Refinishing or Restoring

[Jaxenro]

Ok I know never refinish a firearm. Unlike a car where a high quality restoration enhances the value firearms, knives, etc. should never be refinished and with coins you don’t even want to clean them. Doing so destroys the collector value

But let’s say we are talking a 32 S&W single action top break with maybe 40% nickel remaining. On a really good day the guns worth $300 but that would be a lot. There are just far too many out there in better condition and they aren’t that desirable to begin with. The 38’s and 44’s are far more desirable than the little pocket 32’s and unless there is some proven uniqueness, like a certified famous owner or unique feature, they really don’t have any historical relevance

The problem that I see isn’t so much destroying the collectors value, a $250 gun with a $1,000 restoration will still probably bring $250, but just that. The refinish doesn’t increase the value so from a financial standpoint it is money down the drain.

Simply put you end up with a gun with a lot more invested in it than it’s worth. Is that an issue? Depends on the individual. Have you harmed or destroyed anything? In this case I don’t think so. I wouldn’t restore a rare, desirable, or unique firearm but a run of the mill one with little value to begin with? I don’t think from a historical standpoint it matters just from a financial one

 

[ol777gunnerz]

Never?

Never say never. I have owned a number of valuable S&W single shots & revolvers that had been factory refinished, with provenance belonging to a notable person. Each brought considerably more than a non-refinished same model in excellent condition.

 

[glowe]

Don't be so sure the refinish was the reason why they sold for more than you expected. They might have sold for even more if the wear put on the guns from those owners was evident.

 

[Jaxenro]

I really like the “Eagle Lake” S&W’s. A rich New Yorker had ten of them made for gifts to some lady friends. My problem is they rarely come up for auction and go for a decent amount when they do usually north of $5,000

So will I ever own one? Unlikely. I have to find one at auction and hope there isn’t a person there with more spare cash than I have, which is a lot of people, who also wants it

So do I just live with pictures or take a $200 revolver and have it engraved and refinished to match? At the end of the day it won’t be an Eagle Lake, just a refinished run of the mill, and it definitely won’t be worth what I put into it, but for me it may be worth it.

Wonderful New York Cased and Engraved Smith & Wesson 32 Single Action Revolver Eagle Lake 1892

 

[rct269]

For openers, Gary makes a good point---as usual.

Next is your example of laying out $1,000 for a "restoration". Is that even possible? Certainly, only it wasn't much of a restoration. The last one I knew enough to even talk about was $6,000. Now that wasn't on a little pocket pistol, but the point is whatever you spend your money on ought to make at least a little bit of sense. Spending it on Abraham Lincoln's bedside beater would probably make some sense.

There's a couple of old sayings that might be worth repeating here:

"Look before you leap!"

"Measure twice, cut once!"

Now the bottom line here is the same as always: Not everything you do has to make good sense---or any sense at all----it just has to make you feel good-----YOU, nobody else.

One thing's for sure: You're NEVER going to get a decent following on this topic in a place like this. You, and any followers are going to be the odd men out.

But then again, time passes and things change---just don't hold your breath waiting.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[glenwolde]

I don't like ugly guns. If I was going to keep it I'd probably refinish it. But whatever you spend will be gone. Consider it an entertainment expense.

In my experience having somewhat derelict guns restored, or otherwise brought up to spec, is not a profitable endeavor. Which is not to say that it is not worth it.

I once bought a derelict 6" Model 66-2. This was my choice as a platform for a purely target/range gun. The gun was in pretty rough shape. I sent it off and it got a yoke stretch and a barrel set-back. The timing was reset and I also had them install a .500 wide target trigger, and a DX front sight base. The trigger pull was set to 3# and the gap to .003". Finally, it was bead-blasted to clean up the finish.

Between the base price for the gun and the work that was done it was definitely more than what I could have bought a new-in-box example of the same gun for. Financially it was a bust from a collectors viewpoint. But from a shooter's viewpoint well worth it.

You have no assurance that a new-in-box one doesn't need work. As we all know, sometimes the new ones are jacked up. If you're going to throw it in a safe I guess it doesn't matter. I intended to shoot it a lot. Plus I would have still had the DX front sight base and the target trigger installed.

After the work was done the gun was "right". Not only that, it still is. Some 15 years, and 40,000 rounds later, it's still going strong and shows no signs of significant wear. Now it has been serviced once in that time but only got an inspection and cleaning.

I only shoot .38 cast bullet loads so it should last a long time. Which was the plan. The hundreds of dollars that I paid over an equivalent new gun has been amortized over a lot of years and a lot of rounds. I place a lot of value in having that same gun last me so long and having it set up to my liking. What I wanted to do was to add a couple of features to a 6" K frame and shoot the same load out of the same gun for as long a period of time as possible.

