Ivory Grips - Factory and ???

[jussbad]

Recently I picked up a couple of 3 digit Flatgates (from a gentleman 80 years of age). One was wearing a pair of Factory Ivory (as has been described and written about in several books on Rugers by different authors) the other gun was wearing real Ivory as well. However this pair has the medallions (early satin medallions) mounted in the area where the XR3 Walnuts and Hard Rubber grips have their medallions. Last year I was fortunate enough to purchase another pair of Ivory that also have the early satin medallions and mounted in the same area as the Walnut and H/R grips from Ruger. Both pair of these grips are staked the same and have the back of the grip "counter bored" where the staking is done. Neither pair have the scalloped area on the back with a penciled number. This pair was purchased from a gentleman in Indiana that had owned them from the early 60's.

After the great pictures and descriptions in the recent ROCS digest by Bill Cross and the details in John Dougan's book regarding the several suppliers of grips to Ruger - I question if it is possible that some grips were made this way and sold as factory. By the use of the early satin medallions I wonder if these were some of the first grips to be made for sale by Ruger! The only factory grip available for the single-six in 1953 were Hard Rubber and had the satin medallions (at this time the only medallion Ruger used or had in inventory) installed. According to Dougan's most recent Ruger book (Ruger Pistols & Revolvers) the first batch of ivory grips were ordered March 11, 1953 (possibly for some of the early prototypes?). The second order for ivory was 10/20/1953 again before the first Single-Sixes shipped in December of that year. I don't believe Ruger had ordered or had on hand the more shiny medallion at this point. I believe this could have been the same for Factory Stag (that's another story for another time). Just a thought and I welcome any and all comments... from the young collectors or especially the older Collectors who were around in the early days of the Flatgates and Flattops.
2 pair of ivory with satin medallions mounted in the area of the Hard Rubber Grips and XR3 Walnuts


Backside of same grips

Satin (dull) Medallions

Staking of dull satin medallions

Factory Ivory as known from most collectors today

Backside showing scalloped area and penciled numbers as per Dougan's book

Stag grips with Satin Medallions - Another story another day.

 

[rugerguy]

Very nice Gary, we like them, and not our position to say "right or wrong" as that one is very "opinionated' and usually determined by who has them and if they are 'buying or selling'.
all I can say is Laura has a couple pair ,same thing close to the edge and in further like the first medallions were put on the walnuts...she and Steve Vogel had gone over them and Steve told her they were "correct", so she doesn't care what anyone else may comment, as well as the "FACT" she got them on guns that cost $350 for the Single Six and $500 for the 357 flatop ,INCLUDING the grips and the BOXES............needless to say the 357 flatop went to Bob Campbell long ago. oH yes, and the same Dr. sold her a 10" .44 flatop, in the box ,with factory stags for $575 !! so I doubt he was trying to "con, fraud , or take advantage of her". He wanted her to have them, as he enjoyed her conversations, and help at an RCA Ruger theme show, early in the 1980s .....helps to just be "nice" to people 8)

as well known, there was lots of makers of exotic materials back in the old days, stag, ivory, pearl, but MOST were very difficult to work with , (aside from not being healthy for you breathing 'nacre')
so all too often they were 'broken", and very messy,sloppy as to the drilling, staking.....
we have found over the years and you know well of the 'various' folks who have 'faked' these over the years, if they are TOO good, the seller wants TOO much money, then you have to look at them with a careful eye, and even then its a "crap shoot"......caveat emptor baby............
ivory is still worth a LOT of money, who knows what will happen as to the "do gooders" and animal lovers trying to ban the selling,buying even possessing ANY ivory!!!! :?

 

[contender]

Lots of good info.
I for one would consider all the details of the "life" of these grips. If they have resided on these guns for 35 years, as well as the detail of the staking, AND the correct type of medallions for that period, I'd have a hard time not considering them factory. Back when Bill first started offering stag & ivory, they were a more common thing to be had. As such, it's easy to see how a vendor for grips could take a normal pair of grips, using medallion placement & such to try & duplicate that look on ivory or stag. Like Gary, I think the earlier ones could easily not be pencil marked, (an easy thing to counterfeit,) and if you look at the cost of them then, too many folks wouldn't consider counterfeiting grips as they were available from the factory & NOT as valuable as they are today. (By cost comparison, a Single-Six w/o ivory was about $50-$55 at a dealer, retail being $57.50, while the ivory grips retailed for $16.50 and dealer was $12.50. Today, a Single-Six will cost about 7 times that, average. If you take an average of $15 times 7, you are less than $100.) MANY custom grips now cost more than that. To counterfeit such grips would take unstaked medallions of the correct vintage, and be able to get the ivory grips made & properly drilled etc AND have a correct type staking tool.
I'm not saying it hasn't been done, I'm just feeling like these grips on these guns ARE correct IN MY OPINION.

