Rossi Rifleman

How would you classify the original 92 stock finish?

I'm torn between satin and semi-gloss. I believe a gloss "Miroku style" finish would be overkill.

One of mine, the 45 Colt octagon, I'd call satin. The 357 round barrel I'd call semi-gloss.

Make smoke,

please explain what you mean by "original 92 finish". It makes a real difference when you say "original 92". Big difference between to original Winchester 1892 finish and the cheap water based "finish" put on my 2013 manufactured Rossi R92.


jd

I would classify the original finish on my 2014 vintage as cheap, water based lacquer. I would classify its current Danish oil & waxed finish as satin. I have never had the patience to do the high gloss finish that requires wet sanding to fill the grain.

sounds like Harry and I did about the same thing. Last gun stock I did was my R92 .357 mag. The factory finish pretty much came off with a wet sponge. No strippers or solvents were needed. The 200 grt paper worked fine for removing the proud wood along the wood to metal union, and the rest got some light smoothing with 400 grt. First coat of Watco Danish oil was sorta light and worked in by hand, then lightly sanded with 600 grt to work some of the particles into the open pores. I think I stopped after either five or six rubbings with oil and finished with the final rub downs with coffee filter papers. My goal was mainly to seal the wood and stop there. I don't want anything high gloss.


jd

oh, I forgot to add that the last couple of oil baths were worked with 1200 grt paper.

Mine is one of the older ones so it has the darker stain and semi-gloss sheen. I sort of re-did it but put it back like it was originally.

My older roughly 2007 vintage Rossi 92 has a decent enough semi gloss finish. But along the way I did two rifles for good friends where it looked like the wood was wiped down with some dark shoe polish and not even buffed. On those two I stripped and sanded off the crusty rough finish. And since I was that far into it I also gave the rather lumpy square'ish stocks more of an oval or even tall egg shape while sharpening up the front edge of the shoulder stock's comb.

With all that done I applied three or four coats of boiled linseed oil. The first two being tinted with some fairly dark red/brown stain to aid with adding some color back to the rather bland looking wood.

It was high summer so the stocks with each coat were set out in the full sun and heat of the day. This cured the BLO easily in a day. So the three or four coats didn't take much time at all. I don't normally like to use pigment stains because mostly they make the wood look "muddy" if not done with great care and skill. But tinting the BLO with stain let me add some colour to the wood without the usual muddy looking build up.

The results came out pretty well I thought. So if you're looking at re-finishing my suggestion is to go with the old tried and true and use boiled linseed with or without some stain.

I tried to refinish my .45 with just BLO/turpentine after stripping and sanding, and it looked horrible. Very blotchy, the "mystery wood" didn't absorb it.

Stripped it again, then slathered on Medium Walnut Watco Danish Oil and let that soak in, then wiped the excess off. After drying, then did the 50/50 BLO/turpentine, and it came out great.

Now I have two more to do, I also have a new set of walnut rifle stocks from PGW, just have to fit and finish. But the "mystery wood" doesn't look bad at all after I redid it.

Rondog that pretty well matches what I found other than trying the straight oil right away.

I actually poured on a bit of common paint thinner so I could evaluate the color and look of the grain. And it wasn't great. But keep that hint of using a bit of a flood of paint thinner for the future. It mimics what a few coats of oil will produce. And then evaporates away neatly if things are warm enough. Or evaporates overnight if cold and not so sunny. Turpentine will do the same thing.

Anywho.... it was apparent to me from the thinner test that I needed to introduce some sort of stain for colour and to at least minimally bring out a bit of contrast. Hence the idea of trying some stain in with the BLO. I was very happy with how it worked out.

The grain in the picture above still doesn't jump out at you. But it's head and shoulders over what it looked like dry or with just raw thinner applied.

BCRider wrote:Rondog that pretty well matches what I found other than trying the straight oil right away.

I actually poured on a bit of common paint thinner so I could evaluate the color and look of the grain. And it wasn't great. But keep that hint of using a bit of a flood of paint thinner for the future. It mimics what a few coats of oil will produce. And then evaporates away neatly if things are warm enough. Or evaporates overnight if cold and not so sunny. Turpentine will do the same thing.

Anywho.... it was apparent to me from the thinner test that I needed to introduce some sort of stain for colour and to at least minimally bring out a bit of contrast. Hence the idea of trying some stain in with the BLO. I was very happy with how it worked out.

The grain in the picture above still doesn't jump out at you. But it's head and shoulders over what it looked like dry or with just raw thinner applied.

Yeah, they sure use a pretty boring wood on these rifles! I've found walnut replacement stocks at Precision Gun Works, but they're pretty plain too. I'd LOVE to put some pretty wood on mine.