Original rifle musket arsenal stock finishing process

[keweenaw]

Good day all and merry Christmas,

I am curious about how the government and contractors finished stocks on rifle muskets. I presume it was a linseed oil finish. But does anyone know the details? Were they hand finished, dipped in oil, was the oil heated, etc? I would like to duplicate the process on some repro guns I have to look period correct. I remember years ago seeing the stacked musket "organ" at the Springfield Armory museum, with unissued muskets, but they had, as I recall, a lot of debris on them from the staff cleaning them I guess. What it was I do not know, but was orange in color.

If any of you have info on the original procedures, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks

[Southron Sr.]

My understanding is that after the stock received the final sanding, the stock was dunked in a vat of boiling Linseed Oil, then the stock was set aside for several days for the Linseed Oil on the stock to dry.

[R. C. Hubbard Jr]

Do a online search for the 1862 ordnance manual. In there is a formula for stock finish and wood putty for use on small arms. You will have to figure the reduced proportion. If I recall correctly their formula starts with 13 gallons of linseed oil. Also contain s bees wax and terp.

[keweenaw]

Do a online search for the 1862 ordnance manual. In there is a formula for stock finish and wood putty for use on small arms. You will have to figure the reduced proportion. If I recall correctly their formula starts with 13 gallons of linseed oil. Also contain s bees wax and terp.

Thanks. Found this:

https://archive.org/details/ordnancemanualfo00unitrich

But could not locate how they were originally finished at the factories/arsenals. Anyone have info on this?

Thanks

[Curt]

Hallo!

"History" and the "literature" are pretty much silent on this.

Finish stocks were dipped in "hard oil" (one can find it listed in material inventories such as at Harpers Ferry). Hard Oil is Period BLO, not the modern chemical concoction sold now that has taken out most of the natural hardener agents in the pressed oil itself and now adds even mineral salts through a forced oxygen process.

When done, they went to the drying rooms. It has been said that one of the reasons the rifle works burned so fast when the Union forces set fire to the armory buildings was due to a fresh batch of rifle stocks drying.

I have long pondered the stock oiling process, as it sees to me (and from my own stock finishing) that original stocks lack hardened oil "runs" from excess oil running or coming out of mortising or holes, etc., in the stock. The other is that original stocks are uniformly "oiled" and one typically if never sees uneven absorption or lighter or denser areas that I get in my initial stock oilings until enough oil goes in that there is uniform coverage.

I have always meant to track down a full version of Ordnance Memoranda No. 22 which illustrates the small arms manufacture machines and processes at the Springfield armory.

Curt

[R. McAuley 3014V]

Also, depending on the model arm, certain model arms received different metallic finishes. The early production of U.S. martial arms were finished in the white, a condition often referred to as "National Armory Bright" finish. Later production of the M1816 muskets were purposefully browned in an attempt at a compromise with the problems of long term storage and the lack of maintenance while in store, versus those arms in use. Beginning with the M1841 rifle and continuing in certain models during the Civil War, other metallic finishes were introduced. Several years ago at one of the Nationals, I had the opportunity to examine one of the U.S.M Model 1855 Rifle that was still preserved in its original arsenal finishes, with a color-case hardened lock, blued barrel bands and furniture, and its reddish-browned barrel finish using Dragon's blood as was specified in the Ordnance Manual. The very same finishes had been used with the U.S.M. Model 1841 Rifle. The U.S.M. designation applied to those arms produced by the arsenal for use as pattern guns, and each of the national armories were to produce ten such guns each year to be exchanged with the other arsenal so that standards in fit and finish, as well as dimensional stability could be insured. When the arsenals fell under the military superintendents beginning in 1841, Springfield discontinued this practice and for about 10 years did not forward any model arms to Harpers Ferry until about 1848 or 49 when they send about a dozen guns to Harpers Ferry. Adam Rhulman, one of the chief inspectors there examined the model arms produced by the arsenal at Springfield and pronounced the whole as essentially trash. He condemned them as a whole, reporting that some of the lock screws only belonged in the trash bin because of the lack of threads. Upon a whole, the arms built at Harpers Ferry were regarded as superior to those made at Springfield, part of the reason being the workers were better skilled at their trades.

Sometimes you will find musket parts exhibiting these original arsenal finishes but for much of the time, the army officers ordered their commands to burnish the arms bright in an effort to render a uniform appearance never mind that this may have injured the arm's resistance to inclement weather or misuse. Like the recipe used for the stocks of the muskets, it tended over time to turn the stock color more reddish even though they were not originally this color when the finish was first applied. At one time I had kept detailed notes of the various arsenal finish for each model arm but like so many things in life, once you put it up for safekeeping, you forget were up was.

