<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>AntiqueGuns</title>
    <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/index.php</link>
    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>EN</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:53:20 -0600</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:53:20 -0600</lastBuildDate>
    <category>AntiqueGuns</category>
    <generator>Phorum 5.1.22</generator>
    <ttl>600</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Spurious 1854 Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14990,14990#msg-14990</link>
      <author>nord</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I'm going to lock the original thread because of the length. That and just about everything that can be said has been said.

A personal observation...

It's interesting to note that many here came to the same conclusion based on almost totally different clues. As I shared in my previous post, my knowledge of pistols is almost totally lacking. 

If someone were to hand me that pistol the best I could do was comment that it seemed like a nice little gun. If someone had tried to sell me the pistol on the basis of the supposed provenance I would have immediately declined.

It seems we teach here at AG. Some look at the finer details of a firearm and some look elsewhere. I guess this is a lesson in observation. We all seem to have reached the same conclusion based on totally different perspectives.

Gentlemen... Thank you all.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14990,14990#msg-14990</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:53:20 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14989#msg-14989</link>
      <author>steg</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Colt referred to and advertised his revolvers as Pocket, Belt, and Holster models from the time of the Patersons through the end of the percussion era. He also advertised the calibers as Pocket caliber (.28 and.31 cals.), Navy caliber (.36 cal.) and Army (.36 cal.). After 1860, Colt referred to the Dragoon models as &quot;Old Army&quot; models, and the M1860 Army as the &quot;New Army&quot;. Likewise, after 1861, the M1851 became the &quot;Old Navy&quot; and the M1861 Navy was the &quot;New Navy&quot; model. After 1862, the M1849 Pocket became the &quot;Old Pocket model&quot; and the M1862 Police and M1862 Pocket Navy became the &quot;New Model Pocket revolvers.

Colt stamped the caliber of many percussion revolvers on their trigger guards. The only marks stamped on original, 2nd, and 3rd generation Colt percussion barrels is the N.Y., Hartford, and London addresses, and the occasional military inspection and/or assembly marks.
The M(date) designations are of modern origin and are of collector origin.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14989#msg-14989</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:01:05 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14988#msg-14988</link>
      <author>C.W. Howard</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Ah yes - but that is on paper, not the guns, and wasn't a COLT Patent Firearms paper at that.

I think that &quot;Colt Navy&quot; has been the common designation for a long time, probably at least the 1850s, but it wasna official with the maker or engraved or stamped on the metal of the guns. At least to my understanding.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14988#msg-14988</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 21:14:54 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14987#msg-14987</link>
      <author>McCord</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I have seen the term 'navy' used in a CW regimental company inventory and while this particular record does not specify that the guns were Colts, given the date (1865) and known information about the arming of the unit at the beginning of the war, it seems highly unlikely that these particular arms were arms of navy caliber of other manufacture.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14987#msg-14987</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 20:20:13 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14986#msg-14986</link>
      <author>C.W. Howard</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Peter3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
&gt; Question, did Colt ever refer to Navy in their
&gt; literature on the metal for any of their 19th
&gt; Century percussion revolvers?


Not to my knowledge - referred to in advertising, catalogs and correspondence as &quot;of Navy caliber&quot; I believe, but never on the guns. but then, the Dragoons and 1860s (described as being &quot;of Army caliber&quot; in catalogs and such) don't say anything about &quot;Army&quot; on the metal that I can recall ever seeing or hearing of, either. 

