lose sight of the fact the authors of that book make no claim that there was ever a completed iron frame Griswold & Gunnison, in fact they specifically say they make no claim that there was any successful attempt to make a completed iron framed pistol.
The one thing that everyone keeps forgetting is that they probably had examples of Colt's and Manhattan revolvers in their plants they used as models for their efforts. It is possible these found in the debris if they were pattern shop parts. These very well could have been left when they fled the plant. They would take the completed inventory and flee.
I haven't seen pictures of the frame and parts that are written about in the book. You would think these would have been documented by now. In the world of firearms research and historical research in general, everyone publishes their finds and work, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. This isn't a bunch of "good old boys" with private collections. If the well financed collectors got any whiff of possible finds like an iron framed G&G they would be on it like a chicken on a June bug. This kind of thing doesn't go unnoticed.
There's serious money in this, for instance that best example of a Colt's U.S. Model 1847 went for $920,000 in '08 at James Julia and then last year sold at Christie's for $1.2M...There is SERIOUS money out there. If there is a kid with iron G&G parts there are collectors who would have already offered him more than he could resist.
Regards,
Mako
Fingers McGee
Member
Makos Goods said:
Mako, Columbus Firearms Co revolvers were iron framed. They were made by L. Haiman & Brother using Muscogee Iron Works equipment that they bought from the Columbus Iron Works. Something less than 100 of these pistols are thought to have been made.
makos_goods
Member
Fingers,
You are right of course, in my haste to list them I put them in the wrong material column. I also left out the Whitney copies since we were discussing "Colt's" pattern revolvers.
I think I made this comment here once before when people start talking about modern brass frame revolvers in that the number of original brass frame "open top" and closed frame revolvers was actually very small. People always assume Confederate revolvers were brass because the Italians have made so many kludge fantasy guns and called them "Confederate" this or that.
Brass frame full size pistols of the Colt's pattern were actually very rare and the majority of them produced for sale to the Confederacy were iron framed. There are even a couple of manufacturers who weren't pursuing government contracts and I believe only one of those Schneider & Glassick was brass.
Good catch,
Mako
You are right of course, in my haste to list them I put them in the wrong material column. I also left out the Whitney copies since we were discussing "Colt's" pattern revolvers.
I think I made this comment here once before when people start talking about modern brass frame revolvers in that the number of original brass frame "open top" and closed frame revolvers was actually very small. People always assume Confederate revolvers were brass because the Italians have made so many kludge fantasy guns and called them "Confederate" this or that.
Brass frame full size pistols of the Colt's pattern were actually very rare and the majority of them produced for sale to the Confederacy were iron framed. There are even a couple of manufacturers who weren't pursuing government contracts and I believe only one of those Schneider & Glassick was brass.
Good catch,
Mako
Fingers McGee
Member
You are correct; it's all the Italians fault that the general concensus is that there were so many Brass framed Confederate revolvers. The total number of brass frames revolvers of all types made during the late unpleasantness was less than 6,000.
Schneider and Glassick................ That's a story unto itself.
Another brass frame manufacturer, although not Colt style, was Cofer - again, like the Columbus something less than 100 were made - 82 for the 5th Virginia cavalry. Interestingly, they were trying to perfect a cartridge pistol with a 2 piece cylinder not unlike the R&D cylinder of today only with a hole in the backing plate for a percussion cap.
Schneider and Glassick................ That's a story unto itself.
Another brass frame manufacturer, although not Colt style, was Cofer - again, like the Columbus something less than 100 were made - 82 for the 5th Virginia cavalry. Interestingly, they were trying to perfect a cartridge pistol with a 2 piece cylinder not unlike the R&D cylinder of today only with a hole in the backing plate for a percussion cap.
Last edited:
BHP FAN
Member
even though we're discussing Confederate Colt copies, we shouldn't leave out the ''Whitneys'', when discussing the brass framed guns...the Spiller and Burr is one of my favorite revolvers!
madcratebuilder
Member
The Spiller and Bur is a fine little revolver. As far as reproduction Confederate Colts I like the High Standard run of the L&R (steel frame), the G&G and S&G (brass frame). Very well made replicas.
- Status
