found_fish
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island, BC
...
Last edited:
My shooter SVT-40 project, purest be warned.
- Thread starter 4307
- Start date
boltonscouter
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- parts unknown
That's NICE! I'd buy a stock off you if you went into production!
- Location
- At the gettin' place.
Flame suits are only required when the rifle is not a masterfully beautiful work of art.
May be the best looking SVT I've seen, and I wish I could buy a stock like that for mine.
Well done!
May be the best looking SVT I've seen, and I wish I could buy a stock like that for mine.
Well done!
I thought about producing these stocks, now considering it. Since I'm between jobs and always wanted to start a small custom metal/wood fabrication shop this SVT-40 project gives me something to think about. I keep patterns for everything I build. To be honest I really didn't think people would like this stock for the SVT-40.
Thanks for the kind comment everyone, gives me something to think about.
Thanks for the kind comment everyone, gives me something to think about.
- Location
- At the gettin' place.
Did you have a rough price point in mind? Obviously I won't hold you to it, just trying to get an idea on what this would cost.
Price point is tough to calculate off the top of my head. I'd have to make 2 or 3 to calculate build time, and material costs. It won't happen over night, but I would work much faster than the RCMP firearms lab... LOL.
When I made this stock, the Baltic Birch I used was scrap wood from my basement wood pile. I made my stock for free (actually payed for 10 years ago when I built an analog synthesizer from scratch). The wood was going to land in the dump but I try to re purpose any useful material. I have a rough idea of how much quality Baltic Birch goes for, but don't want to quote a price on the stock. This production idea is only a few hours old so bare with me.
I would start by making wood ply stocks. If the ply stocks are worth making, I'll think about making solid birch as well.
The only thing I can say as far as pricing is, it would have to worth while for me to build and sell, but the price would be reasonable considering the price of the original rifle. No one would pay for a stock that is priced as much or more than buying an SVT-40. Some of the other aftermarket stocks out there are very expensive IMO.
I have an SKS stock in the works as well, different design.
I like the cold war arsenal look and finish. My goal would be to keep true to the arsenal look and feel, inside and out.
Receivers are slightly different from gun to gun. To achieve a perfect bedded fit would be extremely tough without having the destination rifle in hand. This is something I need to think about as it would be an issue. If the bedded fit isn't perfect when installed in someones basement, I'd hear about it. A generic arsenal fit is more realistic to produce. If someone sent me an SVT-40 for a custom fit, I'd need to look into the legalities. These are non restricted rifles, transfer is not an issue, but I'd like to get my ducks in a row if I decide to produce these and do custom fit stocks.
Everything I've made in the past have been one of a kind pieces, I need to do my research into production.
A few years ago considered making heavy duty off-road bumpers for Toyota trucks, and Jeeps. I had a ton of requests and still get requests (it kills me to turn work down). The problem at that time was my lack of proper work space. Producing bumpers and armor for trucks in a residential neighborhood is not a wise thing to do, there are bylaws and grumpy neighbors. At the time the cost was high for industrial shop space and the bank laughed me right out the door, said "no one would buy a replacement bumper" It's a long depressing story.
SVT-40 stocks are not as complicated as bumpers. I still have the bumper idea in my head, they would sell, but to get the ball rolling I think about making lower cost easier to produce items to see if a business would take. Gun stocks are part of this grand idea.
I have a lot of ideas for the firearms world, products and such. It's hard to get the ball rolling.
When I made this stock, the Baltic Birch I used was scrap wood from my basement wood pile. I made my stock for free (actually payed for 10 years ago when I built an analog synthesizer from scratch). The wood was going to land in the dump but I try to re purpose any useful material. I have a rough idea of how much quality Baltic Birch goes for, but don't want to quote a price on the stock. This production idea is only a few hours old so bare with me.
I would start by making wood ply stocks. If the ply stocks are worth making, I'll think about making solid birch as well.
The only thing I can say as far as pricing is, it would have to worth while for me to build and sell, but the price would be reasonable considering the price of the original rifle. No one would pay for a stock that is priced as much or more than buying an SVT-40. Some of the other aftermarket stocks out there are very expensive IMO.
I have an SKS stock in the works as well, different design.
I like the cold war arsenal look and finish. My goal would be to keep true to the arsenal look and feel, inside and out.
Receivers are slightly different from gun to gun. To achieve a perfect bedded fit would be extremely tough without having the destination rifle in hand. This is something I need to think about as it would be an issue. If the bedded fit isn't perfect when installed in someones basement, I'd hear about it. A generic arsenal fit is more realistic to produce. If someone sent me an SVT-40 for a custom fit, I'd need to look into the legalities. These are non restricted rifles, transfer is not an issue, but I'd like to get my ducks in a row if I decide to produce these and do custom fit stocks.
Everything I've made in the past have been one of a kind pieces, I need to do my research into production.
A few years ago considered making heavy duty off-road bumpers for Toyota trucks, and Jeeps. I had a ton of requests and still get requests (it kills me to turn work down). The problem at that time was my lack of proper work space. Producing bumpers and armor for trucks in a residential neighborhood is not a wise thing to do, there are bylaws and grumpy neighbors. At the time the cost was high for industrial shop space and the bank laughed me right out the door, said "no one would buy a replacement bumper" It's a long depressing story.
SVT-40 stocks are not as complicated as bumpers. I still have the bumper idea in my head, they would sell, but to get the ball rolling I think about making lower cost easier to produce items to see if a business would take. Gun stocks are part of this grand idea.
I have a lot of ideas for the firearms world, products and such. It's hard to get the ball rolling.
What influenced your decision to locate the bipod in the position (front-to-back) that it is in? Did you lie down with it? I'm considering doing the same thing. I'm just curious why it's not further forward (or back, etc)?
Thank-you.
Cannon
Thank-you.
Cannon
Yes, I have shot it in prone position, it's comfortable. The mounting location on the stock is to utilize the hand guard as intended. If the bipod is close to the magazine it's awkward to grip the fore stock because the legs are in the way. If the bipod is positioned further forward, the stock wood thickness is thinner for mounting, it's also harder to deploy (longer reach). Another reason is weight distribution. The current position with this particular bipod (Harris) the gun is balanced, not perfectly but balanced for what it is. With the scope deployed and bipod attached the center of balance is just in front of the magazine (empty), balanced at the magazine loaded. When I stand and shoot usually my fore hand (left) is positioned at the magazine or under the magazine. Holding under the mag allows me and my shooting style to balance the rifle comfortably to get a clean shot on target. The bipod has a quick adjustment lever to adjust your bipod angle to accommodate off camber surfaces. Having that lever close to me allows for quick adjustment. The bipod legs folding in the shooting direction i've noticed absorbs recoil allowing me to quickly re adjust firing position faster as the rifle doesn't jump as much as it does in the fold towards shooter position. Folded, the bipod does not contact the stock, even if it snaps to the closed position. This position protects the stock and heat shields from damage.
Ideally a shorter bipod located closer to the magazine would be nice for shooting from a bench, but I designed this gun stock as a utility/ bush gun. Utility being the key.
The bipod is holding its own, no complaints other than it needs a dab of Loctite on the takedown tightening screw. I may replace the current mounting method with a short rail so I can try other bipods, I'm still on the fence. The Harris bipod is nice and will more than likely keep it as is.
Hope this helps.
