Factory Refinish


PDA






highpower
October 6, 2012, 11:36 AM
The thread on refinishing the Model 10 that HKGuns started has me pondering a question about the effect of factory refinishing on the value of a firearm.

Let me start off my saying that I believe in leaving a firearm alone and avoid refinishing if at all possible. However, there are times where a guns original finish or general condition would warrant a cosmetic upgrade.

I was wondering why there is so much stigma on having a gun redone if it is done by the factory that made it in the first place. On the Colt forum you will see now and again someone has sent their Python back to the factory due to extreme finish wear and they come back looking absolutely new. I really haven't seen any good pictures of a gun that was redone by S&W recently so I can't say how their refinishes come out now, but the ones that I have seen that were done in years gone by looked as though they hadn't been refinished at all.

In fact the only way that it could be discerned that they had been refinished was the rework mark that Smith puts on the inside of the grip frame.

I agree that you are always taking a chance with a non-factory refinish as I have seen some guns that were just ruined by incompetent work. I have a Colt New Service that was refinished many years ago that was apparently a fairly rusty gun as you can see very fine pitting under the "new" bluing. The good part of what was done to it is that is wasn't buffed to death and all the corners are sharp and the roll marks are still crisp. Also the screws remain un-buggered up. Of course, if it had been a perfect gun, I would have had to pay a lot more than I did for it.

http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/New-Service/i-nvSwB8b/0/XL/IMG0836-XL.jpg
http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/New-Service/i-MSKZjzv/0/XL/IMG0837-XL.jpg
http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/New-Service/i-hvRqqWx/0/XL/IMG0855-XL.jpg

Now to my current dilemma: I recently bought a 1959 vintage Model 29 Smith and Wesson with a 4" barrel that has a ton of holster wear. Cosmetically it looks bad, but the mechanics are great with no end shake and it locks up tight. I have an original set of grips ready to install on it, but quite frankly they are in much better condition than the rest of the gun. I bought it cheap enough that if I was to send it back to the factory I believe it would still be worth more than what I have in it. Regardless of whether I refinish it or not I intend to shoot it but it really isn't intended to be a carry gun as I have others that fill that role.

http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/S/i-N9kZPTX/0/XL/IMG1585-XL.jpg
http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/S/i-Fk2KZvg/0/XL/IMG1586-XL.jpg
http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/S/i-QWwJ6ZG/0/XL/IMG1591-XL.jpg
http://highpower.smugmug.com/Firearms/S/i-sq4DMvs/0/XL/IMG1590-XL.jpg

So the question is, How much does a factory refinish effect the value? I understand that certain guns are just too valuable to refinish and should at all cost be left alone (think early Colt single actions), However, if a particular gun is below a certain level of original finish would a factory refinish really kill the value of it?

Your thoughts and comments appreciated.

If you enjoyed reading about "Factory Refinish" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
pendennis
October 6, 2012, 11:56 AM
Ultimately, it's the owner's choice, since it boils down to collecting or "amassing".

If you want a firearm that remains a "shooter" grade, and you're aware of what refinishing does to the value, then have the firearm refinished. It's your property, and no one else needs to decide for you.

Collectors always bemoan anything done to the firearm after it left the factory; even replacing the stocks.

Colt, Ruger, S&W, et al, are all in the firearms manufacturing business. As such, they produce tools, and very little in collectibles.

As long as you're aware of what happens to the value, don't sweat it.

The Colt New Service, to most anyone who knows about revolvers, is obviously a shooter grade revolver. But, look at it this way; someone saved it from the scrap heap some years ago, and now you're getting the benefit of a well-built revolver with cosmetic issues. Enjoy it and shoot it to your heart's content.

As to the Model 29 you show, it probably will never be a collectible. The stocks you have on it are replacements. The originals would have been "Cokes". The finish is not all that bad. Perhaps a bit of cleaning with Mothers Mag Polish, and some good wax, will help the finish. What you've demonstrated is a gun with honest 53-year-old wear. The gun has character.

