|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 members (KDGJ, Lloyd3, 1 invisible),
549
guests, and
2
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,924
Posts550,753
Members14,459
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 325 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 325 Likes: 12 |
Thank you Sir.
I knew 'artistry' was involved as it is obvious in the outcome. I just wasn't sure about the notion of set parameters. Sure, some things like LOP, cross sectional size, 'reach', etc. would be proportioned for the customer but, as you say, there is other 'architecture' in play. I shall have to save up my pennies for your book. Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,056 Likes: 338
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,056 Likes: 338 |
Nicely done Steve! Do you first place all your datum and reference lines, and then style the stock to connect the dots?
I work off full size renderings as often as possible. My mind works in images, rather than numbers. So, every set of drawings I use ends up covered in notes, scribbles, calculations, numbers, etc.
Out there doing it best I can.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,995 Likes: 493
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,995 Likes: 493 |
The placement of the front edge of the grip cap has major effects on the total architecture of the gun stock…. They angle of the photo shown here somewhat distorts all of this. In my Custom Rifles in Black & White book I show full length views of most all the rifles as near as straight on profile as I could shoot with the camera. Best, SDH
My copy of CRBW is at home but I'm wondering if you try to keep the grip cap at a right angle to the arc of the grip. It looks pretty close to that in this drawing, though, as you say, the angle of the photo makes it hard to tell. Also, the toe of the stock looks short making for an odd angle to the buttplate. That too is probably an illusion caused by the angle, but I would be interested to hear your take on how these two angles are determined.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) =>/
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,405 Likes: 16
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,405 Likes: 16 |
I have a formula and "order of procedure" for making a full scale drawing that, with actual parts to measure and or trace, given stock measurements and the afore mentioned known locations and relative angles it isn't too complicated to make a decent drawing. I started doing this three decades ago for muzzleloading rifles that were much more complicated than most breechloaders. As promised, here is a better pic of the Martini barreled 6.5 Hagn action:
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,561 Likes: 249
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,561 Likes: 249 |
Thank you for the barreled action picture. I was probably looking at the drawings wrong. It had the look to me like there were subtle differences to make the stock appear slightly fuller than what I thought might be standard.
On your website there's a picture of a notch made by Ed Webber to the back of the falling block on a Hagn so that the side profile follows the profile of the action. Is there enough thickness back there to stay clear of the internals. Great little topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|