Steg can probably offer better information on that than I can.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14986#msg-14986</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:41:56 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14985#msg-14985</link>
      <author>Peter3</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Question, did Colt ever refer to Navy in their literature on the metal for any of their 19th Century percussion revolvers?]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14985#msg-14985</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:25:15 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14984#msg-14984</link>
      <author>steg</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Very likely, as people like that have no shame! Especially when they re-locate to one of the most anti-gun cities in the country.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14984#msg-14984</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:01:06 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14983#msg-14983</link>
      <author>C Worman</author>
      <description><![CDATA[He whose name is not mentioned said price would depend upon what the buyer wanted the documentation to say. I certainly think that's fair. Letters documenting factory experimentals, which might be a way he could authenticate this piece, cost more since it requires a little more imagination on his part. He said he can find a way around all of the discrepancies people have noted. He's the expert. BTW I wonder if he has the temerity to show his face at Baltimore this year.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14983#msg-14983</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:19:23 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14982#msg-14982</link>
      <author>steg</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Gentlemen: You all have missed something important! The revolver under discussion is not a '51. Note the rebated cylinder and the short barrel. It is a M1862 Pocket Navy, which is .36cal, not .44cal.It is now known that Pocket Navy's were made after 1865; so, how can a gun made after 1865 have a pre-dated receipt?
BTW how much did he whose name is not mentiond amongst gentlemen charge for his letter of authentication?]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14982#msg-14982</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:29:20 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14981#msg-14981</link>
      <author>zulu6</author>
      <description><![CDATA[EVERYTHING about that barrel group is WRONG.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14981#msg-14981</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:56:53 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14980#msg-14980</link>
      <author>C.W. Howard</author>
      <description><![CDATA[But, but, but - it is a COLT receipt.....]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14980#msg-14980</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:54:25 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14979#msg-14979</link>
      <author>John Gross</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Among the many flaws with this &quot;Colt&quot; and the [b]ASS[/b]ociated paperwork is that a Model 1851 with a sn in the 57,000 range was made two years [b]after[/b] the date on the bill of sale.

John Gross]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14979#msg-14979</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:39:55 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14978#msg-14978</link>
      <author>C Worman</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I just called my close personal friend RLW and he said he can provide a letter of authentication if the buyer wants one.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14978#msg-14978</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:28:38 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: spencer rifle 1860</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14977#msg-14977</link>
      <author>John Gross</author>
      <description><![CDATA[phil s Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
&gt; pics

It's been altered. By whom we will probably never know. The frame is for a rifle, with somebody cutting down the forearm and adding the sling ring bar on the butt stock.

John Gross]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14977#msg-14977</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:51:28 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14976#msg-14976</link>
      <author>bill curtis</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I know very little about Colts at the best of times but surely this pistol is a genuine version of the nine dollar note with a very recent manufacturing date in which case the alleged receipt would appear to be a blatant case of attempted fraud.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14976#msg-14976</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:42:18 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14975#msg-14975</link>
      <author>C.W. Howard</author>
      <description><![CDATA[There is just something(s) about this one that - doesn't feel quite right...]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14975#msg-14975</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:09:24 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14974#msg-14974</link>
      <author>nord</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Not a chance that I'd make a call on the pistol as I know so very little about them. My point being that should a document be presented to establish provenance, there are some things I'd look for. In this case I see details that would tend to set off an alarm.

I happen to have just viewed some invoices from this general period of time. Not firearm related but similar subjects such as harness work and general hardware. In each case the header and body of the form were obviously by the same hand. This particular invoice doesn't give me that sense. 

So... Without evidence supporting the document in question I'd have to judge the pistol solely on its merit. Which in this case would be impossible as pistols are beyond my range of interest.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14974#msg-14974</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 06:17:17 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14973#msg-14973</link>
      <author>jeffanderson</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I suppose next you will suggest that Colt may not have made a .44 caliber gun in 1854 stamped on the side of the barrel &quot;.44 CAL NAVY MODEL&quot;]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14973#msg-14973</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:47:23 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14972#msg-14972</link>
      <author>nord</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Given a quick comparison of the writing from the header to the body of the invoice I'd call foul. 

1. Writing goes from fluid to halting.

2. &quot;S&quot; and &quot;r&quot; are dissimilar.

3. Numerals don't match well.

Since it would be unusual for two people to write such a document and a near certainty that it wasn't composed over a period of days, I'd have to say that my suspicions would be very high.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14972#msg-14972</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:40:51 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14971#msg-14971</link>
      <author>hmaag</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Spurious]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14971#msg-14971</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:56:15 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Here is an interesting 1854 receipt from Colt</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14970#msg-14970</link>
      <author>jeffanderson</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Here is an auction wherein is offered a most interesting Colt .44 Navy, along with a reciept dated 1854 from Colts authenticating this rare pistol (looks like the Colt clerk who made out the reciept misspelled Pistol and had to back over the &quot;o&quot;
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=161503297
Jeff]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14970,14970#msg-14970</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:58:22 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: spencer rifle 1860</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14969#msg-14969</link>
      <author>phil s</author>
      <description><![CDATA[pics]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14969#msg-14969</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:11:37 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Post-1898 Firearms] Re: New Guns</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?7,14787,14968#msg-14968</link>
      <author>C.W. Howard</author>
      <description><![CDATA[The more I consider the idea of a shorty  die for neck-sizing and seating - the better I like it.

