I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I have
contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
I would like to end up with a high sheen, but not glossy finish, that will
not make the gun slippery to handle, especially if the weather should turn
wet whilst hunting. Are there any of the standard oil based finishes that
somebody (preferably a gun user) would recommend for a finish?
One rifle in particular has a beautiful 'tiger stripe' pattern in the grain,
which I am certain will look fabulous when given several coats of the good
stuff.
I thought i'd drop by first though and see if anybody has any experiences or
information they would like to share?
Thanks
TJ
Thanks for the comments all.
"Andy Dingley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "TJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have
just
> > the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil.
>
> Book recommendations:
>
> "The Modern Gunsmith" (Vol 2, I think) 1930s book (two-vol set, one is
> actions & barrels, one is stocking). Out of print for years, but still
> easy enough to find (look for an ultra-rare copy that _isn't_ signed
> by the author!) This is the best text I've seen on how to apply
> gunstock finishes.
>
> "Staining and Finishing for Muzzleloading Gun Builders"
> William A. Knight and William R. Mende
> Privately published pamphlet, available through US gunshops.
> A couple of real chemists study the science of oil finishes and their
> practical application for recreating old firearms.
>
>
> Then armed with some knowledge, go to your finishing. Ignore any
> comments about commercial finishes or raw oils. These do _not_ deliver
> the right result. To do it right, you're also going to be working
> with either heated or at least warmed oils.
>
> Tru-oil isn't bad stuff as an effective and easily used product, but
> it's far too high-gloss for my tastes (and yes, I do get to work with
> oil finishes on pre-Great War English shotguns).
On Sun, 23 May 2004 00:03:14 GMT, "rj" <[email protected]> wrote:
>USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
>
RAW linseed oil at that. I recall a fellow recruit mentioned BLO within the hearing of the DI. The DI came unglued. I don't think he
had been left in the clamps long enough. He came unglued very easily and very, very frequently.
Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA
Tom Veatch responds:
>>USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
>>
>RAW linseed oil at that. I recall a fellow recruit mentioned BLO within the
>hearing of the DI. The DI came unglued. I don't think he
>had been left in the clamps long enough. He came unglued very easily and
>very, very frequently.
Three fingers, too. For whatever reason, our drill instructors insisted on raw
linseed oil and rubbing the stock long enough to heat it enough for the LO to
pick up a sheen, which it eventually did, long after we were sick of rubbing. I
wonder what boots do today and for the past 3+ decades that the M16 has been at
the fore? Some kind of car polish?
Charlie Self
"Bore, n.: A person who talks when you wish him to listen." Ambrose Bierce, The
Devil's Dictionary
On 25 May 2004 08:15:59 GMT, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
> I wonder what boots do today and for the past 3+ decades that the M16
> has been at the fore? Some kind of car polish?
Probably polish the recoil buffer to try to get rid of the "Squeeky-squeeky"
when you shoot.
You know, a nice set of wood stocks for an AR-15 would bring the looks of
that gun up to "tolerable". Wonder if there's a market...
On Tue, 25 May 2004 10:09:04 -0600, BruceR <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dave Hinz wrote:
>>
>> You know, a nice set of wood stocks for an AR-15 would bring the looks of
>> that gun up to "tolerable". Wonder if there's a market...
>
> JP Rifles sells them. Handguards would be a bit of a problem though with
> the heat and gas tube.
> Nice thing about plastic however is that you can just spritz on some
> armor-all and be done with it 8^)
But it still looks like, well, Bondo.
> Does anyone here know if it would be prudent to belt sand my '96 Krag
> carbine stock into somthing more sporty??? 8^)
You're trying to raise my blood pressure, aren't you.
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On 25 May 2004 08:15:59 GMT, Charlie Self <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I wonder what boots do today and for the past 3+ decades that the M16
>>has been at the fore? Some kind of car polish?
>
>
> Probably polish the recoil buffer to try to get rid of the "Squeeky-squeeky"
> when you shoot.
>
> You know, a nice set of wood stocks for an AR-15 would bring the looks of
> that gun up to "tolerable". Wonder if there's a market...
>
>
JP Rifles sells them. Handguards would be a bit of a problem though with
the heat and gas tube.
