There hasn't been any real proof what the numbers are meant for on the back.

Some are penciled,some are scratched. Some are both,some have none.

I personally know of at least three sets of N Ropers in the 491xx range,

Some believe they were just to keep both sides together during manufacture. Wish I knew as its intrigued me for quite some time.

I would be curious if any Colt Ropers have numbers that could be serial numbers.

I have a N frame set with a four digit number.

Could be the build number on the frame?

I used to own this amazing Mauser 1896 Broomhandle with the most unique Ropers I’ve ever seen. Like an idiot, I sold it a few years ago.

Attached Images

7C416393-4E7B-4682-AE2E-BADA9D588E0A.jpg (47.5 KB, 110 views)

I wouldn't go as far as less desirable. Just much more risky considering how much they cost. I have interest in anything Roper. Just depends how much its gonna cost me.

I got this set because of the wood grain.

Well that’s the coolest thing I’ve seen today

Here is a one of a kind.

This one is another unique set with the pinky notch and fully checkered wrap.

I can go on and on.

Please do that.
We'll be up all night.
Thx

The pinky notch Ropers feel the most comfortable of all to me.
I noticed at least four variations of it. My set had checking all through the notch. Miss that set,

Toys for tots and adults under construction.
Lots more filing etc etc.
Thick teak in abundance for experiments.


Kutzall files/bits etc are great for wood projects and composite boat construction.

Attached Images

	FD9221A7-35BD-4A2E-A744-DD3FA415ADD7.jpg (80.4 KB, 118 views)
	405547C0-AD09-4385-9AFA-22CF04C6B855.jpg (90.8 KB, 88 views)
	4A29F95B-210D-40CB-8C2D-25CBEB757818.jpg (80.3 KB, 103 views)

Looks like it might work for a crossdraw.

As far as SN numbers on the back or whatever they are. They are much more common on S&W Ropers than colt. They never match any SN on my guns if they even are SN numbers. I suspect that it my be an order number but I cant explain why you find more numbers scratched on Smith than Colt.

Here is another unique one with the large butt.

This is VERY rare. Actually the only one I know in existence for that matter.
A police positive with the full King Super Target treatment. It also has VERY rare "D" frame Ropers, with course checkering.

Only pair I am aware of still in the box.

I think this would be a good place to have a little conversation regarding Griffin and Howe stocks / Roper stocks.

The more I learn about "Ropers" the more I think we need to clarify something, maybe even change a bit of terminology.

Skilled; you posted something over on the colt forum regarding G&H stocks. In particular you posted a picture of an advertisement. I had, up to that point, never seen a clear picture of "Griffin and Howe" stocks. It was a bit of a revelation to me, because I immediately recognized two sets of my "Ropers" as looking uncannily like those G&H stocks.

Thing is, these stocks of mine bear all the hallmarks of having been made by Gagne, down to the scratches in the back matching what is on my other Ropers.

They do not however have Ribbons.

Could you by any chance post that G&H ad over here? I don't want to do it without your permission. Along with those wonderful clearly G&H 1911 stocks you have.

I think, these are the two sets of potential Gagne made G&H stocks that I own (sadly, both horribly molested, one I think started life as a Colt even).










Might we need to start categorizing stocks as Gagne Ropers, or Gagne G&H, as we already tend to do with the rare (and easily identifiable) Machine made Ropers?

Additionally. It was mentioned to me that Gagne out lived Roper by a good 20 years, and that he continued making stocks in those years. If I got that right and don't have my facts wrong; is it possible that some of the later "Ropers" shouldn't be called as such at all? Should they just be Gagnes?

I’ve heard the term machine made used a few times before, not sure what Roper/Gagne stocks it is referencing

__________________
kbgrips.com

Keith et al,
Once his stocks got to be so popular, Roper offered a machine checkered option at a lower price. Here is a comparison of Woodsman stocks, one pair hand checkered and the other is machine checkered:

Notice that the machine checkered set has no diamond around the grip screw and no jig holes on the back. Also, the large WR initials only appear on machine checkered examples [I think!]. One other difference--no number hand inscribed on the back. I have never found any correlation between those numbers and the serial number (or assembly number) of the gun. I'm guessing they were just customer order numbers or something similar.

