Jump to content

Put together Colt Vickers at Morphy's


Recommended Posts

Good looking, refinished gun and at least it appears to have MOST of the correct external Colt 1915 parts: .30-06 feedblock, booster, topcover, grip frame, etc.

Fusee cover is not Colt, but from a Portuguese Vickers.

One would assume that the inventory of the internals, lock, recoilplates and barrel would be correct Colt parts.

Colt 1915 parts, in my experience, were not serialized to the receiver.

 

I have the #2 marked 1915 Colt Vickers from the Fox Studios, have had one other 1915 and have seen quite a few nice, original 1915 guns over the years. Looks to me to be an exceptional example.

The painting on the cradle is not my cup of tea. FWIW

Edited by BRMCII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good looking, refinished gun and at least it appears to have MOST of the correct external Colt 1915 parts: .30-06 feedblock, booster, topcover, grip frame, etc.

Fusee cover is not Colt, but from a Portugese Vickers.

One would assume that the inventory of the internals, lock, recoilplates and barrel would be correct Colt parts.

Colt 1915 parts, in my experience, were not serialized to the receiver.

 

I have the #2 marked 1915 Colt Vickers from the Fox Studios, have had one other 1915 and have seen quite a few nice, original 1915 guns over the years. Looks to me to be an exceptional example.

The painting on the cradle is not my cup of tea. FWIW

assembled on a Colt sideplate SN:1570 Colts parts aren't numbered, but they are stamped with a mark specific to colt. If the fusee isn't colt, no telling how many of the internals aren't either.

Edited by bigbore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to disagree that the gun is necessarily a "put together" example due to the number stamped on the top of the front endcap being different than the numbers stamped on the inside of the plate. There is an anomaly with the Colt 1915s. The numbers that are stamped on the inside rear of the plates and also stamped on the bottom front of the jacket, the bottom of front endcap and often just above the front mount holes are assembly numbers, not serial numbers. These numbers should match to indicate that the receiver parts were assembled together at the factory.
The serial number is on the top front of the endcap and is #2321.
The right sideplate is not serial #1570.
The pic of the inside of the right sideplate shows #1570 so if the gun is correct as it was manufactured, the number on the inside of the left sideplate, on the bottom of the front of the jacket and the bottom front endcap should also be 1570. However, there are no pics of the number on the inside of the left plate or the front bottom of the jacket and endcap.
The only way to tell if the right sideplate does not belong to that receiver is to see the other assembly numbers stamped on the gun. Maybe someone who reads this will ask Morphys what those numbers are.
I don't believe the Morphys people know what those other numbers mean.

I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt and believe what the description says about it being in .30-06 since they seem to know how scarce the US parts are.

FWIW

Edited by BRMCII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wray was a longtime firearms, MG collector and FFL/SOT manufacturer in Cincinnati, OH famed for his extensive MG collection and shop housed in a former bowling alley. From an early age, he was active in gun collecting and developed an avid interest in MG collecting and other areas of the MG business from the late 1950s into the early years of the 2000s and passed away in 2012.

The auction of his MGs took place at Cowans Auctions in Cinncinati, OH on April 30, 2013. They may still have copies of the catalog which is an excellent reference for vintage MGs. FWIW

Edited by BRMCII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, there are no pics of the number on the inside of the left plate or the front bottom of the jacket and endcap.

The only way to tell if the right sideplate does not belong to that receiver is to see the other assembly numbers stamped on the gun. Maybe someone who reads this will ask Morphys what those numbers are.

 

 

I emailed them asking for pics of those serial numbers before I made my original post. I'd like to bid, but without that info anyone is crazy to do so. Those numbers matching or not make at least a $10,000 difference in value to what I'd be willing to spend.

I still have not heard back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I e-mailed Keene, who is a friend of mine from back during his Julia Auctions days and asked him to get me the number information on the Vickers.

He was on the road and asked one of his people to check and send the numbers to him so the numbers, so I might get an e-mail or he'll post them somewhere. Hope this helps.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I e-mailed Keene, who is a friend of mine from back during his Julia Auctions days and asked him to get me the number information on the Vickers.

He was on the road and asked one of his people to check and send the numbers to him so the numbers, so I might get an e-mail or he'll post them somewhere. Hope this helps.......

