Accurate Innovations makes wood stock with full length alum bedding block. They are pricey, but might worth take a look:
Custom Replacement Gunstocks, Rifle Stocks - Quality, Accuracy, Aluminum Chassis - Accurate Innovations
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
M40 Build Guide
- Thread starter ncoutdoorsman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- m40
Accurate Innovations makes wood stock with full length alum bedding block. They are pricey, but might worth take a look:
Custom Replacement Gunstocks, Rifle Stocks - Quality, Accuracy, Aluminum Chassis - Accurate Innovations
How's the quality of the silver hill stock. Do you have to work on the stock a lot to get the action to fit? Is the rear or the stock cut with a curve to fit the aluminum 16601 butt plate? For those who actually used one, please post or pm your experience. Thx
Last edited:
MescaBug is spot on. If your looking for a 'drop-in' stock (as opposed to a 'pre-inlet) with a bedding block/system, the Accurate Innovations, is it. They won't sell their bedding block/system, independent of their stock (I asked.) Their stock is in use amongst some M40 enthusiasts and Accurate Innovations has an excellent reputation. My objection to their product, is purely esthetic- the wrist/grip profile, along the radius, is too long and not contemporary to stocks of the M40 period.
Silver Hill makes a nice product and here are some photos of one, so you can see for yourselves. These are 'pre-inlet' stocks, which are typically about 95% finished.
Another option is NUMRICH ARM'S Remington 700SA_BDL stock, which will require some forearm shaping and the usual ~5% fitting.
Silver Hill makes a nice product and here are some photos of one, so you can see for yourselves. These are 'pre-inlet' stocks, which are typically about 95% finished.
Another option is NUMRICH ARM'S Remington 700SA_BDL stock, which will require some forearm shaping and the usual ~5% fitting.
It's called a "Tactical Post" and it rotates the "Power Knob." (pretty sure, anyway.)
Somebody-somewhere currently makes the longer tactical posts, so they can be had. I haven't found that person yet, but I'm still looking. Should someone stumble upon that person, please let us all know.
MescaBug is spot on. If your looking for a 'drop-in' stock (as opposed to a 'pre-inlet) with a bedding block/system, the Accurate Innovations, is it. They won't sell their bedding block/system, independent of their stock (I asked.) Their stock is in use amongst some M40 enthusiasts and Accurate Innovations has an excellent reputation. My objection to their product, is purely esthetic- the wrist/grip profile, along the radius, is too long and not contemporary to stocks of the M40 period.
Silver Hill makes a nice product and here are some photos of one, so you can see for yourselves. These are 'pre-inlet' stocks, which are typically about 95% finished.
Another option is NUMRICH ARM'S Remington 700SA_BDL stock, which will require some forearm shaping and the usual ~5% fitting.
Looks like a nice stock. Have you installed an action and 16601 buttl plate on it yet. My 16601 butt plate is 5.025 inch long and width is 1.586 in the middle of the buttplate. Can you measure the area of the butstock? I like to have an idea of how much work has to be done? Thx in advance
This particular stock is SPF and no, I haven't fit an action and/or buttplate to it. I'll pull it out tomorrow and take-off some measurements, perhaps take 'face-on' and 'side' profile photos of a 16601 sitting on the stock. That said, most of the 16001's out there are 'take-offs,' which mean that they have already been 'resized' at the factory to fit the profile of the individual stock that they were originally put on. I doubt that you'd find any two (2) exactly the same, so any set of buttplate measurements are 'nominal' at best.
Unless you're purchasing a 'drop-in,' it's gonna take some patience, some decent stocking tools and a few skill-sets to finish a 'pre-inlet' offering, from anybody. It helps to have a work area and a decent work bench too. Or, like me, a very skilled personal friend who is one hell of a stocker.
I'll get those representative measurements and photos out at my first opportunity.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
Good eyes. It's an original box for a Remington Commemorative M40 SSA rifle, numbered and everything. The stock, however is a Silver Hill (not off of a SSA M40) and just SPF. The two (2) being in one (1) photo is merely coincidental. While we're on the subject; I am going to sell the box.
There are a couple of different knurled knob types.
If the power ring only has a small screw that locks it into the erector zoom sleeve. you have to drill and tap it for the large knurled post or replace the set screw with a set screw/ small post version from a later scope. The large knurled knob will only have 4 or 5 threads to screw into the zoom ring and is placed to the right of the set screw. I've done a couple of them. The Gen 2s small post also acts as the set screw that inserts into the groove in the erector zoom sleeve. The gen1 has a set screw/lock screw and the large knurled knob. Some just have a set screw and no knob at all. You can mix and match.
