.458 winchester silk purse from a sows ear project

[ChrisG]

For anyone who has ever followed my other builds, I usually bed my rifles in JB weld. So I did likewise on this one. This is not so much to make them accurate (although I am sure it makes them slightly more consistent), but more so that the rifle stock is strong and resilient under recoil. So, being a .458, this rifle needed stock reinforcement. In addition to the two threaded pins already bracing the thin parts of the action inletting, and the threaded rod epoxied through the middle of the pistol grip, I also glass bedded any portion of the rifles anatomy which bears upon the stock under recoil. This includes the recoil lug, the tang and two wings just astern of where the sear protrudes.

After all of that, a final sanding was in order, down to 320 grit. Then I sanded in a coat of Dark Walnut Danish Oil for color with 400 grit sandpaper, followed by a few coats of Boiled Linseed Oil, also sanded in to being to fill in the grain. Still a long way to go and many more coats of oil, but it is coming along.

I slapped it back into its stock for some pictures but It will need some 20 more sanded in oil coats before it is finally done. Then a coat of wax, buffed in. Then the 12-16 hour process of checkering the pistol grip and forend. I am torn between doing a Fleur de Lis checkering, or a traditional English wrap around. I will consider them while I order a few new checkering files for my tools

 

[ChrisG]

So I got the last coat on . danish oil for color, a little danish to fill some grain and then Boiled Linseed the rest of the way. 25 coats sanded in and it came out pretty good! Checkering is coming up. That is a long haul process that usually takes me quite a while due to the piecemail way I have to do is... an hour or 2 a night...

 

[ChrisG]

Checkering process begun! As anyone who has ever done this knows... The stock is only about half done right up until you checker it (man-hours wise). This is a 3:1 diamond pattern. It is not as sleek looking as the 3.5:1 but is more traditional looking I think.

 

[ChrisG]

Checkering on the wrist is done!

 

[sestoppelman]

Dang, you should put yourself on steady!! Nice work.

I also use JB for bedding, you can find it anywhere, good cure time, does the job.

 

[ChrisG]

Dang, you should put yourself on steady!! Nice work.

I also use JB for bedding, you can find it anywhere, good cure time, does the job.

Yup! I just touch up any exposed bedding with a brown sharpie. My inletting job on this rifle was tight enough that there is only a hair thin gray line at the top so not strictly necessary but I probably will do it. I don't think this stock would stand up to a steady diet of .458's without bedding the lug and tang.

 

[sestoppelman]

Yup! I just touch up any exposed bedding with a brown sharpie. My inletting job on this rifle was tight enough that there is only a hair thin gray line at the top so not strictly necessary but I probably will do it. I don't think this stock would stand up to a steady diet of .458's without bedding the lug and tang.

Few if any wood stocks would stand up to a steady diet of .458's without bedding!

 

[CJW]

Checkering process begun! As anyone who has ever done this knows... The stock is only about half done right up until you checker it (man-hours wise). This is a 3:1 diamond pattern. It is not as sleek looking as the 3.5:1 but is more traditional looking I think. View attachment 557492View attachment 557495

Mind sharing which checkering tools you're using? I'm redoing a 550 stock and am going to try my hand at it.

 

[ChrisG]

Mind sharing which checkering tools you're using? I'm redoing a 550 stock and am going to try my hand at it.

They are the large set of dembart ones. If you do get some, get at least 1 spare No.1 coarse replacement cutter and a spare no.1 fine. You use them so much that, while they will still work, a new sharp one speeds the process up tremendously. I save the old dull ones for retouching after the checkering is cut to produce a nice finish.

Checkering isnt hard if you are patient and have some attention to detail. Try it on flat hardwood first(maple or boxwood would be the easiest)to get a feel for how they cut and follow lines and whatnot. Around the curve of a stock isnt that much harder but it makes it a little more difficult.

If you have any questions, there are some great tutorials online and of course Id be happy to lend any insight I have.

