To be or not to be....ROPERS??? That is the question

410bore

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
4,947
Reaction score
9,566
Location
Ohio
I bought these stocks sometime last year on eBay, advertised as Ropers. As you can see, they do have some Roper characteristics….



















At first I didn’t think they were Ropers, but just another one of the unknown talented stock makers of yesteryear with similar style. But the more I looked at them, there were a few things about them that were very Roper-Like, among a few things that were very Un-Roper-like. It was then, that I remembered seeing some very similar stocks posted by Club Gun Fan (Don Mundell) some time before. He had purchased (2) sets of these same type of stocks at a gun show, and had a pair (lent to him I suppose?) that were owned by Peter deRose which were also the same AND came in the original shipping box bearing “W. F. Roper” at the heading of the return address! Having seen Walter’s handwriting and signature on drawings from his book, and also on some S&W Factory letterhead (Walter was a former S&W employee), it seems to me that he himself wrote the label! Also, this week on the forum, another set of these stocks has surfaced; forum member SG-688 posted a beautiful Maple set made for a Colt.

Here is a link to Don's thread;

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...498-big-e-gun-show-very-good-me-part-2-a.html

Here are Don’s sets and the boxed set (sorry I don’t have shots from all angles of these sets but maybe Don can take some more photo's for us?)

















The Colt Set







All of these style of stocks that have surfaced so far have had thumbrests, palmswells, a distinct inletting pattern, and a similar overall shape.

Each set of stocks have inletting that extends very low at the top area of the grip-frame near where the top of the front strap would meet.

Don and Peter's Sets







My Set



The Colt Set



Now, for things that are very Roper-like. 1) on the checkered examples, on a few of these sets, there is a diamond present around the screw escutcheon on the right-hand panel. 2) the checkering border on either panel is generally a very curvy pattern resembling the Roper look. 3) Some of the thumbrests have had lines carved in them for increased grip, just like many vintage pairs have had. 4) Although not as ornately formed, these stocks also have the small “lip” at the front of the stock that leads you right into the trigger guard. 5) This is not evident on every set but on the set I own, the escutcheons are exactly the same as one of the few different styles used on Ropers; the hardware is black in color and is thicker walled on the left-hand grip escutcheon. Perhaps there was some left-over hardware that was used up before switching to the hardware seen on the other examples? 6) A few of these examples have the revolver model and, in one case, the serial number (if fitted to a specific gun) penciled on the back of the grip panels, very similar to many sets of Ropers which have been seen penciled or carved or both penciled and carved. You might say, “well anybody could do that” and you would be correct but coupled with the other clues it’s yet another link to Roper.

Most of these similarities can be seen in the pictures above, below I have included some comparison pictures of examples 5) and 6) compared to authentic Ropers.

5) The dark escutcheons

My Set





A few original sets in my collection








6) The penciled/carved writing






The following Un-Roper-Like traits don’t necessarily ID these as not being Roper, but these are the characteristics we are accustomed to looking for in ID’ing a set of Vintage Ropers. These stocks do not have the following; lack of a ribbon pattern through the checkering on either side, the checkering is subpar compared to older Ropers, no jig marks, and no relief for Pre-War (Domed) upper sideplate screw (which is indicative of the time period these were produced).
The lack of the ribbon pattern is not a big red flag, but it is a common similarity between most Ropers. But, as most of us are aware there were fully checkered stocks offered that lacked the ribbon pattern, and there are many examples in collections today.
The lack of jig marks and the subpar checkering are more than likely due to a new checkering process that used another way to secure the stock blank, OR a different/new stockmaker. Some of you may be aware that there were also “Machine Checkered Ropers” that were a cheaper offering than the standard hand carved option. I suppose the sets in question could be those but most (all?) of those I have seen also had Walter Ropers initials machined into the back of one of the grip panels, where these do not, and the checkering on these just doesn’t look neat enough to be machine-done.

Here are some pictures of a set of automatic Machine Checkered Ropers; originally posted by skilled in post #56 in the below thread.







http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-hand-ejectors-1896-1961/366252-k-frame-ropers-2.html



The lack of the Pre War domed sideplate screw relief tells us these stocks were produced after 1946, with the introduction of the (post war style) magna stock when flat head upper sideplate screws started to appear, and up into the 1954 when Roper passed away. Although we do see this thread where Mathias Gagne is producing stocks several months after Roper’s death.



http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...-fans-article-now-added-thanks-mr-wilson.html




All in all, these stocks are VERY interesting to say the least and with all the similarities and the shipping box bearing Roper’s name being the BIG connecting link, there is no doubt there is a Roper connection here.