Nice thing about plastic however is that you can just spritz on some
armor-all and be done with it 8^)
Does anyone here know if it would be prudent to belt sand my '96 Krag
carbine stock into somthing more sporty??? 8^)
-Bruce
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
"Charlie Self" wrote in message
> pick up a sheen, which it eventually did, long after we were sick of
rubbing. I
> wonder what boots do today and for the past 3+ decades that the M16 has
been at
> the fore? Some kind of car polish?
"Sheen" had become a no-no by my SEA camouflage days ... AAMOF, we were
taught to use a handful of sand/dirt/mud to take it off.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/15/04
Swingman responds:
>Charlie Self" wrote in message
>
>> pick up a sheen, which it eventually did, long after we were sick of
>rubbing. I
>> wonder what boots do today and for the past 3+ decades that the M16 has
>been at
>> the fore? Some kind of car polish?
>
>"Sheen" had become a no-no by my SEA camouflage days ... AAMOF, we were
>taught to use a handful of sand/dirt/mud to take it off.
Yeah, pretty much the same for anything in the Crotch, but during training, and
on base stateside, it's essential to keep up appearances. Or so we were told.
Sort of like the British in the desert when there was no water...but they
stilled shaved, long, long before battery razors.
I always got a kick out of the deadly flat blue-black of the metal assemblies
and the glossy walnut stocks. With our Drill Instructors, there were also the
glossy leather slings, with brass--highly polished--buckles and clips. I lusted
after one of those until I got to ITR and made a real April in NC discovery of
mud, sand, rain, more mud, a lot more sand and various insects waking from a
winter's nap to gnaw on any exposed bits of our skin.
Charlie Self
"Bore, n.: A person who talks when you wish him to listen." Ambrose Bierce, The
Devil's Dictionary
In article <6TRrc.43305$gr.4301727@attbi_s52>, rj <[email protected]>
wrote:
> USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
>
>
I refinished my Pre-64 M70 featherweight a couple of years ago after a
week of hunting in the rain finally ended the factory finish (geeze it
only lasted 40 years :) I stripped it including using an old toothbrush
to give a moderate brushing of the checkering. Oiled it over three
weeks with Linseed oil then finished it with Paste wax. It's worked
great so far.
Allen
"TJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
> the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil.
Book recommendations:
"The Modern Gunsmith" (Vol 2, I think) 1930s book (two-vol set, one is
actions & barrels, one is stocking). Out of print for years, but still
easy enough to find (look for an ultra-rare copy that _isn't_ signed
by the author!) This is the best text I've seen on how to apply
gunstock finishes.
"Staining and Finishing for Muzzleloading Gun Builders"
William A. Knight and William R. Mende
Privately published pamphlet, available through US gunshops.
A couple of real chemists study the science of oil finishes and their
practical application for recreating old firearms.
Then armed with some knowledge, go to your finishing. Ignore any
comments about commercial finishes or raw oils. These do _not_ deliver
the right result. To do it right, you're also going to be working
with either heated or at least warmed oils.
Tru-oil isn't bad stuff as an effective and easily used product, but
it's far too high-gloss for my tastes (and yes, I do get to work with
oil finishes on pre-Great War English shotguns).
On Fri, 21 May 2004 20:37:50 +0100, TJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
> the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I have
> contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
Depending on what it is, you might be destroying any potential
collector value by refinishing it. Please consider looking into
that before proceeding.
> I thought i'd drop by first though and see if anybody has any experiences or
> information they would like to share?
rec.guns might be another place to ask this question, by the way.
See you there, perhaps?
Dave Hinz
On Mon, 24 May 2004 18:11:03 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda <[email protected]> wrote:
> "rj" <[email protected]> wrote in news:6TRrc.43305$gr.4301727
> @attbi_s52:
>
>> USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
>
> I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
> the 1920s.
You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
I mean.
> Each generation has done minor sanding and refinishing
> with linseed oil, and that's it. I remember when I first removed
> the butt plate (when I was about 15) and found my father's name
> on the stock, from when he'd taken it in to his high school
> woodshop for some light sanding. This is a gun that has seen
> heavy use, much of it banging around lose in a model T, then a
> 1950s Willy's. It's a very nice tactile finish for a working gun.