Last edited:
Like Bolt_Trash said, the Silver Hill stock is pretty much dead on as far as the overall look and feel. It might need a little tweaking in the receiver and buttplate area and barrel channel. But it is pretty much a drop-in thing. Anyone with basic woodcrafting tools and skills can make it work. Of course, the biggest challenge is the finish. How to get that same dull/flat finish. There is a few techniques to make wood look distressed. You can even go as far as painting it dark green, like some snipers did, strip the paint off, sand it, and oil it.
I've seen people go as far as soaking it in water, leaving it outside, drop and smash it so it looks 'old'. Of course if you want that brand new look, you just oil it and be done with it.
The best example, is a M40 original stock that sold on eBay a few months ago. Apparently, it is genuine. Dont know if somebody from the Hide got it. I was keeping an eye (both eyes actually) on the auction, hopefully to scope the deal of the century. It started off very low, so I was confident. But as soon as people found out, it went up in 100$ increments to finally sell close to 1500$.
Very, very nice. The only 'un-verified' detail, is the anchor for the front swivel. History says the front swivel was a screw-in type swivels like the Rem 513. But picture shows a metal anchor and what seems to be a Wichita swivel.
I've seen people go as far as soaking it in water, leaving it outside, drop and smash it so it looks 'old'. Of course if you want that brand new look, you just oil it and be done with it.
The best example, is a M40 original stock that sold on eBay a few months ago. Apparently, it is genuine. Dont know if somebody from the Hide got it. I was keeping an eye (both eyes actually) on the auction, hopefully to scope the deal of the century. It started off very low, so I was confident. But as soon as people found out, it went up in 100$ increments to finally sell close to 1500$.
Very, very nice. The only 'un-verified' detail, is the anchor for the front swivel. History says the front swivel was a screw-in type swivels like the Rem 513. But picture shows a metal anchor and what seems to be a Wichita swivel.
Last edited:
After reading my previous post, I thought I'd share some information, and answers I provided to questions I got from a few members here. This thread is very well alive, and adding more information/pictures is what its all about.
As an alternative to the elusive 40X base, the Redfield/Remington 722 base (cant remember the Redfield part number) looks very similar. It has square corners, and fits newer receivers. The rear section has a 'step' that needs to be cut so the base is the correct length, and a new hole drilled. The Redfield logo and patent ID is stamped on the right side, but that can be ground off.
It is a little thinner than the beefy 40X base, but only an expert would tell. They can be bought on eBay for 10-15$.
Some people asked about the 'green' finish used on the receiver/barrel/base. I have a 700SA base, that was given to me by a buddy who was a 2112 @ Quantico. He's got his feet deep in the USMC as an armorer so I believe pretty much everything he tells me. He gave/sold me most of the stuff I used on my M40, M40A1 and M24 builds.
Apparently, this base came off a retired M40, stashed away and never used. Is it authentic or not? Well, obviously I cant be sure. But we can easily see the 'greenish' tint to the parkerizing, especially the area under the rings when it wasnt affected by the elements/light. It is a very hard finish, finger 'grease' doesnt stain it, its not easily scratched and doesnt reflect light, which was the purpose of the parkerizing.
Now, the buttplate screws. I dont know the exact size/thread, but my guess is that they are standard Remington wood screws. Picture shows the countersink.
As an alternative to the elusive 40X base, the Redfield/Remington 722 base (cant remember the Redfield part number) looks very similar. It has square corners, and fits newer receivers. The rear section has a 'step' that needs to be cut so the base is the correct length, and a new hole drilled. The Redfield logo and patent ID is stamped on the right side, but that can be ground off.
It is a little thinner than the beefy 40X base, but only an expert would tell. They can be bought on eBay for 10-15$.
Some people asked about the 'green' finish used on the receiver/barrel/base. I have a 700SA base, that was given to me by a buddy who was a 2112 @ Quantico. He's got his feet deep in the USMC as an armorer so I believe pretty much everything he tells me. He gave/sold me most of the stuff I used on my M40, M40A1 and M24 builds.
