Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

    Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

    When it comes to reproduction revolvers reenactors and living historians are presented with a range of mostly Italian reproductions that within their limitations can contribute to a quality impression or portrayal or just as quickly ruin one.
    One of the biggest reasons lies with ‘brass frame” revolvers. This is due to the fact there were a small number of Confederate made revolvers with brass (yellow bronze) but there are also a number of modern reproductions of Civil War era revolvers that use brass frames where the originals of what they are supposed to represent did not.
    How to separate the Period truth from the modern fiction?

    Why “brass?” All in all, the South was hurting when it came to iron production. It did possess some industry, and some economic and military might. But certainly nothing to compare to the potential as well as existing power of the North.
    But that did not stop some men of patriotism if not greed and an eye for profit like say Samuel Griswold who converted a cotton gin factory into a revolver plant from trying to serve their country if not just their wallets.
    While iron certainly was the preferred standard for firearms, ‘brass” was also around, and in a pinch church bells and candle sticks could always be melted down. But brass also was easier to cast and work with limited machinery and limited time or skilled workers, so it was called up too.

    Q: What do you get when you cross a locomotive builder with a commission merchant with a high ranking Confederate Ordnance officer?
    A: A Get Rich Scheme, er, Serving Your Country.

    Spiller, Burr, & Burton Revolvers, aka Spiller & Burr, sometimes aka the Confederate Whitney.

    Edward Spiller, David Burr, and Superintendent of Armories Lieutenant Colonel James Burton came together in Richmond in 1816 with a desire to produce revolvers but no factory, no workers, and no money to do so. This would be a similar problem for a number of Confederates would-be gun makers.
    Burton was to secure a contract for 15,000 “Colt” clone Navy (.36) revolvers to be sold to the CSA at $40 for the 5,000, $27 for the next 5,000, and $23 for the last 5,000. He would supervise the plans, machinery and tools for a factory. And Spiller, Burr, and Burton would deliver 15,000 pistols by the end of two and a half years.
    Burton was no fool, and part of the arrangements he would get $2,500 when the contract was given (through his help and contacts) On November 30, 1861, plus another $2,500 when the first 100 pistols were finished. He would then be paid one third of the profits each year. And he was clever. As part of the contract, he secured a cash advance of $20,000 upon its signing followed by $20,000 more at the end of three months, and $20,000 more at the end of six months all to build a factory and hire workers. But he got bargained down to $30 for the first 5,000, $27 for the next 5,000, and $25 for the final $5,000. On their part, the three promised to make 7,000 revolvers a year with 4,000 being delivered by December 1862, 7,000 by December 1863, and 4,000 by June of 1864. Iron for cylinders and barrels were okay, and so were brass frames if “properly electroplated with silver.”

    Scrounging for a factory, Spiller & Burr ended up getting the failed Whitney revolver facilities of the Robinson Revolver Factory owned by Samuel Robinson who had switched over to a contract for converting and modernizing Virginia Armory muskets, rifles, and pistols.

    Meanwhile things went badly for Burton. Folks in the Confederate Congress took notice of the ‘conflict of interest’ with a public office holder and securing contracts and money in association with a private company. Supported by Colonel Josiah Gorgas, Chief of Ordnance, Burton was defended, and the charges eventually dropped but not before he had resigned but had his letter of resignation rejected by Secretary of War Randolph. But in the end it was felt that Richmond might have been too hot. (Originals are stamped just “Spiller & Burr.” CS made Spiller & Burr usually carry the "CS' stamp upside down or right side up.)

    In May of 1862, Burton was relieved of the command of the Richmond Armory and sent “South” to establish an armory at or near Atlanta, Georgia. Burton had be told of the coming change, and went to Atlanta to scout for land. But things were slow to develop. Spiller found a suitable plot of land occupied by a flour mill, and started to have it refitted to serve as their revolver factory.
    At the end of November Spiller wrote to Burton that they did not have the 4,000 revolvers due. In fact, they had none. With Burton’s help in fixing their rifling machine they were just starting, and Burton wrote to Gorgas two weeks later that sample arms were forthcoming. One was submitted by the end of the month. Spiller then took his samples to the Richmond Armory, and returned to Macon New Year’s Day, 1863.

