How is this Butt Plate to be inletted?

[P.Bigham]

Reaves Goehring #19 Carolina butt plate.  Never seen  the comb area shaped like this. Almost looks like it to be driven in place after preliminary inletting.

[rich pierce]

I “fix” those angles and inlet it straight down. Then scootch it forward if needed after down. Probably I’m doing it wrong but it works with no visible difference in the outcome, as far as I know.

[Randall Steffy]

I am familiar with Reeve's patterns and those unusual edges need to be filed to normal draft conditions. I feel certain that the original casting that this pattern came from did not have the edges you see and are concerned with.

[Bob Roller]

Speaking from profound ignorance of wood working I would file all of it to a usable shape and go from there.
Bob Roller

[P.Bigham]

Thanks my thoughts also.  I was told his castings were off originals and thought I might be missing something.

[sz]

Best way is to file a draft (angle tapering towards the bottom) on the entire return all around it's edges. Next inlet the sole of the plate to the end grain of the wood and take pains to get a very good fit.  Last inlet it straight down.  The draft you filed at first lets it go in tighter and tighter as it goes down into the top of the comb.
Once screwed into place you can tap around the edges with a hammer and it gets dead tight.  Then file and polish.

Done

aag-443_3 by Steve Zihn, on Flickr
97 Jaegertop by Steve Zihn, on Flickr
000_0191 by Steve Zihn, on Flickr
My Rifle 5 by Steve Zihn, on Flickr
Bbus 2 by Steve Zihn, on Flickr
IMG_0501 by Steve Zihn, on Flickr

[Eric Kettenburg]

I'd sound out Brooks about it but frankly I think it looks like a cool way to ensure that the return doesn't pop up, especially if not using the pin tab for a cross pin.  I've seen quite a few long return buttplates with unused cross pin tabs, and what it really makes me wonder is why the heck didn;t they just cut them off and make life easier?  If not using that tab, I'd definitely cut it off.  But the reverse angles really wouldn't be that much more time consuming to inlet and then when finally finishing the inletting and tapping it forward (shaving the mortise to accommodate - they're not nails after all!) would make for a really rock solid upper return.  Just a thought.  I have no idea if that's original or not but I have seen triggerplates and rammer entry pipes done like this.

[smart dog]

Hi,
I've inlet that plate before but modified to look more English.  I got rid of the forward slants and filed vertical draft.  The plate has the tab for the cross pin so there really is no need for any extra holding power and they would be a nightmare to inlet and risk breaking out wood at those steps.  Here is that butt plate inlet on an English fowler.




dave

[Mike Brooks]

I “fix” those angles and inlet it straight down. Then scootch it forward if needed after down. Probably I’m doing it wrong but it works with no visible difference in the outcome, as far as I know.

That's how I did this casting too. I do believe it was originally driven forward. Although, I never got to take the buttplate off of the original gun to know for sure. It wouldn't be difficult to do the "driven in" inlet if you thought it out ahead of time. A large mallet and a mighty smack on the heal would do the trick. Keep in mind these carolina guns were built incredibly fast and were not of high quality. A guy making these every day could probably put these buttplates on a stock in less than 15 minutes. I myself have mounted buttplates in a half hour when everything goes well.

[foresterdj]

Input from maybe the worst in letting person here, but to me, any idea to drive them in under a straight down inlay seems like a perfect recipe for splinters. File them straight, a bevel under, pin as in the one example. Save yourself an "ARG!" moment.

[elk killer]

grumpy gunsmith of williamsburg on utube has a video on how too

[Eric Kettenburg]

I “fix” those angles and inlet it straight down. Then scootch it forward if needed after down. Probably I’m doing it wrong but it works with no visible difference in the outcome, as far as I know.

That's how I did this casting too. I do believe it was originally driven forward. Although, I never got to take the buttplate off of the original gun to know for sure. It wouldn't be difficult to do the "driven in" inlet if you thought it out ahead of time. A large mallet and a mighty smack on the heal would do the trick. Keep in mind these carolina guns were built incredibly fast and were not of high quality. A guy making these every day could probably put these buttplates on a stock in less than 15 minutes. I myself have mounted buttplates in a half hour when everything goes well.

