What are some good resources for stock pattern layout? Toe, cast, drop, measuring/sizing grip length/openness, etc
Everything I have (several books) and have found is focused on finishing semi-inletted stocks (Westbrook's book is very good; as is Hughe's).
I've decided I need to create my own pattern, but the grip to buttstock transition area is where I screw things up - so looking for dimensions, guides, etc.
Thanks!
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid" -- Ronald Reagan
"Ignorance of The People gives strength to totalitarians."
Want to make just about anything work better? Keep the government as far away from it as possible, then step back and behold the wonderment and goodness.
If I'm honest, what I mostly do is find a stock I like, then I try to make mine "like that". There is always the need to balance appearance with feel. Of course, for real information, you'll want to wait for the guys who know! Regards, Bill
I just take the stock i'm attempting to improve fit and adjust the measurements. For the grip I hold original rifle as it comfortably fits, make a mark at the back of my hand. Then I put my finger on the trigger where I want it and make another mark. That will be how far I move the grip back for me ( just for example) as to cast . toe , drop and comb I do something similar but it helps if someone is helping.
I draw everything out on a big piece of grid paper , sometimes two or three times.
If you don't have it, get the Jerry Fisher drawing from brownells. Not necessarily to copy but to see what a drawing should look like.
If you haven't done one from a blank, get a cheap piece of wood Last one I did for someone and was not sure about the fit, I just glued up some pine 1x8s and did a trial run, took about two evenings as I was only concerned about the basic fit from grip to but. No inletting .
Hope that helps .
Posts: 1068 | Location: oregon | Registered: 20 February 2009
I've seen stocks online I like. And have seen the drawings that Brownells has - very nice. Dorleac draws out all his rifles as well (beautiful).
my dream setup would be able to convert CAD drawings into an actual stock with a 5 axis mill, but this is expensive $$$$ But would give lots of flexibility to try different layouts quickly.
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid" -- Ronald Reagan
"Ignorance of The People gives strength to totalitarians."
Want to make just about anything work better? Keep the government as far away from it as possible, then step back and behold the wonderment and goodness.
I've seen stocks online I like. And have seen the drawings that Brownells has - very nice. Dorleac draws out all his rifles as well (beautiful).
my dream setup would be able to convert CAD drawings into an actual stock with a 5 axis mill, but this is expensive $$$$ But would give lots of flexibility to try different layouts quickly.
I have one...it's called a rasp
Posts: 3453 | Location: Phone: (253) 535-0066 / (253) 230-5599, Address: PO Box 822 Spanaway WA 98387 | www.customgunandrifle.com | Registered: 16 April 2013
I just want to touch on something that seems to me hasn't been clearly articulated in most written sources and may or may not be valid depending on the rifle you are trying to build.
I guess it's understandable based on the history of development, but for some types of rifle I feel the literature lags behind.
Normally, the comb and heel are measured from the bore line. But in my opinion the comb height should actually be measured from the sights. The height at the heel will depend both on the sight height and the position from which the rifle will mostly be fired. Measuring from the barrel is great for shotguns (which is the type of firearm arguably most critical of stock fit, and thus where the art developed from), but for modern large-objective scopes, adjustments have to be made. Furthermore, there are good reasons to mount the scope even higher than the objective bell demands in many shooting situations.
The problem is that this results in a very ugly rifle, which is probably why high-mounted scopes are virtually always combined with metal or plastic stocks.
Many years ago I built a rifle for fiddling with. The purpose was to shoot at longer distances, and to have a rifle that wasn't pretty, so that I didn't have to worry about dings and scratches (yes I have pretty rifles too). At the time I bought quite a large telescope to put on it (by modern standards it isn't a large scope anymore). I mounted it as close to the barrel as I possibly could, and made a lightweight Aluminium stock to go with it. Recently I comprehensively re-built it, and due to some stuff I had read, I decided to raise the scope up by about an inch. The difference is remarkable. I can now see where the bullets impact through the scope, even at relatively short distances. Same caliber and only a small change in weight, same muzzle device and no other recoil mitigation devices. Apart from looks, the only other disadvantage of the high scope is that the cheek-piece and the butt pad needs to be removed in order to allow cleaning from the breech end, but because of the alumimium construction in this case it's relatively easy.
Posts: 467 | Location: South Africa | Registered: 28 April 2020
Originally posted by Peter Connan: I just want to touch on something that seems to me hasn't been clearly articulated in most written sources and may or may not be valid depending on the rifle you are trying to build.
I guess it's understandable based on the history of development, but for some types of rifle I feel the literature lags behind.