And like Dan says, a lot has been done and when somebody wants a lot for something, and you are not sure, "caveat emptor!"

 

[radicalrod]

Gary, Well I think they are FAKE......send them to me for proper disposal :roll: :roll: :roll:

They is what they is....nice Ivory Stocks....wear them with pride

No one can ever say they are 100% factory or not so just enjoy them YMMV....RR

 

[El Numero Uno]

There was a time that I believed that both ivory and stag grips had to have the medallion"up higher and forward". Of late I have changed my opinion about the ivories on location. There are too many turning up like this, with a good history, to say for sure anymore that they are not correct.
CLN

 

[Doc4429]

We (or I) have not seen enough ivory grips to be able to tell what is "factory" and what is not. I assume the grips are factory if the Ruger monograms, escutcheons, staking, and grip screw are at least "period" correct. We need more examples to be able to draw better conclusions. In the article in the ROCS Digest, I point out the bevel on the bottom of various pairs is slightly different and I have recently acquired a pair of ivory grips that is a little less polished than the other ones in my collection, but appear identical in all other ways. For now, I am considering them as factory. Just more food for thought.

Bill Cross

 

[jussbad]

Again, I'm curious about the thoughts of the satin or "dull" medallions as I believe the shiny medallions did not exist when Ivory and stags were ordered by Ruger in 1953. Thoughts anyone?

 

[SteveRuger]

IMHO! I have had & have a few Factory & Non-Factory Stags & Ivories over the years & I know I am getting older & all that but, I don't remember early (matt or dull) medallions on any of them. Gary I like them they sure dress up a Ruger! J/S

 

[rugerguy]

I agree, the "satin' medallions of the early RST's and MK Is and the first Single Sixes of of 1953 and into 54 did NOT stay around very long, as another vendor or dies or whatever took place soon after and they been shiny ever since, yes the necks changed as well as some having neck feather in the 1967-68. yes we've seen over laps of the autos medallions, but not so much in the Single Sixes, and few of lauras have the satin ones in any of their grips, so again, we feel limited but HOW limited or short a period of time, I"d let Chad put more info as to the medallions, the exotic material of the grips seemed to come later in any "quantities" ,mid or latter 50's.......and the pearls we've NEVER seen medallions in them, back to the drilling/cutting of nacre not being good for your respiratory system..........................
I still get more concerned as to the staking ( and it's inner hole formation) than anything else.MOST Ruger exotic grips the staking is pretty crude, uneven,so back to the "if it looks TOO good or is TOO perfect", I'd be wary..............hell the 'average' grip maker just glues 'em in :roll:
and like Bill C noted how often we see differences in how the bevel or bottom of the grips can be shaped, and this I attribute to different makers ( suppliers,vendors) spread out.

again, very subjective AND opinionated, who has 'em, and who is either buying or selling 8) :wink:

 

[jussbad]

Thanks to all that responded. I just wonder how many pairs have been passed on because of medallion location or the fact they had the dull/brushed medallions? I just thought it unusual that when according to Dougan's book Ruger ordered Ivory and Stag grips in 1953 and the ONLY medallion that existed were the brushed/dull medallions. Is it possible Ruger had the shiny medallions ordered in 1953 for Stag and Ivory grips only? Thanks again for all responses.

 

[Robb Barnes]

Thanks Gary for posting about this. It is the very reason I backed away from trying to find a set of factory ivories when I owned a Ross flat top. Too many unknowns in the arena to let me get comfortable on pulling the trigger on a set at the price they were available at. In one way it did make things easier in that I turned to guys like Jim at Nutmeg, Paul Persinger and Roy Fishpaw for my ivories so there is never a question about the origin.

