.44 Special Hand Ejector, 2nd Model, with Ropers, yet again...

[82ndpara]

If I've done my limited research, this appears to be a .44 Special Hand Ejector, 2nd Model (?), Ser. No. 21,826, with a
lanyard loop, military inspection mark on yoke cut out "Probably originally for the 1917 model" (SCSW) and appears to have the target barrel on standard frame.

Check out the side by side photo of the Ropers, what do you make of the pattern? Did I read somewhere that they were "ambidextrous" models?

More photos to follow....

Cheers,
82ndpara

 

[82ndpara]

More photos.... rear sight groove looks milled out for the target front sight...

 

[82ndpara]

Another batch of photos...

 

[82ndpara]

Last batch....

 

[S&W ucla]

My guess is that's a RH set of grips. If you look at them from behind the palm swell is on the right hand side and the left looks sort of flat. If they were ambi grips they would have palm swell on both sides as well as finger grooves. Yours just has groove on right. REALLY nice outfit you have there!

 

[82ndpara]

Interesting, I should have taken a photo of the stocks, mounted, from behind....
While looking at the side by side photo, after thinking about it, the right stock panel looks like it might have a slight thumbrest, perhaps making it a left hand set of stocks....?

 

[Muley Gil]

Interesting, I should have taken a photo of the stocks, mounted, from behind....
While looking at the side by side photo, after thinking about it, the right stock panel looks like it might have a slight thumbrest, perhaps making it a left hand set of stocks....?

I think you're right.

That's not a standard hammer for the 2nd model. It is grooved like the early 1917 and RM hammers.

I think the rear sight was modified with a file.

 

[82ndpara]

I think you're right.

That's not a standard hammer for the 2nd model. It is grooved like the early 1917 and RM hammers.

I think the rear sight was modified with a file.

Thanks for the info on the hammer, I was wondering about that, I hadn't seen one like it before, or in the SCSW.

 

[tennexplorer]

The front sight base looks like the factory target front sight base from the side. Can't say for sure without seeing it closeup from the top. I would recommend lettering this gun, since the serial numbers match and there do not appear to be rework marks. i respectfully disagree about the rear sight notch. I thin it looks milled.

 

[lebomm]

I agree that those stocks are southpaw, not RH or ambi. And yes, the rear sight is milled.

JMHO,
Larry

 

[red9]

Definitely letter that one. The target model is scarce; a factory target front/fixed rear would be WAY scarcer. I know that that combo does exist in K-frames, never seen it in an N. Either way, it's beautiful.

Bob

 

[S&W ucla]

They called that combination a "half target". I want to see a picture of the mounted Ropers from behind to solve the grip question. Curiosity, bad habit of mine!

 

[Hondo44]

82ndpara,
That is indeed a very interesting and unique 44 2nd Model.

The hammer is from a 357 Registered Mag. Although the concentric circles first appeared on the very early 1917s up to the 15000 to 20000 range, the checkering pattern on the top of the hammer was not known until the 1935 RMs. Of course it could be custom checkering but it sure looks similar to the standard RM hammer which also had the concentric circles on standard hammers, but not all humpback hammers. The top of yours is not entirely checkered however does look like these standard RM hammers:

I suspect the Roper grips have had the left side thumbrest removed. The non-thumbrest Ropers I've observed are symmetrical on both sides:

 

[82ndpara]

Here are a few more photos to help....
Thanks for the comments!

82ndpara

 

[-db-]

The stocks are for a northpaw (RH shooter). That is not a thumbrest on the right side but a scallop shaped for the trigger finger. Note how, with a high hold, it guides the finger directly to the trigger.

 

[82ndpara]

I think you're on it, it feels comfortable in the right hand... and i see what you mean regarding the trigger finger....

 

[Hondo44]

The stocks are for a northpaw (RH shooter). That is not a thumbrest on the right side but a scallop shaped for the trigger finger. Note how, with a high hold, it guides the finger directly to the trigger.

Yes clearly made for a 'northpaw'. But the scallop for the trigger finger is typically only present on grips with the thumbrest on the opposite side.

 

[Barrocky]

They used to have a left hand thumb rest. The profile of the right panel is pretty common to Ropers with a thumb rest. I've always called that the finger shelf.

 

[S&W ucla]

Also note the right side palmswell and the flatter left side as I mentioned earlier. I have a set of ambi Ropers that have the same finger groove as above on both sides. They also have a slight palmswell on BOTH sides. The finger groove is better for the trigger finger but it works ok on the thumb side as a rest on my grips.

