Can someone recommend a stockmaking book for someone who has some experience working with their hands, but not necessarily with gunstocks? I have seen "Stockmaking" by Alvin Linden and "Proffessional Stockmaking" by David Westbrook. Any thoughts on either of those, or others?

When/if I ever have a custom rifle done I would like to do the stock myself and would like to get a book or two that would be helpful in learning the processes, including inletting, fitting, cheekpieces, etc.

Thanks,
Bob

Bob,

In my most humble opinion as a student of the art. I would tell you that both are a absolute must. Reason being is that Linden does a wonderful job in helping the stocker to be understand how to execute the grip, in fact in on page 41 of the Winchester pamplet he gives direct measurements. And gives you to rules to follow when executing a grip. IE: ( certain rules that with stocks that can�t be broken for ergonomic reasons: The comb nose must always intersect in the middle of the grip). Which any stocker would know that is the most difficult area to truly master. Linden also had another rule that Grandview knows. I cant remember maybe he can jump in and fill the blank area.

When addressing the book by David Westbrook I would say the biggest void he filled in Lindens writings was the through his pictures. Helping the student to really understand line flow and how it affects the overall look of your stock. Understanding through that line flow that the rear tang of a barreled action will completely dictate how you lay that stock out.

There are two main opinions out there. Some that say you should always start from a blank and then move onto semi inlets. I would respectfully disagree on that because how you can you start from a blank if you don�t truly understand what a stock should look like. Maybe starting from a blank helps you to become more focused to do so. I�m not sure really. But I think in my own studies that I�m much further along than if I had starting doing stocks from a blank. I think to truly be a master of the art. That you must spending hours and hours studying the art. I can�t begin to tell you the hours I have consumed in the past 3 years reading about studying fine sporting rifles. Stockmaking is truly a labor of love.

-Mike

This is an awesome book for studying different styles:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3522737973&category=12573

And I spend alot of time at:

http://www.hallowellco.com
http://www.griffinhowe.com/home.cfm
http://www.westleyrichards.com
http://www.champlinarms.com/

Bob
you may want to do one for an ordinary rifle before doing one that is important to you.(and maybe expencive) You'll learn a lot from your first attempt.

As a sometimes stockmaker and one time teacher of the craft (with some distinquished students), I'd say this for CERTAIN...

START FROM A BLANK for the first three to ten stocks. Follow Linden and study Westbrook and snag every back issue of Gun Digest you can. The Warner custom book is good but VERY dated. I have one.

There are hard and fast rules to follow for each style and the only way to understand them is to DO them. A semi is a very poor substitute because you spend 90% of your time chasing somebody else's mistakes.

There isn't enough incentive (money, trade, or threats) that would make me work on a commercial semi-inlet.......pre-fitted stocks made from the stockmaker's pattern is another story......

To understand stocks takes an understanding of the geometry of them. A semi has no reference points or even a starting place. The first mistake made, whether from the cutter or from the maker, has to be compensated for on the fly and with no way to measure how bad the mistake or even which direction.

Just for instance---

When inletting it's VERY important to turn the blank end for end every half hour or so to prevent inletting more on the easiest side and making the inletting crooked to the center line. It's especially important for the magazine box and bottom metal. From a blank you can check that straightness with a scale or square.

Think of inletting the box and bottom crooked in a semi. You don't know it until the barrelled action is inletted and you see the slight error in the bottom metal made the barrel WAY off at the forend tip.

Now, that means the centerline of the buttstock is so far off the center line of the barrel that either you have cast off or on and you can bet it's the opposite of what you wanted.

If you compound the mistakes you can make with what was made from the errors in a multi-spindle machine and a bad pattern and an operator that might not be paying attention and what you have is a job that creates frustration and waste a LOT of time.

Len Brownell said it best--- "A stock is all straight lines and true lines of curvature."

"Anything you do, make it look as if it was done on purpose."

Study Linden and Westbrook, buy and use a good straight-edge. Your first stock wont be perfect.......nor the first dozen, but they'll be forty times better than the best Bishop-Fajen, etc. (To name a couple of old but now gone companies.) you see on gunshow tables.

INLETTING is more important than shaping for utility. Shaping is MUCH easier to do than it looks. Inletting takes weeks to do at first, Shaping usually takes a day.

Go to www.abe.com and type in Alvin Linden at author and you'll get at least 30 responses. I just ordered a complete set of the three original, 1st edition books complete with patterns for $55.00 plus $10.00 priority shipping.

If anyone has seen the new Leupold catalog cover you have a VERY good idea of what NOT to do.

