montea6b

It has been Texas-hot up here in the PNW this week, and yesterday I cooled off after work with a "Horsefly". (at least if I remember what one is...) Cold beer on the rocks with a dash of salt, right? Horsefly are you still out there to check me on this? I normally favor richer, complex ales, (I'm a northwest beer snob...) but an ice cold Bud sure hit the spot yesterday. Does anybody remember if there was a particular flavor beer to make the recipe correct?

JRH, To answer the first question, it is most definitely non-functional as is. The problem is that the side lever is not camming the cocking piece far enough back so that the contact between the sear on the cocking pierce and trigger is not broken when on safe. What is happening in your case is that the safety blocks the cocking piece from going full forward and allowing the firing pin to strike the primer, (as it should with the safety engaged) but it is not preventing the cocking piece sear from slipping past the trigger. (as it also should) If you take a close look at all the parts and think a little about the functionallity of each, it will become clear quickly enough. To answer the second question, it depends. I suppose that safety lever could have been mounted just a little too far forward on the bolt sleeve. It's a matter of allowable tolerances and I don't have the answer as to exactly where it needs to be mounted. I have one myself, but purchased it installed on the shroud as you did. Perhaps someone with a set of instructions for installation could tell you precisely where the hole should be located so that you could measure and see if is OK. The only answer in this case (short of getting a new safety) is to remove some material from the sear of the cocking piece to increase the distance between it and the trigger so there there is no contact between it and the trigger when the safety is engaged. This is a delicate operation. I'll let the varsity members of this board chime in with recommendations, but the the surface contact between these parts must be very consistent and uniform. It must be kept square, and you don't want to remove too much material. Before going this route however, you may want to try swapping parts around if you happen to have any spare triggers and/or cocking pieces. I have found some variety in tolerances in the parts I've worked with, and you may get a combination that works. Good luck!

I spent a little time reflecting on the experience this weekend and I have determined that there are two root causes to my failure: (1) Not enought time dedicated to regaining proficiency, and (2) Not enough heat applied to the weld. I'll break it down further: 1. My previous success gave me a false sense of proficiency, and I didn't allocate enough time to practice. The conditions I had used the TIG under in my past job pretty much garuanteed success to anyone coordinated enough to write their name with a pen. Joining two pieces of uniform thickness with uniform gap spacing and predetermined welder settings based on thickness rendered it foolproof. Just back off the foot pedal and add a dab of filler rod when you get to the edge and you would have a fine looking weld. Since 3 rental days equaled a week in terms of cost, I rented it for a full week and thought I had plenty of time. Yeah, but there was also a leaky faucet and closet door to fix, a lawn to mow, garden to roto-till, work on 4 out of 7 days, plus attention to give to wife and kids. My hobbies always come last. And at my stage in life that's the way it should be. I did notice a pretty good learning curve, but didn't really give it the proper time to get enough confidence to tackle anything but the roughest bolt. 2. I was a little gun-shy about getting too much heat into the cocking cam, safety lug, and handle root area. I had a heat sink and slathered on the heat stop paste, but I think I was still to ginger in getting a good puddle going on that side of the weld. I would build up a puddle on the handle side and try to coax it over to the root, but would invariably get the electrode stuck, or the glob would just stick, but not flow. Add to that the fact that I was afraid to trip the 50 amp breaker. I only had 45 amps dialed in and the foot pedal was pretty much bottomed out all the time. After giving up on the bolt and going back to the rear guard screw and screw T-handles I had the machine dialed up to 60 amps and didn't have any problems. This gave me a little reserve capacity to goose the throttle when I needed a little extra. I think I could still get 'er done, I just got frustrated too quickly and gave up. Maybe this summer when the wife takes the kids out of town for a few days... A couple other afterthoughts... I was using my failed wirefeed bolt to work on first and I didn't clean it up and get a good uniform grind to start with. It was kinda lumpy. I also thought about cleanliness, but figured that the arc would vaporize any impurities. I can probably do better with a little more prep work. I also didn't have the best work space. The machine was too heavy to get in and out so I backed my truck up into the garage and used the tailgate as a work surface. I didn't have any scrap plate material, so I put down a piece of plywood to protect the tailgate. Everytime I flipped up the hood I had to move the work piece and blow out the fire! I've got all kinds of interesting looking brands in the wood. Just another laughable bubba technique that didn't help my focus. I like Z's idea about a class, I'll have to look into it. Thanks again for the encouragment.