As a shooter, that's great. As a collector, I am cringing. As long
as it's gentle and only with the appropriate oil (sounds like it
is) it's not too bad, though. Fun little guns, aren't they?
Dave Hinz
On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:41:37 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
>>> the 1920s.
>>
>> You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
>> I mean.
>
> The really cool thing is that I have a pair--
Me too ;)
> I got a second,
> matching model at a farm auction about ten years ago for $40. It
> wasn't in quite as good condition, but it's a good match.
I'll double your money right now, my friend...
> Oh yeah-- can't think of a much better gun for a kid to learn
> with. I know there have been many 1,000s of rounds through our
> original and it's still one of the most accurate gun with iron
> sights I've ever fired. I'm looking forward to passing it on to
> my grandkids (along with that second one now).
They were designed for trainig troops; the cost of .30-06 ammo
was prohibitive, and supplies were tight; the .22 trainers have
the same dimensions, etc as the '03 Springfield used by the US
military at the time. Basic marksmanship can certainly be taught
on a .22 as well or better than a high-power rifle, so it's a sound
method.
If you wanted to drop me an email, I'd be happy to look up serial
numbers or whatever for you, if you want specific info on which
varients you've got.
Dave Hinz
On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:17:14 -0400, RB <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mine are old 1906-06 03-A3s from the days when our government felt it
> was a good idea to have a well armed and trained population. I bought
> them, and ammo, from the DCM (the Pentagon's Director of Civilian
> Marksmanship) for $25 each. Admittedly it was many years ago but these
> weapons still work as well now as they did then.
Now that Clinton is gone, you can buy them again from http://www.odcmp.com/
(formerly known as the DCM) but the price for '03's is a bit more than
25 bucks.
> I've been at this for long enough to remember boarding an Allegheny
> Airlines flight at Logan on my way to the Camp Perry pistol matches
> carrying several pistols and about 3,000 rounds of hand loads on board.
> The airline and flight crew were well aware of what I had and why I
> was carrying it. No problems.
When were you at Perry? I bet we have some overlap.
> I still have those pistols. If I carried them on a plane today the
> Govies would have a fit. What's changed? I haven't and the pistols
> haven't.
I've got to get back there. My kid is 5, old enough to hang out on the
beach with mom. Maybe next year. I understand the mess hall got hit
by a tornado and is no longer used, sorry to say.
Dave Hinz
On Tue, 25 May 2004 12:01:43 -0400, RB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dave Hinz wrote:
>>
>> When were you at Perry? I bet we have some overlap.
>
> Mid 1950s.
Ah, then your overlap is with my dad then. Ever run into a somewhat
unruly bunch from Winnequah Gun Club from Wisconsin?
Dave
On Wed, 26 May 2004 01:50:13 GMT, Tom Veatch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 25 May 2004 01:09:44 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Now that Clinton is gone, you can buy them again from http://www.odcmp.com/
>>(formerly known as the DCM) but the price for '03's is a bit more than
>>25 bucks.
>
> Thank you for posting that link. I've been wanting to get my hands on
> an '03 to replace one that I foolishly allowed to get away
> from me when I was home on boot leave and needed a few dollars. Think
> I'll pick up a service grade M1 while I'm at it as a reminder
> of my ill-spent youth.
Check out the spare parts and accessories while you're there. You might
even be able to get some spare walnut stocks (there, back on topic if
even gratuitously so) if you want.
Dave
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On Fri, 21 May 2004 20:37:50 +0100, TJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
> > the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I have
> > contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
>
> Depending on what it is, you might be destroying any potential
> collector value by refinishing it. Please consider looking into
> that before proceeding.
>
> > I thought i'd drop by first though and see if anybody has any experiences or
> > information they would like to share?
>
> rec.guns might be another place to ask this question, by the way.
>
> See you there, perhaps?
