Very dark patina stock — what to do

[Ronald Scott]

This isn’t a Parker but hoping someone on here could help. The gun was built in the 1880s — it’s in good shape and very serviceable as is. No great collector value. Just wondering if there is a way to bring out the grain and shine up the finish. I have no intention of refinishing it but was thinking that maybe linseed oil cut with turpentine might freshen up the finish. Don’t want to do anything until I get some knowledgeable advice. This picture was taken in bright sun— when you look at in inside it looks almost black.

Thanks in advance.

[Rich Anderson]

I don't know how you will accomplish your goal without refinishing the stock. You'll be amazed what it will look like with 100 years of dirt and grime removed.
Here are before and after pics of a GHE 20.

[Dean Romig]

Get some TimberLuxe and follow the directions. It takes off the old grimy stuff while at the same time puts a beautiful new finish on.





.

[Brian Dudley]

Straight linseed oil, used sparingly, is supposed to clean the crud off the surface.

[Ronald Scott]

Top one of pair was done with Timberlux following their instructions. (basically just rubbed on)

Bottom one of pair was done with linseed and turpentine 50/50 mix and a little elbow grease.

The last picture with the single dark stock is the before picture of the straight grip -- both looked similar to this.

[Jerry VanHorn]

Can't beat the ease of Timberluxe. You will be amazed..

[Jay Gardner]

Where is the best place to buy Timberlux?

[Mike McKinney]

I’m not sure anyone but the maker distributes it. You can call Brian at 417-448-4892.

[Dean Romig]

Brian can also be reached at info@timberluxe.com






.

[Eric Eis]

Timberlux is great but before you do anything try some Murphys oil soap, think you may be amazed at what it will do. Just saying

[Randy G Roberts]

Timberlux is great but before you do anything try some Murphys oil soap, think you may be amazed at what it will do. Just saying

Eric tell me about the process, was it diluted ? Thanks !!

[Craig Budgeon]

Have used Woolite in the past with good result.

[Brian Dudley]

I strongly advise against murphys oil soap. Only because I have seen and heard of very drastic results both ways with it. Not worth taking the chance in my opinion.

[Dean Romig]

Have used Woolite in the past with good result.

:shock:
:eek:
:shock:
Really? Why would you even try that stuff when there are so many other products made for WOOD finishes?





.

[Jay Gardner]

What is the process for using Timberluxe?

[Dean Romig]

It is explained and illustrated on his website.





.

[Ronald Scott]

What is the process for using Timberluxe?

I thought that it was some complex procedure but it's not. Just shake the bottle, dip a finger in (or use a paper towel with a little on) and rub it on the surface. Let dry 24 hours in a warm dry climate and repeat until you get the results you are looking for.

The top stock of the pair in the photos above was done with Timberlux and a paper towel. The paper towel method applies more Timberlux than dipping a finger and rubbing with a bare hand. Having done it both ways now, I prefer the bare hand method.

[Jay Gardner]

I thought that it was some complex procedure but it's not. Just shake the bottle, dip a finger in (or use a paper towel with a little on) and rub it on the surface. Let dry 24 hours in a warm dry climate and repeat until you get the results you are looking for.

The top stock of the pair in the photos above was done with Timberlux and a paper towel. The paper towel method applies more Timberlux than dipping a finger and rubbing with a bare hand. Having done it both ways now, I prefer the bare hand method.

That makes sense. The warmth from a finger and the warmth from the friction generated by rubbing in the finish will help clean and penetrate the finish.

[Jay Gardner]

I assume there was crud built up in the checkering. What did you use to clean the checkering and how did you do it?

[Eric Eis]

I strongly advise against murphys oil soap. Only because I have seen and heard of very drastic results both ways with it. Not worth taking the chance in my opinion.

Well that was what old time collectors taught me (Austin Hogan and others) and it took a lot of the crud out of the stock and then you would come back with some oil. Worked for me but maybe they didn't know what they were talking about!
I have heard great things about Timerlux

[Ronald Scott]

I assume there was crud built up in the checkering. What did you use to clean the checkering and how did you do it?

There wasn't much crud built up in the checkering but I used a nylon bristle brush similar to a toothbrush to make sure the Timberlux didn't pool up and fill in the checkering. That scrubbing action with the Timerlux may have loosened and removed any small amount of crud that was there.