Mission accomplished and well worth the cost. I don't expect it to bring much once I am no longer able to shoot it. Sometimes it's not about the money. This is my hobby not my livelihood. Let's have some fun.

 

[Photog]

Seems like English rifles, especially doubles and big game rifles, increase in value significantly when factory refurbished, as they call it. U.S. arms usually are the exact opposite. As for cars, mentioned by the OP, you may increase value by restoring one, but you will rarely get the money back that you spent on restoration. If you look at a top restoration, of say a 1970 Challenger R/T, it may cost you upwards off 85K to have it professionaly restored. That does not include the origional cost of the car. So you can easily have 120K in your car and when it sells, you will be lucky to get 80K for it. I think if you want to have a gun restored, then do it if you are doing it for yourself. But, if you go to sell it, you will almost certainly lose money.

 

[deadin]

I have a finished challenged, (but as tight as it left Monkey Wards in 1900) 44/40 DA Top Break that I kind of like the family story that it got that way by hanging on a peg in a chicken coop in Eastern Montana early last century.. Don’t know just how many critters it discouraged, but I imagine quite a few.
Prime example of a candidate for restoration, but why??

 

[Ameshawki]

I've had guns reblued/refinished twice. From an economic prospective I'm not sure either made any sense. I tell myself I won't do it again.

 

[BMur]

Restoration

This really is a very broad subject. Some guns should be left alone.
However, if pushed, I will proudly stand with RESTORATION most every time.
Why?
Because a very large percentage of antiques found are in miserable condition and/ or if not restored they will be lost from heavy decay and neglect.

I just finished this antique reloading tool box restoration yesterday . Without restoration it would have basically disintegrated.

I’ve restored many antique firearms in this condition to PRESERVE THEM. If done right the value does increase considerably.

Often times also the decay that can often be misinterpreted as PATINA is like cancer. If it’s not removed completely it will consume the antique.

Murph

 

[mikerjf]

You're not "restoring" or "refinishing", you are making a replica of a specific historical firearm. (Which is pretty cool, thanks for the link!)

Obviously you are starting with a real Smith, but you are using it to create a copy of a specific historical Smith. Much like somebody taking an old Colt and making a replica Fitz.

As long as the monetary outlay is worth it to you, I say go for it. I've done it with shotguns.

 

[gmborkovic]

Some collectors choose to stabilize or conserve. But Im an ancient ole
gun guy.

 

[Jaxenro]

Lots of good answers. I’m not looking for consensus or agreement, at the end of the day it’s my money and my enjoyment that matter to me.

Yes fine English shotgun barrels are often rebrownd, it is almost expected, but it is different.

I like how you described it I am in a way thinking of a replica more than a restore. Is it cost effective? No. Will I recoup the money? No. Do I care? That is the question. Custom engraving rarely increases the value by what it costs to have done but it seems like many guns are engraved each year

What I don’t like about restoring is you lose insight into how the factory delivered the gun. I would not do it to a rare or historically significant example. But a run of the mill $250 gun that they made 50,000+ and most of the finish is gone i don’t think it matters

 

[glowe]

You can find a near perfect 32 SA out there if you watch the auctions for and for less than $1,000. All original, unique and in demand, unlike a refinished gun.

 

[Jaxenro]

You can find a near perfect 32 SA out there if you watch the auctions for and for less than $1,000. All original, unique and in demand, unlike a refinished gun.

Yes I have a couple of them. Just not engraved and partly gold plated

We all agree this isn’t cost effective. Financially it is a loser

My question is more along the line of does refinishing (or using as a base for replicating a different gun) a gun that basically has no collectors value (I.e. under $300) wrong?

There were some beautiful gold inlayed Smiths that were shown in exhibitions and are in museums today. My only chance of owning a similar one would be to use a actual old Smith and have it inlayed and engraved to match

Legally I may own it so what I do with it is my businesses but I tend to go with the concept when dealing with historical artifacts even if I own it then I have a obligation to preserve them for future generations after I am gone.


Trying to find a line I am comfortable with between preserving the past and enjoying the present.

 

[mchom]

My thoughts …

As long as the owner is aware of what they are doing I think it’s perfectly fine.

Here is a registered magnum restored by Turnbull (I hesitate to say restored because it’s Turnbull’s charcoal blue) and the polishing does not replicate original factory pre war guns but in most other aspects once could say restored. And with Persinger mammoth ivory stocks.

This was a completely gratuitous expense. I’ll never recover the money I spent. But it was all in good fun. FYI… The gun came to me poorly refinished with hideous electro pencil work done to it.
Some would say this was a huge waste of money …
But too me it was well worth it
I too cannot stand guns that are ugly due to poor work or abuse.
I have others that of course I would not modify or restore.

