Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961

Notices

S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 All 5-Screw & Vintage 4-Screw SWING-OUT Cylinder REVOLVERS, and the 35 Autos and 32 Autos


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-05-2024, 05:32 PM
mrcvs mrcvs is offline
SWCA Member
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,843
Likes: 3,260
Liked 7,115 Times in 1,897 Posts
Default 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point

It recently came up in another thread about originality of a set of M frame stocks from roughly the same era and that they are original despite the diamond surrounding the escutcheon being wildly off centre.

I stated these stocks cannot contain factory original checkering as Smith & Wesson would not allow for such sloppy workmanship—especially, IMHO, the stocks were likely checkered beginning with a diamond surrounding the escutcheon and the checkering pattern radiating outward from there.

Here are 15 pair of N frame stocks(in one photograph, a pair are depicted side by side with the mate beneath and this not a pair, but two pair—the lower left hand grouping of the middle photograph), pre war, 1910 to 1920, all but one being the medallion style, the non medallion with concave contour dating from 1907 to mid 1910.

2 of these pair are attached to Triple Lock revolvers.

All are wonderfully centered on the diamond, the checkering radiating outward to predefined margins.

How many pair do I need to prove workmanship would not allow for such poor layout such that the escutcheon screw/escutcheon are not centered within the diamond created by the absence of checkering in this specific location?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_2547.jpg (116.6 KB, 152 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_2546.jpg (116.0 KB, 120 views)
File Type: jpeg IMG_2548.jpeg (127.9 KB, 94 views)
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
  #2  
Old 03-05-2024, 07:26 PM
44wheelman 44wheelman is offline
Member
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,536
Likes: 318
Liked 800 Times in 398 Posts
Default

I have not seen an off center set. Don’t even need to go look at mine, I agree.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #3  
Old 03-05-2024, 08:40 PM
Vtgw938 Vtgw938 is online now
SWCA Member
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 774
Liked 2,170 Times in 536 Posts
Default

These are much newer but definitely off center. I think I have an older set as well. I wouldn't think they would have got by in the early days.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg M29 Target Grips from M1950.jpg (145.0 KB, 106 views)

Last edited by Vtgw938; 03-05-2024 at 08:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Like Post:
  #4  
Old 03-05-2024, 09:06 PM
paplinker paplinker is offline
SWCA Member
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: May 2011
Location: pa
Posts: 3,071
Likes: 4,018
Liked 5,307 Times in 1,444 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vtgw938 View Post
These are much newer but definitely off center. I think I have an older set as well. I wouldn't think they would have got by in the early days.
Is it possible they could have been a factory seconds set?

I wonder if they marked there seconds
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-06-2024, 12:21 AM
Keith Brown Keith Brown is offline
Vendor
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Beavercreek,Oh,USA
Posts: 833
Likes: 2
Liked 2,917 Times in 446 Posts
Default

Rich, those grips would have taken no more than a couple minutes at most to produce. I doubt they used seconds, it’s just production, nothing more.
__________________
kbgrips.com
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #6  
Old 03-06-2024, 10:26 AM
mrcvs mrcvs is offline
SWCA Member
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,843
Likes: 3,260
Liked 7,115 Times in 1,897 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vtgw938 View Post
These are much newer but definitely off center. I think I have an older set as well. I wouldn't think they would have got by in the early days.
Yes, a much newer pair. This thread was referencing stocks that are pre WWII. Actually, 1920 or before.

Quality control from within our lifespan isn’t quite what it once was.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #7  
Old 03-06-2024, 12:54 PM
kscharlie's Avatar
kscharlie kscharlie is offline
SWCA Member
15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point 15 Pair of N frame stocks (2 on Triple Lock revolvers) to prove a point  
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The Flint Hills - Kansas
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 2,378
Liked 3,368 Times in 684 Posts
Default

Ian, while I can appreciate your point of view, I can't completely agree with it. Smith & Wesson has made hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millinons, of revolvers (speaking of pre-war guns) and surely there were imperfections and mistakes that made it out the door. In fact, I even have a Model 1 "2D QUALITY" that S&W sold at a discount due to imperfections in the casting. At least they marked them as such, but I know that not all of their stocks were perfect from the factory.

I only have 4 pre-war revolvers with factory diamond center wood checkered stocks, and two of them have off centered escutcheons.

The first one is from a .32 RP, shipped 1927, serial # matches gun. It is considerably off center.

The second one is a set of pre war N frame magnas. The escutcheon is not wildly off center, but it is quite noticeable. Serial # does not match the gun they are on, but they are definitely factory original stocks.

I think comparing N frame stocks to M frame stocks is not really a fair comparison. The much larger N frame stocks have a lot more real estate to work with than the tiny M frame stocks. IMO, it would be a lot easier to make a mistake on escutcheon placement on an M frame panel than on an N frame panel.

At any rate, the subject makes for interesting discussion.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg aDSC05812.jpg (281.2 KB, 25 views)
File Type: jpg aDSC05813.jpg (255.4 KB, 29 views)
File Type: jpg aDSC05814.jpg (137.5 KB, 24 views)
__________________
SWCA 3297 SWHF 583
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
Reply


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Triple Lock—N frame pre war medallion stocks or mother of pearl? mrcvs S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 16 08-23-2023 09:46 AM
Pre war N frame (Triple Lock) vs Magna (Registered Magnum) stocks mrcvs S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 14 06-24-2019 07:45 AM
Gun Grabber Mark Kelly buys AR15 to prove point? bobermo 2nd Amendment Forum 17 03-14-2013 06:16 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:36 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)