 

[skilled]

Sweet Ropers !

 

[82ndpara]

Factory Letter.....

Below is one of the three Factory Letters I received tonight:....

 

[S&W Fan]

Nice old revovler. I'm the custodian of one a year newer, shipped Feb. 1925. The letter for that states the lanyard ring is how it originally was manufactured.

 

[handejector]

Neat gun.

That is a fabulous pair of Ropers. Like a pair of magnas with a built in grip adapter!
Those grips are obviously original and unaltered.
The original finish on Ropers oxidizes into that dark brown. On altered or repaired Ropers, I have never seen that finish duplicated and blended into the old finish in any manner that was not rather obvious. Even when the finish gets extremely close, the sanding will leave a different texture on the surface.

They are for a right handed shooter.

Roper made what you ordered. If you wanted a thumbrest, you got one. If you didn't want a thumbrest, you didn't get one.

 

[chud333]

Beautiful .44 and grips sir.
Those Ropers look wonderfully original to me
but i am far from an expert.
Regardless, it is a nice looking package just
the way it sits.


Chuck

 

[model3sw]

Yes clearly made for a 'northpaw'. But the scallop for the trigger finger is typically only present on grips with the thumbrest on the opposite side.

I have noticed in the past, a few artful attempts and changing right handed grips (with thumb rest on left side) to left handed grips and left handed grips (with thumb rest on Right side) to right handed, by very artfully having the thumb rest removed.

There's a pair of 1911 Ropers that have been floating around the internet on GB and EBay in the recent past ... that the owner claims the Colt custom shop removed the thumb rest from a pair of left handed 1911 Ropers to make them more suitable for a right handed shooter, but they looked just awful, well the looked awful to me. I recall because the seller was selling 2 sets of Ropers, the other set was for an older pre-war High Standard slant grip target pistol. I bought the High Standards and passed on the 1911 aborted Ropers thinking ... what a shame. I would not hesitate buying a nice set of Ropers whether they were right or left handed but I would seriously hesitate if they were altered , especially in a non flattering manner.

I'm 100% certain these are Right Handed grips while almost 100% sure (if it had the thumb rest on the left side grip) it has very artfully and skillfully been removed. From the pictures posted, whomever removed the thumb rest on the left grips seems to have done a pretty nice job but they just don't sit right with me for some reason. There are as skilled grip restore / repair men as there are gun restoration experts. The only way to tell, for sure, would be under higher magnification (about whether of not it had a thumbrest that was later removed).

What remains evident is the right hand index finger "wrap-around" to the trigger to help assure a straight pull on the trigger. These are RIGHT handed grips.

 

[Modified]

Weighing in on those Ropers first: original and awesome in my opinion. I'd say they were for someone with small hands.

As to the gun modifications itself I might have a couple things to add.

Does that front sight say King on the right side in very small letters by any chance?

I have two 1917s now that have the Registered Magnum hammer. I *think* that they did this for double action shooting. Mating the RM hammer to the older action makes for an interesting double action which in one of my examples has a very distinct stage in it almost like a Ruger. The other one has that same stage but it's been smoothed out resulting in this oddly pleasing and fast double action pull.

One of my two was most certainly done by King. The other one I think was King but am not certain. I would suspect that if your front sight is a King that they may have been who did the work on the gun. Although I think they would have done a little more work on that rear sight, unless the work pre-date's their super police sights.

Fantastic gun in any case, I'd personally be pleased as punch to own it.

 

[82ndpara]

"Does that front sight say King on the right side in very small letters by any chance?"
I'll have to dig it out of the safe and check, but I don't think so; I may have checked for that when I first posted this thread and we were all trying to figure out what the story is with this one...
I'll try to get back to you soon on it...

82ndpara

 

[model3sw]

Also note the right side palmswell and the flatter left side as I mentioned earlier. I have a set of ambi Ropers that have the same finger groove as above on both sides. They also have a slight palmswell on BOTH sides. The finger groove is better for the trigger finger but it works ok on the thumb side as a rest on my grips.

Agreed. I hadn't seen the rear-view pix until now. What is throwing everyone off of whether ambidextrous or right handed is the pattern of the grips usually has the design on the side where the fingers would rest although these could be ordered any design the purchaser desired.

These have that design on both sides which might give some the initial impression of being ambidextrous.

With Ropers ... if you look at an old Roper order form you could order them with (or without) any option that was available, e.g. the thumbrest, etc. And, they were ordered by the size of the shooter's hand with tracing similar to Herrett's order form in that manner.