Atrocity Modifications

[Modified]

private image upload

I'll just leave this here

Shovel AK is a national treasure!

A poor refinsh is a definite turn off for me. Reminds me too much of the "pristine" Winchester Model 64 that I bought back when I first started collecting guns. Turned out to be a Model 94 that had been rebarreled and reblued. Very expensive lesson for me at the time. I would rather have one with zero finish on it than a reblue.

I also tend to shun modified guns unless they have a large amount of "cool factor", such as Caleb's Triple Lock.

As a fine poster recently said;

A modified gun tells us about the owner. An original gun tells us about the designer.

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;

That being said, after giving up on finding an affordable 44 3rd Model Target, I decided to take matters into my own hands. I found an early post war NOS 44 Spl. barrel and a less than pristine 44 2nd Model Target and took them to Keith Ramirez, a local smith whose guns sell in the 30K range, for modification. I decided that as long as I was having something built, it might as well be all mine. I settled on him building me a 5" 3rd Model 44 Target with (gasp) a color cased frame. I suspect it will make the purists cringe.

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:

Poor polishing and rounding of edges are an indication of poor workmanship or lack of knowledge . Some re finishers polish by hand and use a sanding block to keep flats ,flat and corners sharp. the dishing of the side plate and screw holes look bad

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:

gangster mods. bought on GB for the grips. looks to have been tossed from a moving ????? I've actually grown to like it. 10-5 krs

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.

Remember these were near worthless surplus arms that were sold direct ship mail order (pre-1968) for $10-$20 each. That's maybe like spending a hundred bucks today on a high quality arm that is only worth that or less? Why not sport or customize it to your heart's desire. You don't plan on selling it and don't care what it's worth to anyone else 40 or 50 years down the road.

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.

It was a different time and older firearms were not generally regarded as collectable treasures. Times have changed.

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).

 

[Rammer Jammer]

There are bubba'd guns everyone can see faults in.

Most of what I'm seeing on this thread are guns modified in ways others may not appreciate.

Big difference

 

[The Gila Bender]

I got stuck (or stung) with three really bad acquisitions. A pre-model KCPD .357 3.5", a 28-2, and a Colt 1911 Commander. All had been abused, modified, parts swapped, and were in pretty bad shape cosmetically and mechanically. Heck, I couldn't bring myself to take them to my gunsmith due to the grief and shame he would heap upon me (then charge a bundle to attempt to make them functional). All were sold to people who still wanted them even after receiving full disclosure about condition. Glad to be rid of them.

Some modified S&W's are treasures to me, in particular an ugly chopped, bobbed, and shaved 1917 and a nicely chopped .44HE 3rd transitional. Plus a couple Bowen conversions, but those are "nice" mods.

Feast your eyes upon my choppers:

 

[The Gila Bender]

Oh, one more. An M13 Franken Crewman (C368046) acquired from the father of my brother-in-law. It was an unsafe disaster waiting to happen when I got it. Replaced parts include the barrel, cylinder, sideplate, and stocks. It's, um, "safe-er" and it'll shoot.

 

[LLOYD17]

I settled on him building me a 5" 3rd Model 44 Target with (gasp) a color cased frame. I suspect it will make the purists cringe.

I love custom 5" 44 Targets…

I've been meaning to take a group pic of my various custom guns but still have one project that hasn't been sent out yet for completion.

I agree with the statements about helping new collectors on lower budgets buy quality stuff. I'm still one to look for a deal on a lower condition example rather than pay up for a queen especially since I shoot all of mine. There are definitely levels of custom and refinish and it ultimately is up to the buyer to determine their tastes. There are things I have decided I'm not ok with and other things I love that others may detest.

I think one thing we can all agree on is mis-advertised, mis-represented customs. I come across descriptions every now and again on guns for sale where the seller is clearly mis-representing the item and those sellers quickly find themselves on my "No Thanks" list since that gun will fetch more money to an un-informed buyer which is the purpose of the mis-representation in the first place. It's ultimately on the buyer but some sellers I've come across definitely know better.

 

[Mk VII]

Another 'Fitz-ed' gun, painted by Richard Chopping, who called it 'the very devil to paint.

 

[Mk VII]

This was the gun that he painted, owned by Geoffrey Boothroyd who loaned it to Ian Fleming for the purpose, in the rather casual way that one did in those days.

 

[mindbent]

One mans junk is another mans treasure.

 

[Muddyboot]

Some mods are better then others.....

 

[flundertaker]

Some mods are better then others.....

What am I even looking at here? It looks like a barrel less single action something or other minus the top strap. Is this even real?

