i sure these would look just fine with plastic

i think a synthetic, if that's what you want, fills the need .. if you WANT a tough, light, all weather rig, customized to your specs.. and those are plasticfantastic stocks, then good on you ...

Yes, of course. My apologies...

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Are you saying that a custom barreled action or a factory barreled action inletted and fitted into a $5,000 custom walnut stock is Guild qualified, and the same barreled action in a McMillan stock is not?
KB

Yep.
If applying for membership as a stockmaker.

oops hit the button to soon





well maybe not

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
The only thing missing is all that personal attention, patronizing, ego stroking, sales pitch, and $$$$.

KB

Here's a quote just for you. KB
"Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius" [Sir Arthur Conan Doyle The Valley of Fear ]



I'm a true believer that talent is something that can be learned and earned, and mediocrity can be just a temporary condition.

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

To build a fiberglass stock, you first need a pattern. I wonder how many of these makers make their own patterns? Creating something from nothing.

I like eezridr's post. Makes sense to me.

Still don't have any problem with people spending their own money where they want.

Thanks for the reply. I liked EZ's post too, and I also have no problem with people spending their money where they want to.

Patterns - yes, it's my understanding that McMillan (for example) copied some existing patterns, such as the Sako Hunter. Why re-invent the wheel? Recognition of an excellent pattern and the wisdom to copy it has merit, IMO. They also sort of "created" their own pattern - the Sako American Classic style, for example, which is offered for the Mauser, Ruger, and CZ medium action. Really any of the "classic" patterns, whether fiberglass or wood, is a variant on a generic "classic", and they all have similarities, and slight differences, so it not exactly accurate to say that anyone "created" a classic pattern, but instead rendered their own version of it. McMillan just combined in their view the best featuers of the "classic" pattern.

The idea of creating something from nothing, relating to patterns, is a concept diffcult to grasp. It's really hard to imagine, because all of these patterns have been recycled over and over, with slight variants. Laying claim to something new is mostly imaginary, IMO.

I'm not trying to take away anything from the obvious skill it takes to make one of these walnut works of art from scratch. It's amazing to me. Heck, the skill of doing it without any obvious mistakes amazes me.

An example of "creating" a pattern in fiberglass - McMillan for a short while offered two variants of a "classic" pattern for the CZ 550 medium, one is derived from their own "creation", the Sako American Classic, and the other was "created" from AHR's pattern. They were very similar, with the primary difference in the cheek piece. McMillan, no longer lists the AHR pattern, and I think it's still available directly from AHR. Either stock is an excellent pattern, IMO, and will fit normal people. Heck, copy either pattern in walnut - well there ya go.

Take the tupperwear Butler Creek plastic stock for example. It's their own "creation" pattern, and yet it's within the "Classic" definition. If a guy got one of those stocks, make some slight adjustments, bedding and fill, run it through a duplicator, he could easily claim the walnut copy as his creation, and in fact it would make a very good pattern for such purpose.

I have a couple of walnut blanks that I thought of doing just that with, if the Butler Creek will hold up to the pressures of the duplicator (flex), since I'm not worried about damage to the pattern that way, as I would be in copying from a nice stock already.

KB

KB,

that's why off the rack rifles fit Larry Bird and Willie Shoemaker about the same.

Your phraseology indicates a lack of esthetical values and an acceptance of the phrases "One size fits all" or that "Universal Fit".
In plain english that means "doesn't fit anybody right except the designer" or "Fits nothing in the known universe properly". It's not a value judgement of you.

Stainless and Synthetic rifles lack soul. There is no Beauty in them. I like beautiful things. I have a Jaguar convertible. My brother drives a Chevy Impala 4-door. It's not a value judgement or ego. He doesn't understand cars. For him, it's just a way to get around.

Funny story, and I'll let you go. It's 1971. I had a '68 Roadrunner Coupe we stuffed a 440-6pak and torqueflite into. His girlfriend asked if he would borrow it for a date. I said yes, so he took it over to her house to get her. She wanted him to lay some rubber down. He stabbed it, and did a gorgeous burnout, in a hundred foot long sliding right 180-degree half circle. Scared her so bad, she wet herself. He let her back out, came home with the car. Never said a word, just grabbed the keys to his P/U and away they went.

