Hmmm.. is it not true that much American wood was imported to England (& France?) and used for gunstocks?
People used to stocking guns in European Walnut are going to like American Walnut much especially with the freight cost from say Boston to London or Tulle or St. Etienne.
Lumber would be an obvious back haul for ships coming to the colonies. But European walnut is so superior I cannot see Black Walnut being imported for gunstocks.
I probably have not explained this properly. So I will try again.
First its hard to make headway in a discussion, and this more broken record stuff, when people feel they are making a prop or wall hanger. This seems the be the case with a great many people here and its even worse on the dedicated re-enactor sites.
If you want an AUTHENTIC 18th century firearm the firearms buyer/maker must ask himself in the context of the
time "what would I want if my LIFE depended on the firearm being reliable in hard service?" Because
this is the 18th century context.
With the question above in mind do we want a relatively soft, weak piece of wood or would we want a stronger piece of wood?
It has been mentioned here that stocking a gun is a lot of work, this is certainly true. So unless the workman figures his time as worthless the labor is worth MORE than the stock wood unless buying overpriced Turkish Walnut or buying a completely precaved stock then putting the parts in place and slapping on some finish from the hardware store.
A 300 dollar blank does not seem so expensive if the maker has maybe 800 bucks in labor doing layout, inletting, carving and finishing. Stock layout, sawing, putting in the barrel channel, rod groove and drilling the hole how long does this take? It's just the start. It can take an hour just to do the layout more for the neophyte. Goof the layout and firewood is a very real possibity.
The COST of making the stock is the same (if anything the low quality wood is more time consuming), but the low quality wood does nothing to enhance the value of the finished product and may DETRACT from it. Senseless.
Not doing a fancy gun? Indian trade gun of some sort? Don't need or want figure in the stock? Valid argument for plain wood. However, it is not an argument for LOW GRADE WOOD. There is no valid argument for poor quality wood.
The soft, weak wood is more likely to fail to some greater or lesser extent during inletting or shaping operations. Its actually harder to work, scrape, file or cut for it will often try to tear rather than cut since its weak. It will dent or even tear easier in use if it meets with a minor accident. A major accident will be more likely to break it.
As I stated before, using cheap, soft wood is a false economy, penny wise, dollar foolish stuff. There is no free lunch in gun making.
I have never talked to an experienced stock maker that thought that soft, low grade wood was advisable for use. I was told years ago to always use the best and in working for people who gave me low grade wood to work at times also I learned from experience. ALWAYS use good wood and fancy wood if its at all suitable for the project.
So I am not continuing this discussion just to be a jerk or be contrary. I am trying to point out that low quality wood is never a bargain. Gunstocks are not cabinets or window trim or jewelry boxes.
Dan