I welcome your comments and would love to see if maybe there are a few more pairs hanging around here somewhere ;)
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Very interesting, one thing I noted was the checkering on the Maple set from SG-688. On the Colt set the checkering has no border, just the rows ending. I've never seen a set of Ropers that didn't have a border.
 
Very interesting, one thing I noted was the checkering on the Maple set from SG-688. On the Colt set the checkering has no border, just the rows ending. I've never seen a set of Ropers that didn't have a border.



True they don't, but aside from that, everything else about them is the same as the above examples. The overall shape and design is the same and shape of the checkering area is the same as my set (and maybe Don's checkered sets also but I don't have pics of those sides).

These stocks aren't what we generally know as Ropers. This is new territory it seems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Great subject. Thank you for sharing the information. I still have so much to learn. I have noticed several members hunting for ropers but I have not paid much attention until now. Man they are beautiful. Good luck on the hunt!
 
Very interesting and certainly make you take a step back and scratch your head. But I think there is one thing we can agree on. They were defiantly not made by Gagne. And as far as the box, how may times have you taken a new pair of stocks out of the box and stuck the old pair in the new box? I know I have done it before. Only years later it could be found, and logically they could conclude its contents original to the box. I see this on Ebay all the time, it happens...a lot.

Maybe these were made by Roper "before" he hired Cagne? I saw a post by a member " Club Gun Fan" who claims to have a pair made by Ropers own hand. They have the same wood I think. Here is a pic of the stocks he posted, and are the ones I was referring to when asking for more information.





See post #51, he got very offended when I ask what made him think this. After his rant he "never posted his proof he claimed to have. I did not mean to offend and was disappointing he never showed his proof. I think we could of all learned something.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha.../366252-k-frame-ropers-2.html?highlight=roper

I will be monitoring this thread to see what others come up with. But I think if they are Roper it would have to be early in the game. Because all the Machined ones I have seen all had the Signature Stamp on them.

Travis
 
Very interesting and certainly make you take a step back and scratch your head. But I think there is one thing we can agree on. They were defiantly not made by Gagne. And as far as the box, how may times have you taken a new pair of stocks out of the box and stuck the old pair in the new box? I know I have done it before. Only years later it could be found, and logically they could conclude its contents original to the box. I see this on Ebay all the time, it happens...a lot.

Maybe these were made by Roper "before" he hired Cagne? I saw a post by a member " Club Gun Fan" who claims to have a pair made by Ropers own hand. They have the same wood I think. Here is a pic of the stocks he posted, and are the ones I was referring to when asking for more information.





See post #51, he got very offended when I ask what made him think this. After his rant he "never posted his proof he claimed to have. I did not mean to offend and was disappointing he never showed his proof. I think we could of all learned something.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha.../366252-k-frame-ropers-2.html?highlight=roper

I will be monitoring this thread to see what others come up with. But I think if they are Roper it would have to be early in the game. Because all the Machined ones I have seen all had the Signature Stamp on them.

Travis



I'll agree they are more than likely not Gagne but they can't be early, they aren't made to fit Pre War revolvers, I.E. No domed sideplate relief as I mentioned in my post.

Also, I realize there is a chance that the grips may not have been the set that shipped in the box but given the similarities between these examples and other Ropers I tend to believe they came in the box. Also, as an aside, the boxed set is owned by a VERY prominent S&W collector and were previously owned by another like-collector.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
410 yours look like they were "aged" what is the black stuff all over it? Almost looks like someone gave it and antique look. Can you post a picture of the screw?
 
410 yours look like they were "aged" what is the black stuff all over it? Almost looks like someone gave it and antique look. Can you post a picture of the screw?