 

[rugerguy]

I really do NOT think that Ruger even thought of or specified ,"satin" ( dull) medallions, thats what was on the autos BEFORE they started Single Sixes ,,,,,sooooo ,the medallions were already around the factory or where ever ( in stock) as it still all depended on WHO ???? actually installed , staked them inplace, I've heard way TOOOO many "stories" already and the guys who did it are dead and GONE...thre plastic medallions were made and supplied by various vendors and I have YET to hear the name of ONE "company" ???????? I've heard of MANY companies, mainly in New York who made, supplied various materials for grips, ALL 'aftermarket' for every gun company out there,back then basically Smith ,Colt and Ruger................................

 

[chet15]

Not saying those stags are non-Ruger, and maybe its just the lighting, but the stake holes on the back of the stag panels do not appear to have the same "patina" as the flat portion of the grip. They have a "fresh cut" look to them
Chet15

 

[El Numero Uno]

Think it may the lighting, or the backs have been varnished. The staking does not appear to be the 12, 3, 6 and 9, which, generally to me, means they are Factory

 

[jussbad]

Not saying those stags are non-Ruger, and maybe its just the lighting, but the stake holes on the back of the stag panels do not appear to have the same "patina" as the flat portion of the grip. They have a "fresh cut" look to them
Chet15

I did take these inside with a flash. They are not that light as they appear in the picture. I am in no way saying these are factory - just saying that I have had two pair this way (the first I sold because I was told they were not factory and it was in the beginning of my learning about Rugers) - Now I buy them if I like them either way. I have some favorites and this pair is one of them. I will not pass another pair up if it had the dull brushed medallions since there is no proof that they did not come this way. Since a good supply of stag and ivory were ordered in 1953 I believe that some could have been fitted with these medallions. Either way I LIKE THEM. Thanks again for all who replied.

 

[rugerguy]

they were not "precise" with their staking in the beginning, the stake marks could be about any direction, as well as NOT completely across, maybe why they broke so many pairs and we see so many pairs that do NOT even match ( mainly in the stags) Same with the cutout ( dish) for the numbers, only on the ivorys, got to the point when there were MORE sets around the shop they had to mark them to keep the sets ( pairs) together. Got some of this info from the original owner of Ajax and another company in Philadelphia when we attend the FBI range there for a National Police shooting competition through Police Marksman in the early 70's met a lot of the sponsors and we of course talked grips and customizing, having been doing work with Mr Austin Behlert at the time.and of course about the only guys who were "Ruger" minded was myself, Les Dees and Ron Powers, so we got into quite a bit of this and that as to Ruger, I worked on them, I did NOT collect them , back then it was not even in the topic of conversation, later on Laura started to show and interest and actually collect almost 5 years later. When we had our shop Cleveland Bluing Co back then we paid $7.50 for brass frame sets , and around $6.50 for stags they only retailed for $8.50, ivory and pearl was about $3.00 more.......................I would love to hear more from Rich Wilmot who'se son actually worked with the man who made the arbor press to stake the medallions after so many had been breaking in the beginning, wonder why Rich never spoke up any more about that bit of information????????? most all the people from back then are GONE and the fact of the matter is there are FAR MORE 'exotic' material grips out there than Ruger sold in the first place, so YES, caveat emptor..........................

and bottom line it is still "opinionated and subjective", as MOST have NO clue !!!

 

[DougGuy]

You fellas are well up on the cryptic markings and possible dates, hats off to you for your diligent sleuthery and sharing such hard to find information. A couple of things make perfect sense, as the comment about the dull medallions being the -only- medallions that the factory had when they were ordering ivories.

I have a pair of what I believe to be factory ivories, I shared these photos with a Ruger historian who commented that he didn't see anything that tipped him off that these are anything but factory ivories.

The medallions are up more and forward more than the ones in Gary's photos, they are canted forward equally and match this forward cant that I see on a lot of the older grips but who knows that different runs of grips weren't all made with medallions in the same spot as an earlier run or later run, or even a run from a different supplier? They may have been the dull medallions but there is enough handling wear from when they were on a gun that the black paint is worn off and the raised surfaces are shined by human touch except in one area that is more or less protected, and they have the satin/dull patina in that area.

