24 July 2004, 00:04
MKane160Sizing your cheekpiece....
Chic, Bill, Jim, and other real stockmakers (you know who you are):
Is there a way to "calculate" the size of the cheekpiece in relation to the entire size of the buttstock? I'm in the middle of shaping my first stock, with the intention of sizing everything on the rifle "petite". The cheekpiece, while nicely shaped, just seems to take up the majority of the left side of the buttstock. I can't decide if it's too big or not. I'll try to post some pics but, is there some kind of "ratio" for acceptable size? It's a shadowline cheekpiece on a straight comb....
Thanks.....
MKane160 aka BigDogMK
24 July 2004, 02:05
LesBrooksHere are my guide lines. From the front of the comb to the top of the heel I divide this area into three sections. I use 2/3rds of this area as the reference for a cheek piece. If this is a very small classic, slightly less can be used. The bottom of the cheek piece should be no more than 3/4ths of stock area.
24 July 2004, 05:29
CustomstoxMKane,
I like LesBrooks explanation. I have always done it by eye and put the rear of the cheek piece no closer than 3" from the butt. One thing that will make them look more petite is to make them thinner. Often they end up having a lot more depth than is necessary.
24 July 2004, 14:15
MKane160Thanks, fellas. You have confirmed my fears. The current cheekpiece is too thick and definitely too close to the butt. Part of the "problem" is my desire for a short LOP...no more than 13.25". So, that means the cheekpiece needs to be much smaller. More filing and sanding...
Chic, what was the LOP on the OEJ?
MKane160 aka BigDogMK
24 July 2004, 20:01
rick0311Next time you don't have anything to do...and your alone... put some baby powder on your cheek and then shoulder your rifle and assume your normal firing position.
Then remove the rifle from your shoulder and see where the baby powder is on your "cheek piece."
Cheek pieces sure are pretty though even if your cheek don't get anywhere near most of it.
Rick
25 July 2004, 04:20
CustomstoxMKane, If memory serves me, it was 13 5/8".
29 July 2004, 03:23
alvinmackHoward is %100 pure Metro
29 July 2004, 14:28
HowardI see this forum has been invaded by a bootlicking, city dwelling boy from Minneapolis whose fascination with and participation in the gay lifestyle is borne out in his constant references to something called �metro�!
29 July 2004, 14:39
alvinmackHoward, it's ok to be a cake boy

Now go hug your Uncle Blue

[url=http://[url="http://www.hunt101.com/?p=77658&c=500&z=1"]

[/url]]web page[/url]
Now there's a cheekpiece!
Truth is, I design most of my cheekpieces using the Golden Mean, a ratio to 3 to 5, same as a nautilus shell, Greek and Roman architecture, DaVinci paintings and Rodan sculpture. Most early European and American guns were designed with the same proportions, as were the working parts of flintlocks.
The length of the barrel, forend, grip, buttstock and cheekpiece all take this ratio into consideration in designing this rifle, which by the way, is a .25-20 WCF.
I highly advise working it out on paper first, which I do for most of my projects. It's really a lot easier and more fun the free-rasping walnut when you've got no clue where you are going.
I can't imagine anyone foolish enough to by white walnut!