Apparently, this base came off a retired M40, stashed away and never used. Is it authentic or not? Well, obviously I cant be sure. But we can easily see the 'greenish' tint to the parkerizing, especially the area under the rings when it wasnt affected by the elements/light. It is a very hard finish, finger 'grease' doesnt stain it, its not easily scratched and doesnt reflect light, which was the purpose of the parkerizing.
Now, the buttplate screws. I dont know the exact size/thread, but my guess is that they are standard Remington wood screws. Picture shows the countersink.
Last edited:
After reading my previous post, I thought I'd share some information, and answers I provided to questions I got from a few members here. This thread is very well alive, and adding more information/pictures is what its all about.
As an alternative to the elusive 40X base, the Redfield/Remington 722 base (cant remember the Redfield part number) looks very similar. It has square corners, and fits newer receivers. The rear section has a 'step' that needs to be cut so the base is the correct length, and a new hole drilled. The Redfield logo and patent ID is stamped on the right side, but that can be ground off.
It is a little thinner than the beefy 40X base, but only an expert would tell. They can be bought on eBay for 10-15$.
Some people asked about the 'green' finish used on the receiver/barrel/base. I have a 700SA base, that was given to me by a buddy who was a 2112 @ Quantico. He's got his feet deep in the USMC as an armorer so I believe pretty much everything he tells me. He gave/sold me most of the stuff I used on my M40, M40A1 and M24 builds.
Apparently, this base came off a retired M40, stashed away and never used. Is it authentic or not? Well, obviously I cant be sure. But we can easily see the 'greenish' tint to the parkerizing, especially the area under the rings when it wasnt affected by the elements/light. It is a very hard finish, finger 'grease' doesnt stain it, its not easily scratched and doesnt reflect light, which was the purpose of the parkerizing.
Now, the buttplate screws. I dont know the exact size/thread, but my guess is that they are standard Remington wood screws. Picture shows the countersink.
Just bought a 722 base... I don't think you'll get them for $15 or $20. Mine bid up to $60. My plans are exactly as you lay them out. I also got correct looking rings. I'm going to Navy Jelly off all the bluing and park both the rings and base.
Still waiting on my stock.... Silver Hill has told me "We're making 12 right now, its shpping Friday" for the last 3 weeks. Not sure what's going on there.... I told him only ordered 1, not 12...
Last edited:
Just bought a 722 base... I don't think you'll get them for $15 or $20. Mine bid up to $60. Still waiting on my stock.... Silver Hill has told me "We're making 12 right now, its shpping Friday" for the last 3 weeks. Not sure what's going on there.... I told him only ordered 1, not 12...
lol! If you do get 12 of 'em, let us know
As for the 722 base, they might have gone up in price. I have a few of these and remember paying between 10-25$. That was 1 year ago.
Mescabug, with regards to some of the details on the stock sold on Ebay. On the original M40's, the rear swivel was a wood screw type (obviously Remington in house like the 513T) but the front swivel was threaded into an escutcheon as shown in your picture, which would be correct for the M40. Also the stocks had a 1/8 brass reinforcing pin in the trigger area, also shown in your pictures. It seems not all had this pin by some of the pictures I have seen over the years, but many did. Another option for a stock is the late Michael Kokolus company, Gun Stock Duplicating which is still in business. Apparently Mike had an original stock in hand to copy, they might be worth contacting as an alternative.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
Fucking Marines during Vietnam rubbed oil into their stocks (even the M16 ). Their food was oily as well. I know this because my brother came home straight from Vietnam and bought me my first rifle. It was an Ithaca single shot lever action .22 ("You'll shoot your eye out!"). It had a top coat of varnish and he had me rubbing gun oil on that until I was almost crying. The M40 clone just needs a dull oil finish. I actually have an email from Remington custom shop stating to just use Pledge on the damn thing. Once in a while I can see it is drying out a little. So, as I was taught, I rub gun oil into it. As I've used it over the years it has it own unique set of dings on it now.
). Their food was oily as well. I know this because my brother came home straight from Vietnam and bought me my first rifle. It was an Ithaca single shot lever action .22 ("You'll shoot your eye out!"). It had a top coat of varnish and he had me rubbing gun oil on that until I was almost crying. The M40 clone just needs a dull oil finish. I actually have an email from Remington custom shop stating to just use Pledge on the damn thing. Once in a while I can see it is drying out a little. So, as I was taught, I rub gun oil into it. As I've used it over the years it has it own unique set of dings on it now.