Normally, the comb and heel are measured from the bore line. But in my opinion the comb height should actually be measured from the sights. The height at the heel will depend both on the sight height and the position from which the rifle will mostly be fired. Measuring from the barrel is great for shotguns (which is the type of firearm arguably most critical of stock fit, and thus where the art developed from), but for modern large-objective scopes, adjustments have to be made. Furthermore, there are good reasons to mount the scope even higher than the objective bell demands in many shooting situations.
The problem is that this results in a very ugly rifle, which is probably why high-mounted scopes are virtually always combined with metal or plastic stocks.
Many years ago I built a rifle for fiddling with. The purpose was to shoot at longer distances, and to have a rifle that wasn't pretty, so that I didn't have to worry about dings and scratches (yes I have pretty rifles too). At the time I bought quite a large telescope to put on it (by modern standards it isn't a large scope anymore). I mounted it as close to the barrel as I possibly could, and made a lightweight Aluminium stock to go with it. Recently I comprehensively re-built it, and due to some stuff I had read, I decided to raise the scope up by about an inch. The difference is remarkable. I can now see where the bullets impact through the scope, even at relatively short distances. Same caliber and only a small change in weight, same muzzle device and no other recoil mitigation devices. Apart from looks, the only other disadvantage of the high scope is that the cheek-piece and the butt pad needs to be removed in order to allow cleaning from the breech end, but because of the alumimium construction in this case it's relatively easy.
Agree. I haven't found a big issue with bolt action/rifle scopes, but on ARs it's a big problem for me given the straight stock due to the recoil buffer and my ginormous gorilla head (like size 8 plus hat) - so I have to mount my optics higher and really dig in for iron sights.
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid" -- Ronald Reagan
"Ignorance of The People gives strength to totalitarians."
Want to make just about anything work better? Keep the government as far away from it as possible, then step back and behold the wonderment and goodness.
Originally posted by gunmaker: Lots of summer NRA classes available around the country. SDH also puts on a school building from a blank.
If you can't build it from a blank shaping it with hand tools, then you would have no idea what info to put into a 5 axis CNC.
I was going to check to see if SDH still had his classes. Unfortunately, given I still work, any time off I allot for hunting/vacation combo trips, so need to wait a few years until I am retired.
On the CNC, figured it would be quicker than a rasp for prototypes, but just a dream as they are uber $$$.
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid" -- Ronald Reagan
"Ignorance of The People gives strength to totalitarians."
Want to make just about anything work better? Keep the government as far away from it as possible, then step back and behold the wonderment and goodness.
I've seen stocks online I like. And have seen the drawings that Brownells has - very nice. Dorleac draws out all his rifles as well (beautiful).
my dream setup would be able to convert CAD drawings into an actual stock with a 5 axis mill, but this is expensive $$$$ But would give lots of flexibility to try different layouts quickly.
I have one...it's called a rasp
That's a multi axis rasp, that can be used in so many axis it is impossible to put a number on!
Posts: 677 | Location: fly over America, also known as Oklahoma | Registered: 02 June 2013
Originally posted by gunmaker: Lots of summer NRA classes available around the country. SDH also puts on a school building from a blank.
If you can't build it from a blank shaping it with hand tools, then you would have no idea what info to put into a 5 axis CNC.
Out of curiosity, I visited all 4 NRA Affiliate Summer Gunsmith schools web sites, and none are offering stock making this year. 3-4 are offering checkering classes, and Lassen is offering CCH again. All offered "basic gunsmithing, basic and advanced lathe and machine shop, knife making. A couple are offering engraving, and MCC has a rust blue class". While I was in GS school (30+yrs ago) we were still taught "by hand from a blank". I have always thought it might be beneficial to spend a week seeing another's approach. That opportunity has just never presented itself for me. Not a thing wrong investigating "another way" as we all can get set in our ways.
Posts: 677 | Location: fly over America, also known as Oklahoma | Registered: 02 June 2013
You are not going to find the best dimensions for your body in a book. You can only find that out by shooting.
Times have changed from "classic" stocks, as shown in the picture of the M1917. Those stocks were a combination of carry over from flintlocks and military rifles with bayonets. Maybe they look graceful, but ergonomically they are horrible.
You want to find the correct stock dimensions, go shoot 3P smallbore enough to make a sharpshooter card, or go shoot F Class prone. 3P is standing, sitting, prone. The gun has to fit in all three positions, and what will you find in modern competition rifles is that they are infinitely adjustable. Modern stocks place your hand in a stress free position, the trigger pull length is adjustable to your body, the buttplate will rotate and go up and down, and back and forth. Cheekpieces are adjustable, up and down, left and right. These are all there to place your head in the correct position with the sights. If you have never noticed, your head is shaped differently from everyone else, just like your upper body.
Once you figure out all the adjustments to create a stable, stress free position, all those "classic" stocks will feel like you are cheeking an oar.
Originally posted by SlamFire: You are not going to find the best dimensions for your body in a book. You can only find that out by shooting.