> Dave Hinz
I fully agree with Dave and also to check in at rec. guns. Leave those stocks alone
until you determine the rifles' value. Since you have contacted the manufacturer, I
assume it/they is/are still in operation. Who were the manufacturers? U.S. or
foreign? If they are military rifles, I am assuming the present finish is BLO, boiled
linseed oil, but I could be wrong. Any any event, leave those stocks absolutely
untouched until you know much more of the rifles. What are the dates of manufacture?
If military, the dates could be stamped on the top front of the receivers toward the
barrel and just forward of the bolt opening. Tell us what you see there and on the
two sides of the barrels at the rear where they screw into the receiver. Pay
particular attention to ALL of the marks - even the funny looking ones, perhaps in a
weird alphabet. THEY DO MEAN SOMETHING. Perhaps we can help, perhaps not.
Hoyt W.
Federal licensed Curios & Relics collector
TJ wrote:
> I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
> the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I have
> contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
>
> I would like to end up with a high sheen, but not glossy finish, that will
> not make the gun slippery to handle, especially if the weather should turn
> wet whilst hunting. Are there any of the standard oil based finishes that
> somebody (preferably a gun user) would recommend for a finish?
I have a 40 year old 22 semi-automatic that I purchased new with an unfinished
stock. It has the the nicest finish I have ever applied. It's simply Outer's
gun oil. I applied a number of coats over the first month and then wipe the gun
down with gun oil after every use. I believe the saying for an oil finish goes
something like:
Once a day for a week.
Once a week for a month.
Once a month for a year.
Once a year for life. (It the case of a gun I recommend once after each use).
--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
(Remove "SPAM" from email address to reply)
Mine are old 1906-06 03-A3s from the days when our government felt it
was a good idea to have a well armed and trained population. I bought
them, and ammo, from the DCM (the Pentagon's Director of Civilian
Marksmanship) for $25 each. Admittedly it was many years ago but these
weapons still work as well now as they did then.
I've been at this for long enough to remember boarding an Allegheny
Airlines flight at Logan on my way to the Camp Perry pistol matches
carrying several pistols and about 3,000 rounds of hand loads on board.
The airline and flight crew were well aware of what I had and why I
was carrying it. No problems.
I still have those pistols. If I carried them on a plane today the
Govies would have a fit. What's changed? I haven't and the pistols
haven't.
RB
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:41:37 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>>>I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
>>>>the 1920s.
>>>
>>>You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
>>>I mean.
>>
>>The really cool thing is that I have a pair--
>
>
> Me too ;)
>
>
>>I got a second,
>>matching model at a farm auction about ten years ago for $40. It
>>wasn't in quite as good condition, but it's a good match.
>
>
> I'll double your money right now, my friend...
>
>
>>Oh yeah-- can't think of a much better gun for a kid to learn
>>with. I know there have been many 1,000s of rounds through our
>>original and it's still one of the most accurate gun with iron
>>sights I've ever fired. I'm looking forward to passing it on to
>>my grandkids (along with that second one now).
>
>
> They were designed for trainig troops; the cost of .30-06 ammo
> was prohibitive, and supplies were tight; the .22 trainers have
> the same dimensions, etc as the '03 Springfield used by the US
> military at the time. Basic marksmanship can certainly be taught
> on a .22 as well or better than a high-power rifle, so it's a sound
> method.
>
> If you wanted to drop me an email, I'd be happy to look up serial
> numbers or whatever for you, if you want specific info on which
> varients you've got.
>
> Dave Hinz
>
>
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:17:14 -0400, RB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Mine are old 1906-06 03-A3s from the days when our government felt it
>>was a good idea to have a well armed and trained population. I bought
>>them, and ammo, from the DCM (the Pentagon's Director of Civilian
>>Marksmanship) for $25 each. Admittedly it was many years ago but these
>>weapons still work as well now as they did then.
>
>
> Now that Clinton is gone, you can buy them again from http://www.odcmp.com/
> (formerly known as the DCM) but the price for '03's is a bit more than
> 25 bucks.
>
>
>>I've been at this for long enough to remember boarding an Allegheny
>>Airlines flight at Logan on my way to the Camp Perry pistol matches
>>carrying several pistols and about 3,000 rounds of hand loads on board.
>> The airline and flight crew were well aware of what I had and why I
>>was carrying it. No problems.
>
>
> When were you at Perry? I bet we have some overlap.
