Dan,
As you probably already know, determining the finish on surviving rifles has many challenges not the least of which is the expense of the process and equipment required to do nondestructive testing. Very, very few labs, even in major museums are set up to do it. The John Sheets of Staunton rifle owned by Colonial Williamsburg was tested and the results were published in Volume 5 of JHAT. I don't think I know offhand of any others.
Another reason for the lack testing is the extreme difficulty in determining which layer of finish is the original and which is something applied 5 or 50 years later. Analysis of paint on building is easy by comparison -- they just scrape away one layer after another until they get to bare wood.
Gary
First let me state that there are few things I would feel comfortable disagreeing with Flintriflesmith on concerning the American longrifle. This is perhaps the only one. Stock finish.
I will further state that I really don't care if people use beeswax or varathane as a stock finish. But do not use this sort of finish and the take someone else to task for doing something that is not historically correct.
I came back to the post because a friend phoned and was laughing about the beeswax finish thing. He uses a lot of the stuff in one of his enterprises, knows more about it than I ever will, but thinks using it on gunstocks is, well, he was joking about it....
I had mentioned the Crayon and Linseed mix for the same reason. This formula appears in a circa 1968 Muzzle Blasts BTW and I used it a few times in my youth. It actually works as the article stated if the colors are well chosen. But there are better ways.
Then I lost a finished post it seems and had to rewrite this AM.
The way another friend looked into traditional finishes was this. To find what the finishes were simply look at boiled oil and varnish making of the time, then MAKE SOME and see how it compared to what was found on surviving articles. I guess it’s a form of experimental archeology.
Almost all the varnishes of the time were linseed oil heat modified with some metals to provide dryers, color and body the oil. While find the exact formula some gunsmith might have used might be impossible its not difficult to make boiled oil or a boiled oil varnish using the same available materials and then end up with a very similar product. Since according to Mad Monk many gunsmiths made their own it would be nearly impossible, short of some sort of spectral analysis to find out what was actually used. But rosin and gum mastic are good guesses. Dammar was likely not available but my expertise fails here and I would have to dig. But a quick look on the WWW indicates it did not appear in the west until the 1820s. I don't know if pine tar would work as a resin or not. There are a number of plant gums available that probably would make a varnish similar to rosin or mastic. Nor was a great deal used, hard varnishes are not needed or even desired. A harder varnish is more difficult to make since harder resins need higher temps and careful control must be exercised to prevent heating the oil too hot for too long.
Nor were they excessively concerned with moisture the end grain was not generally sealed in many examples this is true even today.
The idea that gunsmiths made their own finish is certainly borne out by JP Beck having an "iron pot with linseed oil" in his estate inventory. Paint pots are also listed.
So if they DID heat oil in an iron pot in the forge to heat modify it and cook in driers, pigments and resins then this is a smoking gun and I think this is the case. All the ingredients were available and it’s not as dangerous as making nitric acid stain.
The "brown varnish" as found on 18th and 19th century rifles was likely made with rosin. A very common material since ancient times. Heating the oil with some lead oxide/acetate, both ancient materials, iron oxides and maybe a few other dryers or colorants would produce a dark brown oil that would dry much faster than what is sold as boiled oil today. Adding a moderate dose of low temperature resin will produce a shiny varnish that is soft enough for gunstock use. Soft is actually desired in this case since it is superior in protecting the stock compared to finish that might crack or check due to temperature or humidity changes as the wood moves. The finish must be ELASTIC to do this. Boiled linseed oil or high oil content varnishes will do this.
In the early 19th century there is a quote from a letter where a man working at a western post advises a friend to have a "grease" finish put on rather than varnish for western prairie use, varnish being too shiny. I suspect but do not know than he means an oil finish rather than oil varnish. I have some boiled oil in the shop that is still usable as filler than it so thick it will not form a drip if a finger is dipped into it. It was made some years back and has been left open to skin over and thicken. But this, like many things is supposition from reading something written by someone who may not know exactly what he is describing.
We also must remember that anything that dried to a shine was varnish. Be it oil varnish or spirit varnish. It was an old and well developed science by the 18th century. Oil varnishes were used on sailing ships to protect the spars and masts. This was used for the same reason linseed was used on firearms, it was and is very weather resistant. Artists made a wide variety of both light and dark varnishes to use in oil painting. Stand oil is an artist’s product and is not really as suitable for gunstock use as heat modified “boiled” oil.
These are some stock finishes, oils from my finish drawer, dropped onto a Plexiglas plate. The two on the left are boiled oil and while a pretty deep brown, medium coffee I suppose, in the jar they look amber to yellow here. One is very thick, almost grease like. It is still a good fill for walnut and greatly enhances the color of American walnut. The thin oil in the middle is home cooked oil mixed with Grumbachers Oil Painting Medium III, this is a Dammar and Balsam resin varnish and makes a very durable stock finish that will stand being outside for 6 months or so in Montana from fall through to spring with no damage. Something modern plastic varnishes do not do well no matter who markets them.
The dark oil is a mix of home cooked "boiled" linseed oil, the Grumbachers III and Grumbacher's Burnt Sienna and Burnt Umber artist’s colors. Both listed as being actual iron oxides not synthetic colors. This was heated again to combine the oxides in a very small batch as a test.
