TC Stock-Sharon Barrel-poor fit

[ChrisHarris]

 

[30coupe]

I'd try to get the bedding out of the tang area first. Don't mess with the lock area until you have your barrel where you want it. It might be where it needs to be. I had to shim one end of my lock where TC had it a bit too deep. I can't tell from your pictures if it is Acraglass or just epoxy. If it were mine, I'd definitely strip the finish off and start over on that. A good oil finish will let the grain shine through. That looks like some kind of varnish/poly finish.

This is about 8 coats (very, very thin coats) of Truoil.



It really lets the grain pop.

[Papa]

Chris,
There are 2 things to consider that might make the situation fairly simple to solve. I put a drop in barrel  on a TC stock and action and had the same gap as you are experencing. I took a piece of sheet brass, of the appropriate thickness, and made a full octagon shim. Soldered it to the face of the tang, filed it neat on all flats and it took up the gap and looked good. Now I have a brass band at the breach. Don't forget that many original rifles had round bottom barrel channels in their stocks. You could relieve the existing channel, don't touch the side flats, and he barrel should drop right into place. It will never be seen unless the barrel is removed.
Mark

[huntinguy]

 Okay, first off I am what a politician would call an expert... in other words I don't' have a clue what I am talking about.

are you sure that the barrel is fitting into the cutout for the barrel tenon and that is not what is holding the barrel up?

are you sure that the hook and the tang are mating correctly. (I think mike hit on that). I just fit my first hooked breech and it was just one stroke of the file... fit... check ink and repeat bunches of times.

are you sure that the "bedding" is not what is keeping the replacement barrel from fitting correctly. it could be pressing against the hook on the new barrel. 

and last but not least. If you don't have patients, look on this forum at what mike can do with the good parts you have, then set back and wait. 

[ChrisHarris]

I appreciate all the responses and encouragement.  You guys are great!! 

I've decided to go ahead and try to remove the bedding material.  I'm big money into this - and I feel like I overpaid.  No sense throwing more money at a new stock when I'll have to do the same sanding and fitting on that one.  I DID go and read that thread where Mongrel said it was a PITA to work on one of those replacement stocks.  He said it was easier to turn a square block of wood into a stock - than to try and finish a 98% inletted replacement stock.

I took the bare stock over to my brothers house this afternoon.  He agreed it would take some work, but its nothing complicated.  A few emery boards (nail files) and a couple small sanding sticks and sanding blocks ....... I can do this!! I need to get the bedding material out first.  It's hard to see in some of the pictures I posted, but it's everywhere.  It's under and behind the lock plate.  It's behind the escutcheons for the wedge pin.  It's all around the edge of the patch box......... pretty much all over.  Only 3 places I ain't run into it yet, is the butt plate, the nose cap, and the trigger assembly.

I want to upgrade the lock and trigger.  I won't touch those areas of the stock with sand paper until the new parts are here.  I always heard good stuff about the Davis DeerSlayer trigger.  Does Davis make a lock that will fit this stock?  I know L&R makes the RPL locks that are supposed to drop in.  I don't know why, but part of my brain says to match the lock and trigger.  I don't know of any reason to do that - other than I just want matching parts from the same company.  Is it ok to use a Davis trigger and the L&R lock?  Is there another trigger or lock you guys can suggest?

[30coupe]

I appreciate all the responses and encouragement.  You guys are great!! 

I've decided to go ahead and try to remove the bedding material.  I'm big money into this - and I feel like I overpaid.  No sense throwing more money at a new stock when I'll have to do the same sanding and fitting on that one.  I DID go and read that thread where Mongrel said it was a PITA to work on one of those replacement stocks.  He said it was easier to turn a square block of wood into a stock - than to try and finish a 98% inletted replacement stock.

I took the bare stock over to my brothers house this afternoon.  He agreed it would take some work, but its nothing complicated.  A few emery boards (nail files) and a couple small sanding sticks and sanding blocks ....... I can do this!! Yes, you can! Go for it!  I need to get the bedding material out first.  It's hard to see in some of the pictures I posted, but it's everywhere.  It's under and behind the lock plate.  It's behind the escutcheons for the wedge pin.  It's all around the edge of the patch box......... pretty much all over.  Only 3 places I ain't run into it yet, is the butt plate, the nose cap, and the trigger assembly. Those three come fully fitted from TC. 

