I recently purchased a 1898 Krag rifle. The metal has had surface rust on the action but is not pitted and I will leave it alone other than cleaning it. The stock has the usual dings and dent that you would find on a 112 year old rifle. The wood is sound however it looks like someone in the past has used varnish on it. I am hoping that someone can tell me what the original finish should be.  :-/

Ken

skeet1 wrote on Mar 20^th, 2013 at 2:46pm:

. . . I am hoping that someone can tell me what the original finish should be.

Raw linseed oil, applied warm, rubbed in, wiped clean. Repeat as desired, allowing at least a day between applications. Be sure not to leave any oil on the surface - the original finish is IN the wood, not ON it.

Avoid "boiled" linseed oil, which contains chemical drying accelerators and often produces a shiny surface film inappropriate for an original US Krag.

Parashooter,
Thanks for your reply on the linseed oil.

Parashooter: Should the linseed oil be rubbed into an unstained stock (bare wood)?
Thanks -

Note that raw linseed oil will take forever to dry.

The only reason the armory used raw linseed oil was because it was cheap and quick. Not because it was the very best finish for a wooden gun stock.

gnoahhh wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 3:02pm:

Note that raw linseed oil will take forever to dry. The only reason the armory used raw linseed oil was because it was cheap and quick. Not because it was the very best finish for a wooden gun stock.

Horsefeathers! The folks at Springfield weren't sparing the expense. (Think about all the costly machining and metal finishing lavished on Krags.) They wanted a wood finish that penetrated the surface, not one that dried on the outside and would soon be scratched and abraded off in service.

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login
This excellent photo of a nice, original Krag shows clearly how the finish is IN the wood, not on the surface. Notice the unfilled pores, hard to replicate with oil formulated to dry quickly.

Boiled linseed, applied by a real craftsman, is a fine finish for a civilian rifle that will be protected from damage and treated with loving care - but it's simply not what was needed on a military rifle subject to rough service.

Noted. Note also I don't dispute how it was done at the arsenal. If one's goal is to replicate an archaic wood finishing method in conjunction with 'restoring' a collectible to original condition, then by all means have at it with raw linseed oil. I defy anybody to slather on a heavy coat of boiled linseed oil to a freshly sanded piece of virgin walnut and have it be distinguishable from a coat of raw oil, if both are wiped off evenly and left to stand for a couple days. The difference in looks, penetration, and protection will be nil, whereas the the one done with raw oil will not be dry yet (and probably won't be for quite a while thereafter).

As far as any oil finish that is 'in the surface' and not on it, it by far the worst kind of finish for a rifle stock intended for use in extreme conditions. Moisture will pass through into the wood as if it weren't even there. I suspect that they were well aware of that at the time, and also suspect they knew better than to foist a stock finish onto largely ham-handed troops who wouldn't/couldn't maintain them in the field. After all, if a stock got "frahunsed up" it was easier to grab a fresh one and slap it on than to spend time lovingly re-finishing it.

Conversely, let us also not make the Springfield Armory out to be a holy bastion of infallibility. They were only human, and not everything they did was for the right reason. If you had oversight breathing down your neck to tighten up on the costs of building a fine rifle (and believe me when I say that I consider the Krag to be the finest rifle turned out by Springfield, in terms of quality) would you cut corners on the steel work, or on the woodwork- with the idea of not compromising on the overall quality of the gun?