|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
3 members (gil russell, 2 invisible),
509
guests, and
5
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,563
Posts546,359
Members14,423
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 202
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 202 |
To satisfy a perceived need to reduce butt end weight by a few ounces, is there any downside to boring the stock? Finished with a plate, so no heavy recoil pad to remove, also stock has generous dimensions in cross section (1.60" at widest point), an English walnut brand new restock.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
None I can think of, as long as the bit stays inside the stock  In fact, an upside you may not have considered is the possibility to add weight back and distribute it differently, e.g., forward towards the hand to to affect balance.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 202
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 202 |
I'll have it done by a professional. The stock needs a slight bend to fit (it wasn't restocked for me) and I thought I'd get it bored after the bend. Is 2-3 ounces realistic?
I have a prewar Belgian gun with holes bored from the factory, I used them to insert a three ounce lead slug, brought the point of balance back about 1/2".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
Depends a great deal on the stock of course, but 3 ounces is not out of the question.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 879
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 879 |
Walnut weighs between 30 and 38 lbs/cubic foot. If my calculator is right, a cubic inch of walnut only weighs between ,25 and .32 oz/cu inch. To get 3 oz. out, you would need to bore out about 10 cubic inches. Doubtful.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
I love homework.  I weighed 3 fancy English walnut forend blanks and came up with an average of 0.38 ounces per cubic inch.  I've removed as much as 6 ounces. As I said, depends on the stock and how determined you are.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
Mike;
Somewhere I am not following your math. Is that 4 holes 2˝" deep by .875" diameter. If so I get about 6 cu/in of mat'l removed for a weight reduction of about 2.3oz. It appears you have just multiplied the dia of the hole by total depth. Area of a 7/8" hole (.875) is .6013 sq/in times 10 inches of hole . You can't just multiply the dia of the hole by its depth to get cu/in's it takes the area (πR˛ or πD˛/4) of it times the hole depth.
Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
Hmmmm..... Somewhere I am not following your math. Is that 4 holes 2˝" deep by .875" diameter. Think rectangular cavity....actually 3 holes, 7/8" diam, 4" deep with webbing removed between the holes and corners squared up. My math is on the mock up; a rectangular block, 2.5" wide x 4" long x 7/8" thick, equals 8.75 cubic inches, I hope  ....a bit larger all aound than a deck of cards. Real world, the bottom hole would be smaller and angled up parallel to the belly line. Not a rectangular cavity, but even larger volume if need be.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,553
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,553 |
Lovely bit of wood either way Mike Just keep hacking away & weigh the chips. Franc
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,743 |
Mike;
Following now. Those dimensions do indeed come up to 8.75 CuIn. Your math is spot on. For some reason I just had a mind set that you were just drilling holes, which you didn't say at all.
Beautiful wood incidently.
Miller/TN
I Didn't Say Everything I Said, Yogi Berra
|
|
|
|
|