I like life on the edge. Fast cars, faster motorcycles, big bore rifles (especially DR's) and fine combinations of find walnut and blued steel. That's me. Not any better than you, just a little different. There's room for both of us at the dinner table.

Rich

quote:

To build a fiberglass stock, you first need a pattern. I wonder how many of these makers make their own patterns? Creating something from nothing

James, If I understand your question correctly, Echols built his Legend pattern from scratch for McMillan to create in glass.

Mr.Echols may use a syn. stock on some his creations, but he also manufactures his own integral base scope rings and Bottom metal, whilst many smiths stocking walnut rifles will buy someone elses and fit them...Jesus, how many times do we see the off the rack Blackburn & Talley combo..???[yawn]
So some owners might marvel/admire their walnut stock at the campfire whilst another may do the same to the more individual Echols metal on their syn. Legend.

I appreciate the work of talented walnut stockmakers and good wood, but I enjoy a hunt and its memories just as much with a syn. stocked rifle.

Exactly Trax!
Echols was the creative talent behind that.
KB's just trolling filled with liberal logic.

I'd like to take my vote back.
What's the difference between a custom rifle and an exceptional rifle? More often than not, it starts with a beautiful piece of wood.

here's something interesting to think about..

i can make a woodstock, and i have 13 thumbs ... i could make a @#$% 2#$@$ @#$@$ forty F job out of making a synthetic stock ...

go figure

OK, jeffe, I've thought about it.

Can you turn screws with a screw driver? Then you can drop a barreled action into a synthetic Hogue stock. That's the best part - you don't have to know crap about making it or how it's made.

Can you work with runny stuff, or gel, such as accra glass or marine tex? Then you can bed a fiberglass stock.

Can you operate a can of spray paint? Then you can finish a fiberglass stock.

Again, one doesn't need to know how to make one or how it's made - that's completely not relevant to the finished item. Ain't that sweet?

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
KB,

Your phraseology indicates a lack of esthetical values and an acceptance of the phrases "One size fits all" or that "Universal Fit".
In plain english that means "doesn't fit anybody right except the designer" or "Fits nothing in the known universe properly". It's not a value judgement of you.

Stainless and Synthetic rifles lack soul. There is no Beauty in them. I like beautiful things. I have a Jaguar convertible. My brother drives a Chevy Impala 4-door. It's not a value judgement or ego. He doesn't understand cars. For him, it's just a way to get around.

I like life on the edge.

Rich

Rich, I appreciate art and creative things, and skill, and the creations of and within nature as well - and in almost all cases a lot more.

There are just some things I admit that I don't understand about the way you think about this. It's not generic, or one size fits all for me. The rifles are all unique.

I don't get the soul thing, for example. I simply don't attach human traits or emotionism to inanimate objects. There's a word or phrase for that, it's a medical condition I think, but I can't think of the words right now. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure there's no cure. I do like things that look pretty, and function well, like a great road machine, with a nice paint job and some chrome.

I mean really Rich, would you like an auto better if it was one-of-a-kind, hand carved from walnut?

I have an idea for you - your brother is right in his own way. An auto is just a way to keep from having to walk to wherever you want to go. Then there's the auto clubs and antiques too.

Another concept - life on the edge to me isn't about having pretty things, or material stuff, but a state of mind, far more intangible. It's more about what one does, rather than what one has. It doesn't mean radical to me either, it just means something other than materialism stuff to me. As an example, to me a guy like Jimmy Carter lives on the edge, because of what he stands for and does. I don't ever recall reading or hearing about what Jimmy has, but what he has done, mistakes and all.

Sure, the stuff we have brings us enjoyment, but it's not who we are, and it has no personality, and certainly no soul. What?-- ya gonna take it with you? Is the stuff you have - "you", or are "you" a seperate entity?

KB

KB.
but i MAKE stuff ... i kow HOW to make a stock mold .. but have utterly stuffed it every time i try...

a wood stock with hand rubbed oil and bluing is CRAP in coastal alaska ... its just not cricket .. stainless and synthetic is the cat's meow THERE ..

and i don't LIKE that combo much, but i understand the why .. and that is a custom rifle, fella ...

Jeffe,
I don't think you should feel too bad about that. I'm sure that making a fiberglass stock properly is in the very difficult catagory, and making the mold is only part of it.

If it was easy, there would be more folks doing it, and they would have got it right more often. I can think of maybe four or five that have the process good, in their own way, and none of them are small operations. They have a lot of money and research and development time invested.