That Kimber 84 is without any doubt the most misshapen, ugly, terrible, POS I've ever seen in advertizement. Every rule was pretty much broken.....and it shows.

There are plenty of worse done stocks in the world......but not in full color on the front of a catalog!!

I truly believe that anyone here can do better by reading the two books and learning to use a few tools.

I think Jack brings up a good point about semi-inlets......and thus the reason for a first-timer to start from the blank.

When inletting, you are always working with two axes (plural of axis, although Linden did occasionally work with an axe!). On a blank you have master lines to reference....on a semi you are trusting the accuracy of the person who machined the stock. The tendency is to trust the accuracy of the holes machined for the action screws for alignment. My experience is they are accurate about 35% of the time........

As Jack mentioned, inletting a semi is a continual exercise of "scrape and check". The norm (from the blank) is to inlet bottom metal, and then align the barreled action to that with stockmaker's headless screws. However, with a semi it's too easy to have a very slight error in the alignment of the bottom metal.....without you being aware of it.....that throws off the entire metal to wood alignment.

I typically inlet the barreled action first...with headless screws....and check to make sure the screws are perpendicular to the top flat of the stock.....then inlet the bottom metal to that. If the machined inletting is somewhat accurate, or has ample wood to work with, the results are OK. If not......you have a glass job ahead of you, and a candidate for a pattern to be duplicated on a blank........by somebody who knows what they are doing with the duplicator.

And developing a pattern for duplication is what I do now.....

Reading Linden's books, and the works of other stockers, along with careful examination of the stocks of the many great craftsmen that are out there will help identify what makes a stock look good and work well.

Even with the variety of styles, open grips, close grips, sharp combs, thick combs, oval cheekpieces, into-the-grip cheekpieces.....there are certain geometric fundamentals that are followed. In the grip area, it all has to do with the relationship of the pinky finger to the ball of the thumb. I have certain preferences on the style of grip I prefer, but I can live with any style if correctly implemented........from a close-gripped Linden built in the early 30's to an open-gripped British stalking rifle.

If you desire either of these extremes, you might be limited by using a semi. The stock style has been pretty much determined by the machine.

GV

I don't agree with beginners starting from a blank. I did but I had a very good stockmaker, Ray Price, looking over my shoulder so to speak and giving me daily advice. Ray said throughout his career he had over a hundred acquaintances that had started to build a stock from a blank and very few that had finished, in the realm of 5 or so if memory serves me. I was proud of the fact that he said mine was the best of the lot. Even with this praise it had a lot of faults.

I still have that one and although I think it is grotesque by my standards today, I had a lot of help in getting it as good as it was. If you start without that guidance the possibility of giving up would be far more likely than completing something that is anything near acceptable.

I have seen a lot of semis that had plenty of excess wood to allow you to create your own vision in a stock. If they don't have any excess you can ask them to make the outside oversize.

It has been years since I used a semi inlet but the ones I worked on rarely had errors in them but I was more likely to put more in than they started with at that time. I also ended up with a lot more time shaping the stock than one day. Sometimes it took me a day to remember which end went forward.

A beginner using a semi is a lot more likely to end up with something that looks very nice to his buddies and just that will encourage him to keep going.

I just think if a rooky is encouraged to start from a blank you will end up losing a lot of people out of frustration who otherwise would go on to learn to build stocks rather than taking those giant steps required by a blank. Some will continue to use them and learn how to use them to their best advantage or creae their own patterns and find quality people to do the duplicating for them. A lot of them will never reach the level to do it commercially but that I don't believe that this is the point of this thread.

I've probably done about 6-8 stocks from duplicated semi-inletted stocks from Fajen and other stock suppliers. Getting the practice fitting the action and barrel channels kept me from becoming overwhelmed and also helped me to learn how lines and proportions work for my own stocks.
I'm definitely not up to snuff to doing this commercially yet but I might be getting close. I finally did my first stock from a blank and I'm almost finished with the shaping. I've made a few mistakes, but I'm actually pretty pleased with how this stock is coming out. I'm actually enjoying using a set of sharp chisels, some good layout lines, and a little eyeballing to get what I conceive as a pretty nice stock- as much or more than doing a semi-inlet. I'm not sure I would have ever gotten to this stage if I hadn't tried the semi-inlet first.

Chic, didn't you have a source for barrel scrapers that you offered to someone on this board at one time? I have the most trouble getting the barrel channel round in the shank area so the barrel will settle down to the level I want it to. It's getting there, but it is very slow going ( I suppose as it should be).

