montea6b

If you ran into a nice buck outta bow range I wouldn't shoot it with a 9mm!

Two deer hunters were standing on a ridge near a highway in rural south Mississippi on the opening day of deer season. They both saw a trophy-class buck meandering towards them. As the one hunter raised his gun to shoot, a funeral procession came slowly by. The hunter lowered his gun, took off his hat, and stood with his head bowed until the procession was past. Of course by then, the deer was long gone. The other hunter exclaimed: "Wow! That was the most sportsmanlike act I've ever seen! You allowed this trophy buck to escape while showing such compassion and kindness toward someone's dearly departed. You are a great humanitarian and a shining example to sportsmen throughout the world!" The first hunter nodded and said: "Well, we were married for 42 years."

Wow, what a sad shock. I am very sorry to hear this. While I never met him, you kind of feel like you know people here after a while. I had spent some time in South Texas and had exchanged personal emails with him several times. My deepest condolences to his family if you check back in and read this.

Very nice work Don!

Well Scott, have you had any luck convincing your friend?

Nice work! I like the green one, webbing paint? Sounds "Spider-manish"... P.S., welcome to the forum! I'm a USN bubba, I'll shoot you a PM.

Yeah, good catch Mike. I meant the Blackhawk single action revolver frame. I have a Bisley Vaquero in 45LC, and a Super Blackhawk in 44mag. I was contemplating playing a little switcheroo, but am stymied by this frame stamping issue. Do you happen to know when the older stronger Vaquero frames you referenced were made? The topstrap on my Vaquero is obviously thinner, and it was made in the late 1990s, but I hadn't heard about any significant differences in strength between old and new with this model.

Or if you like that factory look just make a square cut 1/16" fore and aft of the handle shaft and hog it out with a chisel! Ditto what Z said, I used the file until I had about 80% contact, (with the handle just kissing the wood) and figured that sanding would take care of the last few thou.

Just another thought, B-Square makes a mount for the O3A3 that does not require drilling and tapping. It looks like the one in the photo Milsurpcollector posted. I wouldn't recommend their side mount scope base for the standard 03 however. I had a bad experience with one... It all depends on what your friend wants the end result to be, but I agree that you could finance a nice project with proceeds from the sale of the original rifle.

Ruger centerfire singleshot frames are all supposed to be the same, right? A pistolsmith could swap barrels and cylinders and have a new caliber easily enough. So, why does Ruger find it necessary to stamp the caliber on the frame?!

I like what you did there Mike. I'm not afraid of oversized on the outside, that's what rasps and sandpaper are for. In fact I like shaping it the way I want it. And I don't mind redoing the tip either. It's the inletting that I wonder about. The idea of "press fit" sounds absolutely wonderful to me. I HATE inletting... If the compaint is that there are some gaps, well, I can live with it if it's not too bad. 'Cuz if I do the inletting, guess what... there are some gaps! All this coming from a guy with 2 stocks under his belt.

I guess I meant constructed as two pieces. It was sort of hard to tell, but I assumed they were joined. I can see the pins now that you mention it. That's interesting. Making this in two parts makes sense to give flexibility for different lengths and ease of manufactuing. You could form the mag well out of sheet metal a lot easier than milling it. What have the aftermarket makers thought of this?

That's interesting, it looks like the magazine well is a seperate piece kind of like the model 70. I didn't know they made any Mauser bottom metal like that.

I'm a big proponent of doing whatever you want with your own guns, but yes, drilling and tapping will destroy it's collector value. I don't know much about the sniper variants in terms of how they are marked, but you can often tell just from the serial number. (at least you can with the National Match rifles) If this rifle is 95% I would try to convince him to leave it alone. I have a National Match rifle that was put into a bishop stock and I restored it to military trim. There's just not as many of them around as there used to be. I can relate to wanting to build a sniper style, (that's actually a cool sounding project) but it would be unethical to try to pass it off as original and a collector would be able to tell anyway. If he just wants a replica of that style with no intent to scam, I say go for it, but build it as a franken-rifle out of cast off parts. Don't cut up a nice matching military rifle. Yeah, annealing the receiver to D&T without re-heat treating is not a safe idea. He might have been able to protect it somewhat, but wet sawdust doesn't seem like a very precise solution to me. Just my two cents worth...

Kenny, Just curious, but what are the issues with the Richards? I've considered picking up a factory second sometime but I'm kind of on the fence.

Very nice! What kind of bottom metal and trigger is that?

Hey Jason! I don't hardly ever scroll below the sporterizing thread anymore... I have one I inherited, although I haven't gotten around to shooting it yet. (shame on me) What I can say is that I'm impressed by the apparent quality and workmanship. The fit and finish is nice, and the action cycles smoothly. I guess that like Mausers, they can vary. I believe mine is German, but I could verify later if you're interested. My only complaint is that the grip seems a little blocky for my hands, but my Father in law put aftermarket grips on it and his hands were bigger. I was pondering the same thing as you several years ago until I got this one under unfortunate circumstances. I'd handle a few before you make the decision, but my vote is that they are a good value. On second thought, I don't particularly care for the magazine release on the bottom of the well. This makes dropping an empty mag a two handed affair, and precludes you from reaching for a fresh one while ditching the old one. Cuz I get jumped by PCP crazed thugs pretty frequently in the office, and have to pump multiple magazines worth of ammo into them!

