I got this 38 for the grips, thinking they are Roper (Gange). They came from a Colonel's estate sale. He had hundred's of beautiful guns. This was competition modified. It's serial number 96758* so a 2nd change and factory reworked. There are ** stamped high on the frame under the grips. There's two dates stamps: 8.12 and 8.16 low on the frame under the grips. It has a cockeyed hammer. Did someone like Roper do these hammers? If so, did they simply heat & bend the original. The guns front sight is not original or was it "filed"? The grips are what I've added the most pictures of. I've looked over lots of your guy's comments on Roper, Sanderson, etc. These have just one rectangular tool mark, no ribbon, but very good looking & well made. What do people think? The S&W logo and 38 Special are all pretty well buffed down. Also, there's a B on the barrel flat closest to the barrel. It's away from the matching serial number. I've read before that this would mean a factory reblue. An N would be a renickel.
Model of 1905 with Ropers???
- Thread starter ars1
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
I am no expert but nobody else has offered a comment.
They don't look like Ropers' checkering pattern to me. Also, I recall Ropers had a small rectangular hole on the inside of each panel used to hold them during manufacturing. But I could be mistaken.
They don't look like Ropers' checkering pattern to me. Also, I recall Ropers had a small rectangular hole on the inside of each panel used to hold them during manufacturing. But I could be mistaken.
Hey - I don't know who made them but they are Beautiful and definately someone that knew wood. Thanks for the nice pictures!
The grips look more like Sandersons than Ropers. The B on the barrel
flat simply means that the barrel, probably along with the gun, was
originally blue. Likewise, an N would mean an original nickel gun.
Those marks were used to identify how the barrel was to be finished.
The pictures don't clearly show the hammer as being cockeyed, but
if it is, its probably a King hammer, but that would have been much
later - like 1930's. Maybe that is the date of the stocks, as well.
The notch in the rear sight has been widened, probably not by the
factory. The front sight does not look factory, either.
Was the original owner a competitive shooter of note ?
Mike Priwer
flat simply means that the barrel, probably along with the gun, was
originally blue. Likewise, an N would mean an original nickel gun.
Those marks were used to identify how the barrel was to be finished.
The pictures don't clearly show the hammer as being cockeyed, but
if it is, its probably a King hammer, but that would have been much
later - like 1930's. Maybe that is the date of the stocks, as well.
The notch in the rear sight has been widened, probably not by the
factory. The front sight does not look factory, either.
Was the original owner a competitive shooter of note ?
Mike Priwer
The gun came from COL. THOMAS C. McNEAL, U.S.A.F. Ret., died in 2009 at age 94. He was in the N.East Ohio area. He left his estate to the Cleveland Clinic & Boy Scouts of America. He had over 500 really nice firearms.
This pistol has been pretty tricked out. I'm thinking the gun was origionally ordered as a target model, got used alot, reblued/reworked twice in the early teens. The grips & cockeyed hammer came along in the 30's. I've looked at a lot of your guy's pictures of grips. The rectangular tool mark is pretty obvious and just makes me think of Roper. There's two real faint pencil marks on each grip that actually look like "11" (eleven). I can't get a photo of them, but this shows up with an eye loop pretty well. The rectangular tool hole can be seen in a couple of the pictures. The wood is definitely a hard, center cut. I've seen only a couple Roper's that had just diamond centers, no thumb rest, and no ribbon. They said these were the ambidexstrous style. There's no circular machine marks on the grips like many due to automation. The escutcheon & screw are old smith & wesson style brass.
Anyways, it shoots just fine. It has to have some stories.
Thanks,
Aaron
This pistol has been pretty tricked out. I'm thinking the gun was origionally ordered as a target model, got used alot, reblued/reworked twice in the early teens. The grips & cockeyed hammer came along in the 30's. I've looked at a lot of your guy's pictures of grips. The rectangular tool mark is pretty obvious and just makes me think of Roper. There's two real faint pencil marks on each grip that actually look like "11" (eleven). I can't get a photo of them, but this shows up with an eye loop pretty well. The rectangular tool hole can be seen in a couple of the pictures. The wood is definitely a hard, center cut. I've seen only a couple Roper's that had just diamond centers, no thumb rest, and no ribbon. They said these were the ambidexstrous style. There's no circular machine marks on the grips like many due to automation. The escutcheon & screw are old smith & wesson style brass.
