Antique finish on metal

[porchdog48]

This web site was recommended at a gun building class at Log Cabin Gun Shop, and it is my new lunch break everyday. I would like to build a full stock hawkins rifle with the metal having an antique metal finish, or metal that is not blued or browned. Sorry new to this game, but what I am want in the end is the bare metal finish with some pitting. Hope this makes some sense on what I am trying to obtain. I would appreciate any input if possible from this explanation.   

[Meteorman]

Lots of ways to skin that cat, depending on exactly what you want to end up with.
Here's one I used.

Started with cleaning parts with alcohol and applying BC Perma-Blue, then sprayed with straight bleach and let set for 15 minutes:


Then rinsed, steel-wooled, and re-sprayed with bleach, let set for another 10 minutes or so.
Parts came out of that step nice and rusty:


Scotch-Brite (green pad) and steel-wooled again.
Then dried and sprayed down with oil, and hit the parts with the MAPP torch until the oil smoked, let air-cool.
Finished with 600-grit sanding with oil.




just sand and steel wool (#0000) back to the level gray that you want.
For each batch , the whole process from start to finish was less than 2 hours.
Some parts showed a little more etching than others - I suppose that's due to different steel, or my timing was off on some batches.
Bleach contact time will determine the amount of etching/pitting in the steel.  Experiment a little.
good luck !
/MM

[Dphariss]

This web site was recommended at a gun building class at Log Cabin Gun Shop, and it is my new lunch break everyday. I would like to build a full stock hawkins rifle with the metal having an antique metal finish, or metal that is not blued or browned. Sorry new to this game, but what I am want in the end is the bare metal finish with some pitting. Hope this makes some sense on what I am trying to obtain. I would appreciate any input if possible from this explanation.   

While it may look "cool" nobody back in the day would pay money for an aged gun.
Furthermore they don't even look used, they simply look like someone antiqued them.
Most people don't think to age them as they would be if actually a new gun that had been used.
How an old rifle looks NOW 150 years after its service like ended,  is not likely to be how it looked with last used. Though some obviously were well used before being retired.
To PROPERLY do a used gun finish one first must make it as new with all the finish then selectively remove the finish from high wear areas. So it looks worn rather than like it was boiled in chlorox.

Dan

[Bart]

Patina added to this lock.

[Acer Saccharum]

In my mind, it's personal preference how you finish your work.


If you are going to age the metal, you should also age the wood; otherwise there is visual contradiction.


Kettenburg does the aged gun better than anyone I know of.

[KLMoors]

There's some waaaayy more experienced guys here than I but here is how I get the look I like. I draw file and sand down all the parts to clean them up. Then I use LMF browning solution on the parts in a sweat box. I leave the parts in for 6 hours or so and then give them another coat to even out the rusting. I sometimes do a third coat if it still looks uneven. I leave the parts in the box for two or three days depending on humidity till they are well rusted.

Then I carefully clean  them off with sand paper to remove all of the surface rust. Then I rub them down with cold bluing. I use either Van's or Birchwood Casey. Then steel wool back to the look you want.

[Bart]

I think Jud Brennan is the best at patina, his guns are so good, its spooky!!

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I don't understand it at all.  I'm going to have a skilled artisan recreate a piece of history for me - turn back time - and then I want him to add all the abuse, neglect, lack of love and care, indifference, and deterioration that comes as a result, on my brand new Lexus.  Yeah, that's the look!  Make it look like it's been in a couple of wrecks.  Someone pls. explain to me what I am missing.

[axelp]

I can totally understand the appeal of aging a finish. Not abuse, but just subtle aging.

It is warm and interesting and it says "handmade" and "folkart." A pristine perfect finish is beautiful, and I respect that for what it is, (amazing) but to me, a large part of the american longrifle art form is more "folk art" than fine art, and that lends itself to a certain amount of aging and unrefined handwork--even abuse. If you study other folk art sculpture and painting, not just guns, it is not usually very refined... We all know that many (not all) originals have very crude carving compared to the amazing work displayed by the great and respected craftsmen on this board. I like/admire/respect the "art" produced by both sides of this argument.