 

I just got a reply back from "info" they sent every pic I asked for except for the side plate SN. The numbers on the jacket match the number on the shown side plate, but of course I gotta know if both side plates have the same number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I e-mailed Keene, who is a friend of mine from back during his Julia Auctions days and asked him to get me the number information on the Vickers.

He was on the road and asked one of his people to check and send the numbers to him so the numbers, so I might get an e-mail or he'll post them somewhere. Hope this helps.......

 

Have you ever seen a Colt Vickers with NO markings on the top of the trunnion? Perhaps a welded up aircraft gun?

1025 3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the 1915 Colt Vickers have any factory markings on the rear of the jacket at the trunnion.
All markings about model, serial, maker, patents, assembly numbers, etc, are stamped on the front top and bottom of the front cap.

The only other stamps are the assembly numbers in the inside of rhe plates and the US inspector's stamps on various parts, u/v

FWIW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the 1915 Colt Vickers have any factory markings on the rear of the jacket at the trunnion.

All markings about model, serial, maker, patents, assembly numbers, etc, are stamped on the front top and bottom of the front cap.

The only other stamps are the assembly numbers in the inside of rhe plates and the US inspector's stamps on various parts, u/v

FWIW

 

Good to know. I asked because this one is marked http://www.sturmgewehr.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2675-wts-cr-colt-vickers-25000/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After looking at the other pics of that gun it is very clear that the actual serial number is 5964 and the assembly number is 6611. Someone engraved the assembly number on the top of the trunnion area which is not correct for the 1915s. It is possible the original registration of the gun used the assembly number which is one of the anomalies with the 1915s. If so, then the numver was engraved on the top probably because they person thought that is what needed to be done. The Brit pattern was copied.
Once again, a buyer should ask if all the assembly numbers are 6611 to confirm that the gun is factory assembled.

Kent Lomont had a quantity of 1915s that were cobbled together and registered post-Amnesty but I don't have any info on how they were prepared for registration.
The gun should be carefully assessed further before paying the price being asked.FWIW

Edited by BRMCII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After looking at the other pics of that gun it is very clear that the actual serial number is 5964 and the assembly number is 6611. Someone engraved the assembly number on the top of the trunnion area which is not correct for the 1915s. It is possible the original registration of the gun used the assembly number which is one of the anomalies with the 1915s. If so, then the numver was engraved on the top probably because they person thought that is what needed to be done. The Brit pattern was copied.

Once again, a buyer should ask if all the assembly numbers are 6611 to confirm that the gun is factory assembled.

Kent Lomont had a quantity of 1915s that were cobbled together and registered post-Amnesty but I don't have any info on how they were prepared for registration.

The gun should be carefully assessed further before paying the price being asked.FWIW

 

That link was just for reference - the add is 5yrs old.

Thanks for your input though. It's appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The numbers that are stamped on the inside rear of the plates and also stamped on the bottom front of the jacket, the bottom of front endcap and often just above the front mount holes are assembly numbers, not serial numbers.

 

Are you sure you dont have that backwards?

 

According to this: https://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=2940&fbclid=IwAR0GSCl1zMAoEDk3LNPaPIWacCpZHr3Yf0cI31mgk2QROsWM9OXZXUAx3Dc

 

 

check the serial number located at the bottom of the end cap and see if it matches the serial number located on the inside of each side plate and on the bottom of the trunnion block. (The number on the top of the end cap is not the gun serial number but an army control number.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope people do not go mad with my ignorance but who is Dick Wray?

Mark

Dick Wray's name came up when I recently spoke with Dan Shea. Dan mentioned that Wray obtained quite a few machineguns during the 1968 amnesty by hanging out at the post office and taking possession of many guns people were turning in and it didn't cost him a dime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The numbers that are stamped on the inside rear of the plates and also stamped on the bottom front of the jacket, the bottom of front endcap and often just above the front mount holes are assembly numbers, not serial numbers.

 

Are you sure you dont have that backwards?

 

According to this: https://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=2940&fbclid=IwAR0GSCl1zMAoEDk3LNPaPIWacCpZHr3Yf0cI31mgk2QROsWM9OXZXUAx3Dc

 

 

check the serial number located at the bottom of the end cap and see if it matches the serial number located on the inside of each side plate and on the bottom of the trunnion block. (The number on the top of the end cap is not the gun serial number but an army control number.)

