Shrinkage. Poor stock fit 2nd HE 45

[M_conrad_0311]

I noticed that all the photos I had posted of my 2nd Model HE .45 Colt were not very good. I had a little time before work one morning as the sun was making its way up, so I tried to snap a few shots. Although it was a cold morning, and I am sure I was experiencing a little shrinkage, I do not believe it had the same effect on the .45's wood . I had forgotten that the original stocks that the big iron came with were so poorly fit. There is no evidence of pencil or stamped SN on the gold medallion stocks. The stocks are well worn. I assume that the stocks have been reshaped or are replacements. Maybe the backs and edges were sanded down at one time? I think I will try and find a better set one day for it. I really like the way these pre-war stag Magnas look and feel. Would you store it with the service style stocks to prevent any further finish issues, or does the condition of this 45 even matter at this point?

 

[Heinz]

Hard to tell from these pics but the condition of the stocks does not match the condition of the revolver. Do you think it has been reblued?

 

[glowe]

I would normally say those sure look like K frame stocks, but they look like N frames on the top. K frame stocks are about 1/16" smaller than N frame stocks all around. My guess is that they did not come from the factory on that revolver since the fit is so bad. Walnut does not shrink anywhere near that much and normally not at all.

 

[M_conrad_0311]

Hard to tell from these pics but the condition of the stocks does not match the condition of the revolver. Do you think it has been reblued?

The side plate has been refinished (maybe just cold blue?). The rest is original.

Maybe these will be better. It seems like the quality of my photos deteriorate when placed in an album?

 

[T44spl]

Nice gun Matty, I believe the stocks are the correct vintage to your gun & are indeed N frame stocks. They're probably just not original to your gun. If i recall correctly stocks were ground to fit each frame & gun individually so another pair of stocks may not fit another prewar gun well as a result.
Those stag grips look magnificent on your gun.

 

[DARE]

I think shrinkage or sanding might be common on 100 year old stocks. My .44 Hand Ejector 1st Model from 1916 and my .44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model from 1926 were both in need of correct stocks. The Triple Lock had non factory pearls on when I bought it. The 2nd Model had some plastic stags.
I tried probably eight or ten bad pairs before I found a couple that fit correctly. The ones with poor fit were all too small.

 

[M_conrad_0311]

These photos may better represent the condition of the finish and fit.

 

[jeffrefrig]

I thought an old Seinfeld episode was involved somehow.
That's a nice-looking revolver. Is a factory letter in the near future?

 

[M_conrad_0311]

I thought an old Seinfeld episode was involved somehow.
That's a nice-looking revolver. Is a factory letter in the near future?

I wouldn't want to short change you. it has been posted before, but here it is.