The staking is countersunk, one panel is almost 12-3-6-9 in orientation, where the other panel is on a 45 degree angle more or less, as is one pair of the grips Gary posted. The scalloped area bears a faintly visible 87 penciled in on each panel.

Have no history on them, why they are not whiter on the inside is anybody's guess, I think they spent more time in somebody's oily parts box or wrapped with a not so clean and fresh rag, who knows. Someone could have thought they would look better aged and this is why they are brown, like I said I have no history on them, they are as I received them in a trade.

I thought about using them on a vaquero but the new XR3 and the original XR3 are a LOT different and they don't even come close to fitting.

I will post photos and welcome comments. Would like to know what these might be worth -and- what a pair like this, if authenticated, even with the stains, might be selling for. Sometimes there is a lot of difference in what something is valued in a book and what that item might really sell for.

If these photos are not good enough, too big, or otherwise annoying or in need of editing or retaking let me know and I will fix it. Apologies for photobombing this thread but I didn't see any other thread which dealt with factory ivories.

 

[street]

You fellas are well up on the cryptic markings and possible dates, hats off to you for your diligent sleuthery and sharing such hard to find information. A couple of things make perfect sense, as the comment about the dull medallions being the -only- medallions that the factory had when they were ordering ivories.

I have a pair of what I believe to be factory ivories, I shared these photos with a Ruger historian who commented that he didn't see anything that tipped him off that these are anything but factory ivories.

The medallions are up more and forward more than the ones in Gary's photos, they are canted forward equally and match this forward cant that I see on a lot of the older grips but who knows that different runs of grips weren't all made with medallions in the same spot as an earlier run or later run, or even a run from a different supplier? They may have been the dull medallions but there is enough handling wear from when they were on a gun that the black paint is worn off and the raised surfaces are shined by human touch except in one area that is more or less protected, and they have the satin/dull patina in that area.

The staking is countersunk, one panel is almost 12-3-6-9 in orientation, where the other panel is on a 45 degree angle more or less, as is one pair of the grips Gary posted. The scalloped area bears a faintly visible 87 penciled in on each panel.

Have no history on them, why they are not whiter on the inside is anybody's guess, I think they spent more time in somebody's oily parts box or wrapped with a not so clean and fresh rag, who knows. Someone could have thought they would look better aged and this is why they are brown, like I said I have no history on them, they are as I received them in a trade.

I thought about using them on a vaquero but the new XR3 and the original XR3 are a LOT different and they don't even come close to fitting.

I will post photos and welcome comments. Would like to know what these might be worth -and- what a pair like this, if authenticated, even with the stains, might be selling for. Sometimes there is a lot of difference in what something is valued in a book and what that item might really sell for.

If these photos are not good enough, too big, or otherwise annoying or in need of editing or retaking let me know and I will fix it. Apologies for photobombing this thread but I didn't see any other thread which dealt with factory ivories.

The grips sure look old enough to be factory Ruger grips. Let me add that I too don't see anything that I can say that they are not factory grips.

 

[rugerguy]

those look pretty good to me, and I think they are what is called "antique" ivory ( mastodon)?? darker, and lots of grain, will shrink, and darken in time and depending on what is used to wipe them down or where they may sit, will soak up various things.......put a bit of baby oil or lanolin or such on them to keep them nice and fresh.
Yes, the set back has often been different over time, some way back, some of them closer to the front , I was told this was done as the thick grips would NOT take a medallion and its "short" stub ( they had to go further forward to the more "flatter" part of the grip panel) you may see some of the very early grips that the set back was more like the further back like the first black plastic ( hard rubber ) grips........I knew grip makers from way back that would even "custom" make the stag grips to fit your hand ( palm swell) and if you were right or left handed, that grips was thicker and more rounded , see this often on old Colt Single Action Armys, as well as them having a long horn steer on one side or the other ( which ever faced out in your holster...this goes WAY back, long before Ruger..............

 

[tommygun]

When I was just a greenhorn in this collecting arena, I was sold a set of ivories as factory originals. I later acquired a second pair through Rugerguy that you all have seen cracked and had to be repaired. ( (They were cracked when I bought them.) Anyway as I compared the 2 as I became more experienced, I realized that one set had the scalloped area with the penciled number and the other set does not. Thought oh no the rookie had made a big mistake. So did I or did I not?????? Unfortunately it is the cracked/repaired set that has the penciled numbers.

