Handguard repair

[louthepou]

Hi guys,

I had to repair this handguard (don't remember from what gun) for a fellow in Canada:


I stripped the wood with furniture stripper, cleaned the break very well (that's very important), and once dry, I proceeded to glueing. The difficulty here was to apply just the righ pressure in all the right directions. I used a dowel inside the handguard to have proper support.


Once that was cured, I sanded the excess glue. I then decided to put two reinforcing "bands" accross the repaired split. You may have seen this on other milsurp wood parts (rear handguards of No1Mk3 SMLE often do). I carved recesses in the handguard and fitted small pieces of wood.


Again, some sanding, and then the repair is done.


Should be good for a while.

Lou

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Peter Laidler]

If I could be so bold as to bold and daring as to pass comment Lou, could I humbly suggest that the slip patch (as we called them) could be a little longer - could I say, 1/2 length again overall. While hard oak isn't a good patching wood of itself, it is superb/the best for slip patches and dowel pegs. Mind you, while oak isn't a good patching wood, it does make a lovely set of bayonet grips for a No1 bayonet

[Claven2]

One bit of advice I would offer is that I've always ran the slip patch grain perpendicular to the grain of the hand guard. Less likely to split again that way.

[louthepou]

Peter, Claven, thanks for these very good tips. I did think about the grain, but only once it was glued! (beginner mistake... I'm learning!)

"Slip Patch" - I was wondering what these were called. Thanks Peter. I saw many of them on No1Mk3* rear handguards, figured it was the right repair for this kind of split. Oh and, please, feel free to be bold and daring any time you want! I thrive on constructive feedback, and I know I am priviledged to have access to so much knowledge.

[Peter Laidler]

The reason we slip-patch at an angle across the grain - so I was told as an apprentice - is that by going at an angle as opposed to across it, square, is that you'll get a LONGER slip patch and therefore more inherent strength at no extra cost. Whether a good woodworker or cabinet maker would agree with this is another matter.

You got any comments on the truth or fallacy in this TBone.......................?

[tbonesmith]

going at an angle as opposed to across it, square, is that you'll get a LONGER slip patch and therefore more inherent strength at no extra cost.

Never heard it in a "class". But it makes sense. Plenty of other joints use this principle, the number one example that comes to mind is a scarf joint, Vs a butt joint. Absolutely no comparison is strength and joint stability, all coming down the different surface area achieved in gluing together pieces of the same section size (plus a little bit more stuff that gets a bit wordy).