Author Topic: learning from a crooked plank (Read 10056 times)

rich pierce · « **on:** February 04, 2013, 06:48:46 PM »

I'm building a rifle from a narrow crooked plank. I imagine that original builders did not have power planers capable of making their blanks perfectly flat and square in every direction. In this case the plank is warped left to right with a slight twist, but there is not enough thickness to plane it or have it planed. So I am using the warpage to put in the cast-off and had to inlet the barrel at an angle to the general axis of the blank. Lots to learn about establishing centerlines, carrying them over to the underside, when nothing is straight and square.

I know, I could have (and have) gotten perfect blanks and had the barrels inlet and ramrod grooves done and hole drilled. This is taking longer but I feel it is re-establishing my skills after a layoff from building. Tool sharpening, layout, getting back to the feel of the chisels and planes, all makes me feel that much more prepared for the rest of the build.

Drilling a ramrod hole into the end grain of hard hickory is sure taxing. I could get no more than 3/8" at a push. I'm using a drill from TOTW and it's not as aggressive as my 3/8 drill modified from a twist drill.

PPatch · « **Reply #1 on:** February 04, 2013, 07:27:46 PM »

Sounds as if you have set yourself a challenge Rich - good luck with your build and, of course, pic's when she's done.

dave

WadePatton · « **Reply #2 on:** February 04, 2013, 08:05:02 PM »

Hey Rich, a related note,

We learned to use the concept of establishing a reference face in working with non-square/rough sawn lumber for the precision fitting of timber-frame construction.

IN short, we picked the best corner, usually between the best two sides and marked it as "reference face" and then every measurement was made from that edge. It creates a "virtual" slightly smaller piece of lumber with which to work. IN the places where other pieces fit to the non-reference sides, the lumber is relieved down to the "nominal" dimension-and then functions as if the entire piece was planed to the nominal dimension.

You set the nominal dimension to the smallest actual size of your rough-sized timbers, and adjust every timber to that size at interface points. It's works out as if every piece was planed to the nominal dimension.

Similar but different yes. Just thought i'd throw that concept in there as I caught myself measuring from both sides of my last blank-after planing and sawing the profile...got a wonky centerline before I realized that my sides were farther from parallel than they appeared-and the bandsaw cut was less than square.

This next blank has a bit of warp to it. I'm going to attempt to remove most of that by spot planing by hand before i feed it to the machine. Then I'll be careful to keep the profile square-probably spot plane that too. THEN I'll pick a reference face to make sure my centerline _is_ my centerline.

Maybe someone pulls some ideas from my rambles.

rich pierce · « **Reply #3 on:** February 04, 2013, 08:13:18 PM »

Thanks, Wade, would love to have some timber framing experience. It's always fascinated me since I grew up on a dairy farm with an 1850's hand-hewn timber frame barn.

Acer Saccharum · « **Reply #4 on:** February 04, 2013, 08:14:34 PM »

I use one spot to reference from, the top surface of the blank where the tang is inlet into. I keep that flat and true, then by using a square, I make sure the lock panels are square to the top plane, thus parallel with each other. Then the bottom centerline is easy to figure. The rest of the gun flows out from this area, all referencing the squared off area.

I hope that makes sense. It's like what Wade said, only different.

Robby · « **Reply #5 on:** February 04, 2013, 08:41:09 PM »

I'm just finishing up a gun using A blank from a tree I had milled up. Warped, twisted, bowed, and maybe a bit too thin, but had such nice figure I had to give it a go. I'm not sure if I understand Wade's methodology, but it sounds like the way I went, along with a whole lot of eye-balling. Dunno! $:-\$
Robby

Acer Saccharum · « **Reply #6 on:** February 04, 2013, 09:21:11 PM »

It's good to train your eye. To work by eye. Yes, I will screw up working by eye, but I can screw up just as bad with straight edges and micrometers.

In my opinion, which I have plenty of, perfect symmetry, perfect straight lines, and perfect everything leaves me cold in a longrifle. I like to see the hand in the handwork.

PPatch · « **Reply #7 on:** February 04, 2013, 09:41:54 PM »

Quote from: Acer Saccharum on February 04, 2013, 09:21:11 PM

In my opinion, which I have plenty of, perfect symmetry, perfect straight lines, and perfect everything leaves me cold in a longrifle. I like to see the hand in the handwork.

Well Acer - you're gonna LOVE my Lancaster then...