 

[rugerguy]

we were told by a grip maker that it depended on the volume of grips being made, if only a set or two at a time, no need to "mark or number" them to keep "set" together...have seen them BOTH ways from Ruger, again must have been a different vendor at the time, now all these later, with all the "fake" having been made, and passed around, there are far MORE sets of ivory , and even stags , than Ruger ever sold in all those years.......
the pair pictured above, do indeed have the "dished" out area where those marks would be found, and yes obviously, still another 'point' that any gifted individual with time, and $$$$ dreams in their heart, could "fake", as I will always say, "if they look TOO good, ,caveat emptor baby"... 8)
especially when you are about to pay the big bucks or stupid money.......all the ones we ever came across except for ONE pair that we let the late Bob C purchase, all came on guns with NO extra charge for the grips............hhhmmm ( and Laura has turned down LOTS of $$$ for any of hers.....) :roll:

 

[jussbad]

Tommygun
How about a picture of the repaired grips? Would like to see how they turned out.

 

[tommygun]

Gary still don't have the picture posting thing worked out. They really don't look any different than they did. The one broken in 2 pieces is now a single grip panel. I was under the impression that the cracks would be less noticeable. Not true! When I got them back I inquired with another grip maker and he agreed that there is no way to cosmetically improve them. The medallion and escutcheon holes were "enlarged" a bit to relieve the pressure that had caused them to crack. You can't tell. Unfortunately the medallions then had to be epoxied in place. So I know have a serviceable pair of factory ivory stags

 

[chet15]

One bit of information that I haven't really shared with anybody because the "factory stag/ivory" question can be pretty toxic at times.
The big question I always had is that the very first invoice for the first six pair of ivory that were ordered (from J.L. Galef) cost Ruger $11 a pair. I don't remember where I saw a pic of the invoice now, but it was published and the invoice says something to the effect of "with installed medallions". These grips were used to put on the six "A" through "F" letter prototype Single-Sixes so the guns could get out to gun writers for review, because the black checkered hard rubber panels were not yet available. I will note that every pair seen on these letter prototypes do have the medallions in identical positions. The grips appear identical in all the pictures.
My nagging question was...if this invoice says "with installed medallions", do the other stag/ ivory invoices from the other 3 makers say the same? Or why don't any/all of those invoices say something about installed medallions (rightfully, another step) before being sent to Ruger, if indeed they were installed by the makers? (Three different companies after J.L. Galef).
By far the overwhelming opinion (not mine) is that each of the manufacturers "must" have installed the medallions. This helps to substantiate in everybody's mind the reason for the wide range of locations that the medallions can be found on stag and ivory that today are considered factory, again by a majority of owners and collectors.
But the question burned...do any of those other stag and ivory invoices say "with installed medallions"?
I finally got an answer from JD a few years ago who said, no...none of the later invoices say "with installed medallions".
So then I brought up the thought with him that there was a very good possibility then that Ruger must have been the one who installed the medallions...to which he replied...maybe Ruger did some....maybe the makers did some...we'll never know. Yes...we will never know, but it is still a burning question, eh? Why don't any of the other three makers invoices say "with installed medallions" when it was probably Ruger's specific instructions that J.L. Galef make those first six pair "with medallions" as noted on the invoice?
Excepting the invoices that are known to have been destroyed, there are 72 other invoices to Ruger for stag and ivory grips in JD's addendum that do not mention Ruger's specific instructions to install medallions.

