Thank you everyone for the input, very interesting. I was not around for the first half of the post-war era, and for a good part of the second half I either running around in diapers or crashing motorcycles. My impressions are based on reading dads complete collection of Gun Digests, and looking at the rifles I could at gun shows. So please, keep this in mid when reading the following. These are just my observations, please feel free to correct them as needed.
It seems to me the post war era could really be divided into three parts. The first, I would all a transition era. Lets say from 1945 thru about the early 60's. During this time scopes were becoming common place, and the modern classic style had not yet really been defined. A lot of pre-war makers were still active, and some of them I think had trouble trying to make stocks that were suited to scope use yet still attractive. Tom Shelhamer is one of these. While his workmanship is consistently very good, his post-war cheek pieces take some time to grow on you. I do not think his post-war work is as elegant as his pre-war stocks.
The second era seems to be from about the mid 60's, thru the mid 80's. By this time the modern classic style, other than a few refinements, had pretty much been defind. What we did see during this time was not so much a change in what was done, but a great increase in the quality that is was being done to. Fit, finish, detailing, and checkering all were refined to nearly perfection in the top makers work.
Once the quality was raised as far is it could humanly be, the top makers started to look for other ways to show off there craft. This is what I see as the current era. The top craftsman are doing things that are just mind blowing. In some ways I think we have gotten away from "form follows function" of the classic style, and we are doing things just for the sake of saying we did them. I certainly hope this is not taken as a criticism, as I say the work being done is just incredible, but doing something just for the sake of doing it, or using some exotic material just to show that you can, is not to my mind in keeping with the classic style.
Again, just my observations, I'd love to hear from some smiths who have been active thru this whole era who can tell me how far off base I am.
A few more names that I don't think have been mentioned yet, Dale Goens and Sterling Davenport.
Thank you everyone, this has been very informative.
John