I want to upgrade the lock and trigger.  I won't touch those areas of the stock with sand paper until the new parts are here.  I always heard good stuff about the Davis DeerSlayer trigger.  Does Davis make a lock that will fit this stock?  I know L&R makes the RPL locks that are supposed to drop in.  I don't know why, but part of my brain says to match the lock and trigger.  I don't know of any reason to do that - other than I just want matching parts from the same company.  Is it ok to use a Davis trigger and the L&R lock?  Is there another trigger or lock you guys can suggest? It won't hurt a thing to mix them. I've heard nothing but good about the Davis trigger. I don't know if they make a lock that will fit or not. The L&R will be an improvement over the TC lock at any rate.

[ChrisHarris]

Darn TC lock plate is BENT. 

How on earth the guy managed to bend a hunk of steel like this....... I have no idea.

[mongrel]

I've seen a number of T/C lockplates bent just so. I don't think it was the owners of the guns. Generally when someone bends a lockplate (or in this case it's more a flexing out of line) they do so by over-tightening the lock bolt, and the plate flexes inward. I suspect the outward-flexed ones came that way, either due to poor quality control or deliberately, the idea being that as they were tightened into the lock mortice they'd pull straight. I could be wrong, I have nothing but my own guesswork to back that up, but that's what I suspect, simply due to the number of such plates I've seen with that exact outward flex to them and no way of accounting for it other than to assume they came that way.

Davis doesn't make a lock that will replace the T/C. The only commercial lock that will work is the L&R RPL. Even IF you found a lock of proper dimensions to be fitted into the existing mortice (by "proper" I mean either fitting as-is or oversized in some areas, so that one way or another it can be made to completely fill the mortice), the placement of the sidelock bolt on both the T/C and Investarms guns will interfere with the travel of the v-mainspring found on every brand of aftermarket lock. L&R solved this problem by locating a stud for the lock bolt to thread into on the bridle plate over the tumbler/mainspring linkage, otherwise it would take a minor act of God and violation of several laws of geometry and physics to get a v-spring lock to work in a T/C or Investarms gun (other than to plug the existing hole and countersink for the lock bolt and its washer, and re-drill higher up to allow the mainspring to clear the lock bolt -- and in my personal opinion any such fill job, no matter how well the plug wood matches and fits, will look like runny cat dung smeared across a clean kitchen floor).

You will have to alter the inlet for the mainspring -- using an RPL lock you will be fitting a v-spring lock into a mortice for a coil-spring mechanism, and wood will have to be removed to accomplish this. The only lock that will drop cleanly into an existing factory T/C mortice is another T/C mechanism for that model gun.

There is no compatibility issue, using the very excellent Davis Deerslayer triggers with any non-Davis lock. There are a zillion custom guns out there that mate the equally-excellent Davis #4 and #6 triggers with Siler, Chambers, and L&R locks. The locks all work the same, with parts that differ in precise size and shape but that are essentially identical of design and function.

I should clarify about those precarved, pre-inletted stocks. They aren't compatible with my way of building or with the limited time frame I devote to each project. A builder or a skilled novice who can afford to spend however much time it takes, working with small hand tools and slicing and shaving bits of wood in areas that tend to be quite fragile, can finish one of those stocks into something really nice. Several such rifles have been shown here, and they're beautiful. My quibble with the precarves is that I can do a near or equally good job of fit and finish in less time, so I have no use for the old-style intricate hand-inletting that many other builders pride themselves on. I'm not looking to carry on the "art and mystery" of old-school gunmaking, I'm looking to make a living by offering a decent product at a relatively affordable price. However, even if you're willing and able to spend a lot of time whittling at areas of wood that are liable to chip, split, or otherwise break if you look at them cross-eyed, if you don't rate yourself much of a woodworker then I'd be uneasy about recommending a precarve to you. The detailing of fit and finish are what make a nice stock, and that detailing is precisely what those "95%" inletted stocks have left for the builder.

[ChrisHarris]

Thanks Mongrel.

I'll go ahead and order the L&R lock and the Davis trigger.  I'll wait to sell the trigger and lock until after I see the new parts and get them installed.

I'm selling the .50 barrel on ebay.  I have no need for it.  I checked this morning and it was up to about $38.  The only .50 rifle in the house is the rugrat that you built for my son last summer.  The rest of my smokers are .36, .45 and .54 

That little rugrat shoots great BTW. 

