The tag in the 69 says Fullerton. Beyond that, there wasnt much difference between Later Dayton and Early Fullerton.

'Significant' differences? No. They have lighter lugs, different lug mounting screws/washers, speckled paint inside instead of flat grey which was used until 1966-7. But they are the same drums, same shells as in '66, same edges etc. The earlier stuff is more sought after, but the later drums are excellent as well. I have several of both time periods and they all sound great.

Most of the first Fullerton shells were one they moved from Ohio to California. Then they bought them from the same supplier for years.

Funny thing about the Cleveland and Dayton drums, They were put together in the same warehouse. Just the offices moved mostly...

That's right. The entire time in Ohio, the shop was in Covington. When CBS took over, they opened an office in Dayton since it was a lot closer to Covington. Cleveland is way to the other side of the state; that's where Grossman Music was (is).

The first Dayton-tagged drums were identical to the Cleveland-tagged drums made the day before, right down to the flat grey paint. This probably continued for 3-6 months before the speckled paint, different screws/washers etc and other detail changes started trickling in...

But all through the Dayton period, 66-69, the plant was the same, the crew was the same, the shells still came from Keller, etc.

The major impact was in the move to Fullerton: most of the workers didn't want to move 2500 miles, understandably, so mostly new workers were in the Ca. facility. But the suppliers were the same, the machines were moved from Ohio, parts inventory was moved, etc. The changes in hardware continued to evolve into 1970 and beyond, most notably the cast collet noses and leg mounts. Also, the look of the tom arms and other metal components changed. However, even though the cast parts had their problems, the plating on these and other components was improved. While I believe that some changes were made to reduce some costs, I also believe that there was a good-faith effort on the part of the production people to actually improve and modernize the product.

It may be heresy to suggest this, considering how devoted we Rogers fanatics are and how the original Ohio goods are revered and how we all loath what CBS eventually did to the company in the 80's.

But the fact of the matter is that making some parts lighter is not necessarily a bad thing. They probably felt that less mass on the shells would improve the resonance. In any event, the look of the lugs is the same, and I believe the plating actually was better. The new collet noses looked great and the new design eliminated the likelihood of the 'wings' breaking off, which was a common problem. They didn't anticipate the cracks opening up around the top, and that's unfortunate. Same for the leg mounts: they looked more sleek and the plating was excellent- I really don't have any problem with that change.

The most visible impact of the move and changing times was that q.c. varied from time to time. The consistency and attention to detail of the Ohio days couldn't be duplicated. So, while much was gained, something also was lost. That's progress.

My point is this: there is not such a huge gap between the Ohio drums and the Ca. drums as many folks believe. The changes were gradual and reasonable in most cases. It really isn't necessary for all of the trashing of the Ca. drums that's been going on for the last 10 years; they're good drums too, just different. I have both and I love them all.

By the way, the b&b lugs were not so hot , were they? Beautiful to look at, but fragile as an egg. Sometimes change is needed and is an absolute positive.

Great info bigdan! Thanks for the history and insight. I personally love the b and b lugs. I still fighting to keep mine alive.