1851 colt navy .44 marked D H Rigdon

Hi bought a 1851 navy G H Rigdon CSA on top and Gusta Ga it’s.44 cal. Would like to know who made it so I can get some information before I go shooting it and possibly over load if it’s not a well made gun. Only has that and a serial number.

I don't think I would want to shoot a possibly 150 year old CSA firearm. It appears to be in very good condition and as a CSA firearm, it would have high collector value. Or is it a heavily defarbed version of a modern replica to remove modern markings.

Does this prove the existence of a .44 "Navy" copy?

We know Leech and Rigdon made .36 copies of the Colt Navy.

First there are less than 20 known Rigdon & Ansley’s with the “AUGUSTA, GA CSA” address and they are all in .36 caliber. They also differ in details from your revolver so I would say that what you have is an outright fake or somebody's idea of a fun project. It's difficult to say who made your gun but if someone had it in hand it could probably be identified. Most likely it began life as an Italian 1851 "Navy" in .44 caliber which in itself is a fictional piece and I feel it never left the factory as it is now. BTW the originals had lead-in cuts on the safety notches and the serial numbers (4 digit) would be in an old font on the trigger guard, frame right in front of that and again on the bottom of the barrel assy. in front of where it joins the frame. It is also found on the front bottom of the grip and on the loading lever latch on the barrel. All numbers read looking at the bottom of the gun with the muzzle pointing up except the one on the latch piece which is read from the muzzle.

As far as shooting it my only concern would be where the added "safety" locking notches are located relative to the chamber walls. In good shape 30 grains of 3f would be safe unless there are problems that don't show in the pictures and 20 grains is an accurate fun load.

Guy in video stats fake ones been made since 1865.
Think the uneven stamping is a give away.

It looks to me like the frame is steped for a rebated cylinder (.44 cylinder) I think I can (or want) to see a rebate line on the cylinder though the photo is so out of focus it's difficult to see.

All 12 cylinder stops should have lead-in cuts. The loading notch in the barrel lug is not of the correct shape for a R&A, it's like a Colt. The hammer spur doesn't seem to be quite high enough but that could just be the angle of the photo. The CSA stamp on top of the barrel should read from the left and not the right as this one does. The serial numbers were stamped individually and the #1 stamp was broken leaving an incomplete impression. BTW the serial number should also appear on the cylinder reading correctly when viewed from the left side as well as in pencil inside the grips. The lettering was all upper case and not stamped individually and none that I can find images of were marked G H RIGDON. It wasn't uncommon to find casting flaws on the recoil shields and cylinders of the "AUGUSTA GA" R&As. Finally Charles H. Rigdon wouldn't have marked his product G H RIGDON.

I bought the gun in Washington Missouri Fleamarket just recently and I’m only trying to get information on it and there isn’t any metal missing.

There is four digit 2**1 number on the front load front trigger and trigger guard frame and strap five total.

I can send more pictures of any part anyone wants other than what I posted there aren’t any names or numbers unless they would be under the grips.

In honesty I believe it’s a replica but it’s a .44 the guy gave me powder molds caps and wads. Says he shot it before but I don’t shoot black powder pistol and I have grown to appreciate my hands. Thanks for any information I get.

Something else I see while I was looking I’m thinking the barrel has been swapped and stamped with numbers to match up with the gun because they are not straight as the gun is.

Did everyone just stop looking at this I still want to know something about it.

If there are no other markings to help identify it there is not much else can be said. Feel sure about all that we can agree on is it is a reproduction. Since they were copied since late 1800s who can say. It's possible that even the s/n is made up. If you can get contact of guy in video perhaps he might be willing to look at pixs of it and help shed some light on it.

Yeah I pretty much thought so. I’m going to go ahead and use one 30 pellet I don’t think anything could go wrong it looks to be well made. Thanks for all that posted and if my next post looks crooked is because I’m not left handed.

Herbert Berry said:

Yeah I pretty much thought so. I’m going to go ahead and use one 30 pellet I don’t think anything could go wrong it looks to be well made. Thanks for all that posted and if my next post looks crooked is because I’m not left handed.

Click to expand...

Loose loading is better, and besides, we tend not to mention p*****s on this forum.

Not sure what that means I don’t and wouldn’t use enough power to justify loose loading I have one slug gun and don’t fire it except to unload it. But thanks to all

By saying "Loose loading" he was suggesting using loose powder instead of a compressed pellet of Pyrodex or what have you.

By using loose powder you can choose to load something like 25 grains or 20 grains of powder giving you much greater control on the power of the charge.

Does anyone know of any Italian repros made with 12 cylinder stops & no rebated .44 cylinder? If not, it very well could be one of the old post war 'fakes'. which should have collector interest on its' own.
And, has the bore been measured to verify .44 cal??
Maybe the NRA Museum website has some Confederate Arms/ fakes as reference?