Doing a project gun just for the fun of it would be cool.

So both the purist collector camp AND the custom / restoration camp can both be right. Just depends on each gun and its owner. It sounds to me that you should do the project. Again just my 2 cents

 

[brendonjames65]

Ok I know never refinish a firearm. Unlike a car where a high quality restoration enhances the value firearms, knives, etc. should never be refinished and with coins you don’t even want to clean them. Doing so destroys the collector value

But let’s say we are talking a 32 S&W single action top break with maybe 40% nickel remaining. On a really good day the guns worth $300 but that would be a lot. There are just far too many out there in better condition and they aren’t that desirable to begin with. The 38’s and 44’s are far more desirable than the little pocket 32’s and unless there is some proven uniqueness, like a certified famous owner or unique feature, they really don’t have any historical relevance

The problem that I see isn’t so much destroying the collectors value, a $250 gun with a $1,000 restoration will still probably bring $250, but just that. The refinish doesn’t increase the value so from a financial standpoint it is money down the drain.

Simply put you end up with a gun with a lot more invested in it than it’s worth. Is that an issue? Depends on the individual. Have you harmed or destroyed anything? In this case I don’t think so. I wouldn’t restore a rare, desirable, or unique firearm but a run of the mill one with little value to begin with? I don’t think from a historical standpoint it matters just from a financial one

You ask an interesting question. Many purists on this forum will state a restoration and/or refinish or any modifications diminishes collector value but there is hypocrisy I’ve found! It seems any S&W factory refinish gets a pass! There have been many RM, NRM, TL and various rare pre war S&W revolvers, many with excellent provenance, that have been sent back to the factory for refinishing, both re nickel and re bluing, sometimes many years later from the date of manufacture.

These guns seem to all get a pass from the collectors because the factory did the refinish. A factory refinish certainly doesn’t harm collector value I’ve seen. Yet a non factory refinish, perhaps even better done than the factory, does not get a pass! Oh the horror, the horror the purists shout! Also non factory engraving gets a pass when done by a notable engraver as well as period correct aftermarket sights and grips, all get a pass.

Many purists shake their fist at the sky and gnash their teeth when discussing Heavy Duty and Outdoorsman’s with cylinders bore out to 357, a common modification of the times, yet I can assure you some of these same people have one right now in their safe which is bored out but they dare not slip a 357 into the cylinder lest they find out the truth!

In fact I would suspect more than a few collectors on this forum have a Chicoin refinished cylinder or barrel on their vintage S&W revolver that they will take to the grave before announcing this! All is not as it appears I suspect. Some purists I’ve seen on the Colt forum take it to the extreme, opining that so much as replacing a screw ruins the collector value!

So to sum up:

Factory refinish by S&W gets a pass.

Non factory engraving not only gets a pass, but done by a notable master engraver greatly enhances the value.

Non factory refinish does not get a pass! Even if better done than the factory!

Modifications as a general rule do not get a pass unless done by Hamilton Bowen and maybe a couple other notable custom revolver-smiths.

And lastly restorations. The purist on this forum do not give a pass! Why waste your money it’s a shooter they say! Or they will be mildly condescending, “gee, your lucky you have a nice shooter, I could never shoot mine.” I personally feel that a Turnbull or C&S restoration for example, is perfectly acceptable and can be quite beautiful to behold. I believe there is nothing wrong with this if it pleases the owner.

Here is my S&W Registered Magnum beautifully restored by Cylinder & Slide with Keith Brown grips and yes I do shoot it!

 

[Jaxenro]

I think I am dividing old top breaks into collectible versus what is often called “shooters”. To me collectible is anything with a unique feature, a factory longer than normal barrel length, or a historical customer, or pristine condition. Those I would leave as is

But the rest to me are fair game to engrave, restore, refinish, or anything else

 

[gmborkovic]

If you want a drippy, new mint gun, just buy one and leave the old crusty,
rusty stuff to us old guys. We have a different viewpoint. We stabilize/conserve antiques.

 

[BMur]

Not Original!

Share a quick story;
Years ago at Butterfields in San Francisco an old “Purist collector” friend and I attended a sizable auction preview.
We examined a wonderful collection and I was having the time of my life until he walked up to one very rare 1st year in fact 1st one produced Colt Thunderer that had been restored but it was gorgeous and a very early restoration.
“THIS IS A TRAVESTY”!!! He shouted at the top of his lungs! He proceeded to literally have a break down. I backed up several paces until he calmed down. Walked up to him and said “CALM DOWN MAN”!
That refinished/restored antique sold for $7,000!

Murph