Times have changed from "classic" stocks, as shown in the picture of the M1917. Those stocks were a combination of carry over from flintlocks and military rifles with bayonets. Maybe they look graceful, but ergonomically they are horrible.
You want to find the correct stock dimensions, go shoot 3P smallbore enough to make a sharpshooter card, or go shoot F Class prone. 3P is standing, sitting, prone. The gun has to fit in all three positions, and what will you find in modern competition rifles is that they are infinitely adjustable. Modern stocks place your hand in a stress free position, the trigger pull length is adjustable to your body, the buttplate will rotate and go up and down, and back and forth. Cheekpieces are adjustable, up and down, left and right. These are all there to place your head in the correct position with the sights. If you have never noticed, your head is shaped differently from everyone else, just like your upper body.
Once you figure out all the adjustments to create a stable, stress free position, all those "classic" stocks will feel like you are cheeking an oar.
Yep - competition stocks fit well. I shot 3P small bore and air rifle in high school for 4 years - Anschutz and Feinwerkbau. Our public high school even had it's own indoor range and once a year we could go shoot M16s full auto at Camp Bullis. And prior to the full auto shoot, I got to show classes how a m16 works and pass it around to everyone (not loaded then, but real!).
But really like the look of classic stocks! I did have Wenig's custom fit a superposed stock to me years ago - that was really cool!
"Evil is powerless if the good are unafraid" -- Ronald Reagan
"Ignorance of The People gives strength to totalitarians."
Want to make just about anything work better? Keep the government as far away from it as possible, then step back and behold the wonderment and goodness.
I just got off the phone with Glen Morovits. He is teaching gunsmithing at Eastern Wyoming College in Douglas. He will be putting a stockmaking summer class in mid June this year. He's a world class gunmaker that can build something from nothing. He trained at Trinidad and worked for Don Allen in Minn, Dakota Arms, Searcy Doubles, Weatherby stocks, etc... He taught at Trinidad for a while then started the new program in Douglas, WY to be closer to his kids/grankids.
gunmaker ------------------ James Anderson Metalsmith & Stockmaker WEB SITE
This years summer class he recommends the students sending their barreled action in early. Then he will bed it in a pattern and duplicate it very close for time consideration. It you have the stones to want to do something from a blank, he would work with you on that as well, but having the inlet run on the duplicator so there's time to learn the shaping would help speed things along.
gunmaker ------------------ James Anderson Metalsmith & Stockmaker WEB SITE
Originally posted by Austin Hunter: What are some good resources for stock pattern layout? Toe, cast, drop, measuring/sizing grip length/openness, etc
Everything I have (several books) and have found is focused on finishing semi-inletted stocks (Westbrook's book is very good; as is Hughe's).
I've decided I need to create my own pattern, but the grip to buttstock transition area is where I screw things up - so looking for dimensions, guides, etc.
Thanks!
As the Jerry Fisher drawings are to scale, you can take measurements directly from them. I don't find them on Brownells site anymore, but find them on Midways' site. Or, just make some 'caliper' measurements off of a stock you like.
Posts: 677 | Location: fly over America, also known as Oklahoma | Registered: 02 June 2013
Originally posted by gunmaker: I just got off the phone with Glen Morovits. He is teaching gunsmithing at Eastern Wyoming College in Douglas. He will be putting a stockmaking summer class in mid June this year. He's a world class gunmaker that can build something from nothing. He trained at Trinidad and worked for Don Allen in Minn, Dakota Arms, Searcy Doubles, Weatherby stocks, etc... He taught at Trinidad for a while then started the new program in Douglas, WY to be closer to his kids/grankids.
Good to hear someone is still willing to teach a "summer class", even if it is only a week or maybe 2, that's better then no in person instruction at all.
Posts: 677 | Location: fly over America, also known as Oklahoma | Registered: 02 June 2013
I am planning on teaching a Stock Shaping Seminar, from the blank this summer. It is already filled with 4 students but I might be interested to hear from serious professional alternates. There are two reasons this is happening 1. I've been asked by two Gunsmithing school instructors to teach them and 2. my longtime good friend James Tucker is coming to Montana to help me. I consider James, an experience instructor, to be in the top tier of stockmakers anywhere, and as he says, "It should be fun!". I've had some health issues contracting Covid19 the past two summers. After 10 seasons I doubt if more Seminars will happen as I've had to face retirement as a fact of life. Having the opportunity to teach teachers, imagining my experience being passed further on, and working with James after talking about doing this together for a decade makes me want to do this. BTW: I ask student to arrive with a barreled action inlet and installed in the blank so we can concentrate on design, style and how to make square into classic.
Originally posted by slivers: That's a multi axis rasp, that can be used in so many axis it is impossible to put a number on!