Ken
(not a gunbuilder, but an artist of 40 years)

[Leatherbelly]

  If it were mine,I'd say,forget it! Blue the metal,make it authentic and let nature take it's course.
  On the other hand, if you were building a wall hanger and wanted it to look "old", go ahead and age it, maybe drag it behind a manure spreader. There are people who buy them to do just that,hang them in the den to give an old "motif" to the room.
  As a shooter,and to follow my persona, I wouldn't drop into JP Beck's shop and ask him to age my new rifle.It just didn't happen.
  Don't get me wrong, I like replica's that are aged to look old, but for a regular shooting iron, I think they look out of place.JMHO though.

[rich pierce]

I don't understand it at all. ............Yeah, that's the look!  Make it look like it's been in a couple of wrecks.  

I resemble that.  I've got that aged look about me, LOL.  Been in a couple of wrecks myself.

The whole longrifle culture is about "story".  There's a story in our heads. There are different ways to "get there", to feel more "in the story".  If this was not true we'd be on a centerfire forum.  Many customers want a gun that shoots like its new but looks well used.  Maybe it helps them be more in the story that is in their heads.  Lots of folks don't get to put much honest wear on their guns.  Work, where they live, other factors limit their field days.

Regarding aging: I recently got to see and handle a Hawken rifle reproduction done in the 70's by a terrific builder.  The gun had been stolen and went missing for over 20 years, and found its way back to the builder.  The superior original metal finish was easy to spot despite the rust and wear.  The wood looked dried out for the most part.  It had some dings and so on but the gun was not heavily used or abused.  it just wasn't maintained well.  The part I noticed most was how wonderful the metal was finished originally- that still shone through.

[axelp]

I remember reading about cowboys that would roughen up and age their jeans so they did not look like a "poser" or a "dude." Even 19th C western gents would go to great lengths to iron out their store bought clothes on account of the new off the shelf creases in them--

I remember as a high school kid washing my new 501 jeans 20 or 30 times before I ever wore them in public.

I think Billy Dixon himself recalls the days of his youth "gearing up" and strutting around town--- and laughing at himself thinking about what a sight he must have looked like in his flashy new duds...

I am sure there is a big part of that in this hobby... its everywhere else too.

I propose that there are two separate issues:

1. Folk Art, imitating standard workman-like quality from the 18th C america
2. Artificially applying age, and wear, or abuse to a new gun.

From what I have seen, there is a definate "art" to both... Its not easy to pull either of these off in a believable fashion. When it is, it looks great---when it is poorly done, it just looks weird.  E Kettenburg is an example of an artist that can and does do it very well... at least in my opinion.

K

[Jim Kibler]

I don't agree the whole longrifle culture is about a story.  There ain't no story in my head when I build a gun.  Don't want there to be either.  All I want to do is build a cool gun.  End of story.  I have no desire to contort my mind into thinking something is good when it may actually be a lunk of junk.  Maybe this is why I don't always relate to others in this arena.  

As to aging.  We've been down this path many times here.  One point I'd like to make is that it might not be intended to actually replicate an old finish.  Just because it doesn't match actual use, doesn't mean that it necessarily has no merit.  For me it comes down to aesthetic appeal.  Variations in color and texture can create a more complex surface that sometimes can be more appealing to my eye as compared to a "new" surface.  There are a few people who have learned techniques to come very close to replicating actual use, but the list is very short.  Most are just creating a visual affect that doesn't actually match true age.  One final note.  Actual use and age isn't always very pretty.  Most tend to take the appealing aspects and attempt to incorporate these into their product.

[rich pierce]

Jim, perhaps you're expressing important differences between artists/gunbuilders and their customers when you say "the story" is unimportant to you.  I can see the longrifle as a medium for artistic expression that is completely independent of "story".  It certainly provides a more varied palette than modern arms, for example.  And when I look at Allen Martin's work, I sure appreciate the striking visual effects of varying color and texture by simulating wear of the wood or metal finish.  I get a similar but not identical response when viewing some other work; say for example accoutrements made by Chuck Burrows.  In addition to the visual interest, some work conjures up stories in my mind, and that's enjoyable.

[bgf]

Actual use and age isn't always very pretty.  

I think you're right -- I've yet to see anyone wallow out the pin holes and split the forend, or maybe knock an edge off the lock mortise and hold the lock in with a nail.  Or maybe a brass band on the wrist.

[axelp]

Folk Art is just that... It can be clumsy, cheap and ugly... and it can be brilliant simple and elegant....sometimes all at the same time! The whimsy and the honesty is what makes it so appealing I think. It is what makes things collectable and valuable.