David R. Pennington · « **Reply #8 on:** February 04, 2013, 10:20:16 PM »

Invaluable tool in working gunstock blanks is wind sticks. Mine are two pieces of cherry (what I had on hand) about 3/4" X 1/2" about 10" long that are planed true and parallel. Set them on a surface at different spots and sight along the top edges of them and any warp or high/low spots are immediately visible. I then mark high spots with chalk and plane away.
I always start by truing one edge first on blank. Usually the top where the barrel is inlet and then try to square up lock side and work all dimensions from there.
Did you say hickory? Are you building a hickory stocked rifle?

flehto · « **Reply #9 on:** February 04, 2013, 10:51:18 PM »

I mark the centerline of the top bbl flat at the breech and opposite the entry pipe and after the bbl has been pinned , the bbl/stock assembly is clamped in a very accurate vise, w/ the top bbl flat against the permanent vise jaw. The bbl/stock is adjusted horizontally until the surface gage pin point is on both bbl marks. Then the surface gage marks a line on the opposite side {trigger side}. The line at the entry pipe is compared to the RR groove centyerline and the 2 usually are "right on". A line is then drawn that connects the line at the breech and that at the RR groove. This line is never lost when shaping the lower forestock. All this is done on the elongated table of my drill press. The bottomside line is extended through the wrist and onto the toe. If castoff is used, the buttplate is "cocked' so when viewed from the bottom, very little castoff is present.

The sides off the lock and sideplate mortices are squared according to the top bbl flat. This method enables one to shape the stock irregardless of warpage or twisting. ....Fred

flintriflesmith · « **Reply #10 on:** February 04, 2013, 11:56:01 PM »

We have discovered that a good many original rifles get the cast off (in part) from deliberately rotating the butt piece so that the center of it top is left of the true "centerline" of the axis of the bore. It seems that most contemporary builders (including many rifles I have built) rely on shifting the entire butt stock to the patchbox side.

This means that a lot of the measuring to get a perfect centerline established may be a waste of effort. It may be more art than science.

Gary

bgf · « **Reply #11 on:** February 05, 2013, 12:07:37 AM »

Flintriflesmith,
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but is that rotation of the buttplate why it is so hard to see any castoff at all sometimes on the comb, but the toeline shows it pretty clearly? At least that is how some of them seemed to me.

snowdragon · « **Reply #12 on:** February 05, 2013, 12:11:28 AM »

I've built from crooked blanks before. I use the top flat of the barrel and the centerline of the length of the barrel to reference everything. It helps to assume that nothing is on the wood is true, and to measure everything from the barrel and trust your measurements. As I build, I like to keep certain key areas symmetrical and square, like the lock flats and forearm, that way I just split the difference to find the centerline on the bottom of the gun.

I also use a string and plumb bob technique to lay out the butt plate. I level the top barrel flat sideways in a vice, mark two center marks on the barrel at the muzzle and breech, stretch a string down the center of the barrel past the butt, then hang another weighted string so that it nearly touches the butt of the stock. This will give you the centerline of the buttstock and the vertical line for the buttplate. From this center reference, you can add castoff and cock the buttplate if you want. (Thanks Fred, I learned the tilted buttplate thing from you). Bill

GANGGREEN · « **Reply #13 on:** February 05, 2013, 12:53:02 AM »

Rich, am I to understand that you're building this out of a hickory blank? I'd be very curious to see some photos as you go along and to hear your thoughts about whether the hickory was worthwhile to deal with or not. I have some hickory on my property and have toyed with the idea of cutting a tree down to see what sort of rifles I could make with it.

rich pierce · « **Reply #14 on:** February 05, 2013, 02:24:51 AM »

Yes, I am building from hickory on a whim. I could not get any hickory from Dunlap, my favorite source for stock blanks, so shopped around and got some awful stuff sent to me by a couple of guys who knew rough lumber but not gunstocks. A couple of the planks would be OK for tractor ramps on the farm I guess, full of knots and rough as a cob. Hickory is considered a poor choice for stock wood for a bunch of reasons. First it has poor dimensional stability compared to traditional stock woods. It changes more with moisture. Bowmakers know this well. Second it tends to be stringy and that can make it hard to plane. Third it is hard as the dickens so everything takes longer. And lastly it is as plain as a white hog. So why am I doing it?

There's a rather unremarkable, unsigned, kind of late original Bucks County style smooth rifle stocked in hickory that (to me) has great lines, and so I am using it for the basis of my build (see pix below). I finally have the barrel in, the ramrod groove done and the ramrod hole drilled. Now the fun begins. This will be a .36 caliber (Rayl swamped barrel) squirrel rifle with a Chambers Late Ketland lock, modified a little. No patchbox. I figure on a squirrel rifle, the hickory ought to get them coming right to me! I am not going to use that particular sideplate. It's too chunky and the front end squared off is unattractive to me. I will go for the long wrist- that and the curved underside of the buttstock are what appeals to me most in Bucks County guns.

Note also some no-no's on this rifle: The sideplate "lock molding" (never know what to call it on that side) is fat and the top line is waaay above the corner of the angled flat. In other words the wood beside the tang is not angled down toward the lock or sideplate "as it should be". This is a characteristic of some Bucks County rifles. They were built "wrong". But this one sure doesn't have any extra meat on those bones!

