Traditional Muzzleloading Association

Craftsmanship => Gun Building and Repair => Topic started by: mario on May 27, 2008, 07:35:50 PM

Title: Slimming down wood
Post by: mario on May 27, 2008, 07:35:50 PM: I finally got my Early English Trade Gun from Sitting Fox ML and I want to slim the forestock down by maybe an 1/8" all around.

Should I use:

A hand plane? (I have various smaller ones)

A scraper?

A rasp? (I think that would take too much off, too quick and be harder to clean up afterwards)

Mario
Title:
Post by: jbullard1 on May 27, 2008, 07:47:28 PM: I use a double cut file and sandpaper
Title: rasp
Post by: ridjrunr on May 27, 2008, 07:59:47 PM: mario,I'm not real exp. hear or anything .but I just recently took ALOT of wood off of a cva kentucky kit to make it not look like a cva.I did the bulk of it with a 4-way rasp and then progressive grades of sandpaper on blocks of wood.Am very pleased even though it is not finished with the stain yet. The sculpting I feel went great.I took my time over a few weeks as it was my first.A little nector after each session didn't hurt either.I'm thinkn the best tool is patience.Yers is a might bit more spendier though so the more exp. guys I'm shure will give input. ridjrunr
Title:
Post by: BEAVERMAN on May 27, 2008, 08:00:54 PM: a# 50 nicholson rasp first, then progress down with the files and paper
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on May 27, 2008, 08:02:12 PM: Quote from: "jbullard1"
I use a double cut file and sandpaper

That's what I use as well. I would avoid the hand plane as it would be to easy to gouge out a piece of wood you didn't intend to. Just work slow and keep checking. Before you know it you'll have that stock where you want it.
Title:
Post by: Captchee on May 27, 2008, 08:23:21 PM: i use no sand paper on my rifles . none .
only scrapers and files to take the wood down

if you do go with paper , make sure you use a block to sand
Title:
Post by: jbullard1 on May 27, 2008, 08:27:38 PM: Quote from: "Captchee"
.......................................................if you do go with paper , make sure you use a block to sand

Very good advice
And Be careful not to round corners that need to be square

Capt. Do you make or buy your scrapers??
Title:
Post by: Captchee on May 27, 2008, 08:34:11 PM: not normaly . some of the smaller ones for the inside of the lock mortises and patch boxes i do but my main scrapers i get from Garlick & Son.
IMO the use of scrapers adds alot to the overal look of a rifle . a good scapper will remove wood faster and much smoother then sandpaper ever can .
the acception is around carvings which i also scape . however i leave the scaper marks . in doing so it shows that actual tooling was used to finish the carving , not modern sand paper .
some folks say this doesnt look finished properly . but IMO it is and shows that the stock was done correctly not mechined or worked as a modern rifle stock would be

just bring things down with rasps ... then swith to metal files to remove the rasp marks and finish ruff shaping . then switching to scrapers to finish shape
Title:
Post by: mario on May 27, 2008, 08:51:50 PM: Quote from: "Captchee"
just bring things down with rasps ... then swith to metal files to remove the rasp marks and finish ruff shaping . then switching to scrapers to finish shape

AHA! Sounds good.

Mario
Title:
Post by: RichW on May 28, 2008, 09:04:38 AM: A plane will work fine, it just has to be the right kind. It has to be small enough to hold with 2 fingers and a thumb, and the blade has to be set at a low angle to deal with grain changes without chipping. It also has to be very sharp.

With a plane you get nice long even cuts, but also small facets between cuts. A file works down smaller areas but you can get an undulating surface. Either way you need to finish with scrapers.
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on May 28, 2008, 09:37:50 AM: Yes, all these tools will work and they work best once a person has the developed skills of usage with them, which I'm sure Mario has.
Title:
Post by: Sneakon on May 29, 2008, 08:26:08 AM: There probably is not a strict answer to this question, but I was wondering how much weight reduction could be expected from taking an eighth inch off the stock all around? Would it be worth doing to an 8 1/2 pound hunting rifle to reduce weight?
Title:
Post by: RichW on May 29, 2008, 08:42:13 AM: I think part of the answer is, a trade gun is a dual purpose gun, and already has a light barrel. Making the fore end lighter makes the gun point better, which is a plus for shotgunning.
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on May 29, 2008, 08:43:06 AM: If weight reduction is the purpose of taking 1/8" of wood off a person is not going to gain much. If a person has some 1/8" strips of wood in their shop they can estimate the weight reduction by putting a caculated amount of this wood on a scale. It's not going to amount to much.