Let's also keep in mind it's one heck of a lot eaasier and faster to inlet buttplates - especially buttplates like this with longer upper portions - onto a stock that has already been roughed out to a near-finished shape.  I haven't inlet a buttplate into a big squared-off blank in years and would surely lose what hair I have left.  Too much time and too much work, too wasteful of energy and I'm sure 200+ years ago those guys worked in the same manner.

[sdilts]

I don't see what difference it makes whether the stock is square or shaped. Takes me the same amount of time regardless of shape.

[Eric Kettenburg]

To each their own, but if I rough the stock down first to near-finished form there is a whole lot less wood to remove in terms of actual inletting, work that is generally more time-consuming and care-laden than simply roughing down a stock (can be a lot "rougher" and faster, no pun intended).  JMHO.  To keep the thread on-topic, this buttplate as I see it would be a perfect candidate for quick inletting into a shaped buttstock.  Big square block?  Not so much nor so quick.

[Mike Brooks]

Input from maybe the worst in letting person here, but to me, any idea to drive them in under a straight down inlay seems like a perfect recipe for splinters. File them straight, a bevel under, pin as in the one example. Save yourself an "ARG!" moment.

This type of buttplate is not a straight down inlet. It goes down then forward.

[Frozen Run]

Is this another example of taking a casting from something that was originally sheet brass? I feel like sheet brass would be a whole lot more conducive to driving forward than cast.

[smart dog]

Hi,
Probably not sheet brass.  The underlug suggests it was originally cast.  If you are supposed to drive the plate forward you also have to make room for the underlug to move forward as well.  It all seems like a poor idea if your intent was a more easily made and less costly gun.

dave

[Mike Brooks]

It is what it is, use it how you will.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Hi,
Probably not sheet brass.  The underlug suggests it was originally cast.  If you are supposed to drive the plate forward you also have to make room for the underlug to move forward as well.  It all seems like a poor idea if your intent was a more easily made and less costly gun.

dave

Unfortunately we can't ask Reeves but I talked to him quite a bit about casting in the 1990s when I was setting up to run my own and I know he did modify pieces if he though it would make the casting more consistent to run, and I do know absolutely that he added some tabs to long-tang buttplates to use as gates.  Whether or not this was one, I have no idea but the entire piece does look on the thicker side to my eye.  Almost every original antique casting I've ever seen in disassembly, regardless of origin, is considerably thinner than what we tend to use today.

[rich pierce]

Good to know. I wonder how one “thickens” a buttplate or guard for casting. Tape?

[Eric Kettenburg]

Bondo, wax or tape.  All reversible once done.  There are better materials now I believe but those are the simple 'old school' materials.

[Dphariss]

To each their own, but if I rough the stock down first to near-finished form there is a whole lot less wood to remove in terms of actual inletting, work that is generally more time-consuming and care-laden than simply roughing down a stock (can be a lot "rougher" and faster, no pun intended).  JMHO.  To keep the thread on-topic, this buttplate as I see it would be a perfect candidate for quick inletting into a shaped buttstock.  Big square block?  Not so much nor so quick.

This makes it easier, however, neophytes need to think it through before removing a lot wood. And be careful with power tools in this.
And I seem to remember photos of a rough shaped stock with no inlets not even the barrel, found in the attic of an old gunshop. But danged if I can remember is which book. Might be in one of the Journal or Historical Armsmaking series. No time to look right now.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Wallace illustrated a stock in one of the JHATs that was not what I would call 'roughed down' but was a heck of a lot closer toward that point than the giant blocks were tend to start out with today.

I have a weird way of stocking that is unlike what most do nowadays, I think, but probably closer toward what was done historically.  I inlet the buttplate before the lock, and it's always after I have worked the stock down quite considerably.  It looks a lot more like a rifle, in other words, than just a big squared blank. And I can tell you, having worked both ways, it goes a LOT faster.

[Dphariss]

I am sure thats the one I was thinking of. But remember few details other than it was far from a big block of wood…

[Jim Kibler]

Drying is much faster, and better if the blank is roughly shaped when green.  I think this was one of the big reasons this process was used. 

Even with our modern methods we use, it's best to blank out stocks in wood that isn't dry and dry them in this state.

Jim