Period correct, quality refinishing - why does it kill collector value?

[handejector]

We are about 180 degrees apart.

I don't collect cars or coke machines. Nothing wrong with collecting either. I simply have no interest. I like to look at the old ones, even the pretty restored ones. I enjoy it. I am glad people like it.
However, IF old cars and coke machines were EVER FOUND in mint condition, believe me, the owners of the old, mint, ORIGINAL condition cars and coke machines would make a BIG DEAL out of pointing out that mine is ORIGINAL, NOT refinished......

So, we are talking about apples and oranges.

I simply do not understand refinishing a gun.
If it is a modern gun, why not buy one in better condition?
I see it everyday-
"I found a 19-3 NIB with tools and papers, and CAN'T bring myself to shoot it! It might lower the value $21.83!"
Next breath- "Honey, let's meet the kids at Longhorn's and spend $185...." "the cruise will only be $2850..."
duhhhh........

If it is Granpappy's pistol that looks like Hell, why in the Hell would you refinish it? If Granpappy had wanted to storm ashore or shoot Dillinger with a new, shiny pistol, we should assume he would have bought a new one. We should also assume the wear on it is from years/decades/centuries of dependable/comforting/reliable service. Leave it like it is and pay $5000 for a mint example of the same gun if you must have a mint one.

I deal guns for a living.
I have traded guns for well over 4 decades.
I was trading guns before I could drive. I'd make a deal, and Mom or Dad would pick up the gun.
I remember my first Colt SA. I was 14. 1st gen 4-3/4 Nickel 44/40. I took it into the shop where my mentor worked. He said "not a bad gun, Lee, but you know it is refinished...." I was crushed. It was good enough to fool this kid. However, it sold quickly thru an ad in the Atlanta paper, and I paid for the ad and made about 8 or 9 dollars on the $165 sale price.

There are plenty of good, clean guns around. There are way more guns with some degree of wear. I prefer a worn shooter to a reblued shooter. I simply want factory finishes on my guns. Period. I've owned many thousands of guns. Never had one reblued. Never will.
If a gun is too worn/ugly for even me, it goes away. There is a better one somewhere........

As a dealer, I should be glad people now accept reblued guns. 30-40 years ago, it was the kiss of death.
"I'll sell it cheap!"
"I don't want it."
"I'll sell it to you even cheaper!"
"I still don't want it!"

Reblued and renickeled guns occasionally find their way into my safe, but they always have my price tag on them. They are not for me.

I don't spend a lot of time trying to change hearts and minds, or getting upset over what other people do (if they don't impinge on my universe).

Do what you want.
Collect what you like.
Spend your money as you wish.

 

[Jim Watson]

The late Bill Adair had a reputation of doing restoration grade work at a cost within the value of the gun. Collectors tell me that there were signs of the work having been done, but to the layman, they looked awful good.

I read about the award winning (and losing) Marlin that Mr Turnbull discovered as being a product of his shop. I really think that restorationists should mark their work in a discreet but unmistakeable way. John Bivens said he did. But a collector told me that if you can't tell the difference you have no business dealing in high end guns.

I remember reading old Shotgun News advertisements for DelGrego Parkers. They were not worth as much as a pristine original, but they were worth more than a well used hunting gun, and they were respectable in most circles. I thought that would lead to general acceptance of restored guns, but it has been very slow in coming and is very expensive.

 

[2152hq]

Pretty bold statement w/o an answer to it in Turnbulls "When someone asks if restoration will affect the value of the firearm......" pitch on his web page.
Comparing the restoration efforts done to the original Bill of Rights, US Constitution, etc ,,,and wether those articles have lost any value becaue of it,,,might be reason that his restoration work won't leave your gun devalued is quite a leap.

For one,,I don't think those articles of history ever go in for a 'make it new' do-over.
Sometimes people just plainly miss the point of the word 'restoration'.
If properly done,,the best compliment for the work is none at all ( if you didn't see it in it's former state).

Anyway,,no matter how well done the work is,,it's still a re-worked gun and collector value is in originality.

Unless of course the reworked gun is presented as an original, then some big money has been made with them.
Not so much with DA revolvers (yet) but the high grade shotgun, Colt SA and Winchester and Marlin levergun world is full of 'original' redone guns,,,and upgrades too.
A number change gets you a matching factory letter too.

 

[Andy Griffith]

The majority of the time, refinishing a gun doesn't make economic sense. Restoration may make economic sense in certain, but rare circumstances.

Also, the consensus is that good, true professional restorations just try to stabilize the condition at where it is rather than bring it up to a somewhat factory new look. Restoration may be installing broken parts, but these parts are conditioned to match the rest of the wear on the arm in question. This is what I like- good, true wear on a honest firearm. I have some with as little as 10% finish left that I love because the piece has character.