 

[Altitude sickness]

What about some kind of unique pattern that functions the same. but isn’t the classic diamond pattern?

You could do a crocodile hide print, a Buffalo Hide print , or an elephant hide print

 

[ChrisG]

What about some kind of unique pattern that functions the same. but isn’t the classic diamond pattern?

You could do a crocodile hide print, a Buffalo Hide print , or an elephant hide print View attachment 572736

There are a few issues here that I see for ME.

First is that checkering is both practical and pretty. No hide print would provide the grip afforded by checkering. In fact, it would have almost the same effect as not carving the stock at all.

Second, I dont think I could create an authentic looking hide pattern to satisfy my eye that it was a faithful representation. Real hide patterns are essentially organized randomness, and mine would likely come out very contrived looking.

Third, in my view (and I know a lot of crafstmen will agree with me), deviating wildly from what established masters have always striven for and calling it "good" establishes a whole new metric for which there is no comparison. So for myself mainly, but also others who judge my work, no one would be able to truly tell if my work was quality because there is no established canon of "masterwork" against which to judge it. That's why top-tier luthiers don't try to reinvent the violin. Florentine violin makers established what it should look and sound like 550 years ago, and if you change it too much, it isn't a violin anymore. Same here. This is an english made mauser rifle, so, to the best of my ability, I am trying to stick to established english gunmaker lines and dimensions while still adding my own unique flair to the rifle.

 

[F. Vaccaro]

Few if any wood stocks would stand up to a steady diet of .458's without bedding!

Whatever you do, don't use a Caldwell Lead Sled with a .458! I found out the hard way with a nice Mod. 70 .458

 

[ChrisG]

Whatever you do, don't use a Caldwell Lead Sled with a .458! I found out the hard way with a nice Mod. 70 .458

100% agree. In fact, I dont own a lead sled because , first, if I can't shoot it accurately off a bench to sight it in (best possibke scenario), what hope do I have of shooting it off-hand? and secondly, I am not convinced it is good for ANY rifle to be strapped into a rigid mechanism and not allowed to move on firing. Something's gotta absorb that energy, and I don't want it to be the walnut in the stock.

 

[cajunchefray]

There are a few issues here that I see for ME.

First is that checkering is both practical and pretty. No hide print would provide the grip afforded by checkering. In fact, it would have almost the same effect as not carving the stock at all.

Second, I dont think I could create an authentic looking hide pattern to satisfy my eye that it was a faithful representation. Real hide patterns are essentially organized randomness, and mine would likely come out very contrived looking.

Third, in my view (and I know a lot of crafstmen will agree with me), deviating wildly from what established masters have always striven for and calling it "good" establishes a whole new metric for which there is no comparison. So for myself mainly, but also others who judge my work, no one would be able to truly tell if my work was quality because there is no established canon of "masterwork" against which to judge it. That's why top-tier luthiers don't try to reinvent the violin. Florentine violin makers established what it should look and sound like 550 years ago, and if you change it too much, it isn't a violin anymore. Same here. This is an english made mauser rifle, so, to the best of my ability, I am trying to stick to established english gunmaker lines and dimensions while still adding my own unique flair to the rifle.

I admire your dedication and craftsmanship.
I’m okay at oil finishing wood, but checkering is just beyond my skills.

BTW, really nice rifle in a great caliber.

 

[CJW]

They are the large set of dembart ones. If you do get some, get at least 1 spare No.1 coarse replacement cutter and a spare no.1 fine. You use them so much that, while they will still work, a new sharp one speeds the process up tremendously. I save the old dull ones for retouching after the checkering is cut to produce a nice finish.

Checkering isnt hard if you are patient and have some attention to detail. Try it on flat hardwood first(maple or boxwood would be the easiest)to get a feel for how they cut and follow lines and whatnot. Around the curve of a stock isnt that much harder but it makes it a little more difficult.

