Gary said in another post, in different thread, in a time long long ago, " I try to choose for the given usage"

I suppose, intuititively, I understand this. But apparently there are 3 or four brain cells way in the back that dont, so I have to ask...

Customer specifications aside, are you saying you would have a wood type in mind for a target gun, or that you would use something else for huntin' rig? If you knew that I was gopherbusting with it, and that it would see the field almost daily, would that influence the choice? Different woods for the different models (holds up better to recoil, holds an "edge" better for crisper carving, etc) ?

Or maybe those 3 or 4 cells were right, and I dont understand.....

Gary may tell you otherwise, but I think mahogany is his favorite, hands down. I know the figured stuff is much heavier so he tries to "reserve" that for bench rifles and the hugebore guns, unless of course a customer insists otherwise . . .

-- Jim



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2009 07:36PM by Jim.

Ive read Gary's thoughts on figured wood, and the page on the website of him wrestling the big plank of maple.

I used to work at the Gibson Guitar factory here in Bozeman. They used a lot of mahogany. I'd forgotten how much Ive cut when I worked there. I can see why its a favorite.

Sweet, Dan! I have a 1976 Les Paul Custom. Not a great year -- just a classic, heavy 1970s Les Paul that weighs about as much as its fat sound. Think "Frampton Comes Alive!" I've had it refretted twice and had the original pickups dipped in parrafin -- the pickup covers made it go microphonic if you'd crank the gain past a certain point. It gets run through a bunch of different tube amps (Marshall, Mesa, VHT, Bogner). Unfortunately, I don't get to play as much as I used to.

-- Jim

Hi Dan,

Sorry ...I've been on a "working vacation" much of last week. Without covering too much old ground ... I've felt rotten much of the past year. The latest series of injections helped alot. The meds helped alot. I now only feel about 85 when I get up in the morning! Yeah!! haha. Anyway ... I've been able to face some of the "chores and needs" around here that I've just had to put off last year. Sort of a "vacation" from which I'll be really glad to get back "to work".

Regarding wood. The desire of most buyers seems to be extremely figured woods. This is for the "look" of the grain. I've always been a poor salesman because I explain too much, and often talk down expensive options. Highly figured woods have "issues". They are much more heavy than the less figured versions of the same species of wood. They are less stable, and tend to warp, check, and twist. When working them, they are prone to "chip out" on edges and corners. They take more time to finish, as they are harder to sand, seal, fill, blend repairs, etc. (Anyone who thinks there are no "repairs" required to highly figured wood blanks, is uninformed).

Now: if you want a rifle to "carry", then you want lighter woods. More straight grain versions of species. Any "target" gun wants straight, stable grain wood, or laminate (for stability). The actions of airguns have more parts than firearms. The reservoirs and valve bodies are heavy. Therefore; airguns are normally biased towards more weight. A good thing in bench guns.

Carved stocks. That's another place where I run afoul of normal desire. Figured woods are a twisted mess of grain. When you carve relief designs, you leave delicate details unsupported. Figured woods chip easier, and are more of a bother to carve. Your cutter must navigate a curve thru hard grain, up grain, left grain, right grain .... and smoothly create the effect you want. It's also less than logical (to me) to buy expensive grained wood, and then carve over all of the detail of that expensive grain. I always find than odd, when I flip thru a firearm's magazine and see a stock of obvious fantastic grain, with this huge blight of checkering overlaying key areas ... just looking like a dark black patch.

Laminated stocks are very stable - yet always more heavy than solid wood. Injected stabalized woods (including some laminates) have the weight of stone ... and it's my opinion they are not suited for stocks.

I tend to make decisions based upon what is logical to me. This often runs against the herd mentality. I think it will work out well, when my work is viewed as a whole. Therefore, I find mahogany to my liking for many things. I like walnut - but don't feel "obligated" to use it because I'm just "supposed to". In fact - I hate walnut dust. It's acidic. It stains the skin, and stings my sinus and throat (yes - I wear dust masks).

Generally, as I've mentioned many times, I hold a grudge against wood grabbing so much attention. The stock is about 5% of the work on a truely handmade gun, yet it gets about 95% of the attention. That allows craftsmen who simply build a gun from production parts, and THUS ... devote 95% of THEIR effort to the stock ... to get big praise. They come to the stock all fresh (because it only took them minimal hours to assemble the production parts of their gun's action). I come to the stock after already spending 200 hours BUILDING the gun's action. And ... there's only a very, very small number of persons who see the difference between the finished products (other than the firearm/airgun category).

The last issue is the one of usage. The fancy stock will "insure" that the gun lives in a gun case, and will never be carried or used. That annoys me (after having devoted so much time to make the gun into an accurate shooter) ... but it's one of the several issues with the trade that simply will not change. You'll have a few similar issues in your trade - things that are just "facts" that you have to live with. Everybody likes attractive guns. But ... it's ugly guns that get used. Whatchagonnado?

Gary



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/30/2009 02:41PM by barnespneumatic.

"Ugly guns that get used"? Eh? I take exception to that comment!! I fine fellow built me a number of really nice looking guns that I've put THOUSANDS of rounds through and he can bet his buttstock that the next one with the walnut stock is going to get shot just as much!