 

[Muley Gil]

What am I even looking at here? It looks like a barrel less single action something or other minus the top strap. Is this even real?

It is a percussion revolver with a cut-down barrel and a bird's head grip.

It looks like a 1860 Colt Army .44 replica that was cut for a shoulder stock.

 

[Flygas]

A poor refinsh is a definite turn off for me. Reminds me too much of the "pristine" Winchester Model 64 that I bought back when I first started collecting guns. Turned out to be a Model 94 that had been rebarreled and reblued. Very expensive lesson for me at the time. I would rather have one with zero finish on it than a reblue.

I also tend to shun modified guns unless they have a large amount of "cool factor", such as Caleb's Triple Lock.

That being said, after giving up on finding an affordable 44 3rd Model Target, I decided to take matters into my own hands. I found an early post war NOS 44 Spl. barrel and a less than pristine 44 2nd Model Target and took them to Keith Ramirez, a local smith whose guns sell in the 30K range, for modification. I decided that as long as I was having something built, it might as well be all mine. I settled on him building me a 5" 3rd Model 44 Target with (gasp) a color cased frame. I suspect it will make the purists cringe.

Regards,
Bruce

Sent from my SM-S506DL using Tapatalk

Photos, please!

 

[wbraswell]

Yeah, the 1917 was probably bought back when you could get them in American Rifleman for $10. A whole lot of 32-34 Fords, and 55-57 Chevys were cut up for dirt trackers, and I'd bet the old men who did it would laugh about people being critical about what they did. I've made my mistake with polishing and cold blue that I won't post. Personally, I like old cars made into gassers. I'd rather see them on the drag strip, than all polished up, and kept in a garage and never seen and used.

 

[series guy]

One mans custom is another mans abomination. I am directly responsible for three of my four customs. First a Model 25-2 that patterned like a cheap shotgun. Using a .44 Magnum cylinder I had Andy Horvath turn this gun into a very accurate .45 Colt. Then a pretty beat Model 19 and an equally rough Model 15 were turned into .327 Federal Magnums by Mr. Horvath. The fourth I bought already "improved" at a pawn shop. It's a Model 58 machined for a target sight with a Model 57 barrel and the target trigger and hammer. It's an excellent shooter.

 

[Modified]

Yeah, the 1917 was probably bought back when you could get them in American Rifleman for $10. A whole lot of 32-34 Fords, and 55-57 Chevys were cut up for dirt trackers, and I'd bet the old men who did it would laugh about people being critical about what they did. I've made my mistake with polishing and cold blue that I won't post. Personally, I like old cars made into gassers. I'd rather see them on the drag strip, than all polished up, and kept in a garage and never seen and used.

The thing is that's not really the issue here.

When I first saw that 1917 advertised it was labeled "factory modified". With one of those old cars it's pretty obvious to most people spending the large amount of money one costs that has been turned into a gasser. But with old revolvers it's not as obvious to a new collector.

So if we can actually show guns which are wrong in such a way that an amateur collector should either avoid or pay a very small amount of money for we should do that. The motivations of the people who made these modifications in the first place are immaterial.

 

[Old Corp]

I often think of how busy the guys were in the 1950's and 1960's that ran bumper re-chroming shops.
Because, I couldn't COUNT how many used guns I've seen that were so plated.
Back in the day, they would cause admirable 'ooh-ing and ahh-ing'.....
Now - unless the price is really right (which it rarely is) they're just pawn shop fodder.

 

[TXBryan]

Seems every "altered" firearm need be evaluated on a very individual basis and we each make different decisions on personal value. Years ago I picked up a 1958 vintage Colt SAA in .38 Special that sports Smith & Wesson brand adjustable sights. They were expertly installed as were the after-market hand-checkered walnut grips. I always wanted a SAA shooter and I got one.

 

[steelslaver]

Here ya go check out one of my Brazilians after I had fun with it in my shop

 

[Truckman]

Years ago I picked up a 1958 vintage Colt SAA in .38 Special that sports Smith & Wesson brand adjustable sights.

That was once a popular modification on Browning High Powers and Colt Government models...I can't remember the last time I saw one of those......Ben

 

[TXBryan]

Truckman - That was once a popular modification on Browning High Powers and Colt Government models...I can't remember the last time I saw one of those......Ben

Does this kind of thing look at all familiar? This SAA has other issues besides target sights and grips. Someone stored it, for an extended period, in a suede lined holster and one can detect the pattern of the suede in the pits on part of the cylinder and left side of the barrel. It functions flawlessly and is a fine target revolver. And it's still a SAA - generally.