Yup.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/YSicHUjU_kI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I kinda want one of those.

This is the off topic forum. Plenty of other interests are shared here.

PS: nice wheel spoons Jeff.

You need some of this.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1381625620.jpg

You're not from 'round these parts are ya?

Spoons and Porsches go hand in hand here. What is your carry of choice?

Speedy:)

I've had this particular Colt from new. It's not faded one little bit. I've had (and still have) many 19th century arms that were faded to just a dull gray from a century of use. It takes about that long. No, there is a definite difference in quality and depth of finish on these latest Colts.

Colt has never really been all that "bad", per se - their quality, even at the worst of times, still exceeded pretty much everyone else's. It just wasn't "Colt quality" for awhile. There are certain expectations from Colt, and they just were not meeting them.

They were resting on their laurels. Unwilling to invest in new equipment and still utilizing 19th century production techniques that demanded a good deal of hand fitting and finishing. By the time labor rates in the U.S. climbed to the point where factory workers could actually make a decent living, these production methods became hopelessly expensive. So, rather than invest in modern equipment and update designs, Colt simply cut back on the hours they were willing to put into the handwork. They were also unwilling to pay the higher labor rates demanded by the highly skilled folks who could actually do a good job on the handwork.

The result was that when purchasing a new Colt, we were forced to do this necessary handwork ourselves or find a gunsmith that could do it. The latter would essentially double the cost of your new Colt, which was already double the cost of competing firearms. It was a bad situation, with no obvious way out.

Colt eventually decided it was not worth it to even try to manufacture its traditional line of commercial firearms. Not just because of the cost of doing so, but because of looming legislation and liability concerns; they saw no future in it. They went full on into the world of military contracting, producing M16's by the boatload. It became the core of the company; they dropped the entire civilian line - Pythons, Anacondas, Peacemakers, Troopers, 1911's - all of them. The only way to get a Peacemaker or 1911 was through their custom shop.

Eventually Colt divided into two companies - Colt Defense and Colt's Patent Firearms Manufacturing Company, the former handling military contracts, the latter Peacemakers and 1911's (they just now reunited under one company). The Python, Trooper, Anaconda, and others were gone for good, though.

Several years ago they came under new management. A retired military officer (not sure of service or rank) took over as CEO. Under his direction, the company is finally reinvesting in itself and updating machinery along with production methods after about a 40-50 year period in which they did neither. They apparently have every intention of re-establishing their presence in the civilian market. They have done very, very well in the military market, so they can afford to invest in themselves once again. That, coupled with the management change (and the change in attitude towards the commercial market that came with it) is the difference that is starting to show.

Colt, for the longest time, just wanted the Peacemaker to die and go away. They killed it twice, declaring it "obsolete". Shooters obviously felt otherwise. It is simply one of those few artifacts of modern times that is "too good to die", even if the company making it doesn't want to anymore. There is a very steady market for them, and for the myriad of imported clones, and for the very similar (but "much improved") Ruger Blackhawk. It's a market Colt just can't ignore. Many, many shooters want "real Colts", not some Italian made replica. Even at several times the price. And now Colt very much realizes they are the keepers of something kind of special, or sacred if you will.

New Peacemakers run from about $1,200 for a standard blued / case colored gun on up to anything you are willing to pay for engraved, or nickel finished, or custom barrel lengths and grips, to whatever you desire. Their custom shop will build anything reasonable. Wait for production guns runs about six months to a year.

These really are excellent "using" guns, beyond their romance and historic appeal. They are just a good, solid, reliable, simple design. Granted, Ruger did improve the design somewhat with coil instead of flat springs and the ability to safely load six rounds (due to their transfer bar ignition system). Rugers are stronger as well, able to handle much more powerful loads - but they are also bigger and heavier, lacking the balance and feel in the hand of the Colt. The Colt also wins hands down with regards to fit and finish, smoothness of the action, and that intangible "pride in ownership". They are truly "heirloom quality" guns. Even the ones from their dark years, honestly. It's just that the newest ones are back to what we expect from Colt.

Thanks for the write up Jeff. Maybe I'll ask Santa for one.

Very interesting. I wonder if enough investment will allow Colt to bring back the Python etc?

Smith & Wesson, if you sit down with their management, will tell you the core and future of the company is the M&P polymer pistol, not the revolvers. Sad.

Colt says no more Pythons - even more expensive to make and slimmer margins than the Peacemaker. They say it would have to sell for $3,000 or more to be worthwhile in today's market. Good used ones are about $2,000 or more, which is still less than good used second generation Peacemakers.

S&W revolvers have been substantially cheapened in our lifetimes as well. They are another company resting on their laurels. Making good revolvers is inherently more costly than good autos, both because shooters expect a better level of fit and finish and because it is very difficult to make one "right" purely through the modern technologies of investment casting and CNC machining. Substantial hand fitting is still required. That simply does not work at today's prices, against today's excellent autos. Shooter accept "ugly" autos; they like "pretty" revolvers.

Ruger is a prime example of a modern company that has adapted modern manufacturing techniques to their revolver production. Their revolvers are, however, totally utilitarian - very rugged, very accurate, eminently useful - but they lack that certain "charm", that fit and finish, that smoothness of action that makes for a truly fine revolver. Their prices would double if they tried to achieve that.

S&W's main challenge with their revolvers is that no one is willing to pay the same premium for them as they are for Colts. While they make some very historically significant revolvers, they absolutely take a back seat to Colt on this front. I think they would drop their entire revolver line if they could. It's a large part of their name and heritage, though. Image still counts among shooters, even if they are buying plastic autos.

