M66 stock repair

[Dick Hosmer]

Just my .02:

Wood looks very nice, but, IMHO, you -or someone - overdid the metal (Naval Jelly? That is BAD stuff for antique firearms - gets things WAY too clean) by quite a bit. Too bad you didn't ask about that.

Yes, it will re-acquire a patina, but probably not in our lifetimes.

[ww321q]

The reason I wanted a M66 was the story behind them. Starting it's life as a muzzle loader for the war and then as a cartridge Indian and bufflo git er! I don't have allot of money and paid less than $160 for it. Most of the guns in my small collection have stories behind them, a part of history to tell .

[ww321q]

Just my .02:

IMHO, you -or someone - overdid the metal (Naval Jelly? That is BAD stuff for antique firearms - gets things WAY too clean) by quite a bit.

I would agree on a rifle that has some value in being original! This gun had been worked over a long long time ago though. Then it was forgotten about somewhere and lost all value due to damage and robed parts. If this rifle had been originally blued or browned (say a Sharps or even newer trapdoor)I would have treated the metal differently. But theses were bright finished for the most part. When I hand this to someone to look at (lay person, not a collector) they will have an idea what it looked like then. With the patina on it, it looked nothing like it did originally. If I had just removed the rust all the metal would have been dark. No bright except on the bottom of the barrel where you cant see it .

[Rick B]

The miltary positively used stain. On the trapdoors and 1903 they used Logwood stain and it is documented. Working on many original stocks retaining the stain I have seen it. Unmolested Post War Garands show heavy stain. The few thousand I bought from the barn unmolested since 1947 have stain.

[StockDoc]

321, well then since you have removed all the Rust Patina, why not redo it? You can get kits to do a brown finish or a blued finish on it. Oxpho Blue puts a nice blued finish that is wipe on. Never have had much luck with the Brown finish, getting a consistent finish. Some people have had luck with Muriatic acid to get the Brown Rust finish. 321, you might consider carving the front stock from some old Black Walnut, I would look in a building supply surplus store for some old table legs. First make them out of a soft wood before you cut into the walnut.


It would be kind of hard for Springfield Armory to stain stocks since wood stain was invented by George Washington Carver and he was born about 1864. Both Duff and Canfield say that the Armories DID NOT stain Garand stocks. I have some NOS Thompson stocks 1964 that are not stain, but oiled in China Oil (Tung Oil)

[Dick Hosmer]

I would agree on a rifle that has some value in being original! This gun had been worked over a long long time ago though. Then it was forgotten about somewhere and lost all value due to damage and robed parts. If this rifle had been originally blued or browned (say a Sharps or even newer trapdoor)I would have treated the metal differently. But theses were bright finished for the most part. When I hand this to someone to look at (lay person, not a collector) they will have an idea what it looked like then. With the patina on it, it looked nothing like it did originally. If I had just removed the rust all the metal would have been dark. No bright except on the bottom of the barrel where you cant see it .

There is nothing wrong - to me - in honest age (which can mean a steely gray with dark tones, liver spots, etc.) on a once-bright gun. But, in my view, Naval Jelly, which can make a gun look like a silver sponge, leaves a very phony-looking finish, which does not resemble the original. When the guns were bright, they were also smooth - when they are no longer smooth, they do not look good - to me - bright.

So, we'll just have to agree to disagree, but we'll do it without any name-calling. [GRIN]

[ww321q]

There is nothing wrong - to me - in honest age (which can mean a steely gray with dark tones, liver spots, etc.) on a once-bright gun. But, in my view, Naval Jelly, which can make a gun look like a silver sponge, leaves a very phony-looking finish, which does not resemble the original. When the guns were bright, they were also smooth - when they are no longer smooth, they do not look good - to me - bright.

So, we'll just have to agree to disagree, but we'll do it without any name-calling. [GRIN]

What you and I see on an antique are the same . There are 2 differences that I see that you may not. #1 is what other people see when looking at an antique. Most don't have an appreciation for that aged patina. To them it just looks old and bad. Right or wrong that's what they see.#2 I see unrestored untouched antiques as a very rare thing. That makes them the highest of value. A 100 say. But any work done on one will drastically reduce it value as much as 60% or more. And then you have ones that have been passed around in a family, shot up, used up. Been refinished several times over its life. May be worth 10 or 20% of what an untouched one would be. Then there are ones like I got that was lost and found, stored in the wood shed with a leaky roof, the barn or outhouse. They are usually destroyed or parted out. I guess our differences are in the look. I thought it was important for the metal to be silver and not blued or browned like so many guns at the time. Removing patina on a rifle like this doesn't make it loose any value. It lost all of that years ago when it was first refinished and more when it was done again. And the final straw was poor storage. This rifle will never be an untouched one or one that was lightly touched up. This gun passed those marks probably 100 years ago. I had the loose rust off the parts and it still looked really bad. What I found amazing was the barrel was in fantastic shape under the wood. Not rusted at all. I'm glad I got it and it hasn't been cut down or rearranged by Bannerman or someone. And it falsely wasn't restored to "untouched " condition( I knew someone that did that when I was a kid. He did mostly Parkers)

[Rick B]

Dear Lord. You are clearly Paladin601 with the same arguements and examples. They have been stain things longer than you think and Indians made stains from many things including Black Walnut Husks Rick B

http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/indexmag.html?http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artapr08/yl-logwood.html

[StockDoc]

You can't change history, no matter how hard you try.

Seems like you are holding on to this Paladin guy, and transferring your hatred for him to me. he must o got the best of you, perhaps a Psychologist can help you with your Transference difficulty. Meanwhile I hope everyone prays for you and your difficulty.

[Dick Hosmer]

Hey, I'm glad you got it, too, and I appreciate your attitude, and the work you put into it - and, despite the pictures, I'm not "there", holding it, so can only go with my feelings and opinions.

That said, I still don't agree (nor do I need to for both of us to be happy) with your choice of metal treatment.

[Rick B]

Keep up with the personal insults but Staining has bee done for centuries. Duff and Canfield have been wrong many times just like the Educational Article in the GCA this month which includes myself and RCS in the article.

I apologize to the original poster for this off track stuff. I just didn't want this guy to lie to you folks. Rick B

http://www.madehow.com/Volume-6/Wood-Stain.html

[StockDoc]

Turnbull's does the same thing you are doing, and is have great luck. You might want to check them out, maybe you can get some tips on how to proceed.

[StockDoc]

not going to respond to you anymore, son. You apparently have to heavy baggage to lug around. Wish you the best of luck dealing with those demons

[ww321q]

Hey, I'm glad you got it, too, and I appreciate your attitude, and the work you put into it - and, despite the pictures, I'm not "there", holding it, so can only go with my feelings and opinions.

That said, I still don't agree (nor do I need to for both of us to be happy) with your choice of metal treatment.

[Dick Hosmer]

Turnbull's does the same thing you are doing, and is have great luck. You might want to check them out, maybe you can get some tips on how to proceed.

Oooops, brought up another of my pet peeves - whizzing up an old gun to look brand-spanking NEW. No matter how exquisite the craftsmanship, and he does gorgeous work, I simply don't care for the practice/concept, but, not my gun, not my money, so, not my choice to make.