Last edited by a moderator:
Silver Hill M40... 166601 & Silver Hill- Buttstock fit-up/side profile
Where were we? Oh yeah... Here's a couple of representative 'side profile' photos of my 16601/-2- buttplate with a Silver Hill M40 stock. My 'old-timey' dial caliper is too small to measure the respective lengths of the buttplate and stock.
Some spec's first: "My" 16601 is ~1.640" at the widest point. "This" Silver Hill buttstock is 1.655" at the widest point. +/~0.015" Disclaimer: Other's mileage may vary. Overall, most deviations, in width, I found along the long axis of the buttstock were ~.010"
If I were undertaking this task, I (think) I would fit the buttplate at the top and maintain the lines at the comb and work my way down towards the mid-section to the toe. Cleaning-up the extra wood along the line extending from the toe of the fitted buttplate, should help accentuate the grip profile.
What say the pros... ??
Patience and some inletting black/or lamp soot should get the job done. The basic carpentry rule applies- you can't add wood back, if you've cut-off/removed too much.
Where were we? Oh yeah... Here's a couple of representative 'side profile' photos of my 16601/-2- buttplate with a Silver Hill M40 stock. My 'old-timey' dial caliper is too small to measure the respective lengths of the buttplate and stock.
Some spec's first: "My" 16601 is ~1.640" at the widest point. "This" Silver Hill buttstock is 1.655" at the widest point. +/~0.015" Disclaimer: Other's mileage may vary. Overall, most deviations, in width, I found along the long axis of the buttstock were ~.010"
If I were undertaking this task, I (think) I would fit the buttplate at the top and maintain the lines at the comb and work my way down towards the mid-section to the toe. Cleaning-up the extra wood along the line extending from the toe of the fitted buttplate, should help accentuate the grip profile.
What say the pros... ??
Patience and some inletting black/or lamp soot should get the job done. The basic carpentry rule applies- you can't add wood back, if you've cut-off/removed too much.
Last edited:
... The only 'un-verified' detail, is the anchor for the front swivel. History says the front swivel was a screw-in type swivels like the Rem 513. But picture shows a metal anchor and what seems to be a Wichita swivel.
It does remain an open question and many have, successfully, just used the 513T buttstock swivel with the wood thread for the front swivel. I also accepted that, in view of the fact that I could never locate a 513T with a machine threaded shaft, until I saw this one on eBay. It was with a bunch of misc. spare parts and it's obviously for a 3/4" or 1.0" sling, but it's definitely a 513T.
I believe, that it just may be possible to replace the wood thread by drifting out the 'pin' in the main body of the swivel and fitting a standard sized machine threaded shaft. Anybody try it yet?
I experimented and completely filed off the wood threads, but the diameter is ~0.170/0.171, which when threaded (~8-32) will not have the tensile strength (29% less) of the industry standard, for this part, which is a 10-32 (see comparison)
Nominal Size Major Diameter Pitch Diameter Stress Tensile Strength*
&
Threads per
Inch Series Allowance Max Min Max Min Tolerance Area in2 lb., min
8-32 0.164 UNC .0009 .1631 .1571 .1428 .1399 .0029 0.0140 850
10-32 0.190 UNF .0009 .1891 .1831 .1688 .1658 .0030 0.0100 1200
Last edited:
What Remington buttplate screw is this... ?
I went to NUMRICH and picked-up at set for what's advertised as for 722 and they sit slightly below the 'rim of the countersink, like this:
THIS (fills the cavity, bearing on the entire surface and standing slightly proud) is a proper fitting screw:
Whatever it is, I want two (2.)
I went to NUMRICH and picked-up at set for what's advertised as for 722 and they sit slightly below the 'rim of the countersink, like this:
THIS (fills the cavity, bearing on the entire surface and standing slightly proud) is a proper fitting screw:
Whatever it is, I want two (2.)
... The best example, is a M40 original stock that sold on eBay a few months ago. Apparently, it is genuine. Dont know if somebody from the Hide got it. I was keeping an eye (both eyes actually) on the auction, hopefully to scope the deal of the century. It started off very low, so I was confident. But as soon as people found out, it went up in 100$ increments to finally sell close to 1500$.
Is this a variant with the 'straight' buttplate... ? Looks like it, from the photos.