__________________
Kevin Williams SWCA1649 HF208

Hello Kevin, I can see a combination of machine and hand work inside but not in the checkering necessarily. Perhaps he used an early rotary cutter to run the lines but I think they would have to be finished up with a single line cutter. The absence of diamonds isn’t an indication of machined checkering in my opinion at least. The lack of jig marks on the back is more likely an indicator of just using a different method to hold the work, a change of process, again my opinion. The revolver grips have far to many compound curves for a speedy machined checkering, even those auto grips have to much swoop, again opinion.

__________________
kbgrips.com

Keith, I'll defer to your expertise. I used to have a fair amount of Roper literature--ads, flyers, etc. but I they are now lost to the deep archives, I guess, because I cannot locate the file. I did find one piece that is relevant. The scan got cut off a little on the right side but is still understandable.

__________________
Kevin Williams SWCA1649 HF208

Kevin, thanks for the scan, had not seen that before. I still think the “machine” was a handheld cutter of some sort. MMC makes one and Ullman machine products is another and I believe the older of the two.
Think of a very high rpm pizza cutter.

And no expert here, just trying to figure it out like the rest. Your original article on the subject is what caused me to try and dig deeper and try and absorb the tiny details.

__________________
kbgrips.com

Keith, if I played even a tiny role in the work you do I'm flattered beyond words.

__________________
Kevin Williams SWCA1649 HF208

Hi Sixgun. Please feel free to post it. I actually don’t own those. I saw them listed in a Jackthedog auction years ago. It intrigued me so much that I asked him for additional pictures for my studies and he was nice enough to send these to me.

Here is another machined pair for study. I recently sold these.

Another interesting feature of Ropers is the finishing. We know he used boiled linseed oil mixed with a bit a Shellac. But he clearly did this to
Most after the checkering was completed. And on the rare occasion it appears to me that it was done before the checkering giving a desirable dual tone appearance. Maybe Kieth could weigh in here.

Fantastic!

Here we are:

All I can saw is WOW!

Sixgun. It occurred to me as king was also selling Roper grips. There could be a possibility that the were just brokering the deal. And the sent the hand drawing to Roper and G&H actually made nothing? Just food for thought.

I think that is a distinct possibility, especially with King. G&H were stock makers for long guns but they may have "sub-contracted" pistol grips to Roper. I've never found any documentation to support this theory but the grips themselves may provide the best evidence.

__________________
Kevin Williams SWCA1649 HF208

I'm inclined to think that Gagne made G&H stocks and that the non-ribbon "Ropers" are likely Gagne made G&H stocks. That the Ribbon is diagnostic of "Ropers".

What I'm unclear on is the timeframe that G&H was offering their stocks in. If the G&H stocks were offered after Walter Roper's passing... that could make a great deal of sense.

Now that the Ad you have is posted in this thread what I would like to see is some opinions of the forum members here regarding my two molested sets of non-ribbon Gagne made 'Ropers'. And, more importantly, if anyone might have a set of revolver stocks that looks exactly like the ones in that advertisement. If we had a set that was exact, and we could examine the back, I think we would have a data point supporting this notion.


On another note, was flipping through something in my library and found this to add to the thread:

For further study for Roper students:
Here are a few more from collection all with NO Ribbon.
From right to left. Far left we will refer to as #1 and its for a larger New Service




1-4 ALL have the detailed work wrap around for trigger guard. Amazing to say the least.


#1 Has NO numbers but does have the owners name, Us Colt guys like to do this to keep the Smith guys from grabbing them. These are thick too (large NS stocks) notice all the deep relief wood around the butt and backstrap



#2 Does have some numbers but cant make it all out, 80-something


#3 Again no numbers, just the owners name (refer to #1 LOL)



#4 No numbers but does have the initials..But notice the jig marks, one thick with two small above.

Sixgun,
I did used to own these:

Roper or G&H? You be the judge

Personally, I think Gagne made, sold by G&H.

I really think that confusion here is just that Gagne made stocks for both sellers.

Of course, that's just my opinion. Threads like this though are wonderful in that more people can weigh in, and hopefully people a lot more analytical then myself. I tend to be able to notice things at a glance other people don't, but can't always tell you why I noticed them. It's a trait that I think was honed by bird watching, and close to a decade of a 3-4 weekend a month gunshow habit when I first got into guns (and WA state still had a lot of gunshows).