This is the thick yellow looking oil finger dabbed on American walnut. The much lighter finish to left is the typical Varathane (platic) varnish.
Note the difference in color and that the heavy oil, if I were to work it back, would have nearly filled to pores in the wood in one application. I put this on as a demo for a couple of Kentucky rifle enthusiasts to show how even this really thick oil would spread on and fill walnut. Then a few day later I decided to put on some plastic finish for comparison. I should have beeswaxed it too I guess but it never occurred to me till this minute.
The dark oil/vanish looks like this applied to scraped maple, a scrap stock in this case. I scraped it smooth, kind of, and put on the finish with a fingertip. It gives the maple a golden color but does little to bring out the curl. It does not raise the grain, as expected and smoothes the surface well. It would likely allow finishing a gun ready to deliver in 2-3 days drying time if the wood was nicely scraped smooth and the varnish applied carefully but this would require a full scale test(s) to prove.
It would probably show the curl better if thinned with turpentine or put on at higher temperature. But I am not sure either would produce a one-coat finish. On plain maple this would not be important and I think this would make an excellent finish for a guns stocked in plain wood.
It is possible that staining with AF stain then burnishing then putting on the varnish might solve the problem of raising the grain on even a carved stock and on a higher end gun the extra work would be justified. By rubbing it on with a bit of cloth or tow build up around relief carving could be eliminated and the rubbing would help force the finish into the wood.
This is photo I have posted before and for good reason. As near as I can tell its a simple "brown varnish" on plain maple. From what I have read this is very much like varnishes found on some 18th century eastern rifles and is likely the same +- formula. The rifle has seen some years of use but other than where it is worn away the finish is in remarkably good its not cracked or checked and in most cases has not failed where it is dented unless it was struck heavily or with a sharp object. Identical performance to a lighter colored varnish seen on a 1870s Ballard single shot I had examined. This rifle is in a glass case now but a good friend handled for several hours years back but was too young to think to REALLY look at the finish which is surely what the rifle came from the Hawken shop with. It is much darker than the stuff I cooked up and has an interesting red undertone.
Sure it is 1850s, but some things were slow to change and I would bet this is a finish that predates the percussion cap.
The varnish was likely painted or rubbed on the smoothed stock, perhaps right over some metal parts then allowed to dry. I doubt the finisher spent more than 30 minutes, if that, "oiling" the stock. Very efficient in time spent. Durable. Gave a dark finish on the plain wood of what is the ultimate pre-Civil War 19th century American "working rifle".
The fact that the heavy oil varnish that did not penetrate well and was worn away in use is why we see some heavily used rifles that appear to have no finish except in well-protected areas. There are other things to be learned from looking at this rifle but it’s beyond the scope of this discussion.
The bottom line is there is a LONG and distinguished history of drying oils being used on wood, usually linseed oil with cooked in driers and resins. It has served this purpose very well for a very long time. Linseed appears on American rifles of all time frames. It’s still in use.
There is no such history or tradition concerning Beeswax as a stock finish. It’s simply not found SFAIK.
I can easily understand the frustration of people encounter when trying to use hardware store linseed oil. Its not stock finish, its designed for use on fences and buildings (log oil if you will) and as a thinner for oil paints. Trying to finish a stock with it will drive the maker to something else with a conclusion that linseed oil does not work and the old timers must have spent years finishing a stock.
Never realizing that it must be further processed to make a satisfactory stock finish. This is a relatively easy to do but its not an option, it has to be done. By cooking the cold processed "boiled oil" from the lumberyard to kill the acids and body the oil, perhaps cooking in some more oxides/driers a very good historically correct finish can be obtained. Adding resins will make a durable oil varnish such as appears of the Hawken pictured
"Cheating" in a way by mixing in some of the Grumbachers III varnish mentioned above will give the Kentucky rifle maker of today an easy way to make a varnish that while likely not 100% traditional certainly is better than many of the products being sold as stock finishes which, in some cases are just cheap modern varnishes, synthetics etc. There are, apparently, some finishes that are not too bad. And there are ways to make something similar without heat. Mixing store bought "boiled" oil with Tru-oil 50-50 or a little more will make a better finish than Tru-oil which to me has very limited usefulness, though it will do touchups on very small areas nicely for example when time is a factor. Adding the oil to it slows the tru-oil and speeds and hardens the over the counter boiled oil. It then has many of the properties of the home cooked oil I make.
So I have written another novel here, taken up a lot of time, but it’s a drum that needs to be pounded on more.
While is possible to make a finish that looks pretty good with synthetic stains and plastic varnishes or beeswax its not what was used back in the day and often this shows in the finished piece. Since its actually pretty easy to make or obtain oil finishes that are at very least more correct if not spot on, I don’t understand using plastics such as Permalyn, synthetic dyes, or hot beeswax for stock finish. Some are actually far more work than the traditional finishes based on my experience and what I read here. I would never dream of rubbing out the finish on a maple stock unless I really goofed in some way. It’s easier to put a high polish in maple BEFORE applying the stain and finish if that is what is desired. It will eliminate the grain being raised by AF stain for example and give a good looking shine to the stock in a couple of coats of finish. But it requires sanding and this sets some peoples teeth on edge it seems, not HC, though some seem to use stains and finishes that are far newer than sand paper and are even less acceptable from the standpoint of being historically correct.
Dan
“If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.”
Winston Churchill
