engraving with a electric tool

[FL-Flinter]

I got a laminated composite Win 52-D stock a couple of weeks ago from Richards Microfit Stocks. Way too much wood removed from the pistol grip area with an angle grinder. Now I have to use the scrap installing the butt plate to build up the pistol grip area/ I would have been better off just starting with a blank than trying to fix their mistakes.

If you didn't like the design/size/style of the stock, why did you order it?

 

[Col. Batguano]

I looked around for others, but this seemed to have the most vertical grip of any that I could find, and a most reasonable trigger reach, at an affordable price. The 52-D isn't the most common 3-P gun out there these days you know!

Just another project until the parts set for my Lehigh arrives.

 

[FL-Flinter]

I looked around for others, but this seemed to have the most vertical grip of any that I could find, and a most reasonable trigger reach, at an affordable price. The 52-D isn't the most common 3-P gun out there these days you know!

Just another project until the parts set for my Lehigh arrives.

That's all good but I'm trying to understand the connection between the tool and finished product. It's my understanding the afore mentioned stock supplier uses a duplicating machine, not angle grinders but nonetheless, no matter what the tool, the end result lies with the operator and not the tool. I'm not ragging on you but blaming the tool for removing too much wood is like blaming the drill for putting the hole in the wrong place or the saw for cutting on the wrong line.

It just tickles me when I see these kinds of comments about power vs. hand tools in circumstances where there's way anyone could possible tell how the work was done. When it comes to the original intent of this thread, work like carving/graving often shows quite clearly what tool(s) were used, however, when it comes to work like rough stock shaping where all traces of tooling is removed during the finishing process no one can say how the work got from point A to point B ... and those that claim otherwise will never put their money where their mouth is because they know full well they're just blowing smoke.
Mark

 

[Robby]

Mark, I agree to a point. I think there are many that can tell a pre-carve at first glance. No money to pony up and not even trying to stir things up, its just what I believe.
Robby

 

[FL-Flinter]

Robby,
I agree on the duplication machine produced pre-carves but when working from a blank there ain't no way anyone is going to tell if the excess wood was hogged off with a rasp, knife, grinder, chainsaw, bandsaw or whatever. As for those who want to argue "tradition", I'm all good with that but they ought not cast stones until they themselves give up electric lights, gas torches, modern solder alloys/paste and all the other modern conveniences. :stir: :wink:
Mark

 

[jdkerstetter]

....when working from a blank there ain't no way anyone is going to tell if the excess wood was hogged off with a rasp, knife, grinder, chainsaw, bandsaw or whatever......

I agree with that statement. One can use any power tool they want to reach the "close" to final dimensions stage and provided the guns features are established with rasps, gouges, scrapers and other traditional tools, no one would be the wiser.

There are a couple of guys out there who I fear have gotten stunted or lazy and leave it obvious what they roughed out the blank with though.

Ultimately it's up to the builder and how much effort he puts into "finishing" his gun whether it is "obvious" what tools he used to rough it out of the blank.

Enjoy, J.D.

 

[FL-Flinter]

And I've seen a lot of sorry looking work done with rasps, gouges, scrapers too - which reinforces the fact that the blame lies solely with the operator and not the tool.

 

[jdkerstetter]

Exactly! But reference to this thread, I think that most of us can agree there sometimes there are just right and wrong tools for any job.

Roughing out a blank is a lot different than trying to repoduce period engraving and carving. Enjoy, J.D.

 

[FL-Flinter]

Exactly! But reference to this thread, I think that most of us can agree there sometimes there are just right and wrong tools for any job.

Roughing out a blank is a lot different than trying to repoduce period engraving and carving. Enjoy, J.D.

Yup!

 

[Deadeye]

JD, your right about the dremel, it's not for carving by the average person or even the above average but just a week or so ago a man brought two rifles over that he wanted me to see and they had the most beautiful traditional relief carvings I've even seen, john Bivens could not have done better. This guys wife had done them with a dremel and these were her 1st try, she was just a housewife looking for something to do. So , never say never.
I'll try to get pictures sometime. They live in another town about 50 miles away. I was totally freaked. Deadeye

 

[jdkerstetter]

I anxiously await the photos, but pardon me if I don't start salting my hat down yet.

I'm going to have to continue to say "never". I mean, if you were "totally freaked" and you saw them, imagine how we who haven't must feel.

I'd also argue that if you're trying to make a case for her work being "traditional" then why did you choose to compare her to John Bivens?

Enjoy, J.D.

 

[Ed Wingenroth]

Hi All !!!

To me this is about "reproduction" !!! When I hold a fine (original) piece of Art, I consider the talent as well as the resource's available to produce that work of Art !!! If it is of current build, I would hope the Builder would present it as such... "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" so at that time, it fall's into the catagory of "Kari Okie" and the one who does this best, get's the most recognition...
You are all wonderful Artist's !!! You were just born two-hundred year's too late ....

God Speed !!!

Ed....

 

[jerrywh]

The only thing wrong with engraving with a dremel is it always looks like it was engraved with a dremel.