Thanks for all the encouraging words. I'm confident that I could get good enough, but this machine cost me $130 for the week and I have to take it back tomorrow. It would have been economically viable if I would have gotten my 5 bolts out of it, but it's too expensive to practice on. Given my low rifle output I think I'll farm these out.

Well, I had grand ambitions of welding up 5 bolt handles this week. After a botched attempt to use a wirefeed welder, followed by the abandoned thought of investing in a OA unit and leasing some bottles, I hit on the idea of renting a TIG welder. I'm both disappointed and discouraged at my pathetic attempts. I worked in a sheet metal fabrication shop for a couple years in college, and fancied myself a bit of a TIG'er... well, I welded more like Tigger of Winnie the Pooh fame. About all I have to show for my effort so far is the filled in forward locking screw hole of a military triggerguard, (the rear one arced and spat severely...) and a set of stockmaker's screws I fashioned from the milsurp screws and some 5/16" bar stock. I did these as a warm up, and then went after a rough bolt I set aside for the first test case. Putting a smooth bead down the tight fitting outside corner of a stainless steel countertop is a far cry from filling in the root of a bolt handle, and the results are just as bad as the wire feed job. It looked like hell and snapped off in my hand. It went so bad that I dare not risk the nicer bolts and Talley handles I bought. I certainly won't go anywhere near the checkered bolt knob I bought. I've been thoroughly humbled. Looks like my incurable do-it-yourselfishness has caught up to me. About all I ended up with is an expensive set of stock makers screws that don't even look very nice. Just crying in my beer...

Nice work Clemson! I'm renting a TIG welder this weekend to do a few bolts, hope my results are as nice...

I'm not talking about sanding the finish in to fill the pores... Yesterday I wiped one down with mineral spirits after a 100 grit session to get rid of sanding dust. It gets tough to tell by feel where it's still rough with the ball bearing effect of the dust. I noticed that it was far easier to tell where I needed to get back to smooth out the previous grit's scratches when the stock was damp and the dust was gone. I started sanding again and noticed that it also cut down on airborne sanding dust that really seems to get me sneezing. Do any of you wet sand your stocks when smoothing them prior to finishing? If so, what do you use? Would water be less fumatacious than mineral spirits, or are there downsides to H2O?

Looks very nice!

Check this out: Auto link

Hey Sniper, I take it you are back stateside? If so, welcome home! Good to have you back cranking out sporters to inspire the lethargic ones like me. (not really lethargic, just too busy with life to devote the time I'd like to my hobby)

Z, I was typing while you posted... A Winchester '95 in a Euro 9.3mm? John Wayne would roll over in his grave! I also got to thinking that the shoulder angle would affect the force on the case as well. Additionally, case length comes into play. i.e. if a 12" rope will stretch 1" before breaking, then a 20' rope should stretch 12" before it breaks. So, by my chain of logic each cartridge should have it's own maximum headspace, (beyond optimal that is) and the longer length, smaller shouldered, and shallower shoulder angled cartridges would theoretically have a greater margin of safety in cases where headspace is excessive. I must have too much time on my hands...

Thanks Burgie! Looks very much like a Whelen as I had heard. I actually was doing a little on-line research in between (as I should have done before posting...) and got the answer on the case head question. I also found that it is .366 caliber. However, I also read a comment that because of the small shoulder it had headspace "issues" like the Whelen. This got me thinking... If the primary danger in excessive headspace is the longitudinal stress on the cartridge causing case rupture, and if a straight walled cartridge does not share this same risk due to having no shoulder for the fore and aft pressure to act against, then it stands to reason that the smaller the shoulder the less the risk associated with excessive headspace. Now, I can see the argument against this logic; for example let's compare a small shouldered cartridge such as a Whelen or 9.3 compared to a large shouldered cartridge such as a .270 WSM. If headspace were .020 over the maximum, and case rupture would occur at .010, then you could make the arguement that both shouldered cartridges would stretch beyond their limit and would rupture. The failure limit of the brass is the same in either case. However, the small shouldered cartridge would have less surface area for the force to act upon and would be less likely to stretch to the full amount allowed by the excessive headspace, would it not? In other words, more of the energy would be expended on the other surface area presented to the expanding gas, (the ass end of the larger diameter bullet) than would be put into expanding the brass, whereas in the .270 WSM the brass would be more likely to be pushed to it's limit. Not suggesting excessive headspace is anything to be made light of or ignored, just thinking theoretically. What do y'all think about that? Am I completely off track?