Here you go (my personal collection, no copyright infringement):

I could never refinish this old war horse! The barrel is almost knife edged on one side from wear at the muzzle! Shoots great though.


One of the worst things I know of from talking to a S&W customer service guy- is some collectors/accumulators send back cylinders to be reblued on brand new guns because of the faint turn ring- and they can't stand having that ring there. Nuts.

I've only had two guns refinished in my life- both were "salvaged personalizations" on guns that had no collector value, but are great shooters that I enjoy. The value from these pieces was how they shot (I got both for nothing ) and so still had little in them after refinishing.

 

[deadin]

Also be aware that a "factory refinish" will be whatever the current factory finish is and not necessarily what the factory finish was at the time the gun was made.

 

[mikepriwer]

Rhetoric aside, collectors value original finish, and a gun loses value
as its percent of original finish diminishes. A refinished gun has
zero original finish. You can disagree with the logic of that, at your
own peril.

A related issue is that most early finishes involved processes that are
nearly impossible to recreate. Some were not bluing at all, in the
context of today; they are the effect/result of packing the parts in
bone charcoal, and then baking at high temperatures.

Also, the steel of the early guns is very different from the steels
of today, and those early steels do not chemically blue the same way
that modern steels do.

The key point, however, is to be aware of what collectors value -
like it or not.

Mike Priwer

 

[SDH]

Some of you are looking for the term conservation, where a historic article is returned to sound condition with no worry of further deterioration.

As for my "reblued" single shot, I view it as a "custom" project as are many of Turnbull's creations. I did it for my own collection and personal satisfaction.

As for recreating history finishes, believe me there is nothing that cannot be duplicated by today's craftsmen. I have done restoration and conservation work on a few of my own guns but I don't own a "reblued" gun.
I enjoy and appreciate the discussion by all on this subject.
(BTW: thanks for the nice comments!)

 

[handejector]

Now, we have inevitably settled into the semantics game.

Conserved is a valid term. If Ol' Betsy ever surfaced from the battle of the Alamo, I should certainly want to see it conserved.
Restored? -- NO.

Conserved, restored, refinished, reblued......

All reblued guns have definitely not been "restored" nor "conserved".
However, by definition, in my mind at least, any gun wearing blue that is not the blue it left the factory with has been reblued, whether it was restored, conserved, or simply refinished.


As I have aged and taken some of the blows life delivers to us all, I have evolved to usually considering the glass to be half full, but in this matter, I definitely consider it to be half empty.

Some guns are worn.
Some are worn very badly.
I simply view them for what they are, as they are.
If one is a gun I want to keep, I live with it as it is.
If one is below the threshold I can tolerate, I don't buy it, OR, if it came with others, I move it along.

To me, the idea is to hunt and to seek out nifty guns that I want.
NOT to create them.

To each his own.
None of this is criticism.
My first post in this thread ends with......

Do what you want.
Collect what you like.
Spend your money as you wish.

......so, I don't need to say it again.

 

[JSR III]

As many have stated, purist collectors are looking for quanity of original finish. Obviously the gun with a mint original finish is worth more than one in say 75% condition. The same can be said for boxes and tools. There are many folks that see no harm in taking a period box and tools and "putting together" what appears to be an original package. Unfortunately, they did not ship together and will never be an original package. Wouldn't the gun that came from the factory that still has its original box and tools be more of a prize find than one someone assembled. Unfortunately, will anyone know the difference in 50 years???

Smith & Wesson must have realized the difference as they marked refinished guns with a star. At least those guns were refinished by S&W.

As far as other collectibles or objects of value, would you still consider the Mona Lisa as valuable if I took it home and broke out my paint by numbers kit and spruced the old girl up a little??? How about that old bottle of Dom Perignon from the first year in 1921. Would you still value it the same if I drank the wine and replaced it with some 2003 Ripple???

Obviously, we are all entitled, so far anyways, in these here free United States, to do whatever we want with our old Smith & Wessons. However, if I as a collector don't think that your refinished, reboxed, restocked gun is as valuable as a true original and choose to pay you less for it, then that is my perogative as well.

 

[rburg]

Boy, do I own a bunch of refinished guns. Yep.

As for why some refinished guns aren't worth nearly as much as an original finish. Well to me, and its my money I'm spending, they just aren't, usually.

There are refinished guns worth more. Those are the one's I've got the bunch of. They're engraved, some inlaid. Those are all by definition refinished. It doesn't bother me a bit. Anytime a gun is engraved, the engraver or his selected sub contractor puts a new finish on the gun. Its the way it is. And generally a good engraver will outdo the factory work by a mile. OK, I've got a few factory engraved guns. I know whereof I speak, and the factory ones just aren't as nice.