JD also said that breakage at the factory was not a big deal for stag or ivory because there was plenty of margin in the markup...that their losses could easily be paid for. I can't quite see how this could be a true statement, and maybe JD was just speaking off the cuff, but it is published in his most recent book that Ruger was charged $8.25 for each pair ivory from Superior Pearl and Horn. After that, they purchased pairs of ivory XR3 from American Gun Handle and Novelty Co., for $8.10 a pair.
Ruger paid $4.25 a pair from Superior Pearl and Horn for pairs of stag. The book doesn't say if this price got any better from the other three stag grip suppliers that Ruger later used.
OK...on page 319 of the same book there is a copy of the August 1, 1955 Jobbers Sheet which lists the Jobber price for ivory at $9 and stag at $5 (Retail was $16.50 and $8.50 respectively, and the dealer price was $12.50 and $6.45 respectively).
This makes a grand best profit on Ruger's end of 90 cents (!!) a pair for every pair of ivory they shipped to Jobbers and 75 cents for every pair of stag shipped out. Break a pair of ivory and you need to sell nine more pair of ivory to break even. That's not my idea of "plenty of profit". Even if Ruger sold ivory direct to the customer, they would have made a maximum of $8.40 profit on ivory. Break one pair and you have to sell another pair to break even.
So then...JD's addendum to his book states that of the first fifty pair of ivory received from Superior Pearl and horn, 21 pair were returned four months later. Of the first 50 pair of stag received from Superior Pearl and Horn, 35 pair had been returned nearly five months later.
Why would they have been returned? Grips out of spec somehow? I would think that Ruger would have sent a blueprint of some sort to the grip maker, or even a grip frame, so the grip maker could at least get the shape of the grip right, to fit the grip frame, after all...why would you cut them out incorrectly when these grips are only going to fit the XR3 frame? Get them wrong and the maker starts losing all of that lovely profit. Whatever the problem though...it must have been solved as there weren't any other pair of ivory returned.
Broken grips? In my opinion, something was wrong with the spec, and the critical point in any of ivory or stag would have been either fit or more likely the thickness of the panel at the medallion area, already weakened by the medallion stem. The thickness of the medallion area has to be precise. That the grip makers made them precise in the medallion area can be seen in what I consider the earliest stag grips (good dark color and nice burl) because these have a very noticeable tapered slab cut from the middle of the grip down to the medallion area. I suppose the maker could hand "grind" the slab cut down to spec but it would seem to be a lot easier if some sort of template were used, just like gun stocks are pre-shaped. Time is money, so why would you make such drastic slab cuts by hand?

Why a precise thickness at the medallion area? Not only to match up as good as possible with the rear of the cylinder frame, but also because of the medallion thickness. I believe the medallion hole drilling was done in a two step process. Drill the medallion stem hole and medallion inset, and flip it over and drill the counterbore on the backside. If the grip is too thick, you'll crack the grip when you stake the medallion. Too thin and you have the stem and or top of the medallion poking above either surface and a rotating medallion (I think stag panels could get away somewhat from having a portion of the medallion area too thin...but not the majority of it).
Don't get me wrong...rotated medallions are not a diagnostic of faked stag or ivory...it could also mean the panels have shrunk slightly.

Just some food for thought.
Chet15

 

[chet15]

DougGuy...I'm not saying these grips are wrong...but just remember that one of the favorite ways of "aging" a pair of ivory panels is to soak them in tea. This was initially a favorite technique of one of the most well-known "factory ivory" makers in California.
I don't remember if it is hot water that will give them the cracks at the bottom or not (I do not recommend doing that to ivory!!), but there was also a process for making those cracks.
There are a lot of fake stag and ivory out there. If you like them, buy them...but always...buyer beware!!
Chet15

 

[mohavesam]

...and this is why I just plain avoid stag and ivory grips...

The probability of encountering fakes on the market is so high, because the pricing potential is so drastic! Figure in the organic/polymer compounds now being produced, the advances in industrial faux materials is way ahead of detection methods.
If I had "factory originals" as you probably have here, there is practically no way to document them as genuine anyway!

I could show them to ten crusty old experts and get ten differing opinions? Even the guys selling ivory cannot guarantee they are genuine and actually have no way of proving they are or are not!!!


Show 'em, wear 'em, shoot 'em!

 

[DougGuy]

DougGuy...I'm not saying these grips are wrong...but just remember that one of the favorite ways of "aging" a pair of ivory panels is to soak them in tea. This was initially a favorite technique of one of the most well-known "factory ivory" makers in California.
I don't remember if it is hot water that will give them the cracks at the bottom or not (I do not recommend doing that to ivory!!), but there was also a process for making those cracks.
There are a lot of fake stag and ivory out there. If you like them, buy them...but always...buyer beware!!
Chet15

The part about these that is definitely not an aged repro, is the squashed chickens. Even the staking is correct, as is the counterbore. This is likely the strongest statement of originality. Ruger did use different vendors for ivories, and there are cryptic markings that are identified with various runs or periods of ivory shipped by the factory.

