Recutting bad checkering

[DShortt]

I have a rifle stock with bad factory checkering. Not sure how this was originally done but it looks bad to say the least.
Is this even worth trying to recut or is it a fool's errand?

I think I already know the answer, but I am not at all experienced with this.

 

[DShortt]

Second example.

 

[DShortt]

Sorry the resolution is poor. Server limitations.

 

[gunsandgunsmithing]

I wish I could be of some help but I'll follow along. Never checkered anything but I've been wanting to give it a try. I really do appreciate nice, sharp checkering on a hunting rifle.

 

[DShortt]

Well I was thinking about using this for a learning experience because I'd be hard pressed to make it any worse. But if it's a lost cause I don't really want to spend time on it if even someone who knows what they're doing couldn't make it look good.

 

[Mark M.]

I have a rifle stock with bad factory checkering. Not sure how this was originally done but it looks bad to say the least.
Is this even worth trying to recut or is it a fool's errand?

I think I already know the answer, but I am not at all experienced with this. View attachment 1496076

What is it on?

 

[DShortt]

A Zastava M85 bolt action. 'Mini-Mauser'. It appears to be laser cut somehow. Or perhaps some form of CNC.

 

[ridgeway]

Looks like you can go deeper and get them to point up. Some finesse and TLC works wonders. I hand checkered and it's very labor intensive and hand knumbing.

 

[paperpuncher]

^^^^ I think you could point that up and improve it. The lines look straight and the spacing looks even that’s half the battle. If the wood is decent and will take the checkering it should be ok. As previously stated it’s labor intensive and in my case it hard on my eyes but why not

 

[joshb]

I think that’s stamped checkering. Give it a try. As mentioned before, not much to lose if you make it worse. If it gets ugly, stipple it.

 

[Intheshop]

Looks "stamped" to me.

It's claimed,for what that's worth? that stamped,or impressed checkering dosen't "do right" when trying this. All I can say is that after converting several R700's to positive,that it was well worth the effort. To the point that it would take a pro to tell it wasn't traditional.

I'd do it....

But do heed the warnings on this craft. A proper cradle,sharp quality tools,VG lighting,calm background music and it "can" be therapeutic. Good luck with your project.

 

[SSL]

Worth trying if you are willing to put in the effort. First determine the line spacing and get the correct tools. Probably will use the pointer and veiner more than anything else...maybe a border tool. Go line by line rather than the multiple cutting head tool. Deepen and shape without altering the diamond dimensions or ratio. Might surprise yourself!

 

[jelenko]

For me, I'd plan on take several sessions to go over all the checkering.
I'd also identify specific areas that meant more to me and do those first - so I'd get some feeling of accomplishment even though I hadn't finished it all.

 

[pdhntr]

I have a rifle stock with bad factory checkering. Not sure how this was originally done but it looks bad to say the least.
Is this even worth trying to recut or is it a fool's errand?

I think I already know the answer, but I am not at all experienced with this. View attachment 1496076

It is my opinion that checkering is not cut with hand tools. Regardless of how it was cut, the problem is the spacing is way too wide. That spacing may be less than 10 lines per inch. Could be more but not much.

That is "flat top" checkering. It is done that way because it is easy and cheap. It is not designed to be pointed. Not to be argumentative but as factory cut, flat top checkering goes, it isn't that bad.

To point that up you would have to push the pointer down into the stock so far it would end up looking terrible. All you would see is the deep lines that were cut, not the diamonds. You could "rock" the pointer but in the end, all you will have is deep furrows and tiny diamonds in your stock.

Most checkering tools start at 18 LPI and go up from there. Any wider than 16 LPI and all you see is the furrows cut in the stock, not the points.

The example below is 20 LPI if I remember correctly. Compare the lines in the two pics and you will see the difference.

No way in hell would I touch that.

Jim

 

[centershot]

I never used a cradle. Lay it on a soft towel. I do not have the artistic ability to lay out a pattern, but I have done several stock re dos. Single line tool either pull or push, whichever feels right.

 

[Will Henry]

The grip checkering makes me dizzy to look at it! I have recut quite a bit of stamped checkering and had it come out OK but this looks a bit grotesque. As mentioned, it looks very coarse. It is relatively easy to recut good checkering but much more difficult to try and fix bad checkering.
With that checkering, I think I might could recut it with a power cutter, set to split the spacing, but I would not be too sure. If a person could get one pass done to split the spacing, then it could be finished by hand. If one had a spacing tool which would split the spacing, he could do that then finish with a single cutter. It might not ever be pretty but it could be passable. Maybe! WH

 

[AlNyhus]

A Zastava M85 bolt action. 'Mini-Mauser'. It appears to be laser cut somehow. Or perhaps some form of CNC.

The checkering on my Mini Mauser was very similar. I epoxied it over, sanded it and painted the stock with a textured finish and a satin clear.

Did you get the light primer hits fixed?

 

[JSH]

I would sure check spacing. I started a project like that a long time ago. It was rolled/pressed and the spacing was not anything I could get the right tool for, found out AFTER I had started. Ended up with a wide border to clean the thing up

 

[DShortt]

The checkering on my Mini Mauser was very similar. I epoxied it over, sanded it and painted the stock with a textured finish and a satin clear.

Did you get the light primer hits fixed?

I found the bottom metal was improperly bedded in the rear and just fixed that last week. I've been waiting for the crowd that only shoot a rifle once a year to vacate the public shooting ranges. The ranges get inundated with novices before deer season and those folks worry me. I plan to make a trip to the range this week. Hopefully that issue will be corrected.

 

[DShortt]

It is my opinion that checkering is not cut with hand tools. Regardless of how it was cut, the problem is the spacing is way too wide. That spacing may be less than 10 lines per inch. Could be more but not much.

That is "flat top" checkering. It is done that way because it is easy and cheap. It is not designed to be pointed. Not to be argumentative but as factory cut, flat top checkering goes, it isn't that bad.

To point that up you would have to push the pointer down into the stock so far it would end up looking terrible. All you would see is the deep lines that were cut, not the diamonds. You could "rock" the pointer but in the end, all you will have is deep furrows and tiny diamonds in your stock.

Most checkering tools start at 18 LPI and go up from there. Any wider than 16 LPI and all you see is the furrows cut in the stock, not the points.

The example below is 20 LPI if I remember correctly. Compare the lines in the two pics and you will see the difference.

No way in hell would I touch that.

Jim
View attachment 1496232

That pretty much matches my observations as well but I am not informed when it comes to checkering. I've considered restocking it as I'd like to try my hand at that as well. I might decide to go that route if it proves that I have the light firing pin strikes corrected that Al asked about.