Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Finish for walnut stock - oil or poly?

The checkering is always my big question in refinishing stocks also. I usually pull out the finish with paint remover and a toothbrush, then gently apply finish over just the checkered areas with a very supple brush. When dry, I tape them off, and am a little more aggressive with the rest of the stock. Some of the rifles I have refinished have been previously refinished and the checkering has already been buggered. Not much a person can do with that.

I'll describe my method, for what it's worth. I don't mask off the checkering. Since it's going to be re-cut anyway I just sand right up to it and if I go too far, so what? Re-cut the checkering when the finishing is done, and seal the checkering with a mix of the varnish you use and some oil to thin it, work in with a toothbrush, blot away with lint-free cloth. Or, just use whatever oil you use on the stock and blot it dry.

There are those who advocate filling the pores with sanding slurry achieved through wet sanding with the finishing oil. While that works, it's not the best- is not prone to staying put and is prone to shrinkage over time. Even if one is hell-bent on using an oil finish, the best way to fill pores is with varnish or epoxy. Slather it on, sand it off down to the wood surface, repeat until all the pores are filled evenly. Proceed with whatever finish you're using. Since I would use a barrier finish for the stock, I just start right in with it. The sanding between coats will cause the pores to slowly fill more with each successive coat. Keep going for a couple more coats after the pores are level full, then rub it out to give it a soft sheen not unlike an "oil" finish.

That was a lesson I learned the hard way many lifetimes ago. I filled the pores on a Winchester 94 stock with some kind of "pore filler" off the shelf of the hardware store, then finished with oil. I got caught in a monsoon and sat there watching the rain slough the finish right out of the pores. Another time I used the "sanding-in" method of pore filling. A year later I was re-doing the stock because the stuff shrank into the pores making it look like I hadn't done a thing. The crazy thing was I was convinced I did something wrong, not that the method was suspect, so I repeatedly used that method a couple more times. (What's the definition of insanity?- Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.) That's when I knuckled down and set out to learn the right way to do it.

Like most things in life, the quality of the end product is a reflection on you, and how determined you are to do it right- no matter how much time/labor it takes. Unfortunately there aren't many quick-and-dirty panaceas in this game.

Thanks gnoahhh, spar varnish it is unless I hear otherwise.

PM me Roy if you get in a bind. "The devil's in the details."

I guess I should buy some checkering tools. How does re-checkering by hand work over pressed checkering, since the wood fibers have been, essentially, smashed?

It can be done ok.

The guy who does my Savage stocks has done the pressed-checkered stocks over for me. He is doing one now and says they are a bi-ch if done properly. The pressed checkering is originally done with heat and possibly steam I think. He uses an iron somehow, and slowly recheckers them properly. They look great when done but its a very slow and difficult process. Good luck.

Gnoahhh, regarding the "filling of pores" in the wood, why not just keep rubbing them over and over with a hand rubbed oil finish, until eventually the pores are all filled up? I know its a slow process but the end result is gorgeous. Here are two of my 99's with a hand-rubbed oil finish.
]99's with hand rubbed oil stocks[/url]

Thanks for the information. I think I will go with spar varnish.

This is a walnut stock, do I need to stain or will the varnish give it the classic look I am shooting for? Any color recommendations?

Sure, it can be done, but one runs the risk of the oil in the pores shrinking with time, not to mention the very real risk of the filler not staying in place in adverse wet conditions. Look real close with a strong light glancing off the wood and see if there aren't teeny tiny depressions over the pores. If there aren't any then the finisher used something other than linseed or tung oil to finish them.

Finishing oils sold commercially are really wiping varnishes thinned to-hell-and-gone, and should be labeled as such. Truoil is an example of that along with products from Formbies, Minwax, Watco, etc. One can do better if one mixes his own with a quality spar varnish, pure linseed oil (or tung oil- it doesn't matter), and a couple drops of mineral spirits-- heavy on the varnish and light on the oil.