Mid 1950s.
>
>
>>I still have those pistols. If I carried them on a plane today the
>>Govies would have a fit. What's changed? I haven't and the pistols
>>haven't.
>
>
> I've got to get back there. My kid is 5, old enough to hang out on the
> beach with mom. Maybe next year. I understand the mess hall got hit
> by a tornado and is no longer used, sorry to say.
>
> Dave Hinz
>
J. Clarke wrote:
> RB wrote:
>
>
>>Mine are old 1906-06 03-A3s from the days when our government felt it
>>was a good idea to have a well armed and trained population. I bought
>>them, and ammo, from the DCM (the Pentagon's Director of Civilian
>>Marksmanship) for $25 each. Admittedly it was many years ago but these
>>weapons still work as well now as they did then.
>>
>>I've been at this for long enough to remember boarding an Allegheny
>>Airlines flight at Logan on my way to the Camp Perry pistol matches
>>carrying several pistols and about 3,000 rounds of hand loads on board.
>> The airline and flight crew were well aware of what I had and why I
>>was carrying it. No problems.
>>
>>I still have those pistols. If I carried them on a plane today the
>>Govies would have a fit. What's changed? I haven't and the pistols
>>haven't.
>
>
> The world has.
My question was largely rhetorical. I don't feel that the world hasn't
changed. What has changed is peoples' values and our tolerance of those
mostly negative changes.
RB
>
>
>>RB
>>
>>Dave Hinz wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:41:37 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
>>>>>>the 1920s.
>>>>>
>>>>>You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
>>>>>I mean.
>>>>
>>>>The really cool thing is that I have a pair--
>>>
>>>
>>>Me too ;)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I got a second,
>>>>matching model at a farm auction about ten years ago for $40. It
>>>>wasn't in quite as good condition, but it's a good match.
>>>
>>>
>>>I'll double your money right now, my friend...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Oh yeah-- can't think of a much better gun for a kid to learn
>>>>with. I know there have been many 1,000s of rounds through our
>>>>original and it's still one of the most accurate gun with iron
>>>>sights I've ever fired. I'm looking forward to passing it on to
>>>>my grandkids (along with that second one now).
>>>
>>>
>>>They were designed for trainig troops; the cost of .30-06 ammo
>>>was prohibitive, and supplies were tight; the .22 trainers have
>>>the same dimensions, etc as the '03 Springfield used by the US
>>>military at the time. Basic marksmanship can certainly be taught
>>>on a .22 as well or better than a high-power rifle, so it's a sound
>>>method.
>>>
>>>If you wanted to drop me an email, I'd be happy to look up serial
>>>numbers or whatever for you, if you want specific info on which
>>>varients you've got.
>>>
>>>Dave Hinz
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Dave Hinz wrote:
>
> Check out the spare parts and accessories while you're there. You might
> even be able to get some spare walnut stocks (there, back on topic if
> even gratuitously so) if you want.
>
> Dave
>
Always a good idea! I bought several spare "C" stocks for my '03 so I
could bed one to zero in the accuracy for cast bullets. The originals
are stored away.
-Bruce
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
"Connie & Roy L. Murphy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I can vote for the Tru-oil also.
>
> TJ wrote:
>
> >I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have
just
> >the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I
have
> >contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
> >
> >I would like to end up with a high sheen, but not glossy finish, that
will
> >not make the gun slippery to handle, especially if the weather should
turn
> >wet whilst hunting. Are there any of the standard oil based finishes that
> >somebody (preferably a gun user) would recommend for a finish?
> >
> >One rifle in particular has a beautiful 'tiger stripe' pattern in the
grain,
> >which I am certain will look fabulous when given several coats of the
good
> >stuff.
> >
> >I thought i'd drop by first though and see if anybody has any experiences
or
> >information they would like to share?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >TJ
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
I can vote for the Tru-oil also.
TJ wrote:
>I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
>the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I have
>contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
>
>I would like to end up with a high sheen, but not glossy finish, that will
>not make the gun slippery to handle, especially if the weather should turn
>wet whilst hunting. Are there any of the standard oil based finishes that
>somebody (preferably a gun user) would recommend for a finish?