Do you have the part number? I have extra M1 Garand top butt plate 1" wood screws... Think these are ok?I went to NUMRICH and picked-up at set for what's advertised as for 722 and they sit slightly below the 'rim of the countersink, like this:
THIS (fills the cavity, bearing on the entire surface and standing slightly proud) is a proper fitting screw:
Whatever it is, I want two (2.)
I agree. The Wichita swivels were not used before 1970. They got the contract in 1970, so early (pre-70) swivels had to be whatever brand (probably Remington in-house).
Confirmed by 2 sources, one of them being Marty from Badger Ordnance. He owns at least 2 REAL DEAL M40's.
Back to the buttplate screws, as we can see from the many pictures, the original screws are 'hollowed' in the center. Its different from the standard X pattern Philipps screw found in hardware stores. Its easy to strip the head if not using a large screwdriver. I dont think they are reproduced...
Good point. Hard to tell... Seems straight to me, or maybe a very slight angle. Was there ever a mention of a straight buttplate? (No time to read the entire thread again).
Last edited:
Mesca, gotta to agree the buttplate on that stock does look very straight, could be the photographs but there's very little indication of a curve. Also yes on the screws with hollowed center both my older Remington stocks have that feature. With regards to the swivels, Bolt_trash I bought a similar threaded 513T swivel, (smaller inside diameter) to experiment, obviously I think your idea makes more sense, removing the threads or replacing the entire wood thread. Chandlers do sell the Wichita set, wood rear, threaded front, its an option for those interested.
NUMRICH Part No. 148770FK 721/722 Buttplate Screw, Replacement $3.40
I don't have any M1Garand buttplate screws, but I've looked and they are straight-slotted.
The M40 was an assembled firearm, from parts that were (then) in the manufacturing stream. I won't hand fit a screw, but I do want a proper fitting screw.
Last edited:
I am looking at a Redfield base on ebay it says R700 RH SA but also has swing over on box would this be one that I want for a M40 clone?
Here's a photo of an original M40 buttplate C.1969:
Not my idea. Proffered by another member and was certainly worth trying, though I'm not happy that it would thread to an 8-32 machine threaded post. 10-32 is and has been an 'industry' standard and probably with good reason. I'll try driving out the retaining pin next and replacing the post with a 10-32 thread.
Thanks for that lead. I'd done a half-hearted search awhile ago and hadn't found those sling swivels outright.
For a Redfield 700SA, this is what you're looking for to identify one:
In the photo to follow, I'm pretty sure the one on the left is the elusive Redfield 511153/40X, but the center and left examples are 700SA's and as you can see, there is some variation in the clipped front corners. What doesn't vary is the 700SA and Redfield logo stamps. You will come across "700-SA" (note the 'dash') and simple upper case "R" logo stamps and they will fit the early 'stepped' Remington receivers and they're probably Redfield products, but they aren't the mounts/bases that are contemporary to the period of M40 production. Be patient. I found mine on Gunbroker, advertised as Winchester Short Action mounts (70-SA.) Checked the stamps, in the photos and they were Remingtons, for sure. Good luck!
Last edited:
For a Redfield 700SA, this is what you're looking for to identify one:
In the photo to follow, I'm pretty sure the one on the left is the elusive Redfield 511153/40X, but the center and left examples are 700SA's and as you can see, there is some variation in the clipped front corners. What doesn't vary is the 700SA and Redfield logo stamps. You will come across "700-SA" (note the 'dash') and simple upper case "R" logo stamps and they will fit the early 'stepped' Remington receivers and they're probably Redfield products, but they aren't the mounts/bases that are contemporary to the period of M40 production. Be patient. I found mine on Gunbroker, advertised as Winchester Short Action mounts (70-SA.) Checked the stamps, in the photos and they were Remingtons, for sure. Good luck!
Are the M40 versions parkerized or blued? If parked, zinc or manganese?
For a Redfield 700SA, this is what you're looking for to identify one:
In the photo to follow, I'm pretty sure the one on the left is the elusive Redfield 511153/40X, but the center and left examples are 700SA's and as you can see, there is some variation in the clipped front corners. What doesn't vary is the 700SA and Redfield logo stamps. You will come across "700-SA" (note the 'dash') and simple upper case "R" logo stamps and they will fit the early 'stepped' Remington receivers and they're probably Redfield products, but they aren't the mounts/bases that are contemporary to the period of M40 production. Be patient. I found mine on Gunbroker, advertised as Winchester Short Action mounts (70-SA.) Checked the stamps, in the photos and they were Remingtons, for sure. Good luck!