My rasps are ambidextrous as well. I refuse to buy a hand stitched one made just for those that only use their right hand.
I've got a couple of French LEFT-Hand, Hand-Stitched rasp that can be set down right next to the Right-Handed, Hand stitched for production wood removal. They really are Superior Rasps~
Originally posted by SDH: I am planning on teaching a Stock Shaping Seminar, from the blank this summer. It is already filled with 4 students but I might be interested to hear from serious professional alternates. There are two reasons this is happening 1. I've been asked by two Gunsmithing school instructors to teach them and 2. my longtime good friend James Tucker is coming to Montana to help me. I consider James, an experience instructor, to be in the top tier of stockmakers anywhere, and as he says, "It should be fun!". I've had some health issues contracting Covid19 the past two summers. After 10 seasons I doubt if more Seminars will happen as I've had to face retirement as a fact of life. Having the opportunity to teach teachers, imagining my experience being passed further on, and working with James after talking about doing this together for a decade makes me want to do this. BTW: I ask student to arrive with a barreled action inlet and installed in the blank so we can concentrate on design, style and how to make square into classic.
Dang, that sounds like an EPIC class, LOVE to be there for that! Unfortunately a family vacation to Yellowstone in early June and a Prairie dog trip to Wyoming in July does not leave much time. Always loved Tucker's work.
John
Posts: 545 | Location: illinois | Registered: 03 April 2003
Originally posted by SDH: I've got a couple of French LEFT-Hand, Hand-Stitched rasp that can be set down right next to the Right-Handed, Hand stitched for production wood removal. They really are Superior Rasps~
I'm sure they're exceptional tools. Just can't justify double the hand stitched expense when my Corradi Gold does the trick for me.
Kind of like building right and left handed rifles depending on which window you're shooting out of.
Have you ever tried shooting a right handed thumbhole stock left handed?
gunmaker ------------------ James Anderson Metalsmith & Stockmaker WEB SITE
News to me! I checked out the web pape, looks impressive. I'll suggest to my students. I've got a passel of Lioger rasps probably enough for my lifetime... I've never made a left-handed stock nor even held a thumbhole stock, probable wont...
I bought mine straight from the maker in Italy a few years ago. They sell them on flebay as well, but not sure if the prices are the same. I do need to use the brush side of my file card more often than my old #49, but they mow the wood off with a 100 grit finish in short order.
gunmaker ------------------ James Anderson Metalsmith & Stockmaker WEB SITE
Originally posted by richj: 2 sided Shinto. I'm too nervous to use a plane.
Never tried one of those. They look interesting. I've gone through several farriers rasps, but the older I get the thinner my skin gets and they're really hard on fingers. I use my Jack plane and block plane on every stock. Most of the time you can only run it one way due to grain flow. They are the best thing to get a line straight without leaving too much cleanup. Sharp chisels and a rawhide mallet make quick work as well. I do make either the stock or the pattern from a blank for each project so there's lots of wood to remove.
gunmaker ------------------ James Anderson Metalsmith & Stockmaker WEB SITE
For forming straight lines on good hard and tough walnut full of fiddleback etc (or cranky punky, brittle, crumbly crap walnut that the kilns pump out nowadays) - the types that don't plane well - I've not found a better rasp than a saw-blade Shinto. They stay sharper, longer, to boot. There may be better flat rasps out there, but I've tried the ones mentioned here and more, and it's Shinto all the way for flat rasps in my shop.
Re layout of stocks, my advice is if you seriously want to learn, you won't find much in print on the subject until you start looking into shotgun fit which is another arena. Study the work of genuine masters (in person, not via a keyboard) and you will learn far more, and quickly if you are apt to learn. Get to know which ones suit you and/or individual customers best and figure out why. Measure them, understand what is going on. Shoot and hunt hard with as many of them as possible. This is the best way, as I see it. No matter who may teach you, the work of other masters holds a lot of wisdom. Try and improve the breed meaningfully as you progress with each and every effort - don't just copy it. That is a mighty fine resource for stock layout.
That education will cost you very dearly in both time and money, unless you are lucky. Some good gunmakers and stockers will tell you they have generations of knowledge handed down, and this is often true. Some of the greats just went forth and made it alone with little or no help. This has cost all of those men (well mostly men) doing the best work greatly. They are trying to bank some pay before they expire, or enjoy retirement if they be so lucky, and so they will generally only engage in helping for free someone that has demonstrated they are the real deal by their actions and intelligence - or else someone that is willing to pay. Men like James, Duane, Darcy et al are rare contributing to threads on forums like this. I bet they have little time spare in their lives.
That gig with SDH and James Tucker would be a very, very fine place to learn.
Posts: 100 | Location: Tasmania | Registered: 27 March 2009