I can spot an unusual or scarce S&W from across the room at this point, but I have to really pick it up and handle it before I can explain why it's scare or unusual. Without being able to handle a range of these potential G&H or Roper stocks I don't think people should put a huge amount of stock in my opinion on the matter.

What might be a great help is, well lighted photos of the outside “and” the inside. Comparisons of hardware,brass, steel, nickel silver, blued ?
Well focused and lit photos of the checkering only, clues are there we just have to see them.
The often mentioned jig marks, what were they used for, exactly.

Skilled, you mention we know the finish, I’m not sure I do, how did you come about that info.
Probably much we will never know for sure but trying to figure it out is interesting

__________________
kbgrips.com

I have to wonder if the stocks that came on this Outdoorsman fall into any of these categories. Many have guessed them to be Roper, but lacking the jig marks, I have always discounted that notion. Wraparound at the trigger guard and great palm swell.

Regards,
Bruce

__________________
Regards,
Bruce

Keith,
We actually know a great deal.Walter Roper tells us in his article written in June 1948 of the American Rifleman.

Bruce,
Sorry I dont believe they fall into the Roper Category

Nor do I .

Regards,
Bruce

__________________
Regards,
Bruce

Bruce, I would say not Ropers, inletting is wrong and the grips lack the fragile sliver that wraps around the back edge of trigger guard, or remnants of it. Maybe one of the other contemporary makers.

Love the Outdoorsman, the grips look appropriate and even better they are comfortable

__________________
kbgrips.com

No, Roper stocks do not have to have the "ribbon" or 3 lobed pattern to be Ropers. In the July 1935 issue of The American Rifleman F.C. Ness authored an article entitled "Farewell to Adapters." He includes pictures of 3 different guns with 3 different sets of Roper grips and none of them have the ribbon.


Most everyone interested in this thread probably knows that Roper wrote 2 books and a column for The American Rifleman for many years. Those are the best sources of info about his grips and there are plenty of example of grips without the ribbon.

Regarding finish: I have in my notes that he used Murphy's number 25 linseed oil mixed with some shellac to give them a sealed effect and slight sheen. I don't have the source noted and can't remember if I took that from one of the sources noted.

__________________
Kevin Williams SWCA1649 HF208

Skilled, I have that book, Gagne mentions it as another way not the only way. That finish is well know in furniture restoration and gun making but it’s very time consuming. Gagne was moving along with these and I don’t think in the long run it was or became the finish he used.

__________________
kbgrips.com

I’ll add to that that many sets I’ve seen in person and in photos appear to me to have had finish added in later years, making comparisons a bit more difficult.

I am sure he dipped them in oil and hung them up to drip the excess off, it always made sense to me considering the grime and darkened look many of them seem take on. Then again, maybe those are some that have been messed with.

__________________
kbgrips.com

Kevin, interesting info, don’t remember reading that before, I’ll give it a try though.

A number of years ago I spoke with a family member that clearly remembered him dipping them and then hanging up to drip off.
Perhaps that mixture was what was used.

__________________
kbgrips.com

Keith,
Thanks for your input. I have never felt they were Roper.
Is this not the "fragile sliver" though ? Not trying to be difficult, just trying to learn.

Regards,
Bruce

__________________
Regards,
Bruce

Bruce look at my post #82 3 photo. That’s what he’s referring too. You can’t see it with the grips mounted to the gun.

The fragile sliver is hard to explain and it can look very different depending on the camera angle. I call it the shelf. Under the shelf is a small groove where the trigger guard rides so nice.
This shelf is broken or sanded on some sets of ropers. Gently fitting the guard in that shelf is prudent on keeping this detail from being broken off.

Well that settles that bit of speculation!

Thanks!

Just bought a set that appears to be a real one owner dog. No real surprise as they were made for a 1st gen Colt. For grins I tried them on a 2nd gen colt and the inletting was a bit tight on the backstrap. Tried them on a USFA and the locator pin was in the wrong spot. Eventually I'll find a gun they fit on. Have seen less that half a dozen Ropers for the SAA and none quite like this. Regarding the "french polish" used by Roper. The old knifemaker Bill Moran told me during a visit to his shop that his handle finish was a french polish achieved by a dipping a rag in linseed oil than shellac and rubbing it into the handle. He told me that it was a finish used by numerous old time furniture makers.

How about these on an I frame Terrier

__________________
SWCA 1932 SWHF 135