I will try again to find the Linden book, but the last time I looked, a used book in rough condition was around $60 or so at the used book outlets I was looking at. Time to look again, I could sure use some insight into what I am doing wrong! - Sheister

I'd have to agree with Jack on this one. Not knowing better and living just down the road from Richard's Microfit, I bought several semi inlets. I figured better to mess up these than a nice piece of wood. But, the inletting is so oversized that no matter how good a job I do it would look terrible with all the gaps. I guess I say this because even if I were to complete these I'd have to replace them since I couldn't stand knowing they were "wrong".

I just lost out on Al Linden's book on EBay. Bummer. I did score Hatcher's Notebook though so it wasn't a total loss.

While I agree that building a stock from the blank is the best way to learn it can be very frustrating for a beginner. If you have access to someone like Chic who can guide you through the process then go for it. Doing it on your own can be extremely frustrating. I started with semi-inlets.

Inletting is inletting. I did not find it any more difficult working from a blank or semi-inlet. The blank just took longer. What I did find frustrating was the style of stock I was trying to produce. Shape of the grip, the nose and comb, forend style etc. I found myself all over the place many times trying to figure out what the stock was going to be when it grew up. It drove me crazy. Defining what my stocks look like is still in the works but I have a pretty good idea of what I want now.

Paul Dressel and Chic both told me that eventually I will get to the point where I have the dimensions and shape of my style of stock all worked out. Im close now but who knows....that may change tomorrow when I get another hair brained idea.

If someone wants to do a stock from a semi inlet it is better to build a pattern stock, glass in your barreled action and send it to a person who knows how to run a duplicator. Avoid the commercial semi inlets. They are way more trouble than they are worth IMHO.

Sheister, I use the gunline barrel bedding tools of varying diameters. They have handle on both ends and really simplify the matter. Use inletting black and scrape away what is black until it all is back. Use a square bridging on the left and right barrel channel edge and it is deep enough when the bottom of the square touches the wood. Prior to it being deep enough it will touch the bottom and one of the edges.

As a side note, the first stock I did from a blank was to my eyes at that time, very spectacular. More so because I had never owned any blanks having that much figure. At best, this stock is semi fancy in grade. I was so afraid of messing it up with a chisel that after a few starting cuts with a chisel and small material removal, I SCRAPED the rest of the action in place using hand scrapers of various shapes. Spot it in and scrap, and on and on and on. It took me two months working nights and weekends to get it in. If there was one trait I exhibited at that time it was determination. If I had not had someone asking me how it was going, I likely would have stopped.

Grandview, let me start off by saying that you have left rank amateur status behind you a long, long time ago. I agree with you that proper inletting techniques are more important than style, particularly if you wish to continue. But if the person ends up frustrated and quits then they have lost out on this pursuit. And if in the shaping of the outside they end up with something that is hideous, then they often toss the project and quit. For some reason I have what I would have to call a "teacher's desire" to spread my love of stock building to others. I don't know where it came from, I don't seem to have that feeling with any other of my pursuits in life. But I would rather have 2 or 3 people interested in stockmaking as a lifelong hobby at a rudimentary level than to develop one student who becomes a professional at the trade. Not to say that the latter would not be good, I just hate to think of losing people who would get discouraged at tackling a blank.

You are right about the acceptable level of inletting being important but it isn't necessary at all times on a personal level. I had an old friend named Paul Peck who used to live in Ellensburg WA, long before Larry's time there. He had retired from the military and was an anasthesiologist at the hospital. He was a totally delightful person and was constantly on the go. It might take the form of coyote, deer or duck hunting, trapping or working at the hospital or sometimes a mixture of all of the above. I have heard stories of him being called in to emergency surgery and showing up with trapping scents reeking from his camo clothing and the fumes trailing behind him making people sick as he walked by to wash up. His stocks looked very good and although never checkered (he said he never had time to master that), the finish looked very acceptable and the inletting looked decent. That is until you looked close. They were always glassed in. His idea was to hog out all the wood that might even think of coming close to the metal and glass it. How his stocks ended up not weighing so much is beyond me. He used to write for the NRA Rifleman on a regular basis but it usually was on metal work of one form or another. The point is that he had a method of creating a stock personally that took a lot of the normal care out of the picture for him and gave him great personal satisfacton. He always admitted that he didn't have the time to do it properly and he just wanted to get them done and shoot them. I guess my point is that for Joe Average, Paul's method works. It is a drastic shortcut and not a good way to do this work commercially but he created stocks with it.

