no finish in certain areas?

[Bigmon]

So I'll ask this.  Why do I see so many really nice rifles and there is no stain or finish in the patch boc, lock recess, and other areas?? I had always assumed those ares need finish also for protection from the elements?
But these high end guns, not finished in these areas??
I always just wondered why??

[RAT]

I only own one original rifle. There is no finish in the barrel channel or lock mortise. It has a grease hole, so no patchbox. I've examined several others. No finish appears in these areas or in any of the patchbox cavities. I've read the same thing many times from people that have examined far more originals than I have. This shows the original makers were not obsessed with this like many are today.

They also didn't slot their barrel lugs when using pins. They simply drilled a hole.

They also didn't cut a flat shelf for the comb portion of the butt plate. They left a hump of wood underneath. But then... I haven't been able to remove a lot of original buttplates to prove this. I get this from photos others have taken.

[J. Talbert]

My experience pretty much matches what RAT said above.

Jeff

[rich pierce]

I’m guessing they built guns expecting 50 years of service from them; an owner and the next generation, maybe.

Regarding the wood under the hump on the buttplate return - on flint longrifles this seems typical. Later guns including original Hawken rifles and Leman rifles I’ve studied (and contemporary Lancaster rifles with the “Bivins” buttplate) display no hump of wood under the buttplate return.

[flehto]

All my builds have all hidden  stock  surfaces sealed but not stained. Only the surfaces that are readily visible have the final  stain and finish applied.......Fred 

[MeliusCreekTrapper]

All my builds have all hidden  stock  surfaces sealed but not stained. Only the surfaces that are readily visible have the final  stain and finish applied.......Fred

By finish does the OP mean stain and sealer, or just sealer? I have always sealed, but not stained, the hidden areas.

[2 shots]

 could stain and or finish have been an expensive item in the day?? maybe they didnt want to waste it?? just curious.

[t.caster]

I don't stain under inlays or buttplate or PB cavity, but I seal them. Under removable items like side plate, lock and rr pipes I put stain along with the rest of the gun, although the lock mortice might only get one light coat. I'm talking about anniline stains used AFTER acid base stains. I don't put the acid base stain in inlays because of all the whiskering involved afterwords.
Then I seal everything. I don't care if originals didn't do that. If you like inlays popping out of the wood like originals did, them by all means don't seal them or epoxy bed them.

[Marcruger]

I was told the reason for not staining inside the cavities pertained to traditional stains possibly leaving acid behind.  Not something one would want against metal such as the barrel, triggers, lock, and patchbox.  Especially metal areas that did not have finish on them. 

I am not sure why they did not seal the wood inside.  Perhaps like today, it could compromise the inlet fit to the parts? 

I personally think it is a good idea to put some sort of sealant/finish inside.  If nothing else but to prevent moisture variations in the stock over time.  It may also retard the absorption of fugitive oil into the stock wood, and prevent "punkish" wood.  Fugitive oil is why I believe rifles should be stored muzzle-down, or at least level with a slight muzzle-down attitude. 

Just some thoughts, and I have been known to be wrong before.   God Bless,   Marc

[RAT]

When you replace the baseboards in your kitchen... do you paint the back side that goes against the wall? Or just the front side that people see?

Same thing.

[Pukka Bundook]

Rat,
We don't normally take baseboards out hunting all weathers...

:-)

[Jim Kibler]

This is a subject that seems to enrage those not familiar with the longrifle from a historical perspective.  You should just read the comments on the video we put together on finishing one of our kits at the Shawshank museum.  The thought of unfinished or unsealed inlets is apparently mortifying to many people.  Hmmm...

I probably have slathered on a seal coat on most of the rifles I've built, but sometimes I don't bother or am just lazy.  I don't think it makes much difference in the end.

Jim

[t.caster]

It's not something that enrages me or obsesses me, it's just something I do. only takes a few seconds, no biggee.

[EC121]

The old timers ran a production shop.  They weren't going to do anything that slowed them down a lot.  Time was money to them.   

[RAT]

Another example is the fact that secondary wood in furniture (such as the bottom of drawers) isn't finished.

This is the type of thing that I think we over-obsess about in our modern times. If we're really THAT concerned about environmental changes affecting accuracy in the field, we're missing the point of using a traditional muzzleloader and should probably switch to using stainless steel barrels and synthetic stocks.

The environmental factors affecting the shooter have a much greater affect on accuracy than those same affects on the rifle itself. I'm a much worse shooter in the rain, heat, humidity, or extreme cold. That's because I'm uncomfortable and not focused on the fundamentals.

The "primitive" aspect of traditional muzzleloaders makes this whole hobby more about the challenge of using this technology than about absolute mechanical perfection. I got into this mostly because of the history... but I love it because I don't have to haul a car load of equipment to shoot. Grab a pouch and rifle and go. You don't need a spotting scope... you don't need a chronograph... you don't need a mechanical rest... Sure, you can use those things, but you don't have to. Like they used to tell us in design classes... keep it simple.