[keweenaw]

Hallo!

"History" and the "literature" are pretty much silent on this.

Finish stocks were dipped in "hard oil" (one can find it listed in material inventories such as at Harpers Ferry). Hard Oil is Period BLO, not the modern chemical concoction sold now that has taken out most of the natural hardener agents in the pressed oil itself and now adds even mineral salts through a forced oxygen process.

When done, they went to the drying rooms. It has been said that one of the reasons the rifle works burned so fast when the Union forces set fire to the armory buildings was due to a fresh batch of rifle stocks drying.

I have long pondered the stock oiling process, as it sees to me (and from my own stock finishing) that original stocks lack hardened oil "runs" from excess oil running or coming out of mortising or holes, etc., in the stock. The other is that original stocks are uniformly "oiled" and one typically if never sees uneven absorption or lighter or denser areas that I get in my initial stock oilings until enough oil goes in that there is uniform coverage.

I have always meant to track down a full version of Ordnance Memoranda No. 22 which illustrates the small arms manufacture machines and processes at the Springfield armory.

Curt

I have examined a number of original muskets over the years. The thing that always perplexed me was the stock finish. Some of these were pristine examples, and seemed to have some kind of built up finish on them. Yet, the barrel channels, lock mortise and butt under the buttplate did not seem to show any oil finish, and definitely no runs of finish as i recall. Someone mentioned that the finish we see on these guns now a days is a result of aging over time. Yet, it does not appear so to me, especially with the pristine examples I have seen from time to time. My limited experience with using boiled linseed oil on a walnut stock, with several coats and drying and rubbing in between, has not produced the kind of finish i see on the originals. Perhaps the initial formulations of BLO makes the difference?

[John Bly]

I agree that most shoulder arms in original condition show no evidence of oil in the lock mortise or barrel channel. I've wondered about this myself. I've used a 50/50 mix of boiled linseed oil and turpentine and it takes a lot of applications and time to get a finish on the stock. I always put it on the butt end of the stock and that end grain soaks up oil like a sponge.

[keweenaw]

If the stocks were dipped in vats of BLO, you would seem to see evidence in the barrel channel, lock mortise, etc. If they were hand rubbed, you would think you would see the occasional runoff into the barrel channel, etc. Maybe these folks were more precise than we are. Or, maybe there was some other concoction added to the finishing process after BLO?

[gemmer]

If the stocks were dipped in vats of BLO, you would seem to see evidence in the barrel channel, lock mortise, etc. If they were hand rubbed, you would think you would see the occasional runoff into the barrel channel, etc. Maybe these folks were more precise than we are. Or, maybe there was some other concoction added to the finishing process after BLO?

Could they have been dipped after shaping and sanding but before the channel, lock mortise, etc. were cut?

[Curt]

Hi!

A minor addition.

The Model 1822 musket (aka M1816).. to use the modern typology... M1816 Type I's started out struck bright (1816ish - 1822), Type II's (1822 - 1831) were browned, Type III's (1831 - 1844) returned to NAB bright.

Finish on surviving originals can be complicated or compromised by what happened to the stocks after manufacture such as someone varnishing in say 1890 or 1935.
Plus, many have a "soft" layer effect caused by fungus that feeds on linseed oil. Or the linseed oil having absorbed environmental dirt and darkened, or later varnished stocks having the varnish darken or blacken with age as on old oil paintings.

IMHO, Period stock finishing is a mystery. One does not find evidence of what a hot dipped or soaked finish "should" be... nor that of the labor intensive process of hand-rubbing a stock with 10-15-20 applications of Hard Oil (Period BLO.)

Curt

[keweenaw]

Hi!

A minor addition.

The Model 1822 musket (aka M1816).. to use the modern typology... M1816 Type I's started out struck bright (1816ish - 1822), Type II's (1822 - 1831) were browned, Type III's (1831 - 1844) returned to NAB bright.

Finish on surviving originals can be complicated or compromised by what happened to the stocks after manufacture such as someone varnishing in say 1890 or 1935.
Plus, many have a "soft" layer effect caused by fungus that feeds on linseed oil. Or the linseed oil having absorbed environmental dirt and darkened, or later varnished stocks having the varnish darken or blacken with age as on old oil paintings.