When it is overly contrived and manipulated... it is not believable and its ugly... I can draw a stick figure and try and make it look like a 6 year old drew it--- and it looks contrived and manipulated and really ugly... My daughter when she was 6 years old, drew one and it was brilliant simple and elegant... I still have it. It has honesty that my contrived one does not.  THAT is the "Art" in Folk Art...and what makes it so hard to imitate.

Same with the aging and folk art on a longrifle.

Ken

[Jim Kibler]

Yes.  Believe it or not I can apprecite folk art, but people have to be willing to separate folk art and artistic failure.  Seems this willingness is sometimes lacking. 

[Simon]

I don,t consider myself a gun builder although I am working on my fourth assembly.  All I can say is that they shoot pretty good and look like $#@*. I cannot make myself use rust and  dings to try to hide my incompetence, and to me that is what some of the so called aged guns look like. 

In my opinion if you can not build a really nice gun with a proper fit and finish you should not try to age it, or it will look worse than mine.
When you have reached the point in your skills set that you can build a nice gun, plain or carved and engraved,  then you can try to learn how to age it.

Mel

[FL-Flintlock]

So if one was to re-stock existing parts, would the re-stocker have gone through the trouble of re-polishing all the metal back to as-new condition or would the parts be left as-is and installed in new wood?

If one runs the RR drill out the bottom, it is acceptable to put a "repair patch" on the otherwise "new" gun that is not aged to indicate why the "repair" was needed.

Gloss varnish is rubbed-back take the "new shine" off a gun that is otherwise "new" and not really "worn in" to the point where the varnish would have lost it's shine naturally.

Brass is intentionally tarnished to tone it down.

Browned iron is mellowed out with brown shoe polish.

Given those examples, I don't see why anyone would take issue with mellowing out in-the-white iron because a lot of people don't care for bright in-the-white shiny iron just the same as some don't care for a dark brown or bright blue finish.  The OP said, "metal that is not blued or browned" which means something on the order of "toned down in-the-white", that means about two weeks of natural aging in our 85%+ humidity so what's the problem if one does the same in a few hours rather than waiting a couple weeks for it to happen on its own with no human intervention? 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[HIB]

Gentlemen, A point of view from a collector might be interesting at this point of this valuable discussion.

Take for instance a water foul hunter in the 18th or 19th century. Do you think he would want a shinny and reflective lock, stock and barrel. I think not as a duck or Canada would see it a mile away.

How about the man on the frontier or anywhere close to the frontier using his gun for food and protection. I doubt if shinny and reflective work here as well for the same reason stated above.

Maybe Buffalo don't see well but the Indian sure could. Shinny and reflective don't work here either.

I can, however, see the man at the local beef shoot wanting a good looking rifle. Shinny and reflective may have found its place in this type venue.

I think one extra step needs to be considered by the contemporary maker. And that is how this gun would have been used in it's time and where can I find out the finished used back then. Were the metal parts browned, blued or left in the white. What does history tell us and how should we apply that knowledge to today's work.  Regards, HIB

[axelp]

True--- beauty is in the eye of the beholder....  I hear on this website many times that a big part of the gunmaker art is hiding mistakes...is that not true? A gunmaker should be proficient at inletting and metal finishing and shaping, but he has to go thru the school of failed attempts and learn clever techniques at hiding those little mistakes, the original builders were pretty much the same weren't they?

Aging a longrifle is no more a sin than crafting one better than the originals... I salute both for the amazing skills they practice.

(edited & revised my post-- I really have no right to comment much, heck I am not even a novice builder)

K

[Chuck Burrows]

My question is - why when some one ask HOW-TO do it, not whether to do it, we start getting folks kibbitzing on why?
Yes everyone has the right to their opinion and to make comments but IMO it often gets tiresome about the why and disrupts the whole flow.......

Rich - FWIW having my name mentioned in the same breath as Allen Martin made my head swell! 

[KLMoors]

Thank you Chuck.

[Ben I. Voss]

ditto.

[Model19]

My question is - why when some one ask HOW-TO do it, not whether to do it, we start getting folks kibbitzing on why?
Yes everyone has the right to their opinion and to make comments but IMO it often gets tiresome about the why and disrupts the whole flow.......

Excellent point.

In a similar vein,  I have a mod94 saddle ring carbine made in the late 1800's that belonged to my long gone stepgrandad.   It's got a beautiful natural aged patina to it and shows 100 years of use.   But... at some point it was rebarreled with a shiny new factory part that looks awful IMHO on that little carbine.   
Parts must match as far as finish age goes.