Anyways, it shoots just fine. It has to have some stories.
Thanks,
Aaron
Attachments
phenson
US Veteran
Just a guess, but from my research, I believe the grips to be Ropers. There are two rectangular jig holes on the inside of the grips. These are what Gagne used to keep the halves aligned while sanding. Sandersons usually have numbers stamped inside both grips and they expose the mainspring screw. I have seen Ropers with at least one side missing the distinctive scroll pattern. I think sometimes Gagne did whatever struck his fancy at the time, and being the most talented at what he did, he created a lot of variations. Your grips do look like his work to me though. Not a King Cockeyed hammer. Looks to have been bent by someone. Its a beautiful unique gun. Congrats.
Last edited:
If they are Roper (and I'm not the one to ask) they would have the fanciest wood I've ever seen for Gagne made grips?? It has the appearance of feather-crotch American walnut(?)
There are a few Roper nuances requiring close inspection.
BTW; If you "got this 38 for the grips" please let me know about the revolver??
There are a few Roper nuances requiring close inspection.
BTW; If you "got this 38 for the grips" please let me know about the revolver??
Interesting Hammer, while it is "cockeyed" it is not a Kings style Cockeyed Hammer. I would guess that the Hammer was heated and bent into its configuration by somebody other than the factory. all the Cockeyed Hammers that I have seen/owned the Hammer spurs were re-shaped but not bent.
interesting
Dan
interesting
Dan
I would say those enhancements were for a fairly serious competitive shooter. Was he perhaps left handed?
When I saw that hammer, I also immediately thought "lefty." But if a right-handed shooter had lost the first joint of his thumb or had suffered a hand injury that kept him from spreading his thumb, he would need a reconfigured hammer to operate it single-handedly. He would be shooting with his thumb (or what was left of it) against the knuckle and backstrap rather than on the left side of the frame. Kind of a sketchy grip, but I imagine one adapts if there were no other options.
I was doubtful of the Roper connection for those stocks at first, but I'm leaning in that direction now.
Is that a bi-metallic front sight? It looks as though there is a raking seam on it.
That might be a 1905/First Change rather than a Second. Does the cylinder have locator dowels that slip into holes in the ejector star? If so, Second Change. If not, First. Either way, it probably shipped in 1908.
Very interesting revolver.
I was doubtful of the Roper connection for those stocks at first, but I'm leaning in that direction now.
Is that a bi-metallic front sight? It looks as though there is a raking seam on it.
That might be a 1905/First Change rather than a Second. Does the cylinder have locator dowels that slip into holes in the ejector star? If so, Second Change. If not, First. Either way, it probably shipped in 1908.
Very interesting revolver.
Thanks for all the info.
DCWilson, Interesting thought about the trigger accomodating and injury. It sticks "way out" and does look like a bent stock trigger.
Yes there are two dowel holes in the ejector star. So, a second change. 1908 would give it 4 years until its first factory return in 8.12
The sideplate, ejector star, barrel, yoke, frame all number. The side plate logo is all but buffed out as is the barrel. Would S&W rework have done that. This gun definitely saw factory work a few times according to the stamps. Also, how can I tell if the bluing on the gun now is factory.
The front sight literally looks like it was removed, filed, buffed, and then reblued to give it the two-tone/bi-metalic effect. What do you mean by "raking seam"?
I've got some really nice S&W stocks and have seen way more. Whether the pictures show it or not, this wood is a really nice hard cut. That's why the points are still so nice. Not only is there one rectangular tool hole, there are some very noticeable rectangular tool marks in a few places on the grips that simply didn't press in very deep. But the marks from them are very noticeable on each grip where you'd normally see a second tool mark.
SDH, I've got to ask what "feather crotch American Walnut is"? I'd bet you've got a picture or two to share and why something gets such a name.
The grips, target sights & age (in that order) got my attention. For my level this gun shoots as perfectly sweet as any 38 I have (Colts, S&W, Rugers). This gun is by far one of my most interesting. And I don't even know what was done inside. The side plate had a missing #1 screw. It all came apart easily and was actually very clean inside. So, put away well.