Here is one of the better You Tube videos showing the Peacemaker with its original load, 40 grain of FFFg black powder and a 250 grain bullet. As shown in this video, we get between 950 and 1,000 fps with this load. Pretty darn serious load, and it dates from 1873. Very accurate as well, as long as the right bullet and, more importantly, lube are used. While I prefer the black powder load, 17 grains of 2400 duplicates it fairly well.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/5mTfeF4yhc8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Some of the boyz on this Board are so inured with the age of plastic that they wouldn't know quality and sophistication if it came and bit them on the azz...they just think of it as some fuzzy notion of nostalgia for a bygone era. SO much the pity for them for their age of nostalgia will be a hunk of plastic...

As for that 84 Carrurea fellow and his PC period ahh.... moment, the Beatles song "Get Back' to where you belong" Suzzy...comes to mind. Now get off my lawn...I just do not have time for stupid anymore.

What struck me as strange was the Colt firearms display at the Gene Autrey Museum here in So. Ca. The historic revolvers and rifles were beautiful examples of hand craftsmanship, but I wondered why they also included an off-the-shelf contemporary AR-15 in the display. Last time there was about 13 years ago, so don't know about the current exhibit items.

Sherwood

I'm not saying that quality and sophistication don't have their place, but I was talking to a past president of the (US, American, North American?) Browning Collectors' Association, and 10-12 years ago, he had taken a NIB Diana Grade Superposed on a pheasant hunt, what do you figure that first shot cost him? And what good is it to leave it in the safe? As for me, there isn't a Browning in existence that could make a hunt more special than my grandfather's old Stevens SxS.

You pick your tool for the job at hand, Jeff's fantastic revolver is perfect for him, but just because someone else chooses a hunk of plastic for their CCW doesn't mean they think quality is some fuzzy notion of nostalgia.

S&W are trying to establish "M&P" as a significant brand in its own right.

Yes, they are - and they are including some revolvers in that line. You'll notice, however, that those revolvers have anything but a traditional finish. They are trying to sell them as some sort of "tactical" finish. The bottom line is, it is far cheaper to slather some thick protective finish over an otherwise unfinished gun than it is to finish that gun with more traditional methods.

Granted, there is a place for these. These finishes are certainly tougher than bluing, doing a far better job of protecting the gun and lasting essentially forever, regardless of use. There is a lot to be said for that. Just not very aesthetically pleasing. That is more important to some of us than others, certainly, and I'll never begrudge those who prefer the practical over the more esoteric. Different strokes for different folks.

As far as I go down that path is into the stainless steel guns. I have several handguns in stainless steel - single actions, one double action, and a 1911. Here in the Pacific North Wet, they are very practical. They have served me well as hunting, backpacking, and all around woods bumming companions. It's nice to not have to worry about them under our typically damp fall or snowy winter conditions. They all wear some level of "matte" finish, which means the manufacturer didn't have to put all the effort into really finishing them. That's fine - they are tools, and damn good ones at that.

The Colts, however, while being fine tools as well, also play a role as "art" to some degree. They demonstrate what we can do when we really care, what we can produce beyond the merely "practical". There is a place for that. Not everyone wants it, or wants to pay the premium to get it, but it's nice that it is out there for those who do.

Beautiful revolver ill trade you for my mk1 grizzly that im finding impossible to sell.

Those look like Turnbull colors alright. Nice!

we talk about tits a lot too...how do you feel about those? In all fairness boys it's his 51st post...give him time..

Jeff here is my current favorite gun to shoot. Seems Sergio Leone, producer of all those spaghetti westerns, didn't want any black powder on the movie sets so he contracted Uberti to make an exact replica of a Colt 1851 Navy that would fire 38SP cartridges and blanks. They still make it under the name of "The man with no name " pistol. It shoots 38 specials no +P, and is a great shooter along with being real fun. I carry is as my sidearm at the shop some days. I could have sold it 50 times already. Just ask Mark..

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1381960071.jpg

certainly not as cool as your real Colt, but a nice replica of an old west gun that you can shoot with brass carts.

Very cool gun. I assume they used black powder blanks on the set, no?

I've never really taken to the cap and ball guns, for whatever reason. My only example is a Ruger Old Army, and the only reason I bought it was so I could carry a sidearm during our muzzle loading seasons. It's accounted for a pretty good pile of grouse over the years. It's actually one of the more accurate handguns I own, at least for the first several cylinders worth. Just too much work to load it to really spend much time playing with it, though.

A conversion like yours would certainly make it far more shootable. I've often thought about trying to find a Richards conversion (or more likely a modern replica). Either that, or one of the several cylinder and backing plate conversions for the Ruger so I could shoot .45 Colt through it. I've got so many .45 Colts between the Blackhawks, Vaqueros, and Peacemakers (not to mention lever guns) that such a conversion might not see a lot of use, though.

I see the Peacemakers in .45 Colt (or .44-40) as a great compromise between the PIA of loading cap and ball guns and the relative (to me anyway) lack of appeal of more modern handguns. I can still load them with black powder and get all of the satisfaction that brings me, yet I don't have to mess with the loading routine demanded by the cap and ball guns. Granted, cleanup is every bit as onerous on the gun, and there is brass that needs immediate attention as well, but I'll put up with that so I can shoot black powder. It's what the old cartridges were designed around, and they really do perform quite well with it. And nothing will ever replace that deep "boom" and the rolling cloud of smoke. What fun.