Over years, I have become dissatisfied with paint. It just doesn't stand up to wear and tear, and is a pain to 'repair' once it inevitably gets beat to heck.
Rather than doing backflips to obtain an acceptable pattern, I shop around for some of those rolls of Duck Tape that feature an acceptable camo pattern.
I first cover the rifle's stock with a layer of masking tape to serve as a removable base. This protects the stock from that gooey/gummy Duck Tape adhesive buildup. The masking tape stays tacky/removable under the Duck tape; I've checked this after several years with two of my rifles. The edge peels up was needed, then sticks right back on down quite acceptably.
Over that, I apply lengthwise strips of the camo Duck Tape, overlapping as needed to achieve complete coverage. Using the X-Acto, the overall outline gets trimmed to neaten up the total appearance.
Now I know the purists might frown upon my approach, and I say we should let them; to each their own. My view of camo is to provide a pattern that obscures shape recognition and blends with surroundings.
This method does that, and keeps the entire process from escalating into an artwork, which I believe only serves as a motivation to baby the resulting paint job. My rifles are tools, and get handled in a respectful, but workmanlike, manner. The Duck Tape holds up to wear and tear quite well, as opposed to coatings, and can be replaced/repaired without any extensive/complex approach.
In the meantime, the original surface remains neatly and effectively shielded from damage under the tape; and can be restored to its original status by simply peeling off the Duck Tape and masking tape below it as if it were just a single layer.
I have no issue with folks who choose another approach; I only ask that this one be considered before one decides to go with a more intensive technique.
Greg