Although technically not fiberglass and hand laid up in a mold, it would be interesting to know just how much it cost a company like Hogue to start-up the production of just one style of that rubber coated stock they make. I'll bet it's stunning.

KB

Tupperware stocks are cookie-cutter stocks, little or no variation in those made by the same source. IOW one size fits all and doesn't fit anyone well. Doesn't make any difference in my mind if the smith designed the first one or not, all the subsequent ones look the same.

We have a local smith who does excellent work building 'custom' rifles, but he has all his wood turned to the same pattern. His rifles are instantly recognizable from a distance, we call them 'Billy' rifles.

Cookie-cutters. Big-time yawn.

I can teach a rank beginner how to properly fit, bed and finish a synthetic stock to professional standards in about a week. OTOH it takes literally YEARS for a stockmaker to reach a truly professional standard with wood.

In my mind the major difference is artistry as compared to craftsmanship. A craftsman can assemble a superlative synthetic-&-stainless rifle but it takes the additon of artistry to make a fine blue-steel-&-wood rifle.

Of course YMMV but a synthetic-&-stainless rifle will never be more to me than a mere tool whereas a blue-steel-&-wood rifle can become a beautiful work of art when made by the right artists.
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:
Tupperware stocks are cookie-cutter stocks, little or no variation in those made by the same source.

Cookie-cutters. Big-time yawn.

it takes literally YEARS for a stockmaker to reach a truly professional standard with wood.

In my mind the major difference is artistry as compared to craftsmanship.

a synthetic-&-stainless rifle will never be more to me than a mere tool
Regards, Joe

OK, learning something all the time. I can't disagree with anything you said there.

Since this opposite to the one-size-fits-all is so important,

Question: Just how does an artist decide what pattern is right for a particular customer? Ok, you say the customer decideds - how - what's the process? Does he have some samples to try and see how they feel?

Or are you talking about artistry to the extent of finishing the stock, not necessarily in the selection of the pattern?

There is an answer to this, and I'm not exactly sure of what it is. I could guess, but one thing you can be sure of is that it may be a leading question. Your answer will give me direction on whether there's a follow-up or shut-up.

If it was me making the choice, most likely I would show the Smith an example of a stock pattern that I liked, (probably one of the cookie-cutters) and ask for suggestions, and mayby ask the Smith to make it like the one that I already know fits. So, the rest of the conversation may be about what mods to make before sending the pattern to a good duplicator.

KB

Basic questions for the client:

right- or left-handed?
tall or short?
hand size/finger reach?
cast-off or otherwise?
short neck or long?
scope type/eye relief/bell size
iron sights or not?

These are basic fitting questions. Here are some more considerations on the artistic side:

comb nose shape
grip curvature and grip cap angle
forearm shape and length
ejection port shape
grip circumference and shape
cheekpiece shape/shadow line
checkering style and pattern
grip cap size and construction
forend tip shape and material
butt treatment(pad, plate, skeleton, etc)
swivel placement and construction
bolt handle shape
type of wood
type of wood finish
desired final weight
metal finish
trigger & TG shaping
bolt stop shaping
sharp edges/transitions treatment
caliber marking
iron sight choice, shaping and placement
scope mount choice and shaping
specialty stock & metal furniture

All these considerations and a lot more that I've missed are integral components of a good custom wood-stocked rifle. Every one of these areas should be thoroughly discussed by the smith and the client before any work is begun, with the client showing examples of the sort of things he wants.

So, how does this stack up with a synthetic stock? Heck, for that matter, how does this stack up against a stock turned from the wood-turner's pattern? Both are kinda cookie-cutterish IMO, VERY little room for any individualistic expression and artistry.
Regards, Joe

This fellow has closer understanding & relationship to walnut than just about anyone.
He just dont sell the stuff
All his wood comes from trees he has personally select/harvested, patiently cut seasoned and turned into blanks over some decades.... he and his fellow smith friends have hunted together for years on custom walnut mausers that they built.
... sure, he definitely has preference for wood over synthetic,... but he dont come across as emotional or soulful about it as some here.

KB,

ever seen the Mona Lisa ? That quirky smile is even more bewitching in person.