Even so, as alluded to, it's a loooong slow process, and the end result is a finish still not nearly as water resistant as a barrier finish. If one is going to go to all that work for a nice oil finish, one may as well just varnish and be done with it, IMO. Truly, a varnish finish if done right and rubbed out carefully afterward, then waxed, is hard to tell apart from a properly done oil finish at first glance. Don't confuse that kind of finish with, for example, the thick tough clear finish on, say, a Browning. Done right it'll be a thin tough elegant water resistant finish that is actually easier to touch up than an oil finish.

I should say that I do feel oil finishes have their place. I use them all the time on furniture, objects of art, and guns that will rarely make it to the range let alone go hunting. Even though I strive anymore to avoid going hunting when there's a chance of rain or snow, sometimes I get caught out in it and for that reason I want those stocks to be as weather resistant as possible. (I once broke an 1899H takedown in half and stashed the pieces under my Woolrich coat when the clouds opened up. I can't do that with bolt guns and solid frames, so I prepare them for the worst.)

Edit to add that the rule of thumb is it takes as long to finish a project (properly) as it does to build it. As with most things in life, what you get out of it is equal to what you put in.

Try the varnish on a piece of scrap walnut and see if you like it. (You probably will.) If you want to stain it after that, bring it up again and we can address stains. My fingers are numb from typing!

You truly know far more about this than me.

Not trying to get in a pissing contest with you. Just trying to teach you something. If you choose not to listen that's your loss. All you have to do is put me on "ignore." Have a nice day.

Two different posters asked me to give my two cents here so I just read through the whole thread and have several comments...

Gnoahhh has everything correct. He left out a few important details and several of his suggestions are not what I would suggest, but they are certainly not wrong.

I am pretty certain Skidrow and I went to the same charm school, and he also sticks to the facts

Oil is not a material that makes a good filler. It absolutely will shrink over time, telegraphing pores. It is absolutely unavoidable. As gnoahhh suggested, pores that do not telegraph over time were not filled with oil.

Oil finishes have the mystique on their side... it was THE finish for a very long time and it can be made very pretty... It was also expensive enough that it had to be used sparingly and kept far beyond its reasonable shelf-life.

And that was why "hand-rubbing" became such a big deal. Once it started to cure it required effort to work it into the wood.

No oil finish is truly waterproof and oil finishes after curing are more hygroscopic (suck water vapor out of the air as opposed to hydro- which refers to liquid water affinity) than bare wood.

Today's wiping varnishes are very easy to apply, simply by rubbing on a heavy coat, waiting 10-15 minutes and wiping dry, repeated many times.

Always make a sample board when possible with a cut-off from the work or even in the barrel channel. I have had many folks test a sanded in finish and none has liked it compared to properly filled finishes. The difference is almost always glaring, the larger-pored the wood is the more glaring.

Old time stockmakers and today's high-end guys get away with oil finishes through several conditions; they tend to use very fine-grained wood, they "cheat" a little with other fillers, or they use a wiping varnish labeled as an "oil finish".

"Oil finish" simply means the finish will look like an oil finish when done and can be applied like one. Many "Tung Oil Finishes" do not even contain Tung oil... they just look like it. As gnoahhh already stated there is no meaningful difference between tung and linseed, assuming they are of the same grade.

A couple random points... never use any varnish other than gloss. The matting agents (usually silica) do nothing positive for the finish. Rub out the finish to achieve the luster desired after the fact.

Filling a stock with a varnish or spar varnish and topping off with oil will look like an oil finish, be easier to repair than oil because the harder finish will ding less and be as easy to repair.

I am certain things were lost in the translation of Mr Pritchard's finish method. Using 320 grit paper between every coat would eliminate any build and create scratches which would be difficult to remove later. Rubbed oil layers are extremely thin and need sanding infrequently between layers, and with very fine paper.
art