Thanks,
Aaron
DCWilson, Interesting thought about the trigger accomodating and injury. It sticks "way out" and does look like a bent stock trigger.
Yes there are two dowel holes in the ejector star. So, a second change. 1908 would give it 4 years until its first factory return in 8.12
The sideplate, ejector star, barrel, yoke, frame all number. The side plate logo is all but buffed out as is the barrel. Would S&W rework have done that. This gun definitely saw factory work a few times according to the stamps. Also, how can I tell if the bluing on the gun now is factory.
The front sight literally looks like it was removed, filed, buffed, and then reblued to give it the two-tone/bi-metalic effect. What do you mean by "raking seam"?
I've got some really nice S&W stocks and have seen way more. Whether the pictures show it or not, this wood is a really nice hard cut. That's why the points are still so nice. Not only is there one rectangular tool hole, there are some very noticeable rectangular tool marks in a few places on the grips that simply didn't press in very deep. But the marks from them are very noticeable on each grip where you'd normally see a second tool mark.
SDH, I've got to ask what "feather crotch American Walnut is"? I'd bet you've got a picture or two to share and why something gets such a name.
The grips, target sights & age (in that order) got my attention. For my level this gun shoots as perfectly sweet as any 38 I have (Colts, S&W, Rugers). This gun is by far one of my most interesting. And I don't even know what was done inside. The side plate had a missing #1 screw. It all came apart easily and was actually very clean inside. So, put away well.
Thanks,
Aaron
Feather-crotch, has grain that appears as if there is a feather radiating from inside of the wood. It is formed in the wood where a limb or root meets the trunk of the tree. Sorry, I don't have any photos handy to illustrate.
The dark brown, almost maroon color make me think it American black walnut, a popular wood with American craftsmen especially with this type of figure. The grain has also darkened with age making it more difficult to identify.
If you go to: galleryroper - keithbrowngrips
you will find a couple sets of Keith's Roper repros with this type of checkering pattern, but he has modified it with a fishtail on the bottom line instead of the straight line of your stocks. One of the sets also has exactly the wood and grain I'm trying to describe!
Again I would say these have fancier wood than the original Ropers I've seen, maybe you're just extra lucky. Keith, Kevin Williams or our guru Lee would be much better at judging them than I.
Very nice regardless!
Best,
Steve
The dark brown, almost maroon color make me think it American black walnut, a popular wood with American craftsmen especially with this type of figure. The grain has also darkened with age making it more difficult to identify.
If you go to: galleryroper - keithbrowngrips
you will find a couple sets of Keith's Roper repros with this type of checkering pattern, but he has modified it with a fishtail on the bottom line instead of the straight line of your stocks. One of the sets also has exactly the wood and grain I'm trying to describe!
Again I would say these have fancier wood than the original Ropers I've seen, maybe you're just extra lucky. Keith, Kevin Williams or our guru Lee would be much better at judging them than I.
Very nice regardless!
Best,
Steve
Last edited:
I concur about the wood. I always joke that Roper used old fence
posts for the wood. I have never seen any Ropers with significant
grain. Fabulous grips, but plain-Jane wood.
Mike Priwer
posts for the wood. I have never seen any Ropers with significant
grain. Fabulous grips, but plain-Jane wood.
Mike Priwer
Hello
In my Humble Opinion those sure look like Roper stock's made by Matheis Gagne to me. Mike is right saying most of Gagne's stocks are of Plain walnut wood without much grain structure to them. Gagne did have Jig's that left behind the small rectangular holes in the back side of his stock's, but as time wore on, he must have found a way to hold them differently when he checked them, as I have an N-Frame Pair of his stocks that have No holes in the rear of them as shown. His Pattern's varied as did his size and configuration of the famous clover leaf checking he applied, and or the heel length of his stock's as the pair shown seem to be rather short, perhaps they were ordered that way if the shooter had smaller sized hands. We have to remember when viewing his work, that he made each pair from scratch by hand with a Simple V-Shaped wood chisel so each pair is unique and can be very different. I am very lucky to have Two of his pairs of custom stocks one being in K-Sq. frame, The other in N-Sq. frame shown below, and they are the most comfortable set of stock's I have ever had to shoot with, The Man Knew his stuff...