Several years ago I built a Factory Five 427 Cobra Roadster. Took a year of spare time. Worth every penny and minute. I'm driving it around corners with arrows and 35mph signs at ninety-plus. At that time, my wife drove twenty miles each way to and from work. 200 miles every week. She went for a GEO Metro and it's fifty miles per gallon.
Those corners and curvy, winding roads... Running them at twice to three times the posted speed in the Cobra was exhilarating. Driving her GEO at ten miles over the suggested speeds was terrifying. So, here we were: her car cost nine-grand new, held four people and luggage for a weekend at the coast, and got fifty miles or a bit more on regular. Cobra, twenty-six grand and 1200 hours of construction, held two people and an overnight bag, and got about sixteen mpg combined. You care to hazard a guess which one would stir your soul, and lead you to a vanity plate that read "Hammer"?

I sold it to a young guy just back from a nasty little war in the mid-east. I missed that adrenaline rush, so now I have an XK-8 convertible. I like that power top, automatic tranny, power everything and an awesome stereo I can actually hear at a hundred with the top down. It stirs the soul, it just lacks that visceral, animal rush when you point and shoot.


So, tell me, what wakes you up in the wee hours of the night with a grin and evokes powerful memories of the last experience you had with it?

Rich
Fast and beautiful...

And we certainly enjoyed the demonstration of skill and art here: http://forums.accuratereloadin...043/m/4711078031/p/1

KB

Can't get that in a synthetic can you?

Rich

That's basically the way I make all of mine. Minor variations in dimensions of course, but no power tools except a hand drill motor and maybe a drill press.

It's the only way I know to get EXACTLY what you want.
Regards, Joe

Didn't we do this with the Legend thread a while back?!?!?!?!!?

A custom rifle is a custom rifle whether the stock is made from wood, fiberglass or woven virginal red pubic hairs.

Whether a rifle looks pretty is inconsequential if the bitch don't shoot.

And who cares how long it took to make the rifle or if one hand carved it with his own teeth, or what "club" one belongs to, if the end product is the same (though most don't shoot as good) it doesn't make it better or for that matter more valuable.

And yes you can make a "pretty" wooden gun shoot. But I don't believe that was the spirit of the OP.

Some people are all into show, others are into results.

This is the perfect thread for that Acura commercial where the guy's make excuses for their excess purchases......rationalization is nothing but an excuse for lack of performance.

Life may be too short to hunt with an ugly gun, but at least with an accurate gun you won't miss or have to make an excuse for your pretty thang.....

quote:

Originally posted by FMC:



Some people are all into show, others are into results.

You make it sound as if one has to choose between the two. I've never found this to be the case.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:
That's basically the way I make all of mine. Minor variations in dimensions of course, but no power tools except a hand drill motor and maybe a drill press.

It's the only way I know to get EXACTLY what you want.
Regards, Joe

Joe,
What's wrong with using a duplicator? To me it makes good sense. Also, what's wrong with starting with a pre-turned 90% ready blank from one of the suppliers, in whatever grade of walnut is desired? I always thought it was a good idea. To me, it's just an expedient way of getting rid of the excess wood, and faster and cheaper than a hammer and chizel.

Most of the turned blanks I've seen leave a lot of wood to work with, so those small details are left for the artist to do.

To carry your way of thinking to extreem, does only the "best" happen when the gunsmith cuts the tree himself, (with a cross-cut saw of course, or maybe employ a beaver), saws out the proper slab for the customer (again without power tools), drys it over time (no kiln), then shapes and finishes it without power tools?

KB

CNC , duplicator or apprentice to do the more repetitive laborious less individually skilled work [though usually not as pleasing as a cute dental assistant],...ask Ralf Martini who polishes out the stack of Hagn actions in his shop....
... and if your production facility is large enough, your employ your own people & machines for all tasks, and just come along and engrave your Co. name to it.
You think that when one orders A Purdey, H&H,Westley Richards, that anyone of that family name have actually crafted some part of the rifle?

FMC,

that does not look like a feedlot steer in you avatar. For a grand we would have sold you an eleven to twelve hundred pound range steer; and another five hundred dollars you would have had it processed and ready to take home and stick in the freezer. Twice the meat.

Not meaning to get cross, but you are making my point. If you are going to be pragmatic about rifles, why would you spend thousands of dollars and shoot a big Elk? Spikes and cows eat better.

Rich

I used to do lots of semi-inlets back in the old days but in recent years I've come to prefer somewhat different lines, especially in the wrist & PG area. The semis and most smith patterns simply don't have the wood in the right places for me.