For those having trouble locating Linden's books, the poster above recommending abe.com was spot on. I just ordered the three volume compilation with patterns for $47. Just FYI

Chic,
Thanks, I have one of the one-handled scrapers and it works OK, but it is SLOW. I was hoping you had some experience with the bent cabinet scraper type barrel scrapers as I think with the right edge they might be faster.
After quite a bit of practice on other projects, I am finally getting pretty proficient with a couple good chisels, mostly gouges and I'm finally getting the results I expected. I also find I'm turning the stock around about a thousand times so I can get the right cut when the grain changes direction on me. I should have a few pictures to post for a critique soon. I really need to see what I am doing wrong so my next one (with a more expensive piece of wood) will not have the silly mistakes I made on this one.
A couple of silly mistakes I made- when I was cutting out for the basic shape of the stock, I cut too close to my lines and ended up with a cheekpiece that is more shallow than I wanted, but I was able to salvage it and it looks pretty good now. I also cut a little too much from the bottom metal to the tip and the stock is slightly lighter than I had intended in the foreend, but it is actually OK looking, except for the fact that this rifle has a Remington Sendero barrel on it, which is fairly heavy. I also cut the grip a little smaller than I intended, but I always liked a smaller grip for my larger hands and I'm interested to see how this will work out.
For a cheap piece of wood, after inletting and shaping, it sure turned out to have a great look to it with dark streaks and changes of direction. Can't wait to start my next one.
One more quick question- do you use a stockmakers vise? If so, where can a guy find or get plans to build one of those?
Thanks for the help- Sheister

Could somebody explain:

"If someone wants to do a stock from a semi inlet it is better to build a pattern stock, glass in your barreled action and send it to a person who knows how to run a duplicator."

Does this mean it is better to start with a blank and make it into the pattern you want to work off of after that? If you don't want to work of commercial semi-inlets how do you make the pattern stock?

So much information! I just sent a link to Chic's site to a guy I know that builds Violin's, I told him he might want to try tackling a stock one of these days. I'm just interested in seeing what he comes up with as far as finish goes.

Red

Ditto to everything Chic said. For the uninitiated, working from a square blank, with nothing but Linden's book to guide them is a recipe for shear frustration.

Sheister,
I use some 90 degree bent shapers but my gunsmith friend made them for me as a christmas present one year so I don't know where you would get them. Actually the two handled version of the bedding tool will take the wood out fast.

When I am shaping a cheekpiece I take it down with either a rasp, a small hand plane or a magicut file and it shaves the wood off fast. I just keep looking at the cheekpiece until I like it. It is easy to get carried away with a band saw or some form of power equipment and once the wood is gone .........

Once you get the line in place for the bottom of your pistol grip, install the cap and shape to it. Do not shape to a naked pistol grip or you will end up with just what you are talking about. The same goes for the butt plate area. I use some old plastic ones but a steel flat plate is better.

I use a vice called a Kimball Vice that was developed by Keesey Kimball. I spoke to his widow last year and her son is tring to get someone overseas to make them again. They are indispensible. Also rather expensive, $365 in 1993 when I got mine, the first year he produced them. I can't imagine working without it. Just don't know where to get them right now. John Ricks found one in some obscure place but I doubt he would let it go. Look for a pattern makers vice, the better wood tool stores have them but they are not cheap.

Dago Red,
To save time I order a pattern for a stock on occasion and then hog out the inletting and glass the wood and metal in, reshape the outside and send it off to someone who knows what he is doing with a duplicator. I have been on a search since my friend passed away and think I have found someone on the east coast. To me it is fairly important for them to have the right tools and that starts and ends with a Hoenig duplicator with Radial clamps. I expect to pay $250 or so for a duplication job to close tolerances. Patterns do not have to be specific to the particular job. They can have extra wood in the grip are, the wrist or any place you will want to make the stock a one of a kind.

I think if you are starting off you would do better with a semi inlet. I will probably find people who disagree with me but you can do better by narrowing your search to someone like Dennis Olson. He has good patterns from what I understand and knows what he is doing.

Once you get a feel for shape and style you can create your own pattern, modify it as you like and use it. The nice thing about a pattern is they don't have to be pretty, they can be made of really crappy wood and bondo. I have put more beddng compound in patterns than I ever have in finished stocks.

Chic,
I used a guy around here for my last stock duplicating- for my Pre 64 Model 70. He has an older machine that is supposed to be very accurate. He told me that if you have a good pattern, he could probably turn within .001" of the pattern. His work is very nice and he is a member of ACGG.

The name is Star S Gunworks. Art and his son Brent are the stockmakers, but I believe Art runs the machine. For some reason I had a brain fart and can't remember the last name. His number is 503-678-1835. They are located just a little north of Salem. His rates are better than the one you quoted. Might want to give him a buzz?