Very nice looking handles! I like the sweepback angle. I'm kind of thinking the Swede would look good with just a hair more sweep now. I tend to favor straighter handles on beefy rifles, but on a slimmer lighter rifle a little more sweep looks OK. So what is really the issue with the Dakota handles? They look a little slender at the root, is this the problem?

Thanks for the compliments. I didn't use any stain, just the slight amber color of the finish. It's a pretty plain stick of wood, but I do like the color as is. Scott, I remember your post and was thinking about trying that myself, although I'd also like to try metal checkering on my own. Z, thanks for the offer, I'll shoot you an email.

I looking at the photos all together, I realize that its difficult to fully appreciate just how much wood I removed. I really went at it. I shortened each end by approx 2 inches, and dramatically slimmed the grip area. The new butt end is just aft of the sling swivel and old hump. I also slimmed the metal tang down to help with the slenderizing of the grip. I wish I had taken better "before" photos, from the same angle and distance. Something else I'm considering is cutting off the aft knurled portion of the cocking piece and a corresponding amount off the firing pin to reduce the amount sticking back into the grip area. Could also save weight and improve lock time. I haven't seen anybody post on this before. Anybody done this?

The stock is looking pretty nice after 6 wet sandings. Been contouring the triggerguard while the finish cures. Put it together this evening so I could dream a little, and it looked so good I had to shoot some photos. Not the best lighting, but you can still see the progress to date. Here's what I started with: Nice little rifle, but 15.5" LOP with a 17.5" barrel was all wrong. Very clublike grip, plastic forend tip, white line spacers, etc. just wasn't my style. I'm going for a youth/lady's/mountain rifle. Here'e what it looks like so far: Basically I slimmed everything down, had Z1R weld a new handle on, rasped off the monte carlo hump, shortened the LOP, and attached a new wood tip. Here's what it looks like compared to a "normal" stock: Some more photos: It had no real loading gate mortise to speak of, and I think this area is an important detail on a custom rifle. Mine's not perfect, but I think it looks pretty good. I need to work on my photography skills. It really looks better in real life!

Mauser98, I hadn't though of it in terms of forearm length, but it makes sense. I had heard of the rule of thumb of making the end at the midpoint of the barrel, which is what I have used on my two projects. This looks pretty good, but if a barrel band sling swivel is used then it really looks odd. I think for a sleeker euro-style sporter the barrel band should go at the midpoint of the barrel, with the forend tip ending well before that. I'll bet the "golden section" would be a perfect tool for determining this point. Here's a good link: Golden ratio Clemson, I happen to think that 2:1 or greater looks too elongated. It's just a matter of perference I guess. What I was considering was to make a diamond template that fits within the box labeled "golden rectangle" in the link above. This would make it just a little less than 2:1, but I think that looks most pleasing to the eye. IMHO...

As each coat of finish on the Swede's stock cures, (It's looking good, I'll post photos when it's done) I've been contemplating the checkering pattern I'll use. I have sketched out several point patterns, as well as some more rounded fluer di leis patterns, yet I'm still undecided. I've also tried to come up with a geometrically proportioned angle for the diamonds to that I can make a template for the master lines. On my last project I just winged it, choosing angles that looked "right", but I am striving for better consistency this time. Using graph paper I haven't been able to get anything that looks just right. They are either too square, or too sharply angled. Over morning coffee this weekend I was sitting on the couch, absent-mindedly pulling the fabric on my plaid PJ pants diagonally into diamond shapes, contemplating the resulting ratios of long to short sides, and wondering if I should measure and capture it when I got it just right, when suddenly it hit me... The "Golden Ratio"!!! If you're not sure what I'm talking about just do a Google search on this term. It would take far too long to explain here, and I couldn't begin to do it justice. Anyhow, I looked it up myself on Google and I think this is the answer. I haven't drawn it out yet, but visually the proportions look just right for making checkering diamonds aesthetically pleasing. There's a reason why Da Vinci was such an artistic genius. By the way, I wouldn't recommend trying to pulverize charcoal to tint the pore filling slurry a darker color. It just seemed ineffective. It all settled to the bottom of the finish and I don't think it did much good. Perhaps a finer carbon dust like graphite powder or bone-black would be better. Something that would actually remain suspended in the solution. Interesting experiment anyhow, and the stock certainly looks no worse for the effort.

This option may expose the step in the barrel, but you could always shorten the top piece at the same spot, then relieve a new groove in the top and bottom stock pieces for the barrel strap. Who says the barrel strap has to go in the same spot on the stock? Just back it up a little. I think I remember seeing an article once about a fake carbine made this way.

The fifth option is high end bottom metal from Sunny Hill or others. You can find it in the Brownells catalog, but it sure ain't cheap!