Here are some catalogue shots of the original.

GANGGREEN · « **Reply #15 on:** February 05, 2013, 04:24:33 AM »

Very cool. The problem with that original is that it's aged so much and darkened so far that you really can't tell its hickory, at least not in the pictures. I'll be paying attention to your build but you've pretty much convinced me that I don't need to use hickory to build a rifle with.

Tom Currie · « **Reply #16 on:** February 05, 2013, 04:54:54 AM »

Keep us posted Rich. Sounds like a challenging project.

James · « **Reply #17 on:** February 05, 2013, 05:10:21 AM »

I think that gun has an exceptional look. What is the barrel length on the original? I have sawn pignut hickory on my bandmill and consider the darkwood to be some of the nicest looking there is.

flehto · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2013, 05:56:29 AM »

Rich...thanks for the BC pics. The lock shape looks very similar to the Chambers Late Ketland which I now use on the BC LRs , but some have questioned it's use on a BC as not being HC. Boy, that BC sure has slim lines and good luck to you and that hickory blank......Fred

rich pierce · « **Reply #19 on:** February 05, 2013, 05:57:19 AM »

Jame, not sure of the barrel length on the original but it's octagon to round and smoothbored. I captured the description off the catalogue but can't find it now. It was brief. I thought it would make a good squirrel rifle, which is something I don't have and obviously "need".

Thanks, Fred. I admire your Bucks County guns and will be counting on you for advice on fore-end shape, nosecap details and other things. What do you think of the lock panels shape on this original?

Acer Saccharum · « **Reply #20 on:** February 05, 2013, 07:01:47 AM »

Quote

Note also some no-no's on this rifle: The sideplate "lock molding" (never know what to call it on that side) is fat and the top line is waaay above the corner of the angled flat. In other words the wood beside the tang is not angled down toward the lock or sideplate "as it should be".

Lock nail placement is critical for a low sideplate panel. See if you can mount the lock/touchhole far back as possible, toward the breech, so the nail can be far back. Go as low as you can, bro, with the lock.

With these thin guns, so much depends on the lock choice.

flehto · « **Reply #21 on:** February 05, 2013, 04:13:29 PM »

Rich...thanks for the kind words...the lock panels are very narrow and contribute to the "petite look" Guess I'll have to go narrower on my next BC. Thanks again for the BC pics which kinda lend some credence to the use of the Late Ketland lock. On the next BC, might modify the tail of the Late Ketland as per your pic. Below is a pic of my latest BC......Fred

GANGGREEN · « **Reply #22 on:** February 05, 2013, 05:40:42 PM »

I don't know if it's HC or not but I love the way that late ketland lock looks flehto. I happen to know that they also shoot very well because I have one on a southern mountain rifle halfstock that I built.

flintriflesmith · « **Reply #23 on:** February 05, 2013, 08:03:10 PM »

Quote from: bgf on February 05, 2013, 12:07:37 AM

Flintriflesmith,
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but is that rotation of the buttplate why it is so hard to see any castoff at all sometimes on the comb, but the toeline shows it pretty clearly? At least that is how some of them seemed to me.

I said "a good many" --- no way did I intend that to mean "all" or a majority. I was just throwing the idea out because I didn't think many folks were even aware of the variation. The rotation I'm talking about (1/8 to 3/16" at the top screw of the butt piece) can and is combined with off-setting the entire stock.
Gary

bgf · « **Reply #24 on:** February 06, 2013, 01:27:02 AM »

Quote from: flintriflesmith on February 05, 2013, 08:03:10 PM

I said "a good many" --- no way did I intend that to mean "all" or a majority. I was just throwing the idea out because I didn't think many folks were even aware of the variation. The rotation I'm talking about (1/8 to 3/16" at the top screw of the butt piece) can and is combined with off-setting the entire stock.
Gary

Thanks, and I hope I didn't seem like I was arguing, because I really appreciated the observation and was trying to apply it to some observations that were perplexing me. There are some where I've looked at them from the comb view in pictures and seen very little castoff, but looking at the toe, there appears to be more castoff. I.e., the TG rear return will be more or less in line with the toe while the rest of the TG is in line with the bore, or the rear return will be straight in line with the rest of the TG and thus angled with respect to the toe line. Also, some seem not to be symmetrical in terms of the buttstock thickness on either side of the "centerline" but it is difficult to see that when looking from the BP return to the tang along the comb. Forgive my blabbering -- I think they did employ a lot of art and craft in building them, just not always according to the same types of precise geometry we sometimes demand.

News:

Author Topic: learning from a crooked plank (Read 10056 times)

snowdragon