Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Whats the best way or what are some methods you guys have used to sucessfuly work a stock to bring out its charcter better? And not damage it.
 

·
Platinum Bullet member
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
None of my stocks have been "worked". When I receive a really dirty stock I have used Mineral spirits or acetone on a clean rag to remove the grease and dirt. I usually apply a thin coat of Boiled linseed oil on another rag to protect the wood after cleaning.

For the striping to appear in the photographs it's mainly good lighting techniques that will give good photographs. Indirect shade or oblique lighting are probably your best bets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
984 Posts
None of my stocks have been "worked". When I receive a really dirty stock I have used Mineral spirits or acetone on a clean rag to remove the grease and dirt. I usually apply a thin coat of Boiled linseed oil on another rag to protect the wood after cleaning.

For the striping to appear in the photographs it's mainly good lighting techniques that will give good photographs. Indirect shade or oblique lighting are probably your best bets.
Jim, try using vaseline on the stock. It removes all the gunk and leaves a nice sheen after wiping it off.
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
1,182 Posts
Likewise, I use Kerosene to clean the grease and oil, Then wipe down with deglosser before applying tung oil. makes the cartouches show up a lit better, and show off the color of the stock without destroying the handling marks. I try to lift "new" marks with hot water. it has worked OK for me so far! Time and elbow grease are the best ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
A gun with nice stripeing makes it worth more to me and I often find myself just stareing at them. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,532 Posts
Depends on what they had on them originally. If shellac, a wipe down may be enough. If a Finn finish, some 1/3 mix after cleaning off the grime may be in order to put some moisture back into the wood.

I don't prescribe to the "wipe them down and leave them alone", as wood that has been abused for many years can benefit with some "restoritives" without hurting the "authentic" nature of the item.

This does not suggest that one should strip every stock down and re-do it. I have only done this to two so far, as I do appreciate the condition that I have received them in. I have done some shellac "blending" on MNs and feel that this is OK, per collector veritas.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
9,970 Posts
"Wipe them down gently with a heavy paper towel dampened with mineral spirits and don't do anything else to them."


I agree.


Pahtu.
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
If a Finn finish, some 1/3 mix after cleaning off the grime may be in order to put some moisture back into the wood.

I don't prescribe to the "wipe them down and leave them alone", as wood that has been abused for many years can benefit with some "restoritives" without hurting the "authentic" nature of the item.
This is simply not true -- and leads to what I've been afraid of since the advent of the "Finn mix." The wood does NOT need any "moisture." The moisture originally in that wood was water, and you can't restore that moisture, especially with an oil product. In fact, the wood was dried to a specific moisture content before it was made into a stock blank and over the last 60 or whatever years that percentage will have hardly changed at all (assuming the rifle wasn't left in the desert or a hot attic or a damp basement, etc.).

A collectible firearm can not recieve some "restoratives" without the "authentic" nature of the item being hurt. Period. A Finn rifle that has been "1/3 mix'd" is permanently altered beyond its original Finn condition, and is not necessarily something I would want in my collection.

A damaged or pre-bubba'd rifle, on the other hand, can be restored using "authentic" methods such as the 1/3 mix (which is still controversial, I migt add) to "correct" status, but will never again be "authentic."
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,429 Posts
This is simply not true -- and leads to what I've been afraid of since the advent of the "Finn mix." The wood does NOT need any "moisture." The moisture originally in that wood was water, and you can't restore that moisture, especially with an oil product. In fact, the wood was dried to a specific moisture content before it was made into a stock blank and over the last 60 or whatever years that percentage will have hardly changed at all (assuming the rifle wasn't left in the desert or a hot attic or a damp basement, etc.).

A collectible firearm can not recieve some "restoratives" without the "authentic" nature of the item being hurt. Period. A Finn rifle that has been "1/3 mix'd" is permanently altered beyond its original Finn condition, and is not necessarily something I would want in my collection.