Are the M40 versions parkerized or blued? If parked, zinc or manganese?
thanks mjh 30 and bolt trash just trying to avoid paying the $200.00 that badger wants for their replica I will just keep looking
Remington M40 Clone mounts...
Last I read, the ONLY M40 mounts available, from Badger, were for later/more recent Remington M700 receivers, that are straight and do not have a lower rear/stepped receiver. They USED TO make mounts for the early/earlier stepped receiver, but they are no longer in production and out of stock.
It's my understanding that Leupold was/is offering a 'replica' M40 mount and ring set for $199.95 (Part no. 30669B/ [MENTION=522]SWFA[/MENTION].com) They don't say, in their advertisement, what Remington receiver style, it will fit.
As long as the Redfield 700SA and their early 1 inch/LOW 4-screw rings are to be found, I'd go that route. And, why not- they are correct, documented and saw wide and varied usage, from what I've seen (not claiming to be an expert.) For the Redfield 511153/40X, be patient. I prefer to spend my money once. I've never, ever, been perfectly happy with a 'substitute' anything. Just my 1.55 cents (adjusted for inflation.)
Last I read, the ONLY M40 mounts available, from Badger, were for later/more recent Remington M700 receivers, that are straight and do not have a lower rear/stepped receiver. They USED TO make mounts for the early/earlier stepped receiver, but they are no longer in production and out of stock.
It's my understanding that Leupold was/is offering a 'replica' M40 mount and ring set for $199.95 (Part no. 30669B/ [MENTION=522]SWFA[/MENTION].com) They don't say, in their advertisement, what Remington receiver style, it will fit.
As long as the Redfield 700SA and their early 1 inch/LOW 4-screw rings are to be found, I'd go that route. And, why not- they are correct, documented and saw wide and varied usage, from what I've seen (not claiming to be an expert.) For the Redfield 511153/40X, be patient. I prefer to spend my money once. I've never, ever, been perfectly happy with a 'substitute' anything. Just my 1.55 cents (adjusted for inflation.)
Last edited:
From what I've seen, the mount/bases could be found with either finish. All the rings I've seen on original and surviving M40's, were just hot blued
Good question. And, that's exactly why I'm here- to get the (best) answers to those little, lingering details.
Is someone is producing, with absolute repeatability, the parkerized finish with the green tint/tinge? I don't know if someone is, or if it's even possible. From what I've read, the green tint had something to do with oil/oils left on the barrel. It sounds great, but it's not how chemistry and actual chemical processes/production work is done- not something we don't all know, already.
So, is the best finish zinc or manganese? Lets get it answered- and that might not be possible, in absolute terms.
Got my stock today. Worth the wait. Nice piece of wood, needs some fine tuning. I'm not going to bother with the V block, but just do a bedding job on the stock.
Are the receiver screws and internal mag of the ADL compatible with the BDL? It seems the magazine is too long and the screws are too short.
D
Deleted member 10043
Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey Bolt Trash, where do these original redfield mounts come up for sale? ebay? Just wondering where to keep a eye out. Thanks.
Redfield mount...
If you go back in the forum, MescaBug helped me identify mine. I eventually found another one, but both of mine were found, on Gunbroker (Scope accessories,) in good/used condition. I do hunt both Gunbroker and eBay, fairly regularly. Some guys hunt the local gun shows and others pick-up mounts in trades.
You know, the mount or rings, you want, may come on a used scope or with a mount that you don't want, or need. If the price is right, purchase the package and trade or sell-off the parts you don't want. Not sure if the base is a LA or SA, but seller represents it's for a Rem700 or you see a set of early 4 screw rings, but don't know if they're stamped (if that's what you want for your project) with the "1-65" stamp, send the seller a private message- ask a question or ask for another photo. You know, gun-guy stuff.
I've got a matte finished 700-SA mount with a single upper case 'R' (it is a Redfield-I checked) for a stepped receiver and a couple of sets of the early Redfield rings (1 w/Torx screws and in excellent condition,) if someone has an interest. The mount might make a decent candidate to TIG weld the front clipped corners, shape them square, polish & hot blue to resemble the elusive 40X.
Good hunting!
If you go back in the forum, MescaBug helped me identify mine. I eventually found another one, but both of mine were found, on Gunbroker (Scope accessories,) in good/used condition. I do hunt both Gunbroker and eBay, fairly regularly. Some guys hunt the local gun shows and others pick-up mounts in trades.