    By mutual consent, a new contract was proposed in January 1863. The Richmond Arsenal had made suggestions here and there, such as using twisted iron for the cylinder instead of steel, and the elimination of the silver plating which was thin and too prone to wearing off unevenly. Spiller, Burr, and Burton were contracted to produce 600 revolvers for February 1863, and 1,000 a month thereafter until the 15,000 were delivered. Payment was at $43 for the first 5,000. $37 for the next 5,000, and $35 for the last 5,000.
    In March of 1863 the contract was given, even though it still called for 600 pistols to be delivered in February.

    In April of 1863 Gorgas wrote to Burton informing him that General Bragg was fussing for revolvers. Burton wrote to the Chief of Ordnance for the Army of Tennessee that he had 100 pistols he was going to inspect and ship if he could be sent skilled workmen to make them. (A common problem for CS gunmakers as the army kept taking away their skilled mechanics and armorers.)
    In May Burton received 40 revolvers from his partners. 33 failed inspection, many as useless, and the seven that passed were by “no means as perfect as they should be.” In fact many did not make it to inspection as they were really bad with such defects as the cylinder chambers not lining up with the barrel. He kept the seven and returned the rest. In May of 1863, the first Spiller & Burr (& Burton) revolvers went into service. Seven.

    Burton got “distracted’ when In the summer of 1863 Gorgas sent him to England to purchase longarm machinery, with an eye to set up “Enfield” production in the South as well as modernize firearm and black powder operations based on a visit to the Royal Small Arms factory at Enfield as well as a visit to the Birmingham makers idled by the end of U.S. purchases.

    In January of 1864 the Confederate government had had enough, and much to the relief of Spiller and Burr, and probably Burton as well, bought the whole operation for $190,804 (roughly $2.9 million today).
    Burton sent his chief mechanic to oversee a move, and by the end of the month the pistol machinery had been relocated to the Macon Armory (built to produce Enfield longarms). By the middle of February it was up and running at a snail’s pace. Plus the Army of Tennessee was still looking for 924 revolvers.
    Production rose, but was plagued by major problems with iron cylinders bursting or cracking, and iron, steel, brass, copper, and lead shortages:

    February……0
    March……….100
    April………….150
    May…………..100
    June…………..162
    July…………….80
    August……….0
    September…0
    October……..50
    November….35
    December…..12

    A total of 689 made by the Confederate government to add to the 762 made by Spiller & Burr in Atlanta (plus one, a presentation piece for General Raines) for a maximum of 1,451 finished revolvers plus a number or pieces parts made into 1865. Because of the lack of skilled workers to assemble them, often times S & B made more parts such as a batch of over 2,000 barrels than what they used.

    Basically the CS government assumed production. NUG, the differences are in the more angled grip frame, and the additional “CS” inspector’s stamp found on most of the government made revolvers. And on a fine point the “Spiller & Burr” barrel stamp was later damaged and not replaced so the last “r’ on “Burr” is flawed.

    With Sherman’s forces running around in July of 1864 and with the fall of Atlanta the beginning of September, Burton made plans to remove machinery idled by lack of raw materials to protect it from raids or loss. Pistol and stock machinery were boxed for shipment.

    In September, Gorgas changed his mind and had some machinery shipped to Columbia and Savannah, but decided to unpack and reset up the revolver works for as long as possible. In October production resumed. 50 S & B’s were made, and 460 Austrian rifles cleaned and repaired. It would go downhill from there.
    It would be short-lived thanks to fears of what Sherman would do. In December things were shut down, and the contents of the Armory, Arsenal, and Laboratory were packed and shipped as previously intended.

    Roughly two out of three Spiller & Burr revolvers went to the Army of Tennessee.





    Reproductions of the 762 made Spiller & Burr revolvers have been around since the 1960’s or 1970’s made by a number of Italian firms as well as offered in kit form. They are the S & B era revolvers with the straighter grip frame.
    As is true of all Italian imports, they suffer from the usual issues of incorrect metal finishes and modern stampings. Kit made ones tend to be worse due to the lack of factory bluing. All or made with modern steel barrels and cylinders although some lads simulate the “twisted iron” look. The brass is yellow brass, and a bit too yellow versus the more yellow bronze of the originals that due to “brass’ sources often was higher in copper giving it a reddish tint. However, age and use has mellowed some of the Italian brass over time (or lads using modern chemicals) to appear more Period.



