Antique? revolver identification

File: 2016-09-04_19.36.31.jpg (2MB, 2757x1642px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2757x1642px

.320 bulldog/european. Looks polished up but the maker may be C. R. Alsop . Need more pics

File: 6520613113.jpg (220KB, 1280x956px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 1280x956px

>>31502207
Here it is, thanks.

I'm going to bullshit here but it's the best I can do. I don't think it's alsop as most of his stuff is 1863-4. This looks more 1880-90s. Grips are screaming France or Belgium to me but that could be off. Lanyard implies possible military sales/Whether or not they sold military...no clue. Looks fine to fire with .320 blackpowder. Shame fiocchi does super limited runs of it .

>>31502255 Lefaucheux 1858 converted to centerfire, I believe. They used to be in 12mm pinfire, and later cf models had a different look, which is why I'm not sure if if't s conversion or an unkown later version (1870/78 custom?). Other conversions like this do exist, they are worth 300$+ depending on the condition, uniqueness, and if the box and manuals it was originally bought with are included.

>>31502131
From ittle search of the interweb, all points out to it being German Lefaucheux clone made by knifemaker named C.R Kirschbaum in town of Solingen somewhere between 1863 and late 1880s.

>>31503394
*punctuation

looks like your typical bushmaster single action famas in .22 hornet

>>31503189
>converted to centerfire
If it was a pin fire, you'd see the hole in the cylinder where the pin jutted out for the hammer

It also doesn't have the right frame set up for pinfire. there's no room for the hammer to strike from the top of the pin.

>>31503394
You are cool

>>31503394
Also lack of pin holes probably means it is centerfire, which implies later production

File: Lefaucheux.jpg (751KB, 5008x3339px) Image search: [Google]

751KB, 5008x3339px

>>31503432
Hence converted, the cylnder may've been changed. But the clone theory above me makes more sense, as the gun in OP's picture bares a resemblance to the Lefaucheux in the picture attached to this post, but deviates in certain areas like the barrel, top of the grip, longer rod etc.

>>31503506
I understand that, but there'd be no real reason to shave the cylinder if it was a pinfire at one point. they'd both have a pretty good sized rim.

and the hammer is incompatible with the frame to start with if it was ever a pinfire. it'd just hit the top of the frame instead of a pin. so i think it was always a centerfire gun.

>>31503579
True. You make a valid point there. Guess it's a later clone from the 1880's or something.