The black stuff I'm not sure of , almost like something coming out of the wood. The screw is not the original. They came with a screw that was incorrect and didn't work properly, this one is a replacement


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sorry but if Gun Club Fan calls them ropers I would not question it at all as he has probibly forgotten what I ain't even had time to learn. Also unless I.am getting my member names wrong does and will have a tremendous amount of involvement in both the collectors association, historical society and in the new factory letter requests. He has helped me in the past with questions pertaining to Combat Magnums and I would consider his knowledge and experience rock solid. Just my opinion.
 
Sorry but if Gun Club Fan calls them ropers I would not question it at all as he has probibly forgotten what I ain't even had time to learn. Also unless I.am getting my member names wrong does and will have a tremendous amount of involvement in both the collectors association, historical society and in the new factory letter requests. He has helped me in the past with questions pertaining to Combat Magnums and I would consider his knowledge and experience rock solid. Just my opinion.

I don't and never had doubted his knowledge. I just asked for him to share it.
 
I don't and never had doubted his knowledge. I just asked for him to share it.

Gotcha. Apologies for thread drift. All the Grips pictured above are something to behold. So again thank ms for starting this thread. I still like the cokes though a little better for now. But maybe just maybe I'll change my mind :-)
 
Last edited:
Very interesting thread.

I may look behind some of mine to see if any have that off set inletting at the top. What gives me some pause is that none of the sets pictured with the off set inletting are ribbon pattern ropers. Every example is of a different type roper than we most commonly see.

The other thing that immediately catches my eye is that all my ropers really hug and roll under the trigger guard really well. Sort of like the real early factory target grips. These seem a bit more shorter around the trigger guard like the later seventies style factory targets.

I would not go as far as saying what these grips are or are not but i would really want to see a off set back ribbon pair to tie all these grips to one maker.
 
4) Although not as ornately formed, these stocks also have the small “lip” at the front of the stock that leads you right into the trigger guard[/B]


Rich, I believe this is what you are referring to regarding the area near the trigger guard. My set has this but as I said, it's not as nicely or precisely done as a vintage set of Ropers.

Also regarding the ribbon, these grips don't have to have the ribbon to be counted as Ropers (as I already mentioned).

The point of this post is not to prove these are the same as "Ropers" as we generally see them (Gagne Ropers) but to state that they are "Ropers" in the sense that Walter Roper had a hand in them, marketed and sold them which makes them Ropers just the same, just of a different era and style of manufacture.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This thread is very cool and brings up a lot of questions. I look forward to seeing all the answers and hopefully more similar grips.

One thing that I was wondering and maybe one of our forum grip makers can answer for me, is which is "normally" done first, the borders, or the checking?
 
Rich, I believe this is what you are referring to regarding the area near the trigger guard. My set has this but as I said, it's not as nicely or precisely done as a vintage set of Ropers.

Also regarding the ribbon, these grips don't have to have the ribbon to be counted as Ropers (as I already mentioned).

The point of this post is not to prove these are the same as "Ropers" as we generally see them (Gagne Ropers) but to state that they are "Ropers" in the sense that Walter Roper had a hand in them, marketed and sold them which makes them Ropers just the same, just of a different era and style of manufacture.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some of mine have that lip on the inside but not all. The thing i am unsure of and is different that i observed in the past is on the back of the grips ,on either side of the half circle is that one side appears lower than the other side. Some are even rounded at thw corner.The lower side seems mostly to be closer to the trigger. Is this correct or am i seeing it off from looking at the picture wrong.

I am open still to they may all be ropers as there are so many variations in looks, but the backs to all mine are very similar and are even on both sides of the circle.
 
Yes Rich. I noted this in the thread. All these have the front side that is lower.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
More pictures of my Colt grips. Great work, whatever they are.




 

Attachments

  • Unk Colt trg borderless a 13.JPG
    Unk Colt trg borderless a 13.JPG
    156.1 KB · Views: 11
  • Unk Colt trg borderless b 13.jpg
    Unk Colt trg borderless b 13.jpg
    150.5 KB · Views: 12
  • Unk Colt trg borderless c 13.jpg
    Unk Colt trg borderless c 13.jpg
    99.6 KB · Views: 11
  • Unk Colt trg borderless d 13.jpg
    Unk Colt trg borderless d 13.jpg
    105.3 KB · Views: 10
  • Unk Colt trg borderless e 13.jpg
    Unk Colt trg borderless e 13.jpg
    146.5 KB · Views: 10
Last edited:
Back
Top