>
>One rifle in particular has a beautiful 'tiger stripe' pattern in the grain,
>which I am certain will look fabulous when given several coats of the good
>stuff.
>
>I thought i'd drop by first though and see if anybody has any experiences or
>information they would like to share?
>
>Thanks
>
>TJ
>
>
>
>
>
If you determine that the guns do not have a collector value, try
using Birchwood Casey Tru-oil. Great stuff!
"TJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I have a couple of rifles with walnut stocks. At the moment they have just
> the 'factory' finish, which looks like a couple of coats of an oil. (I have
> contacted the manufacturer to try to discern exactly what oil).
>
> I would like to end up with a high sheen, but not glossy finish, that will
> not make the gun slippery to handle, especially if the weather should turn
> wet whilst hunting. Are there any of the standard oil based finishes that
> somebody (preferably a gun user) would recommend for a finish?
>
> One rifle in particular has a beautiful 'tiger stripe' pattern in the grain,
> which I am certain will look fabulous when given several coats of the good
> stuff.
>
> I thought i'd drop by first though and see if anybody has any experiences or
> information they would like to share?
>
> Thanks
>
> TJ
>
>
>
"rj" <[email protected]> wrote in news:6TRrc.43305$gr.4301727
@attbi_s52:
> USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
the 1920s. Each generation has done minor sanding and refinishing
with linseed oil, and that's it. I remember when I first removed
the butt plate (when I was about 15) and found my father's name
on the stock, from when he'd taken it in to his high school
woodshop for some light sanding. This is a gun that has seen
heavy use, much of it banging around lose in a model T, then a
1950s Willy's. It's a very nice tactile finish for a working gun.
-Derek
Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Mon, 24 May 2004 18:11:03 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> "rj" <[email protected]> wrote in news:6TRrc.43305$gr.4301727
>> @attbi_s52:
>>
>>> USMC recipie linseed oil + large amounts of elbow grease :-)
>>
>> I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
>> the 1920s.
>
> You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
> I mean.
>
The really cool thing is that I have a pair-- I got a second,
matching model at a farm auction about ten years ago for $40. It
wasn't in quite as good condition, but it's a good match.
>> This is a gun that has seen
>> heavy use, much of it banging around lose in a model T, then a
>> 1950s Willy's. It's a very nice tactile finish for a working
>>gun.
>
> As a shooter, that's great. As a collector, I am cringing. As
>long as it's gentle and only with the appropriate oil (sounds
>like it is) it's not too bad, though. Fun little guns, aren't
>they?
Oh yeah-- can't think of a much better gun for a kid to learn
with. I know there have been many 1,000s of rounds through our
original and it's still one of the most accurate gun with iron
sights I've ever fired. I'm looking forward to passing it on to
my grandkids (along with that second one now).
-Kiwanda
On 25 May 2004 01:09:44 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>Now that Clinton is gone, you can buy them again from http://www.odcmp.com/
>(formerly known as the DCM) but the price for '03's is a bit more than
>25 bucks.
>
Dave,
Thank you for posting that link. I've been wanting to get my hands on an '03 to replace one that I foolishly allowed to get away
from me when I was home on boot leave and needed a few dollars. Think I'll pick up a service grade M1 while I'm at it as a reminder
of my ill-spent youth.
Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA
RB wrote:
> Mine are old 1906-06 03-A3s from the days when our government felt it
> was a good idea to have a well armed and trained population. I bought
> them, and ammo, from the DCM (the Pentagon's Director of Civilian
> Marksmanship) for $25 each. Admittedly it was many years ago but these
> weapons still work as well now as they did then.
>
> I've been at this for long enough to remember boarding an Allegheny
> Airlines flight at Logan on my way to the Camp Perry pistol matches
> carrying several pistols and about 3,000 rounds of hand loads on board.
> The airline and flight crew were well aware of what I had and why I
> was carrying it. No problems.
>
> I still have those pistols. If I carried them on a plane today the
> Govies would have a fit. What's changed? I haven't and the pistols
> haven't.
The world has.
> RB
>
> Dave Hinz wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:41:37 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
>>>>>the 1920s.
