Turkish walnut and salt

I have two pieces of highly figured Turkish walnut. Unfinished blanks. Any way to test if it has salt in them and if so how to remove it? Thanks

What makes you think they'd have salt in the first place? Best way I know to test is a 1% silver nitrate solution. Apply a little to a small spot of fresh wood. If the solution stays purple, it's fine. If it turns white, it's got salt. You can get it from Amazon. As for removing it, I'm not sure. Hopefully it doesn't have any salt.

I don't see why you would get salt in walnut. But if you want to test remove the wood to form the stock then try the silver nitrate. Birchwood Casey https://smile.amazon.com/Casey-Stoc...70&s=gateway&sprefix=birchwoo,aps,190&sr=8-24 or https://smile.amazon.com/Birchwood-...46&s=gateway&sprefix=birchwoo,aps,190&sr=8-14 True oil will seal the stock so no need to remove salt.

You two must not be aware that years ago Browning and some others used salt cured stock blanks and many nice rifles were turned to junk because of it. I don't think I'd trust a finish to keep the action from rusting up.

Not sure how you'd test for it but that curing method ended long ago as far as I know.

Silver nitrate will work especially if the salt is heavy. Salt cures used to be used in Oak particularly for boats (~1659-1850). I've never heard of it being used in walnut! Thanks for the info.

From what I have read, the salt cured stocks ceased production in 1972 and all existing salt cured stocks that Browning had were burned.

Thanks for the information.

SteelBlue said:

From what I have read, the salt cured stocks ceased production in 1972 and all existing salt cured stocks that Browning had were burned.

Click to expand...

The blame falls on the entity(s) that processed/cured wood with salt, prior to selling blanks to gun companies.

Browning wasn't the only maker that unknowingly used salt-cured walnut for gunstocks, just the most infamous.

Winchester & Ruger, for example, both got some from their wood vendors.


.

Browning did in fact know that the stocks were salt cured and even bought the process from Morton Salt who developed the technique.

"Morton Salt had developed a salt solution drying process successfully used in the furniture industry with good results. This cured the walnut much faster than the kiln method. Browning tested it and there were no problems, so Browning bought the process in 1965. "In an area roughly the size of a football field, five-foot by five-foot by eight-foot stacks of stock blanks were covered with salt. The salt was supposed to leach out the moisture and dry the wood quickly. The process did accomplish its purpose but the moisture that was drawn out of the blanks on top of the stacks ran down into the blanks below, resulting in a brine solution that soaked the lower wood blanks." (Schwing, pp 246) The retained salt reacted with the gun metal with the finished stock was installed. This caused the rust associated with "the salt wood problem".

According to Schwing's interviews with Browning's Harm Williams and Val Browning, all the salt curing was done in the US and affected at least 90% of all Browning stocks from made from 1967 to 1969. The problem continued to show up until 1972, but in smaller numbers. It was then that the entire supply of walnut blanks was burned and replaced with traditional kiln dried wood."

rugerjunkie said:

You two must not be aware that years ago Browning and some others used salt cured stock blanks and many nice rifles were turned to junk because of it. I don't think I'd trust a finish to keep the action from rusting up.

Not sure how you'd test for it but that curing method ended long ago as far as I know.

Click to expand...

^^^This.^^^

And even now, there are still guns that turn up with terrible rusting under the stocks, which can really only be explained by the salt curing. You'd think the salt cured blanks would be out of the supply chain by now, but they still surface occasionally. And many of the salt guns didn't show evidence til many years later, when the problem had been mostly forgotten, or not even known, by newer gun enthusiasts.

Very legitimate question by the OP.

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=120860

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgZBIhqnoj0

I purchased a used #1 from Cabelas with salt wood issues. The mounting area for the butt stock was a mess. I returned it for a 100% refund. I think Cabelas was going to send it to Ruger for repair. Never heard anymore about it

pete44ru said:

SteelBlue said:

From what I have read, the salt cured stocks ceased production in 1972 and all existing salt cured stocks that Browning had were burned.

Click to expand...

The blame falls on the entity(s) that processed/cured wood with salt, prior to selling blanks to gun companies, that are to blame.

Browning wasn't the only maker that unknowingly used salt-cured walnut for gunstocks, just the most infamous.

Winchester & Ruger for example, both got some from their wood vendors.


.

Click to expand...

Yes they did !
https://imgur.com/d2Qep0I

I had a liberty #1 that had one of the most beautiful butt stocks I have ever seen it had salt wood that etched the receiver about 1/2 inch where the butt stock met the receiver it wasn't an uncommon problem I sent it to Ruger and they replaced the stock and refinished the receiver unfortunately the new wood wasn't nearly as good

Gramps

Thanks to the OP, I like to think I'm fairly familiar with a lot of gun issues but this is completely new to me.

I guess, being paranoid, I'll see if I can find out from Ruger if my No.1 might have issues? I purchased it new in 1977, haven't had the stock off more recently than about 2004.

I can't think of a single good reason for mating salt cured wood to a steel rifle.

For the mods, it would be really nice not to have to log in every time I try to comment on this forum. Don

In reference to the post regarding a 200th year No 1. I too, own a No 1, 200th year; the pistol grip cap and receiver rusted really bad. I noticed the rust around the stock/receiver joint and pistol grip cap/wood joint were discolored and then determined it was rust. Seperated the receiver from the stock and it was bad! Pistol grip cap, too! Ruger refused any responsibility stating the rifle had gotten wet and poorly taken care of! I knew the rifle had never been wet. The butt stock was also highly figured. Hmm.

Donnieweps said:

I can't think of a single good reason for mating salt cured
For the mods, it would be really nice not to have to log in every time I try to comment on this forum. Don

Click to expand...

I'm not a mod, but your computer should log you in automatically each time you pull up the forum. I'm guessing you may have an older computer that doesn't do that.

On the login screen check the "log me in automatically..." . Box!

kevin masten said:

In reference to the post regarding a 200th year No 1. I too, own a No 1, 200th year; the pistol grip cap and receiver rusted really bad. I noticed the rust around the stock/receiver joint and pistol grip cap/wood joint were discolored and then determined it was rust. Seperated the receiver from the stock and it was bad! Pistol grip cap, too! Ruger refused any responsibility stating the rifle had gotten wet and poorly taken care of! I knew the rifle had never been wet. The butt stock was also highly figured. Hmm.

Click to expand...

The one I posted also happens to be a 200th yr 45-70 with outstanding wood,also has the same problem around the grip cap.