+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: Eddystone M1917 Stock Warp Issue

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size
  1. #31
    Contributing Member rcathey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last On
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Location
    St. Louis, MO Area
    Posts
    616
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    02:09 PM
    Awesome results! Thanks for sharing. Iíve been following this thread and itís great to see the happy ending!

  2. # ADS
    Friends and Sponsors
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Location
    Milsurps.Com
    Posts
    All Threads
    No Drill-Tap scope mounts for Mosin Nagant, Mauser K98K, Yugo M48, Swedish M96 and M38, Swiss K31, K11, 1911 and more! Bringing mil-surplus rifles to modern standard without damaging historical values! We specialise in military utensils and artefacts such as helmets, daggers, medals and badges, etc.  The on-line store is intended for personal browsing and searching of collecting objects. All items are provided historical value only and can be used for home collection or other purposes except of fascism, Nazism or other extremism manifestation or its propaganda. LIMITED TIME OFFER FROM THE AMERICAN GUNSMITHING INSTITUTE: Get Immediate Online Access To AGI's NEW Armorer's Course for Glock Pistols, Covering Every Generation of Glocks, Including the Latest Model 42/43 and Double Stack Pistols for ONLY $7.00! Brian Dick ... BDL Ltd. - Specializing in British and Commonwealth weapons Chuck in Denver ... Buy-Sell-Trade .. Guns, Cars Motorcycles Service Publications - Collectors books that earn their place in your library! Your source for the finest in High Power Competition Gear. Here at T-bones Shipwrighting we specialise in vintage service rifle: re-barrelling, bedding, repairs, modifications and accurizing. We also provide importation services for firearms, parts and weapons, for both private or commercial businesses.
     

  3. #32
    Contributing Member WarPig1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last On
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Location
    Delaware county, PA just outside Philadelphia.
    Posts
    2,528
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 PM
    Real Name
    Jeff
    You'll have to forgive me, but I don't see how you corrected anything. In your original post you said the forearm was drooping an 1/8" down and to the left. I don't see how that was corrected from your photo. I just see a shim that takes up about the kerf of a blade, basically a zero sum game.

    To bring the frontend up you'd have zero gap at the top of your cut and you'd need at least 1/8" at the bottom because you used a shim and the two halves where squared up. Otherwise you lengthened the stock. No way around the rails "the barrel channel sides" taking on a V shape in that case. How did you address the leftward twist?
    Unless the problem wasn't as severe as stated then the slop in your joint was enough to correct any perceived issue you had.
    Like I said forgive me, a warped/twisted stock can't be fixed this way without effecting other parts and functions of the stock.

  4. Avoid Ads - Become a Contributing Member - Click HERE
  5. #33
    Member Hcompton79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Location
    Oxford, MI
    Posts
    56
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 PM
    Real Name
    Hunter Compton
    Thread Starter
    Perhaps I overstated the issue initially, but basically it seemed the front end of the forend seemed to cant slightly downward and to the left with the axis of the angle being right about near the rear barrel band.

    The shim is slightly thicker near the bottom of the stock and on the left hand side, but not by much, a small change at that point was enough to correct the swing of the muzzle end to bring it to the point desired. I would think if you were to have a 1/8" difference in thickness near the middle of the forend this would create a much steeper angle and would pull the forend at least an inch upwards.

    I probably should have taken before and after photos, but the barrel bands make for an unphotogenic muzzle end picture, and I didn't want to take off the front sight protector to get them off.

    The proof is in the pudding though, whereas previously with the handguards and muzzle cap off the stock tip would only touch the barrel as shown on the below diagram, it now contacts the bottom with some upwards pressure uniformly and without interference from the nose cap. As long as that happens, and there is no contact between the receiver and that bearing point, it shouldn't really matter whether the stock has now taken on a small-v bend (although I would say the angle it was at was previously worse as there was a clear gap between the upper and lower front hand guard without the muzzle cap on.)


  6. #34
    Contributing Member CINDERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last On
    Today @ 11:44 AM
    Location
    Southern Corner Western Australia
    Posts
    5,347
    Local Date
    10-16-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 AM
    Real Name
    CINDERS
    A good result the real test will be 50-100 rounds down range to see how the set up likes the jarring of firing & recoil forces, nice job.

  7. #35
    Contributing Member WarPig1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last On
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Location
    Delaware county, PA just outside Philadelphia.
    Posts
    2,528
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 PM
    Real Name
    Jeff
    No, I don't think we were on the same page. It's your's and what's done is done.
    Look on the bright side, you've created the proof some poor schmuck 100yrs from now will use to prove Doughboy's smuggled rifles home in duffle bags.