The next class of guns are "reworked" guns. I have no idea what that really means. I'd like it if someone here could enlighten me. The * beside the serial can mean many things. The classic answer is it means refinished or reworked. That last may be the kiss of death, or just a broken part replaced. To a collector, it often is the same kiss of death.

But there are guns so rare or seldom seen I'm not afraid to pick them up, * or not. The 44 3rd target is one. It has the nasty * by the serial. And no one has adequately explained to me what they did to my gun. Its worn enough I don't care. And I'm only aware of one other example, so I'm not sending it to the scrap yard.

And I've got an early K22 postwar. Its K155*. I'm again clueless as to the work done to earn it a *. In that situation, the * is into the blue. It means someone hit it with the * stamp. So I just assume it was a "major part" they replaced. So its my shooter. And a good one at that.

I don't share Lee's aversion to refinished or reworked guns. If its rare enough or interesting enough (to me), I'll buy it. Yes, the amount I'm willing to pay may be seriously reduced. But I'm still interested depending on what it is.

 

[mikepriwer]

I'm with Dick Burg, conceptually. If a gun is rare/scarce enough,
and I want the gun, I have no problem with the fact that it's
refinished. It may be the only one I will ever see.

Mike Priwer

 

[Fuego]

Does not the "museum quality" begin to be a factor? Would a museum prefer to have an unfinished antique in it's collection vs. a restored antique?

And do not the larger museums have a restoration department that works over old paintings and artifacts to restore them?

That said, is there anything sadder than seing a chrome plated Luger?

 

[DWFAN]

This is a very interesting subject to me. I restore S&W stocks. I restore them period correct. That means they look the way they should for the period. 100 year old stocks do not look new. There are exceptions but they are rare. Lee, Mike, and SDH make valid statements. They are not original. My restorations are not original. They are representative of what they should look like given proper care. Lee has examined some of my work and asked, how did you do that? The point is it's NOT original. People accept my work because the finished product fits the time frame. This is not easy to do. How do you finish a gun to be period correct? I think it could be done but at what cost and who are you trying to fool? Guns are like coins. They have grades. Originality is the foundation of that grade. The other side of the coin put's refinished guns in a category in a new light. People want nice guns and are willing to pay for them. They don't care if they are refinished. That market will always exist. These people are foolish, are being taken for their money and don't care. God bless them. Makes my stuff worth more. Just an old mans nickles worth.
DW

 

[beagleye]

One thing about original finish-

Original finish preserves a kind of record of what has happened to the gun and how it has been treated. The marks and wear all make me wonder about all those past days and history. If it has been cared for it shows. I really enjoy that.

Once the gun has been refinished all that history is washed away and the way it was treated also becomes a question mark.


Pete

 

[pangris]

This has evolved into a very interesting discussion.

The concept of engraving caught my attention.

Hypothetical situation -

Someone buys something rare, say a 29-1, that isn't mint, or close to it.

They send it off to a master engraver and have the full monty applied - as well, as noted, as a refinish - assume a masterful blue job, as well as one can be applied.

Now what is it worth?

More, because of the class A engraving and perfect finish, or less, as is no longer originial?

 

[P&R Fan]

Count me in lockstep agreement with Beagleye, Misty and Lee. There's just something interesting about good honest wear on a gun. How many times have we said "If only it could talk"? In my opinion refinishing takes some of that away. Sure, it may look good, but there's just an intangible value that is lost, at least for me.
Several people have mentioned cars and other collectibles, but I have an example that I think hits closer to home. I've been married for over 21years to a beautiful Woman. She's a Cougar. (I'm 45, she turns 50 in a few weeks). She is a total fox, in fact she was a fashion model before I met her. She has often remarked that she would like to stave off the aging process with plastic surgery someday (When she gets REALLY old). I tell her absolutely not. I think Women get better looking as they get older. Yeah, I'm not stupid, I'm sucking up, but that doesn't mean it's not true. Sure, she's aged in the years we've been together, but so have I. There's only one way to stop the aging process and that's the dirt nap. I think she has only gotten more beautiful over the years. I'd hate to spend a bunch of money to have her look different, even if SHE thought she looked better. It's the same with guns, that wear usually got there honestly, and to my eye a refinish only hides that. If I want a new looking gun, I'll buy a new gun. If I want a new looking Wife I'll........never mind.
Now excuse me while I go comb my REALLY COOL gray hair.

 

[TheHobbyist]

The subject is somewhat analogous to antiques, refinished furniture versus period correct for example.