My "Cartridges of the World" book has been MIA since the move. What is the case head diameter of this cartridge? More importantly, does it require the bolt face to be opened up like a magnum? How about modifications to the feedrails? Also, what exactly does 9.3mm work out to in inches? Is it equivalent to a .375, or would you need specific metric bullets if you were to reload?

I was sure there was, but I was looking in the archives to find an old thread to post a link to and never came across it! Thanks for the reminder FC.

Thanks guys, I forgot about the front triggerguard tang being longer on military TGs. The first stock I did had the shorter length for a commercial guard, but it was easy enough to lengthen. Or one could grind the military guard to fit I guess.

Richard's Microfit has several different Mauser stocks, the Mauser 98, Mauser 98 FN, and Mauser Mark X. Can anybody here tell me what the differences in inletting might be? The only thing I can possibly think would be different is some additional inletting to accomodate a side safety, and I find it hard to believe that they would even bother making an extra cut for this when it is so simple to modify a standard 98 stock for this. Anybody?

"The Gun Digest Book of Riflesmithing" by Jack Mitchell is one I would recommend.

Very nice drawing Walnut, thanks! I found the photo of the unusual release I alluded to, here it is: It's a little tough to see from the half sized photo. It appears that the pivot hole is in the same place as the 1909 style in the bow release, so the spring arrangement should be similar. Interesting approach.

How do you protect the areas you don't want parked? Also, is the result a greenish or mostly black finish? Photos would be cool!

Well, just kind of a tutorial with photos I guess. Short of the Zastava side button which I don't particularly care for, I think this style would be most resistant to inadvertent opening, as well as fairly easy to do. I'd like to try for the in-the-bow release like you do, but that seems like not only more labor intensive, but easier to mess up and have it look bad. I remember that you have to drill a hole at approximately 45 degrees for the plunger, and then you'd have to make a plunger and a way to keep it and the spring from coming out. Just looking for enought detail mainly so that I don't have to think everything out from scratch. I actually saved a photo of another unique style I came across that I hadn't seen before that I just might end up trying. Very similar to the in the bow style, but without the release button actually inside the bow if you can picture that. (I'm traveling with my laptop and the picture is on my home computer or I'd post a shot of what I'm talking about.) I'll take any ideas you have!

Thanks Jason, it probably was Morgansboss no that I think about it. I can't find my copy of the gunsmithing book. I bought it on your recommendation mainly because of the chapter on hinging a military guard, but it hasn't resurfaced since the move last year.

Somebody on this forum emailed me their technique for doing a Winchester model 70 style release for a hinged floorplate on a Mauser triggerguard, but I can't seem to find what was sent, and I don't remember who it was now. Whoever it was, could you please contact me, resend, or post it here?

Don, That's a significant improvement in my mind. I have pondered the same thing, but you're the first person I've seen actually do something like this. The military conversions just look "cut up" in my mind, and yours looks more like the custom made 3 position safeties on the market. Scott, Steve Wagner has a short turtorial and some good photos on his website installing one on a '96 Swede. Check it out: Side swing '96 I just purchased one for a Swede I'm working on and it comes with pretty decent instructions, but a picture is worth a thousand words. I have also contemplated going at it without a mill, but I think I would screw it up with a dremmel. My thought was to chuck a cut-off disc in the drill press and made the cuts undersized to be cleaned up with needle files. I also have some stones of various sized that could be chucked in a drill press and used. If you have the work mounted in a steady rest and go slow there's not reason why it couldn't work. Kinda Bubba, I know, but forking out the bucks for a mill for the light work it would see is not efficient, and I'm an incurable do-it-yourselfer. I'll post lots of photos of my mistake...

THanks guys. I guess there's a reason why it hasn't been touted more widely.

I've toyed with this idea before and wanted to see if anybody else had. For the rare times when I might want to do some milling it seems like a stand alone machine dedicated to this purpose is not an efficient investment. However, for light non-precision work similiar to the hinged triggerguard project that DonMarkey posted here it seems like a drillpress with a milling bit would be able to handle the work. Of course the tricky part would be getting it to feed nicely. Several years ago at a summer tent sale of cheap tools I saw a vise with hand cranks that could have been used for this. It had markings to measure the amount of travel on both axis, and looked like it could be clamped or bolted to a drill press table. I thought about getting it, but it was poorly made with lots of slop in the worm gears. I seem to remember that it took about 180 degrees of free handle rotation when reversing direction before it would start to move the other way. Anyhow, if I could find a better vise to feed the work with I'd be interested in trying this. It also seems to me that with such a set up and some router bits that you could also inlet a stock pretty well. Anybody have thoughts or experience with this idea?