A damaged or pre-bubba'd rifle, on the other hand, can be restored using "authentic" methods such as the 1/3 mix (which is still controversial, I migt add) to "correct" status, but will never again be "authentic."
Well said Skywarp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Since I'm a newbie here on this forum, I'm getting pro/con on old stocks. Wanted to clean an old stock but now I don't know. What I have is a M91 - 1897 Tula Emperial in a Russian stock with 3 inline Finn hangers amost all in the white with SA and D marked. Have other MNs in lesser value that I may/or not finish including a M44 Tula which is not on the lesser side. Stock is very battle ridden with lots of markings, just want to see if there where others underneath that I can't see. Pro's/ Con's?
Claude
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
Since I'm a newbie here on this forum, I'm getting pro/con on old stocks. Wanted to clean an old stock but now I don't know. What I have is a M91 - 1897 Tula Emperial in a Russian stock with 3 inline Finn hangers amost all in the white with SA and D marked. Have other MNs in lesser value that I may/or not finish including a M44 Tula which is not on the lesser side. Stock is very battle ridden with lots of markings, just want to see if there where others underneath that I can't see. Pro's/ Con's?
Claude
Don't do a thing with it. It has lasted 100 years as-is and will last another 100 under normal conditions, assuming it doesn't see any more wars. If you "clean" it it will never look or be "right" again.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
9,970 Posts
"Wanted to clean an old stock but now I don't know."

I refinished my first MN, a 1929 Tula 91-30, just the stock - after I was done, it looked terrible & I was not satisfied with the job I had done. Later I found PB's site & this one & folks with considerable experience taught me to appreciate military rifles in their original condition - Sure I have wiped down rifles removing grit, pineneedles from my Finn rifles, dirt from my Turk rifles, etc. But pretty much I do not worry anymore about dings, scrapes & rifles with dark finishes - I keep em they way they came to me & am tickled I have found a few really good one's....=+)

Would be a crying shame if I "cleaned" off the original finish off this cool M27....=+)

Enjoy the collecting hobby mokan57, it has been really fun for me.

Pahtu.
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
Heavens to Betsy -- Pahtu, if you ever think of trading off or selling that M27, let me know first! Something about it really grabs me. :D
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
11,447 Posts
...A collectible firearm can not recieve some "restoratives" without the "authentic" nature of the item being hurt. Period. A Finn rifle that has been "1/3 mix'd" is permanently altered beyond its original Finn condition, and is not necessarily something I would want in my collection...
Well said. I agree 100%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Thanks guys, I do appreacate collecting, and history. Only have 28 Milsurps at this time and 13 are MNs + my old Savage 22.s. But Damm these old MN's just seam to come up from any where and have more history then I have ever realizied. They are fun to shoot and collect as well. There will be more to come I'm sure.
Claude
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,532 Posts
This is simply not true -- and leads to what I've been afraid of since the advent of the "Finn mix." The wood does NOT need any "moisture." The moisture originally in that wood was water, and you can't restore that moisture, especially with an oil product. In fact, the wood was dried to a specific moisture content before it was made into a stock blank and over the last 60 or whatever years that percentage will have hardly changed at all (assuming the rifle wasn't left in the desert or a hot attic or a damp basement, etc.).

A collectible firearm can not recieve some "restoratives" without the "authentic" nature of the item being hurt. Period. A Finn rifle that has been "1/3 mix'd" is permanently altered beyond its original Finn condition, and is not necessarily something I would want in my collection.

A damaged or pre-bubba'd rifle, on the other hand, can be restored using "authentic" methods such as the 1/3 mix (which is still controversial, I migt add) to "correct" status, but will never again be "authentic."
Sky--tell me where I am off on this topic...

I have read here and other places that Finn stock blanks (non-post war) were soaked in BLO/LO before being turned into stocks. (Pine tar to the surface is another subject.) The BLO/LO soak is what gives the birch some of its flames/figures/striping.

So if they originally had linseed oil impregnated into the wood via a deep soak, using a 1/3 mix on the surface after wiping down with mineral spirits (or turpintine), would only introduce beeswax as a new substance to the wipe it down method and then just to the surface area as a protectant from wet, as in using a wax on the car.

Now for a post-war "Dry Stock", I absolutely agree...leave it alone.

What am I not getting here? :confused:
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top