 

No, I don't believe I have anything "backwards", but whomever wrote that seems to have, in my view, a very limited understanding of MG manufacture and conventions. I have heard this interpretation and, to be accurate, the serial of every military issue firearm is a "service control number", since the serial number is critical to inventory and tracking of firearms. And, the military has no say in how such guns are manufactured. However, such an interpretation is completely contrary to the long established marking convention which is that a formal NO. followed by a number is the serial of the gun. Also, the convention of mating or assembly numbers is well established. The positioning of the NO. XXXX with the type of gun prominently stamped at the top, makers name under that, the model ID stamped under the maker's name and then the NO. XXXX is an almost universally observed convention in the manufacture and marking of MGs. And then the inspector's stamp next to this information which is exactly where one would expect find it. This info is almost universally placed in a prominent position for obvious reasons.

Relegating the serial number to small font numbers haphazardly stamped on the bottom of the front endcap and jacket, inside of the sideplates and often on the front crosspin mount hole just does not hold any water in my opinion, as the serial number.

To put it another way, assembly numbers are also "control" numbers in every sense of the word, used to insure control and identification of the mated major parts of an assembly once it has been fitted correctly so the personnel know exactly which parts constitute the specific accepted assembly.

Colt actually did establish an odd convention which is unique to the 1917 WC BMG production. They did not mark the parts of the 11917s with a Colt ID like Westinghouse and Remington did. My speculation is that not having marked parts would easily identify them as Colt given that W and R identified those two makers. Eventually they marked the parts of their commercial variants of the Brownings that they made.

Having seen and handled probably a couple dozen 1915s over fifty years, and seen the registrations of some portion of that number, 1915s show up registered under their assembly numbers for one reason or another, and with these guns, usually the top stamped number is lined out and the assembly number is stamped next to the discontinued number. Sometimes the top number is gone so the assembly number is used. These guns were registered often within a few years of the implementation of 1934 NFA regulations and all the way up to the '68 Amnesty. The registrants often had no knowledge of the guns, their numbers, IDs and various info necessary for registration so would use whatever number or type came to hand.

If it pleases someone to call the number stamped on the top of the front endcap an "army control number" so be it. One of the single most valuable aspect of the private possession of MGs is that we own these guns, see multiple examples over time, build them, maintain them, shoot them, discuss them, research them and accumulate extensive familiarity with MGs in general and specifically and this is a vastly more effective resource compared to the old and even some recent gun writers who have hardly any access to these guns compared to us. There is all sorts of misinformation in a lot of the older literature on MGs and even in some recent so I will consider info gathered from hands-on experience by those who own them far more accurate and credible than that of someone that does not have such a benefit.

Think whatever makes you happy!! FWIW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The numbers that are stamped on the inside rear of the plates and also stamped on the bottom front of the jacket, the bottom of front endcap and often just above the front mount holes are assembly numbers, not serial numbers.

 

Are you sure you dont have that backwards?

 

According to this: https://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=2940&fbclid=IwAR0GSCl1zMAoEDk3LNPaPIWacCpZHr3Yf0cI31mgk2QROsWM9OXZXUAx3Dc

 

 

check the serial number located at the bottom of the end cap and see if it matches the serial number located on the inside of each side plate and on the bottom of the trunnion block. (The number on the top of the end cap is not the gun serial number but an army control number.)

 

No, I don't believe I have anything "backwards", but whomever wrote that seems to have, in my view, a very limited understanding of MG manufacture and conventions. I have heard this interpretation and, to be accurate, the serial of every military issue firearm is a "service control number", since the serial number is critical to inventory and tracking of firearms. And, the military has no say in how such guns are manufactured. However, such an interpretation is completely contrary to the long established marking convention which is that a formal NO. followed by a number is the serial of the gun. Also, the convention of mating or assembly numbers is well established. The positioning of the NO. XXXX with the type of gun prominently stamped at the top, makers name under that, the model ID stamped under the maker's name and then the NO. XXXX is an almost universally observed convention in the manufacture and marking of MGs. And then the inspector's stamp next to this information which is exactly where one would expect find it. This info is almost universally placed in a prominent position for obvious reasons.

Relegating the serial number to small font numbers haphazardly stamped on the bottom of the front endcap and jacket, inside of the sideplates and often on the front crosspin mount hole just does not hold any water in my opinion, as the serial number.

To put it another way, assembly numbers are also "control" numbers in every sense of the word, used to insure control and identification of the mated major parts of an assembly once it has been fitted correctly so the personnel know exactly which parts constitute the specific accepted assembly.