  8. #36
    Contributing Member fjruple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Last On
    Today @ 09:23 AM
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    433
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Hcompton79 View Post
    Perhaps I overstated the issue initially, but basically it seemed the front end of the forend seemed to cant slightly downward and to the left with the axis of the angle being right about near the rear barrel band.

    The shim is slightly thicker near the bottom of the stock and on the left hand side, but not by much, a small change at that point was enough to correct the swing of the muzzle end to bring it to the point desired. I would think if you were to have a 1/8" difference in thickness near the middle of the forend this would create a much steeper angle and would pull the forend at least an inch upwards.

    I probably should have taken before and after photos, but the barrel bands make for an unphotogenic muzzle end picture, and I didn't want to take off the front sight protector to get them off.

    The proof is in the pudding though, whereas previously with the handguards and muzzle cap off the stock tip would only touch the barrel as shown on the below diagram, it now contacts the bottom with some upwards pressure uniformly and without interference from the nose cap. As long as that happens, and there is no contact between the receiver and that bearing point, it shouldn't really matter whether the stock has now taken on a small-v bend (although I would say the angle it was at was previously worse as there was a clear gap between the upper and lower front hand guard without the muzzle cap on.)

    Attachment 96451
    I did the same thing to a M1903 C-type stock. The stock had looked like it was stored outside in the rain.

    -Cheers

    --fjruple

  9. #37
    Contributing Member rcathey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Last On
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Location
    St. Louis, MO Area
    Posts
    616
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    02:09 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by WarPig1976 View Post
    To bring the frontend up you'd have zero gap at the top of your cut and you'd need at least 1/8" at the bottom because you used a shim and the two halves where squared up.
    Well you stoked my curiousity. Pretty easy to sketch into AutoCad. I got lazy and didn't actually measure my 1917 but estimated the length of the forend at 10" and thickness as 1.5". If those are even close..well..your wedge shaped shim is not. If the forend is longer or thicker than this, the 1/8" shim would be even more wrong. As the OP said above, he's adding angle much further back from where he needs it. Thus he needed to add much less space to achieve the correct offset.

    I'm sure there's some math that can figure this sort of thing...by why bother when AutoCad will do it for you!


  10. Thank You to rcathey For This Useful Post:


  11. #38
    Member Hcompton79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Location
    Oxford, MI
    Posts
    56
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 PM
    Real Name
    Hunter Compton
    Thread Starter
    I'll take it to the range on Monday and see how she works, weather permitting. I'll let you guys know what happens.

  12. #39
    Contributing Member WarPig1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last On
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Location
    Delaware county, PA just outside Philadelphia.
    Posts
    2,528
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    03:09 PM
    Real Name
    Jeff
    My apologies, I use Workbench not CAD. Workbench has difficulty taking into account all the variables such as angles, arcing wood, blade kerf, finished length, barrel to forearm contact, etc until itís had itís coffee.

  13. Thank You to WarPig1976 For This Useful Post:


  14. #40
    Advisory Panel Patrick Chadwick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 09:08 AM
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4,550
    Local Date
    10-15-2018
    Local Time
    09:09 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by WarPig1976 View Post
    To bring the frontend up you'd have zero gap at the top of your cut and you'd need at least 1/8" at the bottom because you used a shim and the two halves where squared up.
    That's what happends if one uses all that high-tech stuff. Simple proportioning is sufficient. I actually measured my M1917, and at the position of the barrel band, the fore-end wood is about 30mm wide. The distance from the cut to the front bearing point is about 25 cm (depending on where the bearing point is taken to be). I.e. a good 8 times as much, so 1/64" skew at the cut would produce a change of 1/8" at the front end.



    Quote Originally Posted by Hcompton79 View Post
    I would think if you were to have a 1/8" difference in thickness near the middle of the forend this would create a much steeper angle and would pull the forend at least an inch upwards.
    Correct.

    And now we can put theory aside and look forward to seeing the results on a target!
    Last edited by Patrick Chadwick; 10-12-2018 at 04:04 PM.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

Similar Threads

  1. M1917 Stock question/issue
    By BobinNJ in forum Pattern 1913/1914 and M1917 Rifles
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-02-2017, 07:58 PM
  2. Eddystone 1917 & Kerr Sling install issue
    By lkgmadmax in forum Pattern 1913/1914 and M1917 Rifles
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-24-2015, 09:20 PM
  3. My only M1917 Eddystone
    By yoopercollector in forum Pattern 1913/1914 and M1917 Rifles
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-12-2015, 08:37 AM
  4. M1917 eddystone 30-06
    By mac1911 in forum Pattern 1913/1914 and M1917 Rifles
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-15-2010, 03:18 PM
  5. M1917 Eddystone
    By AlReiter in forum Pattern 1913/1914 and M1917 Rifles
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-17-2009, 07:11 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts