Finally!

[Phil Yearout]

I have long wanted a set of genuine Sambar stag grips for my First Series Colt Woodsman. Some years back I ordered a set on ebay but they were way too thick and they totally changed the look and feel of the pistol. Fortunately the guy had a return policy. Then I tracked a set of really nicely aged ones that ultimately went for more than I paid for the gun; couldn't justify those!

Around Christmastime I found another pair on the bay, as nicely matched as any I've seen; very similar texture on both sides. The seller graciously supplied me with the measurements, which were just a very few thousandths over that of my OEM wood grips. Still, they were expensive, and I was kinda gun shy from the first pair I'd tried. One day I checked the listing and he was offering 20% off, free shipping, and a 14 day return privilege; couldn't pass that up!

Long story longer, I love them! They're beautiful, the gun looks great and feels really good in the hand; in fact I think the slightly thicker grips improve the feel, for me anyway. So here she is at last; the faux stag grips she had been wearing went on ebay the next day...

[OH Osthaus]

That looks great

[Elk Hunter]

Those do look nice!

I had a set of stag stocks on a Colt single action army, 44 special years ago. Traded them off for a set of factory stocks because they tried to peel my hand every shot with hot Keith loads. Looked great, but hurt too much.

[Phil Yearout]

Well these are pretty smooth. Plus I won't have to worry about that with a .22 and low pressure loads.

Relatedly, anybody with stag grips is pretty proud of them. A friend got a SA Colt Buntline with a set of what he thought were pretty poorly matched and fitted stag grips. That was fine with him because he wanted to put a set of walnut grips made from a special tree from his father's back yard on it anyway. But he sold the stags the next day for I think he said $450!

[edgarspencer]

Those are handsome grips. Your gun is actually a First Model, Second Series. From 1915 to 1927, they didn't say 'WOODSMAN' anywhere on the gun, until sn34000. The Sport model, like yours, came out in 1934. The long barrel version wasn't called 'First Model' until 1934
There are a lot of those in top bureau drawers in this part of CT. I always said I want one of those, and If I get rid of five more, I'll have one.

[Phil Yearout]

According to Bob Rayburn's book which is pretty much the definitive guide for these pistols, it's a First Series Sport. The Sport Model was added to the line in 1933. This one is c. 1938 according to the serial number list in Bob's book.

The flip side...

[charlie cleveland]

great looking pistol the new stag handles really dress her up...charlie

[Richard Flanders]

The first handgun I ever shot was a Woodsman with my grandfather in 1957. The first rifle I shot was with my other grandfather and was a Marbles Gamegetter, also in 1957.

[edgarspencer]

Originally Posted by Phil Yearout

According to Bob Rayburn's book which is pretty much the definitive guide for these pistols, it's a First Series Sport. The Sport Model was added to the line in 1933.

That makes more sense. The First series, was only the 6 1/2", and had the early style hammer spring housing, which was a checkered oval, The second series added 'The Woodsman', and changed the spring housing. the checkered oval went away and was replaced by the straight serrations. These were the first ones designed for high speed ammo.

[C.O.B.]

Your lucky to have a holster with the gun. I bought a Match Target several years ago and haven't been able to find a suitable holster for it. It slops around in one I use for a Ruger MK1 target pistol.