If you have any questions, there are some great tutorials online and of course Id be happy to lend any insight I have.

Thanks. I have some nice clear maple to practice on.

 

[CJW]

What about some kind of unique pattern that functions the same. but isn’t the classic diamond pattern?

You could do a crocodile hide print, a Buffalo Hide print , or an elephant hide print View attachment 572736

Practical or not that is neat. Unfortunately I could screw that up in the blink of an eye.

 

[ChrisG]

I admire your dedication and craftsmanship.
I’m okay at oil finishing wood, but checkering is just beyond my skills.

BTW, really nice rifle in a great caliber.

Thank you! It has been an off and on project for me, and now that it is coming to a close, I can't wait to get it done and go take something with it.. unfortunately, all the black bear around me are probably holed up for the winter... so it might have to be a coyote that's the rifles christening...

 

[Woodcarver]

There are a few issues here that I see for ME.

First is that checkering is both practical and pretty. No hide print would provide the grip afforded by checkering. In fact, it would have almost the same effect as not carving the stock at all.

Second, I dont think I could create an authentic looking hide pattern to satisfy my eye that it was a faithful representation. Real hide patterns are essentially organized randomness, and mine would likely come out very contrived looking.

Third, in my view (and I know a lot of crafstmen will agree with me), deviating wildly from what established masters have always striven for and calling it "good" establishes a whole new metric for which there is no comparison. So for myself mainly, but also others who judge my work, no one would be able to truly tell if my work was quality because there is no established canon of "masterwork" against which to judge it. That's why top-tier luthiers don't try to reinvent the violin. Florentine violin makers established what it should look and sound like 550 years ago, and if you change it too much, it isn't a violin anymore. Same here. This is an english made mauser rifle, so, to the best of my ability, I am trying to stick to established english gunmaker lines and dimensions while still adding my own unique flair to the rifle.

Great job on the checkering, looks great! You are correct in that the key is being patient and not getting in a hurry. Not trying to start with a 32lpi pattern is also important, lol. There is a lot to be said for using a standard pattern for a particular model of rifle, especially if your goal is to have your own version of a classic rifle. When it comes to resale, it can really play a part in valuation.
Other, unique, methods of "checkering", like scales or skin patterns, can in fact, provide as good a grip as regular checkering. Stippling, for instance, creates a rough pattern-less surface that can be better than checkering for grip, depending on style. It all depends on how the wood is shaped by the carver. Making them "look right" definitely pushes them into the art category. I've seen some amazing scale and hide patterns done for sure, but I've also seen some dismal attempts that truly detracted from the rifle.

 

[ChrisG]

Great job on the checkering, looks great! You are correct in that the key is being patient and not getting in a hurry. Not trying to start with a 32lpi pattern is also important, lol. There is a lot to be said for using a standard pattern for a particular model of rifle, especially if your goal is to have your own version of a classic rifle. When it comes to resale, it can really play a part in valuation.
Other, unique, methods of "checkering", like scales or skin patterns, can in fact, provide as good a grip as regular checkering. Stippling, for instance, creates a rough pattern-less surface that can be better than checkering for grip, depending on style. It all depends on how the wood is shaped by the carver. Making them "look right" definitely pushes them into the art category. I've seen some amazing scale and hide patterns done for sure, but I've also seen some dismal attempts that truly detracted from the rifle.

Oh man, 32LPI! You wouldn't use checkering tools for that, just 60 grit sandpaper, sanded in two directions 60° apart!

All kidding aside, you are absolutely right of course, and I have stuck to 16LPI, because it affords the best purchase on the rifle, is easier to accomplish without straying, and lasts long than the finer checkering does because it is the deepest.

 

[ChrisG]

So I was looking through some pictures of Westley richards rifles and I thought... I should just refinish this stock to bring out that deep luster of a polished oil finish. So I refinished the stock for that effect, then laid out and started checkering the forend... it feels like this project will never be done, but I guess we're on the home stretch now...