Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stock repair screws???

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Stock repair screws???

    Hey all. I'm new to the forum, if this belongs under an existing thread or topic let me know. I didn't see one specifically related to this issue. I found this stock, looks like some holes were filled on either side of the stock. I was told it had grenade sights, but the location of the holes doesn't look right. Any idea what these might be?
    SA stock, GAW inspection stamp.
    Last edited by joedammann; 08-29-2017, 11:33 PM.

    #2
    I would have to side with your guess. Not only are they in the wrong spot for grenade sight mounting, but the sight screws don't go completely through the stock.
    Jon

    Comment


      #3
      Definately not grenade sight base screw holes. Wrong location and shouldn't be on both sides. Is there any evidence of a crack in the tang of the stock (behind the receiver heel) or pistol grip area. If not those are a real mystery.

      Comment


        #4
        I don't have the stock yet. When I receive it I'll check for cracks etc. and post some additional images. Thanks for the input.

        Comment


          #5
          Title says it correctly - those are stock repair screws. I have a few of those somewhere in my parts bin. I have seen them a number of times on stocks that do not appear to have a crack and they were placed in exactly those locations, which makes me think they were also used to reinforce that area.

          I will be very interested to see more of this stock when you get it in your hands.

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks for the input gents, much appreciated.
            Near as I can tell there are no existing cracks, so looks like it might be for reinforcement as Bodyman mentioned. It's definitely been through a rebuild, has the RA-P and the uncircled P. Here's some pics, take a look let me know what you think.
            By the way does anyone know anything about marks under the buttplate? Can't seem to find much on the subject.

            Comment


              #7

              Comment


                #8

                Comment


                  #9
                  Sorry for all the separate replies, but I have to wash these image through an app for compression.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Thanks for the great photos of an interesting stock, Joedammann!!
                    Welcome to the Addiction!

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Is it by any chance a long channel? What does it look like under the buttplate? How about the clip latch cutout and the oprod cut? Just wondering, ...

                      Comment


                        #12
                        There wouldn't be any reason for them to reinforce the stock with screws unless there was damage or cracking of some sort. They would not have taken the time to do that during a rebuild nor would there be a reason for them to do such a drastic repair when they typically had a mountain of stocks available for swapping out. One cracked badly enough to require that much of a repair would have generally ended up in the firewood pile. IMHO, someone other than USGI, did the repairs in order to salvage the stock because it has a decent Cartouche and proof stamp on it. Even though it's apparent the stock, at some time and on some rifle, went through rebuild the repairs wouldn't have been done without a reason to do them.
                        Last edited by lapriester; 09-15-2017, 11:52 AM.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Very valid point lapriester, particularly about repairs not having been done without a reason.
                          I can certainly see someone trying to preserve the stock because of the clarity of the cartouche and proof marks.
                          My question is; if there were not damages sufficient for an arsenal to address, why would anyone else?

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Good questions.

                            My questions above were more in an effort to determine if that stock is from the period of the cartouche or if it was perhaps earlier.

                            Some background; years ago, back when Jim at DuPage was still up in DuPage, I got a chance to visit for an afternoon and he handed me a decently readable RS cartouched stock. I turned it down when I saw screws in it. No indications of a crack, no rebuild stamps, just two screws, ... in exactly those spots, ... (I probably should have bought that, ...).

                            I've always paid attention to those screws, and over the years I have seen other stocks with them in those same locations without an indication of a crack (maybe the screws just do that good of a job) - some of them were early, some not, some rebuilt and some not, some WRA and some not. Somewhere from the early days, maybe one of the document guys can locate it, I seem to remember that ordnance had a directive to put them in those locations when needed (for reinforcement?), but they can be and were used in many locations on the stocks and at many repair levels. Heck, I think somewhere I even have a rear handguard that has one in it (!). I'm not sure when but they seem to have gone out of favor before the war ended and Woody's tenure is about as late as I have seen them (I don't think I have ever seen them on Korean era production - this is when I can see lapriester's comments being spot on; a crack goes on the scrap pile. But early on in the pre-war era it was completely different - they were struggling with this new design and its problems and then trying to just get enough of these made, so every part was treated like it was made of gold).

                            There are lots of ideas and theories on these and they lead in lots of directions. As early production Garand wood was (rumored to be?) made from leftover 1917 blanks from WWI and therefore perhaps a bit too dry, some have suggested that there was in need for reinforcement in that location, meaning that these screws were being installed when first made. But that would also mean that WRA ended up using these blanks too (or some other really tantalizing possibilities surrounding the extreme similarities of the two types at this early stage and the inability for Onsrud to make enough of the giant copy lathes to even make them - oooh, good stuff!! (By Korea they had sub'd this to Overton, and those stories are amazing, ...)), which is possible but no documentation has turned up for that yet, not as far as I know (maybe it is in Bruce's big book somewhere). But this idea that they were used to reinforce this spot would explain why so many do not show any sign of a crack, though I have yet to see these screws on a complete rifle that is purported to be original (now you guys are going to make me dig around until I find the unused ones that I have somewhere, ...). Heck, as far as that goes, I have never even seen them on a rebuild, only on loose stocks. Maybe some of the guys down at Anniston would have had a better feel for what was coming out of the boxes years ago, but I never thought to ask them.

                            If you look in this picture, you can just make out the little screw in the one rear handguard;



                            How's that? I told you not to make me type more than 10 characters, ...

                            Comment


                              #15
                              To continue a bit more with all this (if you guys can stand it - I like these thought exercises), I started thinking about the difficulties they were having with the design early on and trying to get it into production. I reread some of the objections that Winchester had (in the Pugsley papers) and that they flat out said the design was not ready for production, yet they were asked to bid the cost for making the thing. All this while SA kept modifying the design, which further illustrates the pressure they were under to get this into production. But the list of components that SA was trying to save early on is extensive and is really quite a list. Anything from complex parts like receivers all the way to simple slides where we have all the variations of followers with slides shapes and angles, early receivers sent back to have chrome put on barrel bearing surfaces, or barrels like the pic below of the original barrel on 179,xxx that is swaged, excess MS parts like hammers being placed in early production rifles, 200 gastraps being produced out of order to use up the parts - I am sure you guys can add to the list but it shows the pressure they were under to produce.

                              I think things were just crazy at that time. So why not a few screws in a batch of wood that was prone to cracking, especially during a time when stock manufacture was but one more pain in the arse problem? From what we see today, we can say that the repair screws tend to be used early on and later stocks are very much the exception.

                              Anyway, always found it to be an interesting topic, and just strange that these show up like this on often on earlier wood, and when you see the screws in these locations that nobody seems to see the crack that it was repairing. Maybe they really are just that good. No real answers, just lots of questions, really.



                              Sorry if some of the information I put in these is pretty basic - I know most of you guys are pretty advanced but I am always trying to be cognizant of the newer guys that may just be starting out. Those new eyes have a way of seeing things we have missed for years, ...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X