Weight reduction would and could come from a combination of wood removal and swamping the barrel.

I could see removing the wood if you're going for slim line looks as this seems to be the in thing these days. I'm not sure what muzzleloader style we're talking about here as I don't believe it was said, but in the Museum of the Fur Trade there are many examples of what I would call "beefy" stocked period muzzleloaders.

With this said I'll add that all of us have in our minds eye what we like and what we precieve as the look and feel we prefer in a muzzleloader, and I would see no reason to not to personalize your muzzleloader if it gives you a personal feel of what you prefer.
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on May 29, 2008, 08:47:02 AM: I see Rich posted we're talking about a trade gun here. I must of missed that. No barrel swamping with this.
Title:
Post by: Longhunter on May 29, 2008, 08:47:33 AM: Mario, I was lookin at that Early English Trade Gun on Sitting Fox's web site an I like that style...it speaks to me if you know what I mean. How are their finished guns?

How long did it take to get your kit? Be sure and show us some pictures when you get er done.
Title:
Post by: Sneakon on May 29, 2008, 08:54:46 AM: Well, the initial post was regarding a trade gun, but mine is TC Hawken type with 54 GM barrel and Pecatonica walnut stock. Yep, I'm trying to personalize a factory gun. Don't want to hijack this thread, but as long as I'm asking questions about how to reduce weight, how much difference is there between woods, e.g. walnut vs maple.
Title:
Post by: Captchee on May 29, 2008, 03:21:46 PM: depending on the wood 1/8 can add considerably to the balance of the weapon .
consider this
lets say your for stock is 1 ¼ deep x 36 inches long .
you remove 1/8 of an inch per foot that going to equate to removing a board weight that would be ¾ thick by 1 ¼ wide by 1 ft long .
now how much weight would that be ? depends on the wood used for the stock as well as density of that wood as well as the density of that given board
for instance right now I can get a CM blank that ia 1 inch X I inch x18 inches long . that piece kiln dried weighs in right at 1 lb
fiddled walnut is 1 3/4 lbs . so as you can see a figured piece of walnut that has 1/8 taken off the complete rifle could result in a weight reduction of 3 to 4 lbs depending on the blank itself .
But at the same time you can also have wood with high figure thats soft and wieghs less . so how much wieght again is dependant on the peice itself not of the species of wood

but lets say we stay with CM based on the pen blank I used above .
now that one l lb is spread all along the for stock, this isnt including the mortise area or the but stock .
so as you can see depending on the wood , you could easily take a 10 lb rifle down to 8
and achieve a balance that hangs correctly .

while it is true that there are examples of heavy stocked rifles , these are mostly found early in the 18 century or late into the plains rifle area . now yes there are exceptions to this but normally the rule is that between 1760 there about on up , the forstocks are rather light tell we get to the plains era when the rifle shorten up and become somewhat beefier and more robust in a lot of ways .
past all that though , the important part is achieving the proper balance of the rifle .

so if your one for a more stocky beefy look then do so . just remove whats needed to balance the rifle correctly
Title:
Post by: mario on June 02, 2008, 05:49:04 PM: Quote from: "Longhunter"
Mario, I was lookin at that Early English Trade Gun on Sitting Fox's web site an I like that style...it speaks to me if you know what I mean. How are their finished guns?

How long did it take to get your kit? Be sure and show us some pictures when you get er done.

It was a 3 month wait for an "in the white" gun. I made a few mods (longer barrel, Chambers lock, etc) and it came in at $989 shipped.

Joe,

I ordered this gun as a base for me to finish into what I believe was an Indian Trade gun for the Mohawk Valley of NY in the 1770s. I used specific orders from Sir William Johnson (Superintendant for the Northern Indian Dept.) to English gunmakers like Wilson, quotes that mention the fact that the Mohawk wanted lightweight guns and a few original guns of the period. Some weigh in at less than 6 pounds with 48" of barrel!

I'm slimming down the wood to give it a profile more like the originals I've seen. Better handling qualities are just an added benefit...

Will post pics when I can.

Mario