In any case, thanks for the help- Sheister

Chic,

Is that the person that you would recommend I get the semi-inlet from? When you say your order a pattern, does that mean just line drawings?

Right now I am still trying to get around to finishing a grip cap on a stock I am playing with. Next is getting proficient with the checkering, then I want to tackle the full out stock work. I need to learn the fitting, cast off or on and all that, because with the rifles I shoot or intend to shoot open sighted none of them are custom fit for me, just standard that have been cut to my length.

I printed this topic too and will add these books to my list for this next month when I order the checkering kit.

Red

Sheister, you are talking about Brent and Art Selnau (sp?)and they are very good at their work and very nice people. I would recommend them in a heartbeat. I had forgotten about them. I am not sure what machine they use but I know their work is first class.

[ 05-24-2003, 08:26: Message edited by: Customstox ]

Dago Red, I didn't phrase the very well. I order a semi inlet and turn it into a pattern for my work. That involves adding wood, taking some away, creating cast off etc. In essence building the pattern to the shape I want. Often if it is a utility pattern, I will build a lot of things oversize so it can be cut to that shape and then when I get the blank back I shape it the way I want it. When I want a stock cut from the fancy wood, I glass the action into the pattern. The pattern then goes with the blank to the duplicator and he cuts the blank to my pattern.
The time consuming thing is in the inletting. As Jack said, shaping is a lot faster than inletting.

I have heard good things from Dennis Olson regarding his work and although I have not used him, I feel he would do a decent job. He sounds like the kind of guy that would not send out junk. I can't say the same for some of the folk who specialize in just duplicating stocks. At least a couple of them in California, however I have not used any of them for some time.

[ 05-24-2003, 05:50: Message edited by: Customstox ]

Chic,
FWIW - My gunsmith has a Kimball vise too and so I have been looking for one for about two years now ...but to no avail as yet. I have seen another vise at Woodcraft Woodcraft.com product number - 142768 that is a "Patternmaker's or gunstock carving vise" that seems quite versatile. This appears to be the same one that NECG uses as a base for their modifed gunsmith vise. The Woodcraft vise goes for $95 but can be had on sale for less if you wait.
JP

[ 05-24-2003, 09:40: Message edited by: Pfeifer ]

Pfeifer, I have seen those in the catalog and they have the vice jaws that both swivel if I remember. Nice looking vice. I have a photo of the Kimball here for those who haven't seen them. They extend and swivel on the long shaft and the inside jaw swivels.

Chic,
Please keep us posted if you hear anything new on the Kimball vises. Hope they can get that worked out.

FWIW - Here's a picture of the Woodcraft vise I mentioned above...



[ 05-27-2003, 02:54: Message edited by: Pfeifer ]

After doing a few semi's I've purchased a blank and Lindens book which is available thru Brownells. I would be interested in suggestions for books that have a lot of photos of custom stocks to use for a style reference. My first stock will be a blind magazine. The only reason for this is I'm making a stock for my colt light rifle since I have it and don't want to buy a barreled action soley for my first attempt. I haven't yet jumped into Lindens book and don't know if he references blind magazines. I think it will be a trick to get a nice square box with hand tools. Can anyone suggest a bit for use in a drill press that can help or would I be better off sticking to hand tools? Thanks

Dempsey,

The easiest way I know of is to lay out your lines for the magazine box very carefully, then take a forster type bit and drill out as much of the wood inside the lines as you can using a depth stop. Then you just take a nice sharp flat chisel and clean up the sides and scrape the bottom flat and you're done.
Chic or some of the experts here probably have a better method but this works for me.

A vertical mill and extra long 3/8" mill makes it a snap.

Be SURE to inlet the box at least .010 deeper than needed to keep it from bending the action when the screws are tightened.

Thanks for the replys and for the picture Jbelk. A vertical mill, is this any different than a drill press?

demsey ask---

quote:

---

A vertical mill, is this any different than a drill press?

---

A drill press is to a vertical mill as a Moped is to a bulldozer.

They both drill holes and have a motor on top but that's where any similarity stops.

jbelk

I figured as much! Dumb question but I thought I'd ask anyway. I haven't seen a drill press that would adjust accurately to .01. I imagine I'll being doing things in a primative fashion. Maybe I'll check some auctions in the future.

you know, I see harbor freight with mills that start in the hundreds, but they are advertised on their website as mill/drill press. Are they real mills and they are just saying that they can also do drilling, or are they just modified drills?

what should a person look at for a small mill?

Red