IMHO, Period stock finishing is a mystery. One does not find evidence of what a hot dipped or soaked finish "should" be... nor that of the labor intensive process of hand-rubbing a stock with 10-15-20 applications of Hard Oil (Period BLO.)

Curt

I expect the mystery will continue until someone comes across an arsenal document or perhaps one from a contractor (who I presume would do the same as a government arsenal).

[Dave Fox]

Alas, not directly connected to musket stock finishes, but highly recommended is Merritt Roe Smith's quite detailed book "Harpers Ferry and the New Technology" (Cornell Press, 1977). Springfield, sited amid industries leading the world in technological advances, sucked in that atmosphere. Harpers Ferry was remote and positively adverse to change, staffed by luddites who came and went as they chose, were often fueled by alcohol, and for years afterward honored a coworker who murdered a reform-minded superintendent at his desk. A shipment of M.1816/22s from the Ferry was found not only not to have been proofed but not to have had the vents drilled. It might have been boxed during hunting season.
One could go on, but suffice to say Smith's book is a great read for folks in our hobby and why I personally have an affection for Harpers Ferry products. They have a very human history.

[John Bly]

I certainly agree with Mr. Fox's appraisal of Merritt Roe Smith's book about the Harper's Ferry Armory. It was well researched, well written and gives an insight into the beginnings of the Arsenal thru becoming a world class manufacturing facility. It is a study of the growing pains of establishing a technological facility in an rural agricultural society. Mr. Smith was a professor at MIT in the Department of Science, Technology and Society.

[Jim Wimbish, 10395]

Stock finishing. After some thought about the condition of guns that I have, including ones that were either unissued or very lightly used, I would say that they got one or more hand rubbed coats of some linseed oil mixture and that is about it. I seriously doubt that the entire stock was dipped. It looks like the guns were assembled and then someone rubbed some oil on the stocks to protect the wood. There is no sign of oil in the lock plate cavity or in the barrel channel. I think that they were only concerned about oiling the wood that was exposed after assembly. They also knew that once issued, the gun stocks would be oiled by the soldiers in the field.

[keweenaw]

Well, i found a copy of "Fabrication of Small Arms, Ordnance Memoranda No. 22" which covers the trapdoor springfields, which, I presume, would have the same kind of stock finishing as Civil War muskets. It states regarding stocks: "Oiling: coating the stock with raw linseed oil applied with a brush".

Not much to go on but that is what it says! Maybe the formulation of raw linseed oil is not what we have exactly these days?

[Curt]

Hallo!

"Maybe the formulation of raw linseed oil is not what we have exactly these days?"

It is not.Although one can find it as "raw" or "cold pressed linseed oil."I think in health food stores mostly.

What we use in its place now is a modern alchemist brew called "Boiled Linseed Oil (BLO). Modern BLO is purified which takes out most of the "hard" qualities. Because "raw" can take a week or two to "dry," modern BLO has preservatives and chemical additives (lead and salts) added to speed the polymerization up It does not dry like evaporating oils). It is not boiled,, but warmed and then has oxygen forced bubbled up through it.

In brief... take out the "hard" stuff, and it greatly reduced linseed oil's ability to be waterproof or even water resistant and it is just a furniture "finish" that allows water to pass through it (hygroscopic) until enough minimal layers are built up with 10-20-30 applications or so depending on the concentration.

(Increase the hard stuff content, and one evolves up into oil-varnish or even varnish.)

Curt

[R. McAuley 3014V]

Maybe the formulation of raw linseed oil is not what we have exactly these days?

The modern "boiled linseed oil" is a blend of raw linseed oil, stand oil, and metallic dryers (catalysts to accelerate drying). As it is described on-line: in medieval times, linseed oil was boiled with lead oxide (litharge) to render it into a product known as “boiled linseed oil.” The lead oxide forms lead "soaps" (lead oxide is alkaline) which promotes hardening (polymerization) of linseed oil by reaction with atmospheric oxygen. Heating shortens its drying time.
It is this very form by which it is referred to by the 1862 Ordnance Manual as consisting of 103 parts raw linseed oil, 3.15 parts of copperas, and 6.3 parts litharge (lead oxide); then the manual gives instructions to boil this compound for four and a half hours, over an even fire, so it does not burn. The let it stand and deposit the settlement. It is the presence of the copperas (iron sulfate or ferrous sulfate) that gives the finish its red color as it oxidizes over time.

The "raw linseed oil" hasn't changed, but the formulation for "boiled linseed oil" in 1862 is not exactly what is commercially available today because of its acute toxicity to humans.