>>>>
>>>>You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
>>>>I mean.
>>>
>>>The really cool thing is that I have a pair--
>>
>>
>> Me too ;)
>>
>>
>>>I got a second,
>>>matching model at a farm auction about ten years ago for $40. It
>>>wasn't in quite as good condition, but it's a good match.
>>
>>
>> I'll double your money right now, my friend...
>>
>>
>>>Oh yeah-- can't think of a much better gun for a kid to learn
>>>with. I know there have been many 1,000s of rounds through our
>>>original and it's still one of the most accurate gun with iron
>>>sights I've ever fired. I'm looking forward to passing it on to
>>>my grandkids (along with that second one now).
>>
>>
>> They were designed for trainig troops; the cost of .30-06 ammo
>> was prohibitive, and supplies were tight; the .22 trainers have
>> the same dimensions, etc as the '03 Springfield used by the US
>> military at the time. Basic marksmanship can certainly be taught
>> on a .22 as well or better than a high-power rifle, so it's a sound
>> method.
>>
>> If you wanted to drop me an email, I'd be happy to look up serial
>> numbers or whatever for you, if you want specific info on which
>> varients you've got.
>>
>> Dave Hinz
>>
>>
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
RB wrote:
>
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> RB wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Mine are old 1906-06 03-A3s from the days when our government felt it
>>>was a good idea to have a well armed and trained population. I bought
>>>them, and ammo, from the DCM (the Pentagon's Director of Civilian
>>>Marksmanship) for $25 each. Admittedly it was many years ago but these
>>>weapons still work as well now as they did then.
>>>
>>>I've been at this for long enough to remember boarding an Allegheny
>>>Airlines flight at Logan on my way to the Camp Perry pistol matches
>>>carrying several pistols and about 3,000 rounds of hand loads on board.
>>> The airline and flight crew were well aware of what I had and why I
>>>was carrying it. No problems.
>>>
>>>I still have those pistols. If I carried them on a plane today the
>>>Govies would have a fit. What's changed? I haven't and the pistols
>>>haven't.
>>
>>
>> The world has.
>
> My question was largely rhetorical. I don't feel that the world hasn't
> changed. What has changed is peoples' values and our tolerance of those
> mostly negative changes.
Can't disagree. Not sure when it happened, but remember Kennedy, a
certified card carrying liberal, saying "Ask not what your country can do
for you, ask what you can do for your country"? And now even the hard-core
Republicans expect all to sit around with our fingers up our butts and let
the government take care of us and all of our problems. And so several
airliners full of people dutifully let the hijackers do their thing instead
of pulling them down and tossing them out, because that's what you're
supposed to do in an emergency, be a good little do-bee and let the
government handle it.
>
> RB
>>
>>
>>>RB
>>>
>>>Dave Hinz wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 24 May 2004 20:41:37 +0000 (UTC), Kiwanda <[email protected]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>>>
>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>I have an old Springfield .22 that has been in my family since
>>>>>>>the 1920s.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You know that that's worth a small fortune, right? Unmodified,
>>>>>>I mean.
>>>>>
>>>>>The really cool thing is that I have a pair--
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Me too ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I got a second,
>>>>>matching model at a farm auction about ten years ago for $40. It
>>>>>wasn't in quite as good condition, but it's a good match.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I'll double your money right now, my friend...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Oh yeah-- can't think of a much better gun for a kid to learn
>>>>>with. I know there have been many 1,000s of rounds through our
>>>>>original and it's still one of the most accurate gun with iron
>>>>>sights I've ever fired. I'm looking forward to passing it on to
>>>>>my grandkids (along with that second one now).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>They were designed for trainig troops; the cost of .30-06 ammo
>>>>was prohibitive, and supplies were tight; the .22 trainers have
>>>>the same dimensions, etc as the '03 Springfield used by the US
>>>>military at the time. Basic marksmanship can certainly be taught
>>>>on a .22 as well or better than a high-power rifle, so it's a sound
>>>>method.
>>>>
>>>>If you wanted to drop me an email, I'd be happy to look up serial
>>>>numbers or whatever for you, if you want specific info on which
>>>>varients you've got.
>>>>
>>>>Dave Hinz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)