 

[ChrisHarris]

I saw these pictures on that other muzzleloading forum today.

I wish I knew how to do that.  I don't usually care for beads and inlays.  But this checkering looks fantastic to my eyes.

[ChrisHarris]

I wasn't comfortable making the modifications myself, so I met up with a local guy who does work on ML's.  I had to face the reality of the situation..... I searched for almost 2yrs to find the "right" stock for this Sharon barrel.  Patience paid off and I found one locally, but it didn't quite fit.  I was too chicken to take the risk of ruining such a fine piece of wood.  It ain't the purdiest hunk of wood, but it's good enough.

That being said...
Initially, I only asked him to fit the barrel to the stock.  He said that wasn't usually a problem and it shouldn't take more than just a little tweaking here and there to get the barrel fitted properly.

When I delivered the gun to him, we talked about a scratch on the stock and I told him how much I despised the super thick, super shiny, super orange lacquer finish on most TC stocks.  He said it was easy enough to remove and then take a look at the wood and see what we had to work with.

Here are the results:
http://s437.photobucket.com/user/LPS_Blasto/embed/slideshow/Smokers/TC%20Sharon

[ChrisHarris]

So, I got the stock fixed and re-stained with a flat oil finish.  I like the finish and the gun shoots fantastic.  The barrel lives up to it's nickname of "the laser"   I know it's never going to be anything close to an accurate reproduction of a real Hawken, but it's still a nice rifle and I enjoy shooting it.  I plan to shoot it in the local contests, but I realize there will be some restrictions with relation to the sights.  Currently, the front sight is a blade with a brass bead on top.  It's ok, but I'd rather have a smaller bead.  The rear sight is a typical TC or Williams and is fully adjustable for both windage and elevation.

I don't really want this to turn into a discussion of rules at shoots, because they're all gonna be different depending on the club and who's in charge that day.  What I REALLY need is some help putting HC/PC sights on the rifle.  Most people aren't going to say much if I'm using some type of "traditional" sights.  The blade sight up front is fine by most peoples standards.  It's the adjustable rear sight that makes me think somebody might get sore some day when I'm takin' his money and he might whine a bit about my sights.  So I want to go ahead and replace them both right now with something that would generally be accepted as HC/PC at most any place you go. (excluding REAL serious competitive national matches)

I've been looking at TOW and I do like the RS-HA-5 adjustable rear sight.  I have been doing a little reading, and I think most are in agreement that this type of sight would usually be considered more PC/HC than a Thompson Center or Williams rear sight with adjustments for both windage and elevation.  Not that those didn't exist at the time or maybe a short time after the fur trade era...... just that they weren't as common on a "normal" persons gun.

Is the adjustable rear sight from TOW ok? I DO like the adjustable rear sight, I just don't want to put it on there if it's nothing close to PC/HC.

Do I need to go to a buckhorn sight instead? Honestly, the few other guys' rifles that I've handled with buckhorn sights -- hated them.  If I HAVE to go to a buckhorn to be PC/HC, I'll do it and learn to shoot with it.  I'd just prefer not too if there's any way to justify the first sight as "correct"..... AND keeping in mind that we're not fooling anybody.  It's no Hawken if you want to be a purist.

Then there's the front sight.  I don't NEED to replace the front sight to satisfy any rules.  Typical Hawken rifles had a blade front sight.  I WANT to replace it, because it's too fat.  It silhouettes the targets.  Is it PC/HC to use a steel sight or should I use a brass sight?  I like the look of a blued front sight - all black as far as my eye is concerned.  But I see TOW offering brass front sights.  Are these more appropriate or PC/HC for my rifle?  I like a SKINNY front sight that's flat or maybe a teeny post with a little bead on top.  Thinner the better. How do I know which front blades are thin?

[William]

If the majority of competitions you will participate in require non adjustable sights then take a look at the semi-buckhorn sights available for your rifle.  Use a file to widen the notch in it if it helps your sight picture or to file off the front sight to bring up the point of impact.  If you have a dovetail to attach the rear sight then consider the fixed or primitive sight that Lyman makes and includes with both the GPR and Trade Rifle they make.

Now, if the shooting matches have categories of fixed and adjustable then work up a good load using what you've got on there already.