want opinions


PDA






wizard
December 26, 2010, 03:41 PM
I have a Colt Vest pocket .25 auto in perfect functional condition but showing the effects of 100 years of being carried. I am tempted to re-blue but would like the opinion of others as to whether I should.

If you enjoyed reading about "want opinions" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
*Klutch*
December 26, 2010, 03:46 PM
just my opinion, you should never reblue a gun of that age. Let it show 100 year wear marks, it 100 years old.

sansone
December 26, 2010, 03:50 PM
if you just want it blued for your own pleasure then go ahead. If you want it blued to increase resale value then do not

wizard
December 26, 2010, 03:55 PM
OK. Thanks guys. Guess I'll leave it alone. This thing was carried by my Dad and grandad and me as a backup. Not much but great in a knife fight.

The Lone Haranguer
December 26, 2010, 09:33 PM
I have a Colt Vest pocket .25 auto in perfect functional condition but showing the effects of 100 years of being carried.
That is called "patina." :)

It is doubtful that even the best refinishers or restorers could exactly duplicate the original bluing process used, and the cost would likely exceed the value of the gun. A poor job (e.g., edges rounded off, letter/number stampings blurred) will look far worse than the patina. Given those choices I would leave it alone.

MidwestRookie
December 26, 2010, 09:34 PM
yep, definitely let it shine in it's historically worn glory...

stanger04
December 26, 2010, 09:40 PM
you should really post a pic, don't see many old guns. Nice to remember history. That's why I get on here it's a gun show everyday,lol.

bestseller92
December 26, 2010, 10:30 PM
Honestly I think if you take a .25 ACP to a knife fight you just might end up gettin' stuck....

stanger04
December 26, 2010, 10:38 PM
I have a .25 DUO which is a cheap gun but a great Browning copy and is stamped 1943. I love it, weighs more than my G19,lol. I also love the history with it as DUO refused to make guns for Hitler, to me that makes it a gun worth having and a gun is a gun, I'd rather have it and never need it than be naked.

As for getting stuck, yeah it might happen but the attacker will be shot and he/she will be as miserable as I am. Plus with my gun they better go to the hospital, the cops will get them and if they don't they'll die cause I use lead bullets. Lead poisoning is a long and painful B*t*h, plus I'd aim for the gut, hurts really bad and bleeds a lot.

bestseller92
December 26, 2010, 11:08 PM
Make no mistake, the Colt .25s are beau coup cool guns and I'd love to have one. But I'd never rely on any .25, given any reasonable alternative. The idea is to select a weapon that will keep you out of ICU, not just send your antagonist there to keep you company.

stanger04
December 26, 2010, 11:28 PM
The best tool to stay out of ICU is your brain. Stay out of bad areas, park in well lit areas, and always find a way to walk away first, sometimes swallowing your pride is the best way to win a fight.

Shadow 7D
December 26, 2010, 11:39 PM
It will destroy the value of the gun as a 'collector' piece, but, if done properly, add durably and beauty, and not knock off too much on how much it's worth,

jfrey
December 26, 2010, 11:40 PM
While the .25 is not the optimum defense caliber, the little Colt guns are well made and becoming a collector's item in certain areas. The .25 beats a rock in a fight if you have the chance to use it first. They make great hide away guns and the .25 bullet will make you hurt if you get hit with one.

I called Colt and they asked the serial number and told me what year mine was made. I also got a copy of the dis-assembly instructions.

bestseller92
December 27, 2010, 12:29 AM
Very true, stanger04.

easyg
December 27, 2010, 01:14 PM
The .25 beats a rock in a fight if you have the chance to use it first.
It depends upon the size of the rock.

A bowling ball sized rock to your opponent's cranium will probably do more damage than a .25 to his cranium. :evil:

rocky1
December 27, 2010, 02:12 PM
As everyone seems to be pointing out, it's not much of a self defense weapon, (but if you got the BG arms length away, point it at his forehead and squeeze the trigger, he's probably going to drop like a rock).


Either way, I'd consider collector's value, if it isn't too beat up. I'm sure there'll be a whole bunch of folks that will argue it, but... There is a point in a gun's life where beat up exceeds the loss of value found in refinishing the gun. It then becomes a matter of personal satisfaction.

Pictures here might help you get another 47 opinions, or you can make a trip to your local "trustworthy" gunsmith and ask him for his "honest opinion", as to whether it should be re-blued. Better yet, try and find a local collector, and ask his opinion. Determine what it's worth in present condition, and what it's worth reblued, and ask yourself if it's wise to do it. If you aren't going to further destroy value of the gun, if it's reblued, then why not. If it's going to destroy value of the gun, I'd say no, keep it like it is.

sxcamaro05
December 27, 2010, 03:34 PM
Even with wear marks, do not get it reblued! Once you do this the value of the firearm decreases sharply. Wearing adds character and shows a gun that was not a safe queen but has quite some actual history attatched to it. A guy I know had his Winchester 94 reblued and the stock redone. Cost him $400 and when he took it to get it appraised for resale, the number that came back was about less than half of what he expected.

If you enjoyed reading about "want opinions" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!