Third Party Press

What is a "Early" Receiver tang?

Refer to picture 34 in the second post. If I am interpreting your question correctly, you'd be referring to the area in that picture near the rear action where the screw goes through the stock from the bottom. If you look at that wood where the hole is, you can see where it appears to be "ramped" so to speak. It would appear the machining of that flat area, where the rear tang of the action rests, isn't deep enough, which would cause the tang to sit higher than the wood line.

Hope I answered your question correctly.
 
I agree with the above and I'd add in post 1, photos 18 and 21 you can see the tang sitting above or proud of the surrounding stock.
 
Perhaps I am missing something but, it appears to me that the stock, used as the example, is very much over-sanded.
 
Perhaps I am missing something but, it appears to me that the stock, used as the example, is very much over-sanded.
Yeah but if you look at the bolt and sling cutouts, the edges are very crisp so if the stock was severely sanded I would expect those edges to be rounded.
 
Perhaps I am missing something but, it appears to me that the stock, used as the example, is very much over-sanded.
Might be more due to wood shrinkage. I’d love to see comparative photos of the undersides of ‘early’ & ‘later’ receiver tangs for comparison, to better understand what the differences may be.
 
Perhaps I am missing something but, it appears to me that the stock, used as the example, is very much over-sanded.

I am the owner of this rifle. That stock is NOT sanded and is 100% original armouers stock that wasnt final fitted/relieved to that particular action. Hell, even the bayonet lug pin hole wasnt even drilled.

I shouldve just stated in the original post that the stock lacked any final fitting & relieving. My choice of words may cause some confusion.
 
Last edited:

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top