    References:

    Albaugh, William, A. III, The Confederate Brass-Framed Colt & Whitney. Broadfoot Publishing Company, Wilmington, NC. 1955

    Albaugh, William, A. III, Benet, Hugh. Jr, Simmons, Edward. Confederate Handguns. George Shumway, Publisher, York, PA. 1963

    Curt
    Last edited by Curt Schmidt; 04-12-2014, 12:53 PM.
    Curt Schmidt
    In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt

    -Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
    -Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
    -Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
    -Vastly Ignorant
    -Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.

  • #2
    Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

    Great stuff Curt!! I love my Spiller and Burr and it actually appears to be one of the better repros..dates from the early 90's. Dark wood, good bluing, all period stamping but the shape of the hammer is the same as your photo, a little thick. Interesting that the "C.S." is stamped upside down on the original you show, but mine is right side up on the other side of the gun. Did it vary?
    Soli Deo Gloria
    Doug Cooper

    "The past is never dead. It's not even past." William Faulkner

    Please support the CWT at www.civilwar.org

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

      Hallo!

      Left side, right side, or missing.

      Markings/stampings on originals are randomly "inconsistent." Some carry just serial number. Some maker's names. Some serial and maker. Some serial and "CS" or "C.S" or "C.S." on left or right, or upside down. Sometimes parts carry the serial number.
      One has only "CS" on the left. One no markings.

      Here is one, obviously with a missing loading lever that was gunsmith repaired at some time, with the inspector's stamp on the right side:



      Curt
      Last edited by Curt Schmidt; 04-12-2014, 06:53 PM.
      Curt Schmidt
      In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt

      -Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
      -Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
      -Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
      -Vastly Ignorant
      -Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

        42 were sent to H.B. Davidson's TN cavalry brigade in January of 1864:

        CSR of Lt. Davis, brigade O.O.

        Ordnance Stored turned over to Davidson's Brigade Jan. 1864

        500 Cartridge Boxes
        500 Cap Pouches
        500 Waist Belts and Plates
        500 Haversacks
        184 Spurs and Straps
        250 Canteens and Slings
        500 Curry Combs
        392 Horse Brushes
        99 Short Enfield Rifles
        40 Long Carbines
        85 Short Carbines
        180 Texas Cavalry Saddles
        174 Texas Cavalry Stirrups
        4000 Cartridges cal. 58
        4679 Cartridges cal .54
        2 Austrian Rifles
        2 Mississippi Rifles
        4 Springfield Rifles
        42 Spillier & B. Repeaters


        Will MacDonald

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

          Thanks Curt! Hey, are those notches on that grip?
          Soli Deo Gloria
          Doug Cooper

          "The past is never dead. It's not even past." William Faulkner

          Please support the CWT at www.civilwar.org

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

            It's funny how many so called historians continue to site the shortage of iron as the reason for casting brass frames. Considering the small number of pistols produced by the Confederacy, the amount of iron saved wouldn't add up to more than a few twelve pound balls.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

              Instead of "shortage of iron" substitute "lower cost of bronze" and the answer becomes a bit closer to the truth. Also, brass or bronze being easier to "work" than iron the machining costs were less. When you see this metal on a period fire arm it is not necessarily because iron was in short supply...Enfields are loaded with brass hardware and the Midlands were very well supplied with iron.
              Craig L Barry
              Editor, The Watchdog, a non-profit 501[c]3
              Co-author (with David Burt) Suppliers to the Confederacy
              Author, The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy
              Member, Company of Military Historians

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Brass Frame Revolvers: Realties and Myths, Part 1.

                Hallo!

                Yes.

                In a number of ways with the Confederate use of bronze..., a similar reason that the Italians went to brass for reproduction frames is that they could be (more) inexpensively and quicker cast instead of having to be machined or tooled.

                It occurred to Henry about 1860... and Winchester about 1866 too. ;) :) :)

                Curt
                Curt Schmidt
                In gleichem Schritt und Tritt, Curt Schmidt

                -Hard and sharp as flint...secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.
                -Haplogroup R1b M343 (Subclade R1b1a2 M269)
                -Pointless Folksy Wisdom Mess, Oblio Lodge #1
                -Vastly Ignorant
                -Often incorrect, technically, historically, factually.

                Comment

                Working...
                X