# properly drying gunstock blanks?



## jimmyjames

I was surfing the web about drying gunstock blanks and I came across this article 

http://doublegunshop.com/phiatt4.htm

Saying that kiln dried wood is unusable for gunstock blanks, I find this very hard to believe, the walnut company down the road steams and kiln dries millions of stock blanks for all of the gun manufacturers in the USA and abroad, how can that guy say that kiln dried wood is unusable with a straight face??? The log company has been selling them like this since war times....... does that mean there's a bazillion guns out there with wrecked stocks???


----------



## Mike1950

*RE: properly dryimg gunstock blanks?*

That stock sure is pretty. Seems to me that what is done commercially and what is done by elite stock builders are 2 different animals. If you want to sell to the elite you better dry it by their methods or convince the they are wrong (GOOD LUCK) 
Common sense tells me that a piece of would in a semi controlled environment-drying for 10 years is going to be more stable then one quick dried in a kiln.
Couple very good stock makers here that I bet will have something to say.
I do know that a lot of work goes into fitting a stock- sure would not want to do it with a crummy stock.


----------



## Kevin

*RE: properly dryimg gunstock blanks?*

Jim, the preface of the article attempts to let the reader know at the outset that it's very subjective:

_"This is an important question to buyer, sellers, woodcutters, and importers. It is also an area of extreme disagreement. This article will attempt to show why there is disagreement and what factors are involved in coming to an agreement. The two general areas of conflict are how long it takes to properly dry wood and how long it takes to stabilize wood."_

But I take exception to the very sneaky 3rd sentence itself:

_The two general areas of conflict are how long it takes to properly dry wood and how long it takes to stabilize wood._

This starts the average reader off believing there is no disagreement with there being two types of dry wood; 1) "dry" wood and 2) "stabilized" dry wood. He isn't referring to wood that has been chemically stabilized either. He's referring to wood that supposedly still has plenty of stress to rid itself of, or more specifically that only time can rid the wood of it even if it's held in a perfect range of controlled temperature and moisture. This is an unprovable theory yet his entire article is built on this premise. 

Luthiers will tell you the same thing. In my simple mind once you remove moisture to a certain point, the cells are not going to move any l;onger no matter how crazy the crotch wood fibers are twisted and interlocked. If you allow the moisture absorb and take it back out, crazy grain will move more than straight grain IMO but once moisture has been removed and the wod has a MC of say 6%, or even just EMC, then no movement of moisture in and out of the cell = no movement of cell walls = no movement of cells themselves = no fiber movement = no wood movement. Period. 

I would never waste my time trying to convince a luthier or a stock maker of this because it's easier to convince a politician that honesty is the best policy. In my pea brain, what these artisans are experiencing is wood that takes in a little moisture and moves a lot relative to straight grained wood. I don't care if a stock is 500 years old if it takes in an amount of moisture moving the wood from 6% to 16%, that 500 year old stock is going to move every bit as a stock, all things being equal (wood grain) as the piece that just came out of the kiln at 6% moisture. 

I could be wrong, but it would be almost as hard to convince me otherwise as it would to convince them otherwise. What they have going in their favor is they create works of art from the stuff we bring out of the forest and dry for them. I don't argue with their results, I just don't think they get the results from letting a piece of wood become an antique prior to crafting it into a gun or fiddle. Human nature is to believe _"Surely the wood is more stable, the longer it sits around."_

As a potential vendor (I think this is the crux of your question?) you have to model your sales approach to fit their wishes. If you try to change their thinking in even the slightest way they will not trust you. The more accomplished artisans are the most picky wood buyers on the planet as well they should be. They have vendor after vendor vying for their business, and they are competing against many other artisans for sales. As long as they know you are honest, they will still buy your wood and they will decide whether to build with it right away or stash it away in their pile of aging wood. 

This is based on _my_ experience selling to a wide variety of artisans in niche markets, Others' experiences may not be similar.


----------



## jimmyjames

*RE: properly dryimg gunstock blanks?*

Yeah I don't have any interest trying to beat a dead horse and convince them otherwise. I agree with everything you said. I have thought about cutting stocks and I may cut a few and see what comes of it, heck I can't cut everything into pepper mills and bowls.... were going to go cut again Saturday morning and will probably be cutting all day Sunday as well, some huge loads of walnut came in as well as a crapton of honey locust, were just going to go after all of the crotches in them unless the straight stuff shows figure, I also ordered some smaller band saw blades so I can cut the profiles for stocks.


----------

