
Non-walnut 28 Buttstock
#1
Posted 05 February 2004 - 05:50 PM
#2
Posted 05 February 2004 - 06:42 PM
They did apparently use different wood during wartime production, but the numbered butt stocks are pretty early production. Maybe the grain varied on walnut depending on how it was cut? Deerslayer is the wood guy, maybe he knows what else was used.
#3
Posted 05 February 2004 - 06:44 PM
I think only original Colt buttstocks had serial numbers on them, and that was where they were located. Too bad it was painted and refinished, if so.
Doug
#4
Posted 05 February 2004 - 06:46 PM
#5
Posted 05 February 2004 - 06:56 PM
Dan
#6
Posted 05 February 2004 - 07:07 PM
AZ, The serial number is on the rear end, the part that is covered by the buttplate. There is a serial number on the buttplate, but it doesn't match --5217.
#7
Posted 05 February 2004 - 07:33 PM
#8
Posted 05 February 2004 - 07:53 PM
I have run across non-crossbolt stocks that appear to be made of poplar or some other wood. They have a funny grain, in that they are somewhat iridescent (poor choice of a word, but I don't know how to descibe it) in one direction, but not the other when finished with a linseed oil. I have one of these on my WH gun. I also know walnut varies in density and some are heavier than others..
I did not know that early non-colt guns had SN'd stocks. I wonder what the purpose was for that, and numbering the buttplates, except for maybe the stocks were fitted to the plates, then both were numbered, and the buttplates went to the blue tank and the stocks to the varnishers, and the plates and stocks were matched up again afterwords so the fit was perfect?
That seems like a lot of work for a military gun, and maybe that was the intention, but during refinishing nobody gave a crap about cosmetics, and buttplates and stocks were just assmebled without regard to matching the numbers up.
You could have Colt wood though, somebody familiar with the fonts used in the stampings could possibly tell.
I got a 1921 stock a few years back for next to nothing, that looked like it sat in the sun and rain for 30 years before I got it. Not much rust on the metal, but the wood was sunbleached like an old barn. The numbers matched on those. I refinished it the best I could (it actually looked OK), and somebody gave my $400 for it, because it didn't have a sling swivel cut out.
Doug
#9
Posted 05 February 2004 - 09:06 PM
I was satisfied with my kit -- til I heard you got 2 buttstocks. Did you pay extra?
I'm not sure made the barrel, but it is new or almost new. Frame was by A.O., with AO or Stevens internals. Bright bolt was very nice.
#10
Posted 06 February 2004 - 12:30 PM

#11
Posted 08 February 2004 - 07:26 PM
Edited by LIONHART, 09 February 2004 - 12:39 PM.
#12
Posted 08 February 2004 - 09:00 PM
#13
Posted 09 February 2004 - 12:46 AM
#14
Posted 09 February 2004 - 01:01 AM