At the moment I'm having a stock turned but am also having a TON of extra wood left on it in order to get enough cast-off. It's being turned to my own pattern that has no cast-off, my pattern stock is being made for another shooter. Two different rifles for 2 different shooters means 2 different sets of dimensions.

The only part of preturning that I don't like is the fact that many times the stocks all end up looking like each other. 'Billy' rifles that have little individual character and fit almost no one well.

The reason I don't use many power tools is that I don't own many. Of course machine tools would make things A LOT easier, you wanta buy me some?

I'm with Idaho Sharpshooter on this one, I used to build hot rods 'cause the factories simply didn't make 'em fast or agile enough. My favorite was an Austin-Healey 3000 with HiPo 302 Ford and top-loader 4-speed. The engine conversion was surprisingly simple and straightforward and the result was stunning. Part of my enjoyment was the 'sleeper' aspect, it was fun to blow their doors off and then show them the underhood and sit around bench-racing.

Kinda like having a fine hand-made walnut stock on a well-performing rifle, you have the best of both worlds even if you're just sitting around looking at it!
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
If you are going to be pragmatic about rifles, why would you spend thousands of dollars and shoot a big Elk? Spikes and cows eat better.

Rich

And some people wouldn't know if they eat better or not.

Rich. Because I can. And it's a Red stag I shot in New Zealand in '07.

I just prefer function and accuracy over form.

Pretty guns just ain't interesting if they don't shoot.

With respect to the original topic. No, there is no difference between the two. A custom gun with a synthetic stock is just as good as one with wood. Period. End.

Do I have both? Yes. I can afford a Legend, I don't have one. Do I think it's worth it? Yes. Truth be known, I have 2 P.L. Holehan rifles in the process of being finished right now. They're both wooden stocked and each one costs more than a Legend.

Again, with respect to the original topic. I prefer to spend the $ on function over form.

And yes I head/neck shoot spikes, wouldn't even dream of doing it with some nigged out .270 with integral/machined sights and barrel band that doesn't shoot worth a shit. (for the life of me, why would anyone put integral sights on a 270? use a 30-30 or .44 for chrissakes....makes no sense to me)

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:
in recent years I've come to prefer somewhat different lines, especially in the wrist & PG area. The semis and most smith patterns simply don't have the wood in the right places for me.

At the moment I'm having a stock turned but am also having a TON of extra wood left on it in order to get enough cast-off. It's being turned to my own pattern that has no cast-off, my pattern stock is being made for another shooter. Two different rifles for 2 different shooters means 2 different sets of dimensions.

The only part of preturning that I don't like is the fact that many times the stocks all end up looking like each other.

I used to build hot rods 'cause the factories simply didn't make 'em fast or agile enough. My favorite was an Austin-Healey 3000 with HiPo 302 Ford and top-loader 4-speed. The engine conversion was surprisingly simple and straightforward and the result was stunning.

Regards, Joe

My point was sorta reinforced by your answer, which is that duplicating, or machine turning can produce plenty of variety, to cover the needs and fitting of an infinite number of different shooters. It all depends on the pattern on the feed side of the duplicator, which I presume the cutting side will clone, bondo and all. Another point is that there isn't that much difference from one stock to another where a few basic patterns wouldn't cover 95% of the needs.

I'm not buying the "billy rifle" thing being attributable to pre-turned blanks. There's obvious ways around it, if that's a goal. First thing is the color and grain of the wood - they are all different. Second, the drop at comb and heal, LOP, monte carlo or clasic, forend, grip, etc. can be shaped in a huge variety of ways from just one pre-turned blank pattern.

Billy pattern problem solved, as if it really is a problem in the first place. There are several proven patterns that fit most people very well. Just select one. It's rare to find a person whose needs are such that an odd ball pattern is needed to fit him. Most often it's a matter of taste, whether one likes a classic or monte carlo, for example.

I understand what you mean with the custom auto analogy to custom rifles. That's why I have custom work done, whether it involves walnut or fiberglass, makes no difference. There's a lot more to it than merely the stock. The cartridge, the chamber, the barrel, stainless or blue, twist rate, load data and variety, the scope, and the list goes on. If it wasn't for the satisfaction of something custom, not readily available otherwise, then what's the point?

