OP
Modified
Member
Shovel AK is a national treasure!
As a fine poster recently said;
That cool factor is usually significantly impacted by poor work. By this point in the thread I hope it is clear to people that I don't object (in fact I love) modifications, but that the modifications like the ones I kicked the thread off show a serious lack of care in their modification.
In your case;
The gun you are going to have (have and aren't showing us? I want to see!) is/will be very cool and reflect your taste and desires. Some people may look at it and turn up their nose, but those are the types of folks who would turn up their nose at anything that wasn't new in box anyway.
Take these fine guns for example:
I have a couple of modified guns that I like! Chopped, channeled, stroked and bored by artists at the John Jovino co.. A 25-2 and 25-5.
Both were fine guns before are are still...
Nothing atrocious here at all. They were modified with care and detail befitting the underlying quality of the gun. The end result is to my way of thinking an even more desirable pair then they were before the work was done.
The thing is:
You are entirely correct here, and more importantly this is something you can gather from pictures. Even bad pictures. New collectors (who we want in our community) should be able to benefit from the experience of those of us who had to "buy an education".
And a gun like this:
when had for a song, is an absolute hoot to own. But this is a gun that, despite the modifications, still shows the character of whoever modified and used it. Unlike the poorly modified guns at the beginning of the thread that covered up the character with the terrible refinishes and slapdash workmanship in the modifications.
What's done is done, and there is no undoing it. Justification for having done it is beside the point. There's no reason even talking about this, and it has nothing to do with this thread.
The point now is to protect people who may not know any better from over paying for guns that may only have value as shooters, if that. Because we live the internet age we can't even know if guns such as the ones I kicked this thread off with are even properly functional. I think it's important that anyone with more experience on these matters try to share that experience.
Based on a lot of responses in this thread they are still not regarded as such.
I had a 4"686 no dash and an early 4"617 round butted in the 80s......S&W liked the idea and started round butting all their revolvers in 1995.
Sometimes you have to build the gun that S&W didn't. Think about all the PPC guns from the 70s. Chopped 39s from the 80s that got us the 6906 and 3913 in the 90s.
No disagreement from me there. A lot of those PPC guns are really neat, when done in a quality manner.
I find it somewhat fascinating how so many people respond to this thread by defending what was done to the guns I kicked the thread off. It makes me worried that such poor quality and questionable modifications are still being done to fine old guns today.
And again, I will say this clearly: I don't object to well modified guns, I simply object to modifications executed in a slapdash manner, or occasionally the ill considered mod. The hammer in the M&P being one of the latter (I worry about the strength of it after whatever was done to it, along with the unsightly nature of it).
...Ben