[Craig Budgeon]

To answer your question Dean, we used it more than 40 years ago on a Winchester lever gun. The stock on that gun was filthy from storage and had oil in the wrist. We used a flannel cloth and straight Woolite beginning in the wrist. I know the purchaser of that gun was pleased with the wood. In addition, I don't see any sense in applying material on a stock without removing the offensive material first. Frankly, 40 years ago Timberlux was not even created yet and we were able to produce very acceptable results with $.20 worth of Woolite.

[Ronald Scott]

I don't see any sense in applying material on a stock without removing the offensive material first. Frankly, 40 years ago Timberlux was not even created yet and we were able to produce very acceptable results with $.20 worth of Woolite.

I agree that the "offensive material" needs to be removed -- BUT I didn't want to "refinish" the stock. By "refinish" I mean strip off all of the original finish down to the bare wood. I wanted to retain the original finish but clean it up. The wood was so dark, either from 140 years of dirt gradually getting rubbed into the finish, or just built up patina from being in the attic for that long. I thought that Timberlux would do that and was surprised to read the instructions and find that all you do is apply it over the existing finish. But it did lighten the wood and bring out the grain without me cleaning the wood in any way.

I'd like to see the results of a stock cleaned with woolite -- sounds interesting. I wouldn't want to try it on a stock still on the gun though -- I think there is a chance the caustic ingredients might rust the metal. Removing the wood from two 140 year old shotguns for a simple cleaning is more work than I wanted to do.

[Craig Budgeon]

Ron, admittedly removing Winchester wood is easier than removing Parker wood but, I wouldn't recommend cleaning the wood without removing the wood from the frame first. Since the laundry room was adjacent to the workbench we chose Woolite as the mildest SOAP available. Johnsons Baby shampoo or a dish washing soap without any detergents maybe a better choice, however, do not mix water with the soap you choose as that will raise the grain where the finish is worn away. Since you already committed to Timberlux I would wait a year and if you are still dissatisfied make a choice on your next approach.

[Craig Larter]

I just purchased a D grade top lever hammer gun 10ga #4 frame with a very worn black stock. I cleaned it with acetone by wiping it down with paper towels. Then a few coats of timberlux and the grain and color appeared. It's now protected from moisture and doesn't look refinished yet some nice color and grain is apparent.

[Eric Eis]

I strongly advise against murphys oil soap. Only because I have seen and heard of very drastic results both ways with it. Not worth taking the chance in my opinion.

Austin Hogan recommended it in the PP and I have used it with great results.
Guess Austin and me didn't know better. Sorry for the imput

[Brian Dudley]

Eric,
I only say that because I have seen varied results. Including removal of remaining original finish completely. Whatever had worked for others is just fine of course. It is just my thought on the matter.

[Larry Stauch]

And then there's the other old way.

[Dean Romig]

Very nice Larry.

What is the “other old way”?





.

[Larry Stauch]

Refinishing of course. I know that is not something that he wanted to do, but you really don't know what's under there until you take a look. And the right guy doing it can keep the character of the old wood without making it look new.
Either way I can't wait to see the results. Good luck with the project and please keep us informed.

[Jay Gardner]

I spent $12 and bought a bottle of Timberluxe. Rubbed in a light coat with my fingers, waited 24 hours then went over the stock with 0OOO steel wool then rubbed in a second coat. I could not be happier. The finish looks original, there is now depth to the grain, which now pops. This is exactly the result I was hoping for.

https://i.imgur.com/rKQc3wU.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/F2oeXb6.jpg

[Ronald Scott]

Refinishing of course. I know that is not something that he wanted to do, but you really don't know what's under there until you take a look. And the right guy doing it can keep the character of the old wood without making it look new.
Either way I can't wait to see the results. Good luck with the project and please keep us informed.

See post #5 in this thread for before and after pictures. Yours looks great! I just didn’t want to strip off the original finish and recut checkering. The checkering on both of my guns was still pretty sharp. I just wanted to bring out the grain and spruce up the finish. I’m happy with the results I got.

[Ronald Scott]

"Tuesday, October 22, 2019

"A Word About Modern Gun Care Products

"Many modern gun care products are quite simply incompatible with the finishes used on classic and custom firearms. Many of these products contain silicone, teflon or some other type of "high-tech chemical enhancement" that is touted as the last word in gun protection, usually because these additives are used in some form in some unrelated industry. It's called marketing, which is the way bullshit is spelled in the language of business. The biggest hazards posed by these products are to organic oil-based stock finishes, including any variation of "London" oil finishes and oil-based film-type finishes. Silicone (NOT silicon, which is what computer chips are made from) rags and sprays should not even be in the same zip-code as a gun with an organic stock finish. Regardless of whether it's a spray or on a rag, IT WILL PENETRATE ANY ORGANIC STOCK FINISH and it will soften and ruin it. As a side benefit, it will also completely prevent refinishing unless the contaminated original finish is chemically removed. Depending upon the depth of the silicone contamination of the wood, complete removal ranges from merely damnably difficult, to almost impossible.