You know, the mount or rings, you want, may come on a used scope or with a mount that you don't want, or need. If the price is right, purchase the package and trade or sell-off the parts you don't want. Not sure if the base is a LA or SA, but seller represents it's for a Rem700 or you see a set of early 4 screw rings, but don't know if they're stamped (if that's what you want for your project) with the "1-65" stamp, send the seller a private message- ask a question or ask for another photo. You know, gun-guy stuff.
I've got a matte finished 700-SA mount with a single upper case 'R' (it is a Redfield-I checked) for a stepped receiver and a couple of sets of the early Redfield rings (1 w/Torx screws and in excellent condition,) if someone has an interest. The mount might make a decent candidate to TIG weld the front clipped corners, shape them square, polish & hot blue to resemble the elusive 40X.
Good hunting!
Last edited:
mjh30, How old are your Remingtons? I've been on a serious hunt to identify a Remington model that used those screws, on their buttplates and I'm starting to zero in on the 740.
A Zinc finish is a little lighter and has a gray/charcoal look. Mangangese is darker with a dark charcoal tint.
Parkerizing is a chemical process using a low strength acid combined with either Manganese (usually WWII up to summer of 1944 and then again on all post war new production) or Zinc ( summer of 1944 to end of WWII and post war [rebuilds].)
Looks like zinc... (but, ideally with a greenish tint.)
Bolt_Trash, I have 2 700's ones dated 66, the other 67.
With regards to Parkerizing, the book says just blued, with regards the following picture the rings on the left are parked, bought them from an old timer in Albany where the Corp had the refurbish depot, looks like a manganese finish but where he was from, was enough to peak my interest to buy. The center rings and base I had parked the same time as the barreled action, the flash made them appear a lot grayer than they actually are. The base on the right is close but not perfect, center picture Redfield made a lot of different bases for the 700 action, these all fit.
With regards to getting the green tint in the parkerizing, no one is doing it as far as I am concerned, I have asked several. Most agree on older WW11 firearms it involved the cosmoline the rifles may or not have been packed in, well the USMC m40's came in their very own Plano case, so that couldn't have caused it. Shootersolutions here in WA, sells Parkerizing kits, he used to sell a grren tint that you would rub onto the firearm at the time you parked it, hes no longer offering that product because its not even ormd safe, but on his site he states if you buy a kit from him he will tell you over the phone what you need to know to get that green tint.
With regards to Parkerizing, the book says just blued, with regards the following picture the rings on the left are parked, bought them from an old timer in Albany where the Corp had the refurbish depot, looks like a manganese finish but where he was from, was enough to peak my interest to buy. The center rings and base I had parked the same time as the barreled action, the flash made them appear a lot grayer than they actually are. The base on the right is close but not perfect, center picture Redfield made a lot of different bases for the 700 action, these all fit.
With regards to getting the green tint in the parkerizing, no one is doing it as far as I am concerned, I have asked several. Most agree on older WW11 firearms it involved the cosmoline the rifles may or not have been packed in, well the USMC m40's came in their very own Plano case, so that couldn't have caused it. Shootersolutions here in WA, sells Parkerizing kits, he used to sell a grren tint that you would rub onto the firearm at the time you parked it, hes no longer offering that product because its not even ormd safe, but on his site he states if you buy a kit from him he will tell you over the phone what you need to know to get that green tint.
Last edited:
Where were we? Oh yeah... Here's a couple of representative 'side profile' photos of my 16601/-2- buttplate with a Silver Hill M40 stock. My 'old-timey' dial caliper is too small to measure the respective lengths of the buttplate and stock.
Some spec's first: "My" 16601 is ~1.640" at the widest point. "This" Silver Hill buttstock is 1.655" at the widest point. +/~0.015" Disclaimer: Other's mileage may vary. Overall, most deviations, in width, I found along the long axis of the buttstock were ~.010"
If I were undertaking this task, I (think) I would fit the buttplate at the top and maintain the lines at the comb and work my way down towards the mid-section to the toe. Cleaning-up the extra wood along the line extending from the toe of the fitted buttplate, should help accentuate the grip profile.
What say the pros... ??
Patience and some inletting black/or lamp soot should get the job done. The basic carpentry rule applies- you can't add wood back, if you've cut-off/removed too much.