Some seem to be saying or thinking that if it ain't a classy piece of fancy walnut, hand carved - why bother? Otherwise settle for three inch groups from our 30-06, with a redfield 4x, plain factory stock, etc., and clean it and sight it in once a year, whether it needs it or not, since obviously those who don't appropriately appreciate fine walnut don't have the decerning personality to get satisfaction out of a really good rifle anyway. You know - the unwashed masses, with their grubby fingers wrapped around their synthetic stocks.

KB

I love the look of a fine piece of wood and blued gun, that is what I picture and think of when it comes to fine/custom guns. However in the real world of hunting guns get banged around and weather conditions can be hard on them too.
My last three rifles I had built are ceracoated and built on kevlar/synthetic stocks. The stocks are slightly different,because of calibers and planned use. Maybe these rifles are not beautiful in the traditional sense, but are practical and tough for all hunting conditions.
So yes a custom can be built with synthetic. My .02

My original answer was that, Yes, synthetic-stocked rifles can be custom at least up to a point.

Do I want one? No.
Do I think any synthetic stock is worth more than about $1,000? No.
Are they better under severe conditions? Of course.
Are they more accurate? Sometimes.
Do any of them look good to me or fit me? No.
Would I brag about owning one and show it off to my friends? No.
Would I recommend a synthetic stock to any of my friends? Of course.
Do I want one? No.

Different strokes.....
Regards, Joe

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

Do I think any synthetic stock is worth more than about $1,000? No.

So am I to believe that the metal work in your wood stocked rifles is worth no more than lets say $800?

Stock -- $1000
Metal -- $ 800

A darn good rifle can be had on a budget of $1,800, whether walnut or fiberglass stocked, or whether the Metal is $1000, and stock $800.

Likewise, if the metal is $1550, and the stock $250, and the better the metal work, the better probability of accuracy. The stock is just something to keep from having to hold onto bare metal, and something to hold against your shoulder. Looks are extra, and bonus, and optional, and subjective. Whether it shoots and functions well is measurable, and is not subjective.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Nelson:

quote:

Originally posted by J.D.Steele:

Do I think any synthetic stock is worth more than about $1,000? No.

So am I to believe that the metal work in your wood stocked rifles is worth no more than lets say $800?

Chuck, the SIGHTS on some of my rifles are worth more than $800. Yes, I'd say that the replacement cost on some of my metalwork would run up to quite a bit. Just for grins and giggles I priced one of the last bolt rifles I built and the total was almost $8000 with the cost being split about evenly between woodwork and metalwork. Some engraving but no gold inlay or border, nice express sights & QD lever rings, several traps, all the usual bells & whistles including Krieger barrel, lapped & trued action, etc etc.


BTW this is about 1/2 the Guild price but also not necessarily Guild quality, I'm not a Guild member.

So, where'd you get the $800 figure? If I had only $1800 to spend on a rifle then I'd probably get a CZ or similar and a $600 walnut blank. The rest would go for sights.
Regards, Joe

FMC & KB,

you do both understand we are just ragging on you.

Wood just has an appeal, like acoustic guitars, wood dashes on cars, or a well done Longbow and cedar arrows. It was alive once, and by finding something beautiful inside, you breathe life into it again. It has value.

One of my Grandfather's brothers was a cabinetmaker by trade. I used to just sit in his shop, listening to that schoop-schoop sound a spokeshave made on hardwood and inhaling the aroma of fresh shavings.

Wood stocks make memories.

Rich

Rich. Just havin fun brother. Took out the little red car yesterday.....had to clean out the plugs..buck-forty....

8x57 - MK X Mauser - blued metal
9.3x57 - FN Mauser - Black T metal
9.3x62 - Ruger 77 MKII - blue metal
9.3x338 - Ruger 77 MKII - stainless matt finish

Metal work, collectively about $4,000, maybe $5,000
Scopes, about $1,000
Stocks, altogether about $500

All - 3/4" groups or better, easily, with several loads -- priceless.

I consider them all works in process, and someday plan on better stocks. I put my money on getting them to shoot first, and succeeded. They could all be candidates for walnut stocks, but I think I'm gonna go with a McMillan on the stainless rifle. The others, I don't know. They just shoot so well as they are, there is little encentive to mess with them. I'll probably just enjoy them a while longer and think about it.

Pretty is, as pretty does. Ain't they purty?

Regards,
KB