The beauty of lacquer or shellac is that they are evaporative finishes. Their solvents evaporate leaving the finish behind and they can be reactivated by applying the solvent once again. Therefore, you can add a coat of lacquer (if that's the appropriate finish for that rifle) and just incorporate it into the original. If you apply four coats, you actually end up with one as each melts into the previous one. So, if you need to save the stock you might want to apply a coat, then just "sand" to smooth the finish, not the stock. That should take care of your open grain issues. Sounds like the wood has dried out in that spot. The "flaggelation" only begins when one starts to sand the wood which ruins the inletted areas and ruins the stock. How many stocks have we all seen where the buttplate is larget that the butt of the stock or the profile is altered? That's because someone ground the heck out of it. However, smoothing the finish properly with a mild paper and your hand is appropriate, imho. Remember, however, that as beautiful as some stocks can be, we're not looking for beauty but authenticity. When you're done, you might want to rub the finish with some 0000 steel wool dipped in oil. That will knock down the new finish shine and produces a more worn finish appearance.

The ultimate goal here is to do only what's necessary to preserve the stock from further deterioration. Do nothing and the stock will fail. However you can also do too much. Finding that balance is important.

My creed here is simple: I want my stocks to look as they did when the last soldier held the rifle out for its last inspection before being mustered out of service and into storage. That preserves the original finish, dings, dents, and history that it so richly deserves. If you can approach your stocks with that simple creed, then it will be preserved for current as well as future use. To not address a failed finish or failing wood just promotes further damage and an eventual failure. If we were to put these behind glass, to be gawked at and not fired again the approach would be different.

Hope that helps and we glad you're taking your pieces seriously enough to find that fine line.

Rome

Eb, join the club.

Over the years here, I've tried to distinguish the difference between "collectible" and "historical" pieces. Collectible pieces are those that don't have a particular, specific provenance. They are examples of pieces that existed during a particular time period and usually have seen service but are used, usually not abused, and still have life in them. These pieces are what 95% of us collectors find in our closets. They can't be attributed to a particular soldier historical figure or can be specifically named as individual pieces during specific pieces of history. Yet, they most certainly were 'there' and deserve their places. They are serviceable and, with proper care, can be and should be preserved as historical pieces for the next generation. They are also found at the range, safely being fired, hunted, or just maintained as usuable pieces.

Historical pieces, otoh, are those pieces that CAN be attributed to a specific person/soldier at a specific time.

Consider this.

Your family passes down an old heirloom chest of drawers. Most certainly it was manufactured/made in, say, circa (around) 1800 and is perfectly servicable. It's attractive and has been continuously used in homes by your predecessors. These pieces have a value, to be sure, but that value will only be maintained if it's properly serviced and maintained. Wood requires that. To put it into one of your rooms and to be continuously used requires that it be serviced and if that means making sure that the joints are tight and the finish made intact, that's fine. Should you have someone strip the piece of all of its patina and "restored"? Well, not necessarily, if it can be preserved without that. Without that maintenance, however, it will most certainly continue to fail and eventually fall apart. It's going to be used, after all, and can't be unless it's serviced.

Now, consider, that same identical piece but with this one distinction; it was owned by Abraham Lincoln's parents at one time and can be documented. It's definately known that Lincoln kept his socks in the top drawer. It arrives at your house in the exact same considiton as the one above. THAT chest of drawers has a specific, historical provenance and specific history. THAT piece is NOT to be used because using it would require continued maintenance and that maintenance would require at least some restoration/repair that would ruin its patina or cover up some history. THAT chest of drawers needs to be seen as it is with every single chip, crack, carved initials in the side panel, and original bits of finish and should probably be behind glass or in a special environment that will stop any further degredation.

This is, imho, where the differences lay between preservation and maintenance of our rifles. If you buy a collectible piece that has obvious signs of deterioration because of the lack of a finish on the stock then you have to decide what you must do to stop that deterioration in it tracks, ESPECIALLY if you're going to shoot the thing. A dried out stock will most certainly fail under the pressures of firing and cleaning destroying it or most certainly requiring serious repairs. No, you're not going to be climbing through foxholes or bayonetting things with it so it doesn't need to be fully restored but it can be maintainted and safely shot if you perform the required maintenance/repair to make it so. This will also preserve it for your heirs. That same piece, if it has a provenance as mentioned above as a "historical" piece, would be simply preserved. No one in their right mind would take Lincoln's fowling piece and drag it through the woods looking for quail. Nope, that piece would be behind glass, with a protective layer of microwax applied to preserve it for the future generations. You most certainly would NOT alter what you've got but rather preserve it in it's tracks as is.

About two years ago, I was touring an ancient home in the Stonington, CT shoreline. A friend's family had owned the house since it was build in the mid 1600s (it's now in a trust but not open to any public). We arrived at one particular closet. My friend said hold out your hands. He then produced a musket, complete with bayonet, that was in totally original deteriorated condition. It was a musket that, through provenance provided by his ancestors, had been dropped at Bunker Hill. I was in awe. He then says, (knowing my affinity for firearms and my chosen career), "Hey Rome, how 'bout you restore that thing for us so we can shoot it once and a while." (!). Well now, from what I've just written here, what do you think my answer was? Surely, you'd have to conclude that I told him that this piece (VERY historic of couse) belonged in some type of container that will arrest any further deterioration, period. It shouldn't be handled unless you're wearing gloves. Don't take the bayo off and most certainly don't try to move the lock. That, Eb, was a historical piece I've mentioned.

I know this is long but I haven't had the opportunity to really discern the difference between 'historical' and 'collectible' in quite a while. The oldtimers here will have read this before so to them this is old hat. The newer members here, however, might more clearly understand where we're coming from here at Parallax.

Our goal is to preserve our pieces, with as much patina and history that the stocks hold BUT with the understanding that our pieces need to be maintained for firing at the range, safely and accurately. So, in that light, the Type 46 Siamese Mauser you've got needs to be maintained properly or that stock will most certainly fail. Just slathering on a coat of finish might not cut it in that regard unless you're prepared to make it a wall-hanger and gawk at it from time to time.

I am NOT advocating a total strip/sand/beautification of that stock but, rather, a common-sence approach of some restoration and finish repair. When you're done, it'll make sure that the next owner will barely be able to tell, if at all, that that stock has been serviced.

Guys who champion never doing anything but minor cleaning should be buying top-of-the line pieces and rarely, if ever, exposing them to the range. Even they, however, need to be properly maintained. Most of us, however, find ourselves buying cosmo-soaked beasts that have been very degraded and without care, will most certainly be uncomfortable to shoot or even handle. By using this common sence approach and using the techniques we've described here and in the essays at the top of this forum, you'll be able to resurrect that piece and preserve it for future generations.

Whew! Too much typing this early in the morning. Hope that helps clarify my approach here.

Rome