Test-fired a round into a box of magazines in my hobby shed to confirm that everything works mechanically and (a) confirmed it is indeed a Mashburn Bee as suggested by the &quot;218 M Bee&quot; stamp on the barrel; (b) ejection of the formed case is crisp and effortless; (c) headspace is correct; and (d) firing pin has definitely been bushed (given the rest of the conversion features i expected that, but nice to have it confirmed).

Now to get some suitable bullets and set up to do some load development. Will have to do some shooting to get formed brass (what a sad chore...).]]></description>
      <category>Post-1898 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?7,14787,14968#msg-14968</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:44:15 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Post-1898 Firearms] Re: New Guns</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?7,14787,14967#msg-14967</link>
      <author>Joel Black</author>
      <description><![CDATA[That sounds like a great idea and more useful than a dedicated die.]]></description>
      <category>Post-1898 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?7,14787,14967#msg-14967</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:16:12 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Winchester rifle buttplate</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14946,14966#msg-14966</link>
      <author>Marty</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Winchester's, especially those that have extra ordered features such as deluxe stocks, routinely would have an assembly number stamped into several parts during the final finishing processes. Most often a custom ordered firearm would be completely assembled then disassembled in order that additional finishing and or polishing could be applied.  To insure that all the fitted parts came back together to the same gun several parts would have the same &quot;assembly number&quot; stamped onto them.  The number you found on the bottom of the inside of the butt plate should be repeated on the inletted wood for the upper tang on the butt stock, and on the lwr. left tang of the receiver under the butt stock. If these numbers don't all match then the part(s) have come from different guns.

Regards,
Marty]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14946,14966#msg-14966</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:56:21 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: spencer rifle 1860</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14965#msg-14965</link>
      <author>nord</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Go to the &quot;General&quot; board and look at the second post down.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14965#msg-14965</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:41:43 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: spencer rifle 1860</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14964#msg-14964</link>
      <author>phil s</author>
      <description><![CDATA[im new to how to do things on the computer and as soon as i can figure out how to attach within the the 2mb i will post pics]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14964#msg-14964</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:39:24 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: spencer rifle 1860</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14963#msg-14963</link>
      <author>pikeman</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Please post some good quality photos of what you have. The information you listed isn't enough for a responsible reply.

pikeman]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14963#msg-14963</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:29:13 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] spencer rifle 1860</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14962#msg-14962</link>
      <author>phil s</author>
      <description><![CDATA[i have been researching this rifle that my dad left to me for some time it is a 56/56-52 cal 30&quot; barrel 6 groove stamped spencer rifle pat. march 6th 1860 boston mass serial # 3613, i haven't been able to pin point which unit it was issued to but suspect that it was bought not issued to the soldier i know that most of the rifles did not have the saddle-bar &amp; sling mount it also has a short wood forearm which is 10&quot; with a end cap of 1/2&quot; leaving 17 1/2&quot; of the barrel exposed with only one ring mount and then the endcap i show no indications that it was ever longer and they match up to the rest of the rifle for wear and patina  the butt stock has g.b. stamped on both sides my guess is that the soldier was in the calvary and had it made or modify for easier access while on horse back has anyone seen this before]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14962,14962#msg-14962</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:20:28 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[Pre-1899 Firearms] Re: Winchester rifle buttplate</title>
      <link>http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14946,14961#msg-14961</link>
      <author>johnhamilton</author>
      <description><![CDATA[My carbine made in 1927 has nothing cast into the butt plate.]]></description>
      <category>Pre-1899 Firearms</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.antiqueguns.com/phorum/read.php?6,14946,14961#msg-14961</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:32:44 -0600</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
