Refinishing old guns? - sacrelige?

[S&W_aussie]

Hi,

Just wondering what people's thoughts were regarding refinishing worn blue, rust, etc on older guns?

I don't think there are too many would have a problem with re-bluing a well worn 27-2 or 60s era model 14 but what about refinishing a 1940s vintage M & P?

These guns are not rare but have a lot of history and many have seen military service but is that really enough reason to leave them in a banged up state? I am sure the original owners tried to keep them in good repair...it is only age and neglect that has let them get into a shoddy state so is it a bad thing to want to restore them to former glory?

I heard a good analogy a couple of weeks back at a gun show - if you owned a classic car would you just let it rust away or would you restore it? ...I'm thinking restoration.

As you can probably tell, I am indecisive about a possible restoration project...any thoughts will be greatly appreciated

Mike

 

[murphydog]

Mike;

You are going to get a lot of opinions on this topic!

If you are considering a refinish of a common gun that has no collector value, and are not intending to restore it to factory-new condition with the attendant cost (as in, you could buy a really nice original one), why not?

How is the early summer down there?

 

[S&W_aussie]

Hey Alan,

Summer is wet so far and going to get wetter! Nice and warm today about 30C

Thanks for that. I am pretty certain that there were over a million of these guns made...not rare by any stretch of the imagination but I know some people are passionate about keeping guns original.

My plan is to do nothing more than have the gun cleaned inside and out, reblued to as close to original as I can (too keep any more rust at bay) and clean the grime out of the grips. I don't want to pretend I have a show-room fresh gun..just something neat and tidy and free from rust.

I own a few old black powder handguns going back to the 1840s. I would never refinish them although I have repaired a couple. I do understand why some people like the idea of not touching them but I wonder where do we draw the line?

If you had a rough looking old Schofield or Russian would you leave it or bring it back from the dead?.....is it ok to refinish nickel guns? ....lots of questions

Mike

 

[Bell Charter Oak Holsters]

This subject has been discussed (almost endlessly) in this forum and typically generates debate. You might use the search feature to review some past threads on this subject to develop some sense of just how polarized peoples opinions can be.

Most collectors generally bane the notion of refinishing, for a variety of reasons. Others will argue that theres nothing wrong with refinishing a "shooter" grade gun. For myself, I believe that it's your gun so do as you please.

Welcome to the forum!

 

[Joe Kent]

I tend to agree with Lefty, it is yours so you should do what pleases you. Plus if the refinish extends the useful life of the tool you are using, so much the better. If it is in fact , "super rare", leave it alone and sell it to a collector and buy a new "use'n gun".

 

[S&W_aussie]

Thanks lads,

I think after reading the posts and other threads on the subject I will be giving it a refinsh...Ill post before and after pics when its done.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Smith357]

I'm generally one of those guys who like to keep things original, unless the gun has been previously altered. For an example an old M&P that has a lot of blue wear and a few rust specks should be left alone, but if the barrel has been cut, the frame round butted, or it has had a bad re-blue, then its a project gun just ripe for a custom job.

 

[RussellD]

I wouldn't refinish anything from the 50's. However I dont see anything wrong with refinishing newer guns. Hard chrome is my preferred finish of choice and one day my children will thank me when they inherit guns that look like new that were covered in hard chrome.

 

[blujax01]

Okay so my first year Highway Patrolman was hard chromed by the owner in the 50's. A commonly accepted practice at the time but now all I hear is "darn shame someone ruined that classic" and look at me like it's my fault!
You cannot please anyone else nor should you try. Refinish it, chrome it, have it engraved, put some Ruby eyed scowling skull faux ivory stocks on it if you want to and wear it proudly. Your gun - your way ...

 

[n4zov]

I'm not going to jump into the storm that will probably follow your questions, but I will comment on your observation: "I heard a good analogy a couple of weeks back at a gun show - if you owned a classic car would you just let it rust away or would you restore it? ...I'm thinking restoration."

Cars and guns are completely different animals as far as restoration is concerned. Restore a 1956 M-B 300SL Gull Wing Coupe and you add to its value. Restore a pre-war Registered Magnum and you virtually destroy its value. Personally I like restoring guns unless they have some unique historical value, but I know it decreases its collector value.

 

[Art Doc]

#21


Restoring or rebuilding guns.

21. If you are asking about refinishing a worn looking gun or rebuilding a beater gun, in the vast majority of cases the cost will exceed the value of the finished product. Just rebluing a revolver will run $250 or more by the time you add shipping costs and refinishing the gun will actually lower its value in most instances. If the gun is an heirloom, or has some special meaning, and you want it looking like new and the cost be damned then go for it. But most times refinishing a gun is not economically feasible. It's almost always cheaper and more satisfying to buy a better looking gun if that's what you really want.

 

[rburg]

I thought we were talking about older guns. Anything with a model number isn't an older gun. And sacrilege isn't even a mild term for what I think of those damaging a fine old firearm. It should be punished by instant death, or maybe forcible sterilization.