"Keep the following AWAY from ANY organic stock finish:

"- Silicone, in any form, be it spray, oil or cloth
- Rem-Oil in any amount, or really any gun oil for that matter
- Gun Scrubber, this stuff will dissolve even some synthetic finishes and some plastics

"Probably 90 percent of the gun care products that exist only excel at separating money from one's wallet and the above are actually capable of damaging a fine gun's finishes. A good oil that doesn't contain silicone, teflon or powdered space-shuttle tiles is all that is needed for the metalwork and if you feel the irresistible urge to fondle the wood, please only use a drop or two of boiled linseed oil. Do NOT use LIN-SPEED or TRU-OIL (or their like) as "maintenance". These are FINISHES (they are in fact varnishes), they are not used for maintenance any more than one would wipe one's car down with fresh paint to "freshen it up". Speaking of cars reminds me of waxes and there is a certain brand of very expensive wax that some museums use, and many gun owners as well . Do not use this on any stock that you ever plan to have refinished either.

"There, you can't say that you were not warned."

Vicknair Restorations, Specialist Gunsmithing Weblog

Entire post can be found here:

https://vicknairgunsmithing.blogspot.com/search?q=stock+finish

[Chuck Bishop]

Years ago I had a very high condition DH with a straight grip. It's the one pictured in my avatar. I only wanted to clean the surface of the wood. I used Murphys Oil Soap. Took the shellac off a small spot before I realized what was happening! I refinished that spot with shellac. I'll never use it again on a stock with shellac.

[Dean Romig]

I have found Murphy's to be extremely harsh and I don't use it either.





.

[Russell E. Cleary]

I went to Mr. Vicknair’s website blog, the link supplied above by Ron, to see his entire post on the matter.

With judicious application, there are a few products he DOES recommend for use on metal that does not harm a gun’s organic wood finishes. (Cleaning fluids for bores are not specifically addressed, however.)

In short, recommended products for wiping down of metal and lubrication are: Break Free CLP (it has minimal Teflon) and Hoppe’s Original Gun Oil; and for hinge pins and bites, Mobil 1 Synthetic wheel bearing grease.

[Dean Romig]

I use RIG exclusively for all areas of metal to metal contact... roll joint or hinge pin, frame knuckle where forend iron rotates, sides of barrel lug, breech face where extractor/ejectors ride against it.





.

[Ronald Scott]

I’ve been using Mobil One synthetic oil as an all purpose gun oil with good results for years. It’s a lot cheaper by the quart than small bottles of “gun oil.”

[John Dallas]

I think RIG is great!

[James L. Martin]

I also use Rig and Ballistol

[Larry Frey]

[QUOTE=Ronald Scott;287976]"Tuesday, October 22, 2019
"Keep the following AWAY from ANY organic stock finish:
"- Silicone, in any form, be it spray, oil or cloth
- Rem-Oil in any amount, or really any gun oil for that matter
- Gun Scrubber, this stuff will dissolve even some synthetic finishes and some plastics


This surprises me as I recall my first trip to Ilion and both Babe and Lawrence told me they wipe the entire gun (metal and wood) down with Rem-Oil. I have done this for 20 years with no obvious ill effects.

[Craig Budgeon]

I use High-Pressure lube which is used on lathe dead centers. It adheres very well to metal, will withstand very high temperatures, and doesn't effect finishes. I wouldn't recommend its use on guns other than hinge pins. It can be found at industrial suppliers such as MSC and probably Amazon. You will probably avoid making mistakes you didn't want to make by following Dewey Vicknairs advice, however, I think he prefers custom work as opposed to restoration.

[Ronald Scott]

Anyone else use Renaissance Wax on gun exterior metal?

[Mike Franzen]

I love Vicknair’s writing style. Very entertaining. I used Murphy’s Oil Soap one time based on a recommendation from this forum. It just made a mess and seemed to have removed some of the original finish. I’ll never go near that stuff again. Since then I’ve just left the stocks alone or had a professional like Chris Dawe or Brian Dudley do the work. But, I’ve heard a lot of good things about Timberluxe. I’m going to order a bottle and see what it can do for my 1878 hammer gun stock that previously got soaped.