I am aware of fakes, but also consider this. When these were made, if you believe that they are originals and correct for the '53 to '58 period, there was no need to make counterfeits because the genuine articles were quite affordable and easy enough to get. So that points back to the medallions being the part that authenticates them. Not only the medallions themselves, but their placement, method of staking, and the counterbore behind them.

If you are the same Chet who initially looked over these photos a few years back, I both respect and appreciate your opinion, if you are a different Chet, then let me add that the Chet who was kind enough to look over the detailed photos mentioned quite a few of the small points of interest and stated at the time that although he is aware of fakes, he did not see anything about these that would lead him to believe that they are anything but the genuine article.

It's a shame that someone has either neglected them in an oily parts box, or artificially aged them quite some time ago, none of which appears recent enough to cast doubt on the authenticity, but even in the company of KNOWN to be genuine ivories of the same age and patina, I feel they would match the documented genuine grips, if there IS such a thing, beyond question.

I currently am the owner of these grips, but am considering offering them for sale. I know what a nice pair of white ones in good shape would be worth, and these are definitely not on the same value as such a set, on the other hand they are what they are and speculation is exactly that, speculation, which won't detract from the value that they do hold. I know what new ivory brings on GB and I would think these would hold somewhat more than what a new set would bring.

 

[rugerguy]

Douguy, those are NOT "squashed" chicken medallions in the grips pictured above, and as for those cracks, that is from "time, age, natural shrinking" process and dirt getting in them............. :wink:

Merry Christmas

 

[DougGuy]

Douguy, those are NOT "squashed" chicken medallions in the grips pictured above, and as for those cracks, that is from "time, age, natural shrinking" process and dirt getting in them............. :wink:

Merry Christmas

Really? My bad, I'm not a collector or not really knowledgeable on the early Ruger production either. I have learned more from this thread about factory ivories than I could have learned from Google, so thank you for that.

Merry Christmas to you and yours as well, and the same for everyone else on this forum!

 

[chet15]

DougGuy...yes I would be the same Chet you spoke of. I don't remember looking at the pictures previously, or if I did don't remember seeing the backs of them.
Just made mention of the darkness because that was initially the way to make fake ivory look "old".
I think everybody here on Rugerforum.com knows my opinion on stag and ivory grips with medallions in them.
The problem is, there are those who know how to make a fake pair look "factory", thereby increasing the sale price of the grips.
So the next collector inherits the problem, and so on.
The problem I've always had is originality, because originality should be what makes a pair of factory stag or ivory worth the fair market collector value, instead of "they look right, so lets sell them for another $1,200 more".
Today, with all the pair of stag and ivory that have traded hands from one collector to another since prices skyrocketed, there aren't very many pair that anybody can say are truly factory original without a doubt...Count the 6 pair of ivory on the letter prototype Single-Sixes, the pair of ivory that is on #100 Engraved .357 flattop...maybe a few other pair that were documented and beyond that how do you tell??
There's even two pair of ivory on a well known consecutive pair of Single-Sixes that has at least one panel that is fake...but I guarantee the owner didn't buy them as such, nor does he know what I found in the pictures that I took of then....I didn't even know it till I looked at the pics again.
Then there are the three pair of ivory I saw at a collector's table in Nebraska in the mid '80's. At the time I was just getting hyped about Ruger collecting so asked if I could take the grips off the guns to see how they were numbered on the back. Hmmm...interesting that all three pair of grips had consecutive numbers...then I noticed at least one of the panels had a post '66 medallion in it (might have been three of the panels, don't remember now). So all three pair were fakes. Those three pair are floating around out there somewhere in somebody's collection who believed up and down that they are the real deal. Who knows how many people have inherited the problem with those three pair alone?
Everybody also talks about staking on the back of the medallion. I've seen stag and ivory that have very light hits on the end of that stem...why? Because if you go to cranking on the edge around the rear of the stem you are going to break the panel. I could go on and on...but doesn't matter much because again....those who know how to make stag and ivory look factory, have done it. And today the descriptions of what "factory" should look like are all over the board...not my opinion, but the general thinking right across the board.
Chet15