 

[kutter]

It's easier for me to stain the entire stock, incl bbl channel , under the butt plate, trigger plate, lock, etc ,,all at the same time than it is to just do the 'outside' and try and skip around those hidden surfaces.

I use solvent stains and a brush. So the entire process takes a few minutes at best.
Saving time and stain by deleting  a swish of the brush up and down the bbl channel or skipping  the trigger & lock inlets ?

The finish goes over everything as well. Those hidden surfaces get a couple coatings, then they are on their own.

Wood will do what it wants to do anyway as far as pulling in moisture. Not much we can do to stop it.
I don't leave my stuff out in the rain or use  guns for boat paddles and tent poles.
So they hold together pretty well.

[M. E. Pering]

WARNING... These comments are pure conjecture, and demonstrate the ignorance of the poster...

The ancient makers were making a tool to be carried into the woods everyday.  They were making art at times, yes, but mostly they were making a tool.  I think we, as modern recreationist, forget that.  They were not concerned about a gun surviving hundreds of years, but a mere five would have pleased them.  We too often assign our current minds to those of 250 years ago, and it simply does not work.

Frankly, I am amazed that the guns have survived with no special care all of these years.  That being said, most people in the 1700s did know how to take care of wood.  It is not unlikely that men would have rubbed linseed oil into their guns after every hunt.  This would have protected would under inlays, and thus, the old builders didn't bother with finishing areas that could expand, and prevent reinsertion of inlays and the like.  I believe there are several accounts of men using animal grease in the barrel channels, which would be a definite anti-rot effort.  I find no reference to this being used under inlays. 

[Rich]

I have not seen any historical accounts of why there is no finish behind inlays, butt plates, lock inlets, etc. From a practical standpoint, inlays, patchboxes and butt plates are fit to the bare wood. A finish will change the fit. That's why the lockplate inlet needs to be scraped after finishing. Linseed oil is not waterproof, so once water penetrates, it will take longer to dry. Varnish is better, but even it is not waterproof.  In the barrel channel, bare wood will also dry faster.  Rot is not caused by water but by water and fungus together for extended periods of time. The fungus dies in dry wood.  The goal should be to keep the wood dry. It's also easier, faster and cheaper to not finish those areas.

[flehto]

Irregardless of what was done by the original builders, the only areas that don't see a single  coat of LMF Sealer  are behind the permanent inlays on all my builds .A single coat of  LMF sealer  penetrates the wood because it's thin and therefore nothing has to be done w/ the inlets for the inlays to fit. These same hidden  inlets  aren't stained so do look like an original. The reasons why original builders didn't  stain and seal  hidden inlets  were probably mat'l costs and labor.

My bedroom dresser in the summertime has hard closing drawers which aren't sealed and I wished they were......Fred

[RAT]

When staining and finishing, I leave everything on the rifle except the barrel, lock, trigger, and trigger guard. I apply the stain with a paint brush. I'm not careful, but only a small amount gets in the inlets. The first coats of finish are thinned 50/50 with turpentine. They go on quick with a paint brush. I'm not careful with this either. Again... not much gets in the inlets.

I can't believe they calculated the small amount of stain and finish that might go in the inlets to determine the costs associated with doing... or not doing... these areas. I think they just left the hardware on and did it. If you take a buttplate off of an original you will find finish that has leaked under the edge of the plate. That pretty much proves what they were doing. The same is true of patchboxes. I can't say I've personally seen this other than in photos... but photos count.

[Mike Brooks]

So I'll ask this.  Why do I see so many really nice rifles and there is no stain or finish in the patch boc, lock recess, and other areas?? I had always assumed those ares need finish also for protection from the elements?
But these high end guns, not finished in these areas??
I always just wondered why??

Refer to originals.

[P.W.Berkuta]

I do not stain the interior or under parts that are inletted but I do seal those areas. I'll either use the Permalyn Sealer or shellac and apply 2 coats to those areas when doing the rest of the stock. It makes me feel better when I do this as opposed to leaving it bare

[577SXS]

To me I think all the surfaces inside and out should be sealed. Why would you want the wood to soak up moisture anywhere especially inside. You have a dried wood stock that will absorb water and oil very easily, if you seal them then they are less likely to absorb anything that may damage the wood over time. A many of a stock has be ruined due to oil soaking into the wood. I have also seen stocks broken and mortises chipped and splintered because when wood got damp it swelled and then someone tried to take the gun apart. Someone said "do you paint the back of baseboard when you replace it". You should but due to cost it is rarely done. Wood paneling should be sealed on both sides to keep it from cupping but again it's rarely done. I will always seal the inside of any stocks I build.