I think there are some benefits to be noted here as well. For instance, if a person has a smaller budget, they may be able to acquire a nice example of a particular model in varying condition for a price they can afford. They are still enjoying the hobby and can aspire to a nicer example down-the-road should they choose.

 

[bettis1]

My answer to the "To refinish or not refinish, that is the question!" riddle is: "It depends".

I once owned a first year Triple Lock that was so perfect that it looked like it should still be in the factory vault. The only indication that might lead you to believe that it must be refinished was that logic just told you that a gun couldn't be almost 100 years old and still look that good. Roy saw it and agreed. He suggested that it might have been factory refinished back many years ago and just didn't get marked. He lettered it as such.

I have one Registered Magnum that is a true 99% gun...except for the fact that it has a small 7.42 stamped on the frame. Is it a factory original finish? Well, I don't know. I don't know if that that stamp referred to the finish or not but if it did, the same workmen who put on the FIRST ORIGINAL factory finish also put on SECOND ORIGINAL factory finish. Is it worth less because of that stamp, probably so, but it would be hard to logically support that argument in an objective debate.

I have another non-Registered Magnum that came from an old estate in an obviously reblued condition. To make matters worse, that old bad reblue was very worn...indicating that it had had an "active life in its later years. Because it had been a "user" gun, I was perfectly happy to leave it as it was. That was until the letter came back and said that it was originally shipped as a very uncommon nickel non-RM. Additionally it had been sent to a lawman and carried by him in his career in two different agencies. That settled it for me and I had it "restored" to the original condition. Had it been just any old gun, I would have been content to leave it as it was but since the "original" finish was long gone I am comfortable in having it put back as near as possible to when first shipped. I've shown it before but here it is again to make my point.

Bob

 

[rburg]

Someone buys something rare, say a 29-1, that isn't mint, or close to it.

They send it off to a master engraver and have the full monty applied - as well, as noted, as a refinish - assume a masterful blue job, as well as one can be applied.

Now what is it worth?

Too many variables in your situation. An engraved gun assumes the value of the engraving. The term "Class A" doesn't apply. The factory probably won't do the job of your "master engraver". I know that one might get me in trouble.. but.... my opinion is the factory doesn't employ the best engravers. They employ those who are willing to work for them. Not bad, but not the best.

So your engraved gun suddenly is valued more for the art work applied than for the raw material used. Sure, the gun itself does add or detract some from the total price. But if you take a gun worth $2000 and then add another $2000 worth (cost) of engraving, the result probably isn't a $4000 gun. It probably turns into a $3,000 gun or less.

Its why I prefer to buy my guns already engraved. I graciously allow the person who commissioned the work and paid for it to take the sizeable loss. Then I attempt to skin him. It usually works.

The sum isn't greater than the components. You have the added bonus of being able to see the completed work, not just have a vision of it.

Often you can find a gun with $2000 worth/cost of work done, and purchase it for less than that amount. So you get the gun for free, so to speak. But while you're getting a work of art, its still a refinished work of art.

Understand also this is thread drift. Engraved guns assume a different kind of collector value. Those who only collect pristine examples turn up their noses at engraved guns (unless they're factory engraved.)

To separate me more from some collectors here.... I actually carry some of my guns. Yes, both the not perfect older ones, and the engraved ones! I have a tiny collection of 44s that are less than perfect. Very nice, but not perfect. My 4" triple-lock, my 4" 3rd models, and even my postwar 3rd model. And now Lee was generous enough to accept full price on his 1950 (4th model.) Yes, they've all been loaded up, fired for function, and now carried. Just for the fun of it. Its one advantage of collecting slightly less than perfect guns. You can use them for the purpose they were built. You can't do that with the perfect examples.

 

[pangris]

Too many variables in your situation. An engraved gun assumes the value of the engraving. The term "Class A" doesn't apply. The factory probably won't do the job of your "master engraver". I know that one might get me in trouble.. but.... my opinion is the factory doesn't employ the best engravers. They employ those who are willing to work for them. Not bad, but not the best.
...

Its why I prefer to buy my guns already engraved. I graciously allow the person who commissioned the work and paid for it to take the sizeable loss. Then I attempt to skin him. It usually works.

Then I attempt to skin him... A man after my own heart!!

I again may have shown my inexperience in the term "class A" - didn't mean factory per say, just full coverage and top shelf quality.

Ah, the beauty of individuality.

I've rarely been one for engraved guns myself, but I'm drifiting into unfamiliar territory with some of these.

For example, I have a 29 6.5" no dash that is 95-97%.

Can't decide whether to never shoot it again and consider it art, or say to hell with it and take a deer or two.

Possibly find a twin to it and have them engraved for my sons (identical twins), killing all value to anyone not bearing our name.

Eh. Options, options...