Colt actually did establish an odd convention which is unique to the 1917 WC BMG production. They did not mark the parts of the 11917s with a Colt ID like Westinghouse and Remington did. My speculation is that not having marked parts would easily identify them as Colt given that W and R identified those two makers. Eventually they marked the parts of their commercial variants of the Brownings that they made.

Having seen and handled probably a couple dozen 1915s over fifty years, and seen the registrations of some portion of that number, 1915s show up registered under their assembly numbers for one reason or another, and with these guns, usually the top stamped number is lined out and the assembly number is stamped next to the discontinued number. Sometimes the top number is gone so the assembly number is used. These guns were registered often within a few years of the implementation of 1934 NFA regulations and all the way up to the '68 Amnesty. The registrants often had no knowledge of the guns, their numbers, IDs and various info necessary for registration so would use whatever number or type came to hand.

If it pleases someone to call the number stamped on the top of the front endcap an "army control number" so be it. One of the single most valuable aspect of the private possession of MGs is that we own these guns, see multiple examples over time, build them, maintain them, shoot them, discuss them, research them and accumulate extensive familiarity with MGs in general and specifically and this is a vastly more effective resource compared to the old and even some recent gun writers who have hardly any access to these guns compared to us. There is all sorts of misinformation in a lot of the older literature on MGs and even in some recent so I will consider info gathered from hands-on experience by those who own them far more accurate and credible than that of someone that does not have such a benefit.

Think whatever makes you happy!! FWIW

 

It's not so much what makes me happy, it's that I want to know what I'm talking about and understand what I'm willing to spending tens of thousands of dollars on and numerous contradicting references don't help. Robert Segel is far from a "nobody" in the NFA world. What he says makes sense. The numbers stamped inside the side plates, and water jacket were obviously done during the assembly process by Colt employees. The number on the top of the waterjacket, is a different font that looks like it was stamped on by the inspector (not a colt employee, but an Army officer).

 

So who has a copy of the paperwork from the factory listing the serial numbers? If that exists, there will be no question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, the SERIAL number was stamped by the inspector, then, who was an Army officer. This Army inspector, if he actually did the stamping, didn't just stamp arbitrary numbers but would stamp the serial production as it was produced in a serial and orderly manner. That's how MGs are tracked and inventoried as with all firearms manufacture.
The Army personnel at Colt were observers, inspectors and participants at times but did not manage the production.

Put it this way, regardless of what they are called, "army control numbers", or whatever, the numbers on the top of the front endcap have absolutely every conventional characteristic of a "serial" number, act as "serial numbers" so it's really a semantic difference, in my opinion. The other stamped numbers have every conventional characteristic of mating or assembly numbers and clearly function in that way so, the duck analogy seems to apply. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
During those years when Colt produced the Vickers guns, the firearms industry was hidebound by many rigorous manufacturing conventions and the markings on the 1915s follow those conventions, in my opinion, and the logic behind those conventions has not changed.
As a collector, manufacturer and reactivator of MGs for almost 50 years, I have seen, handled and worked on hundreds of different MGs made from 1885 up to current types and some conventions have hardly changed. Markings protocols are one of those conventions that have endured to this day.
I have no argument with Segal, know him and have read his monologues over the years, have gratefully learned from them at times but they are not without factual errors in places, in my experience, and my views will be different due to different perspectives and experiences than his. That's certainly the way life is.

If the inside plate numbers correspond to the other numbers, factory originality is confirmed, which, I believe, is what you want to have confirmed. The registration is legitimate so no worries there.

There is no available listing of the serial numbers of 1915s or other Vickers that I have encountered. Dolf Goldsmith would, without doubt, have included such information in his book on the Vickers if it was available. Maybe it is in his new Vickers book which I have yet to obtain.
When Colt went under for financial reasons many years ago, most, if mot all, of the business and other paper work was thrown out. Some was retrieved by employees, but the records that you want to see apparently no longer exist. We'd all like to see such history for Colt MGs but it, apparently, wasn't worth saving. I have a number of friends who spent years working for Colt and have lamented the loss of that history from just the plain stupidity of those involved. Maybe it was saved but remains undiscovered.

If the anomalies are too overwhelming for what you feel is the value of the gun, just don't buy. Wait for another example that satisfies your needs and perceptions as much as is possible. I've explained what I believe are the facts based on many, many years of experience and research and if my views are not acceptable, ignore them. Simple enough. FWIW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...