Model number guns, unless certifiable as some oddity, are OK to damage or destroy as the owner wishes. Its almost always a loser economically as has been pointed out. You can sell the gun and buy a much nicer version and have ammo or holster money to boot. But refinishing anything with a number up as high as a -2 or worse isn't worth considering an offense against humanity.

 

[rhmc24]

People have their own definitions and often apply them broad-stroke to everything. I will give a few specifics. I'm into pre-1911 Colts, mostly 1902s and 1905s. When I get one that is complete, original, etc working properly, usually with little or no finish, I keep it as-is. I may replace a grip panel or minor part but that old gun is survivor and I help it survive. Others, some I have assembled from parts I collected, I usually refinish but not all. I have now a 1902 slide about 90% waiting to find a fine frame. Recently a 1905 with about 70% high polish blue but patches all over of heavy deep pitting, I polished down to mirror all over and sent frame and slide to Turnbulls to have markings replaced and blued at cost of about $500 -- 6th one I have sent them. Altogether not a money-making proposition but for me it is estate building rather than for the current market.

These early Colt autos particularly the 1905s command respectable prices in most any condition. A nicely restored one is probably worth my investment in time and resources.

I'm reminded hearing a man say I know I paid too much but great old gun and I wanted it. His friend remarked - not too much just too soon---------

 

[rhmc24]

People have their own definitions and often apply them broad-stroke to everything. I will give a few specifics. I'm into pre-1911 Colts, mostly 1902s and 1905s. When I get one that is complete, original, etc working properly, usually with little or no finish, I keep it as-is. I may replace a grip panel or minor part but that old gun is survivor and I help it survive. Others, some I have assembled from parts I collected, I usually refinish but not all. I have now a 1902 slide about 90% waiting to find a fine frame. Recently a 1905 with about 70% high polish blue but patches all over of heavy deep pitting, I polished down to mirror all over and sent frame and slide to Turnbulls to have markings replaced and blued at cost of about $500 -- 6th one I have sent them. Altogether not a money-making proposition but for me it is estate building rather than for the current market.

These early Colt autos particularly the 1905s command respectable prices in most any condition. A nicely restored one is probably worth my investment in time and resources.

I'm reminded hearing a man say I know I paid too much but great old gun and I wanted it. His friend remarked - not too much just too soon---------

 

[feralmerril]

Just know what your getting into. Almost always you will lose money both ways on refinishing. In essence you will be paying $250s to lower the guns value another $250s if/when you sell it.
If for some reason you still want to refinish it and it pleases you, go ahead. Just dont be surprised when you try to sell it. Reblueing never, ever helps the value with the exception that you sell it to a unknowing foolish buyer.

 

[mikepriwer]

A 1940's M&P, coming from a guy in Austrailia, sounds like a Victory
model in 38 S&W. If that is what it is, and if it spent time in WW2
in Austrailia, then we are talking about a gun with some history,
involved in that history, in that part of the world.

In such a case, I think the condition of the gun reflects what it
went through, and I think it would be inappropriate to refinish it,
as it would lose a lot of what it went through. There are a number of
products that will kill and remove rust, without damaging any finish
that may be left. In this context, I would certainly clean it up, and
have any repairs made, if necessary, so that it is functioning properly.
Then I would keep it well oiled, and leave it alone.

Imagine, for a moment, walking into a military museum, and finding
that all the artifacts on display had been restored. I suspect that you
would wonder what you were doing in such a place.

Historically significant items are what they are, in large part because
they are historically significant. I think that is how they should be
maintained.

Mike Priwer

 

[W.E.G.]

This thread is a fun read:
Nouvelle page 0

 

[one eye joe]

A weapon is a man's jewelry according to the Beduin tribesmen. I can understand and appreciate that thinking. I don't own any super rare weaponry and I DO enjoy pride of ownership, so I would rather have a tastefully restored old shooter that doesn't pain me to look at than a beat up old "original". I also own several old hot rods and a completely restored 1967 Corvette Roadster that is un-modified but in showroom condition. I spend my money as I see fit , to satisfy MYSELF. I could NOT care less what anyone else thinks . They can do what THEY want with THEIR weapons and cars and THEIR money. Life's too short to tote an ugly gun or drive a slow and/or ugly automobile IMHO......

 

[just for fun]

After 20 + yrs my brother in law retired from a small police force in North Carolina. When doing so the department gave him his MP model 10 (5 screw). Good cop,but for the most part not a "gun guy" maybe 10% of the blueing is left and the barrel is pitted both inside and out. Timeing and fuction is dead on.
My sister in law gave it to me because, "the kids would just sell it." It would just not be his gun if I were to refinish it. By all standards (other than mine) it's a beater. Still money won't buy it.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Hi,

I heard a good analogy a couple of weeks back at a gun show - if you owned a classic car would you just let it rust away or would you restore it? ...I'm thinking restoration.

Unfortunately (in my view) there is a contingent of car and motorcycle guys who are enamored with "patina" (mostly, I think their stuff just looks like $%^#).

This topic will stir up a lot of folks.

I definitely think some guns can be carefully refinished / rebuilt to be as close to new as possible, and some guns shouldn't. Where's the dividing line?

I think it falls into the "I'll know it when I see it" category...

.