What can I say? Ya got me.

Gary

Good, informative post Gary. It's very interesting, and I learned something new about wood.

its just a stick for holding the action in place ,, whats the fuss... lol . ofetn its the stock people notice first , and overlook the action. i guess its probably only a fraction of the time spent on a stock as to the amount of time spent on the action too. but its no good giving a rolls a coat of emulsion either . lot of good reading there gary. as ever.

Gary says: Everybody likes attractive guns. But ... it's ugly guns that get used. Whatchagonnado?

Thats easy, order two guns.... one ugly, the other ornate.....But I 'd be shooting the ornate one all the time......

When did this "obsession" with figured wood start? Looking back thru history, most rifles had straight grain. PArt of it, maybe, is that firearms are not the tools they were, even a hundred years ago. We dont hunt as a primary source of food. Most of us eat what we hunt, but if we get skunked in the field, there's always McDonalds on the way home. Maybe I just answered my question.... as the function shifted from tool to toy, maybe the aesthetics of the stock reflects that shift of thinking.....?...?

Hello Dan,

You nailed it. Tool to Toy ... Good term. When I've seen antiques, I have indeed noted that the wood was usually straight, plain, and stable.

Of course; beauty has always been .... "attractive" ... Therefore; there have always been special pcs. which were made far beyond a logical level of ornamentation. Nothing wrong with that in my mind ... but they should be used. That proves the skills the craftsman built into them. From my position, it also spreads the word around. Few people come rummage under your bed in the rifle case, to witness the work I put into a given gun. I'd like to see photos of the guns shared, and their capabilities demonstrated.

Gary

Another point to consider is that the stock might be an easily recognized testament to the care given to the build of the gun as a whole. I expect that a great majority of people looking at a gun cannot determine if it was carefully crafted (unless it has gross flaws that make it easy to recognize as mediocre). For those people, the beauty and finish of the stock might be the main determinant in deciding if they are looking at craftsmanship or simple production. That's not really fair to the smith (nor is it a reliable measure) but I believe it's true, even for a good number of "enthusiasts/internet experts."

Jerry ... and Peter,

I see your points regarding the stock work reflecting the type of work a builder does.

What I hate (another of those little nagging things ... haha) ... is that builders who use mainly stock actions and parts, come to the stock portion of the project all fresh and the stock is 95% of the total work they do. By the time I get to the stock, I've been on the project for what seems like half of my life. That's actually another of the reasons I don't work straight thru on project: I often need to "take a break" on a given project, and come back to it when I feel more fresh, and find the spark to do the stock work. Doing the work when you can concentrate on the work, is the best way.

That's how you got those angled bias cuts on your laminated Prairie III grips to line up as they do Jerry. ;?)

Gary

Really good point on the P3 grips! 99.9% of the world would never see the gun from anything other than the straight-on left or right side and would not know if the laminate lines matched from one side to another. The fact that the grips feature lines line up precisely along the thin parts you can see when viewing the gun from the rear or front is a real testament to the care taken to get every detail perfect; regardless if others notice. Even better, I know that all the details inside the gun, the ones that can't be viewed from any angle are also perfect.

I agree with you Jerry. The stock can be an indicator of quality work since you can't really see the inside of the gun such as the valves. When I got my custom bigbores, I always look at the stock and the fit and finish over real carefully to see the quality of works. When the stock and the fit and finish look beautifuly and flawless, then I know there's a very good chance that the builder also had put the same attention and quality to the whole gun. I've always appreciated a goodlooking and accurate gun, and I also appreciate the works of a skilled, talented and creativity of the custom builder.

Peter,
I guess you've reinforced my point; the stock can be an indicator of quality work but it should not be the only indication. After all, you can take a Chinese action and wrap it in a mirror finished super fancy wood stock and still have a pretty but mediocre gun.

Jerry,

Cheap Chinese action wrapped with a fine hand crafted stock?
Like this:??

Got about 30-40 hours in the stock...... 30 minutes in the action....

Action is one of the "truck sale" B-3-1's....US$25.00.....

$25! Don't they even feed those kids anymore?

They "manufactured" it ... AND ... they transported it HALF WAY around the world AND "R-E-T-A-I-L-E-D" it for that!!!!!!

Can't wait to see what their Hummers will cost. What do you think? $8,500 ??? And they'll make them with pure wind energy.

Gary

What do you call a Chinese Hummer; "Chummer"?

Sweet and Sour Hummer.

I imagine that the "Chinese Hummers" will be called by the same name we use for things like unicorns and faeries, the word "imaginary" comes to mind. Seriously, those things are so wide you can hardly even drive them on American roads, and you're gonna try to drive them all over the far east on roads barely wider than a donkey path? NOT. I refer of course to the original model Hummer, the later poseurs are just ugly Chevys.

And I think Dan has it nailed as far as the function vs. form issues goes stock-wise. The reason you find old Kentucky rifles stocked in straight grain hardwood is because they didn't have Kevlar and fiberglass stocks back then. I'd bet any frontiersman with experience would have given his eye teeth for a rock-stable weatherproof rifle stock back then, no matter how ugly it was.