My buttplate was the slighest bit too narrow. I wanted to freshly stand the stock a bit, so now it's a perfect fit. Curvature a tiny bit off, but screwing it down should more than take care of that.
I found getting my action to fit right a bit of a pain. There are high points all over, and my receiver was sitting too far to the left. Worked it for about an hour last night. I'm going to skip putting the bedding block in, just too much material to remove. And once you start, there is no going back. Going to think about it a little more. I am going to make my own pillars out of aluminum tubing and bed my action directly into the wood as I see some major voids.
Last edited:
tokiwartooth, just take your time, already seeing some of your other work you have some excellent skills. Picture below is 67 adl stock that I removed the fleur de lis checkering from and cut for the bdl floorplate, it didn't come out too bad in the end up.
I had to be careful around the buttplate
I had to be careful around the buttplate
Are the screws, for the buttplate, identical to the 'type' that I/we are looking for?
That's my understanding, also. (I always wondered about your Park'd rings, in this photo. Torx screws too. Questions-Questions-Questions)
Zinc - Manganese... gets mighty confuse'n.
They sure did. As near as I can tell, from vintage Redfield advertising sheets, Redfield introduced the 700SA mount, with the clipped front corners, in 1968. They were still manufacturing the Gen.I Accu-Range scopes at that time also, so these mounts and scopes could have also been contemporary in their pairing and usage, on the M40, fairly early on.
Thanks! That, is a place to start. I leads me to believe that it is, at least, possible to do.
Last edited:
Take your time- as in REALLY take your time to get that buttplate near perfection. It the only vertical 'line,' on an object that presents on a horizontal axis and it really stands-out.
That 5% to finish a pre-inlet involves all of the very tedious stuff. Don't be in a rush. It's a lot of 'remove a little wood - recheck- add soot- recheck - remove a little wood.' The bedding material will fill-in any gaps on the underside of the action and barrel. If noticeable along the top of the stock, you won't be at all happy, though at that point, you could always paint it green or gray.
Good luck!
Not compatible... The ADL box is taller. If I were you, I would buy a steel floorplate kit from Pacific Tool & Gauge. The early Rem 700 bottom metals is steel, not aluminum. Looks exactly the same.
For those looking for an alternative to parkerizing, Cerakote has a color that is very similar to the green-ish finish on the M40. Its called Tungsten.
I've seen it on a pistol, and it is very close. Of course, its not the same 'texture'. Most tactical gunsmith shops will do Cerakote. Parkerizing is messy... Stuff from the past
Cant get enough of those build threads!
Good photo. It's always the little details that get you and having a photo, to review, is a great advantage and visual tool. Thanks!
For those looking for an alternative to parkerizing, Cerakote has a color that is very similar to the green-ish finish on the M40. Its called Tungsten. ... it is very close. Of course, its not the same 'texture'. Parkerizing is messy... Stuff from the past
I think using Cerakote for the Bolt Shroud, Bolt (body & knob) and the Bottom Metal, the safety and the sling swivels, is the best/easiest way to achieve the requisite "Semi-Gloss" and "Gloss" black finishes on these parts.
Now, for determining what part, is what type of finish, is the fun part.
1.) The Bottom Metal is a Semi-Gloss and in that, there is no dispute.
2.) Bolt Body: Semi-Gloss ?
3.) Bolt Shroud: Gloss ?
4.) Bolt Handle & Knob: Gloss? (Somewhere, along the line, from photographs, I've got it in my head that the parts, to the rear of the reciever (the Bolt Shroud, Bolt Handle and Bolt Knob) are a "Gloss" black finish, but the Bolt Body is Semi-Gloss.)
5.) Safety Lever: Semi-Gloss?
6.) Sling Swivels: Parkerized? Semi-Gloss Black?
I'd like to find out, part-by-part, for sure.
While we're on it, S.H. member "budiceale," who invited me to this site, for my build, used Cerakote's "Armorer's Black," for his own build and was very happy with the results.
As far as Parkerizing, a/k/a "messy... stuff from the past ?" I think, being from the past and being semi-messy, myself (by my own admission,) Parkerizing, for this build, is the way to go, for the action, barrel and Redfield mount (optional, of course.)
I do like the Cerakote finishes and used it for a recent .416 Rigby DGR build. You don't want to have to take this stuff off though, if you happen to change your mind later (not recommended.)
Yeah, well... this is important stuff!