Roper K-Sq, custom shooting Stock's Dated 1936 on the rear. Note the checking border width difference in the left lower stock panel in the second picture. Hand Made differences can be evident
Roper Custom shooting stock's N-Sq, Frame, No square Peg holes on the rear
In my Humble Opinion those sure look like Roper stock's made by Matheis Gagne to me. Mike is right saying most of Gagne's stocks are of Plain walnut wood without much grain structure to them. Gagne did have Jig's that left behind the small rectangular holes in the back side of his stock's, but as time wore on, he must have found a way to hold them differently when he checked them, as I have an N-Frame Pair of his stocks that have No holes in the rear of them as shown. His Pattern's varied as did his size and configuration of the famous clover leaf checking he applied, and or the heel length of his stock's as the pair shown seem to be rather short, perhaps they were ordered that way if the shooter had smaller sized hands. We have to remember when viewing his work, that he made each pair from scratch by hand with a Simple V-Shaped wood chisel so each pair is unique and can be very different. I am very lucky to have Two of his pairs of custom stocks one being in K-Sq. frame, The other in N-Sq. frame shown below, and they are the most comfortable set of stock's I have ever had to shoot with, The Man Knew his stuff...
Roper K-Sq, custom shooting Stock's Dated 1936 on the rear. Note the checking border width difference in the left lower stock panel in the second picture. Hand Made differences can be evident
Roper Custom shooting stock's N-Sq, Frame, No square Peg holes on the rear
Personally, I do not think that these are Roper stocks. I also don't think that the 2nd pair shown by Hammerdown are either. The Roper stocks that I have seen and examined have the two rectangular jig marks on the back and usually have a number and a year scratched into the back of the panel as shown in the 3rd picture. I also agree that the Ropers that I have seen were all made from plain and straight grain wood. As a woodworker I can tell you that woods with extreme grain patterns are much harder to work with and I can imagine that trying to check such wood would be a bitch.
If you really compare the diamonds created by the checking process and the way that they lie on the wood, you will notice the differences between Hammerdowns 2 examples as well as ars1's pair.
If you really compare the diamonds created by the checking process and the way that they lie on the wood, you will notice the differences between Hammerdowns 2 examples as well as ars1's pair.
Hello James
I showed Keith Brown the pictures of my second pair of Roper's that you feel are Not Roper's. He examined them and concurred that they were Roper Stocks as he has seen some of Roper's Later Produced stocks "without the Jig Holes" as everyone seems to bank on for being a Roper exclusive markl.
He went on to say that due to the clover leaf pattern and long tongue design and the strain screw relief, they were all Roper stock making traits. It is known that Albert Gagne Matheis's Son, worked for his father in making these custom shooting stocks, and perhaps it was he that found a way to hold the stock Panels while they got checked without leaving the square Peg jig holes behind ? Processes change as do the Makers marks & I have seen Many Roper stocks without the Dates scratched into the rear of them, Not all are were dated by him that I have seen in the past. I feel it was hit and miss with these Maker traits from Gagne on dating his work, just as the differences in the width broadness of his Clover leaf patterns, or a Thin Line around the outside Border of the checking pattern, or Jig Holes, as these were hand made and who knows if he dated or marked every single pair that he made. 
I guess these precise attributes that we have all come to feel are Purely Roper Traits will always remain a Mystery as Both makers of them are not among us anymore, to ask them, and we have to remeber there was at least Two makers of these stocks they were not all made by Matheis Gagne. I stand on What Keith Brown confirmed about the second pair being Genuine Roper stocks... and whether anyone else thinks that they are or not is not of any Importance to me as they fit my hand like a glove such as the K-Sq. Pair I have and they will not be offered for Trade or sale due to their comfortable features, I haven's found any other stock's out there that can begin to compare to them. 
Sebago Son
Member
I believe you may be right.
It is also possible that Mr. Roper used more than one contractor for his stocks. Mr. Gagne was a Clock Maker.
I sure wish that Michael Stern was around. He was the ORIGIONAL researcher of Roper Stocks from many years ago and was the person that made the Roper / Gagne connection through his findings.
I sold him many, many pairs of Ropers 10-12 years ago as part of his research.
BTW, what is a pair of K-Frame Ropers doing on a Registered?
Drew
Similar threads
- Locked