[Rick Riddell]

Murphy’s and automotive polish!

[Ronald Scott]

I love Vicknair’s writing style. Very entertaining.

How about his analysis of American made shotguns? I would imagine pretty controversial in this group.

[Brian Dudley]

How about his analysis of American made shotguns? I would imagine pretty controversial in this group.

How so? There was not much negative said about Parkers. And his thoughts on the other makers are spot on. Especially Smiths and Win 21s.

[Dean Romig]

How about his analysis of American made shotguns? I would imagine pretty controversial in this group.

It goes to show that everybody has an opinion and many opinions differ.





.

[Ronald Scott]

How so? There was not much negative said about Parkers. And his thoughts on the other makers are spot on. Especially Smiths and Win 21s.

You are right. I just reread the section on American made doubles. I remembered it wrong. He rips L.C. Smiths and Winchester Model 21s apart more than he criticizes Parkers. The only small criticism of Parkers is: "From a design standpoint, I would never refer to one as "hellishly" complex but they certainly are needlessly complex. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the designer got paid by the part. The early guns used a complex, multi-piece linkage to translate the toplever motion to the single under bolt.
With all of the pivots and contact points in this linkage one would imagine that wear would "stack up" and result in much play in the mechanism. One would be correct."

[Stan Hillis]

You are right. I just reread the section on American made doubles. I remembered it wrong. He rips L.C. Smiths and Winchester Model 21s apart more than he criticizes Parkers. The only small criticism of Parkers is: "From a design standpoint, I would never refer to one as "hellishly" complex but they certainly are needlessly complex. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the designer got paid by the part. The early guns used a complex, multi-piece linkage to translate the toplever motion to the single under bolt.
With all of the pivots and contact points in this linkage one would imagine that wear would "stack up" and result in much play in the mechanism. One would be correct."

Well, in the interest of "completeness" since we're quoting Dewey, he did have this to say as well ....

It is in the ejector mechanism that I would use the "hellishly complex" description. An entire book/manual could be written about this mechanism. I'll spare you. A common problem with ejector Parkers is that even though the gun is tight on face, the joint will be loose when the gun is open. This is caused by the forend iron wearing the forend lug at the point where they come into contact. This area experiences accelerated wear due directly to the pressure of the ejector mainsprings.

And this, actually .......

The cocking mechanism (and the need to house it) is the reason that small bore Parkers look out of proportion. Regardless of gauge, the action remains roughly constant in size (from the action flats on down), giving the smallbore guns a very disproportionate look.

SRH

[charlie cleveland]

sounds like it would be hard to sell dewey a parker....charlie

[Phillip Carr]

LOL Charlie I think you summed it up.

[Stan Hillis]

sounds like it would be hard to sell dewey a parker....charlie


Maybe, maybe not. Dewey is pretty tough on all the American made doubles (SXSs). What he did in his blog writings is point out the faults of each design, without regard for the brand loyalty that many of us are so prone to. Some see that as being overly hard, but I appreciate the frankness of his writing. I've learned a lot from him.

SRH

[Craig Budgeon]

With the exception of NID's and 21's most American double guns were being produced with there final designs by 1920. After 100 years, any mechanical device can be improved even if it is a material change. Parkers are complex especially the ejectors but the design is reliable.

[Brian Dudley]

It would be interesting if James Hayes’ Parker redesign would have have been implemented and put into production. That was the late 1920s and the Crash/Depression took care of that.

I believe it would have certainly changed things for the good for the company.

[Eric Eis]

sounds like it would be hard to sell dewey a parker....charlie

I don't know, maybe you could but I can guarantee you that you could not sell him a LC Smith!

[Ken Descovich]

That's alright just more L. C. Smith's for me.

[Bill Murphy]

A new Parker would be without any appreciable problems for many decades if no one ever messed with them, other than shooting and cleaning. Had the factory remained available for parts and service, Parkers would not have a reputation of being a bit fragile. Ham fisted local gunsmiths have yet to destroy the bulk of Parker Repros, but, given enough time and enough 3" 20 gauge ammunition, the Repro could go the way of original Parkers. Over the last 100 years, it seems that many Parkers reached a damaged condition by the use of large quantities of ammunition not suited for the gun.

[Dean Romig]

I would like to give Brother Murphy's post multiple "thumbs up" clicks but we only have the option to click it once.





.