If you send it back to S&W, the bluing they use today will not match the bluing originally applied. It will appear almost black. That's just the nature of the modern bluing process at S&W.

Were it my revolver, I wouldn't do anything to it, except clean it up, and try to find a set of "Cokes" for it. Barring location of them, I'd put a set of Ahrends Retros on it, and blast away. My smallish hands can't abide the large S&W targets.

mmitch
October 6, 2012, 11:59 AM
hp,

I collect no-longer-made Smiths and Colts, and I always buy the highest condition gun I can find/afford. Generally, I opine any refinish diminishes collector value, but have learned that a factory refinish with appropriate stamping, somewhat mitigates any diminished value to collectors.
I have yet to encounter a Registered Magnum that is within my budget, but, should I do so, it would be a situation where I would never consider a refinish. First, I would not pay large money for an RM (or any gun) that was cosmetically challenged to-the-point where it would "affect my delicate sensibilities." And, second, in the case of buying an historically significant gun, I consider any finish wear as part of the weapon's character and history.
Specifically, in the case of your 29, were it my gun, and I felt the need to refinish, I would let the folks in Springfield do the work. If I was going to carry this gun, I would leave it "in situ."

Mike

ColtPythonElite
October 6, 2012, 12:04 PM
I am all for a factory refinish on well worn guns if it makes the owner happy. They just need to realize the money they spent usually doesn't increase the value much, if any at all.

highpower
October 6, 2012, 12:07 PM
I have a set of the original stocks. Years ago I bought a Smith 1917 that had them on it. Took them off to install a correct set for '17 and they have been sitting in my grip drawer for twenty years. I think they may be worth more than the 29.

bluethunder1962
October 6, 2012, 12:26 PM
Most of it is are you going to keep the gun. If you are then who cares about the value of it. That is a cool gun. I would love to have it. Does it shoot good with that short barrel? I have a 44 mag s&w alloy. I can't shoot mags in it it just ripps my skin open. If yours is fun to shoot I might look for one like it.

highpower
October 6, 2012, 02:28 PM
The recoil is stout with 240grn factory .44mag ammo and the muzzle blast is fierce. It is not a gun to shoot full house loads in all day. However, it is quite manageable and accurate with .44 special level ammo and in fact, that is what I primarily shoot through it.

If you want to shoot heavy loads, a longer barrel/heavier gun would be much more pleasant.

CraigC
October 6, 2012, 02:50 PM
Firstly, I do not understand the obsession with resale value, at all. Firearms are the only consumer product that we buy that we expect to use for 50yrs and not lose any money on. In some cases it's true but it should not dictate our lives. Using something should cost money. Spending a little money for a lifetime of enjoyment should not be such a terrible thing. So I do not understand or agree with the idea that resale and/or collector value should dictate how we treat our guns or influence what we do with them.

That said, I the affect refinishing has on a firearm's value is ONLY dependent upon how well it was done. Not who it was that performed it. To say that a S&W refinish is better than one done by Doug Turnbull, simply because S&W is the original manufacturer, is foolish to the highest degree. There are just too many variables for there to be very many hard & fast rules on the subject.

IMHO, if you have a firearm that you would be more satisfied with were it professionally refinished and you are comfortable with spending the money, go for it. Personally, I would use Ford's or Accurate Plating before sending one to S&W. Yes, they are the original manufacturer but they don't produce any more sixguns finished like those of 30yrs ago so why would we assume they know how to refinish one??? Would you send a blackpowder era Colt, Winchester or Marlin to the manufacturer for restoration or would you be better off sending it to a shop like Turnbull's?

bluethunder1962
October 6, 2012, 03:17 PM
Thanks highpower. That is what I thought. I don't have anything against the long barrel guns but I only buy guns I can carry. That gun looks so cool also. It WOULD be beautiful re finished. If you do it post some pictures.

just for fun
October 6, 2012, 03:55 PM
The recoil is stout with 240grn factory .44mag ammo and the muzzle blast is fierce. It is not a gun to shoot full house loads in all day. However, it is quite manageable and accurate with .44 special level ammo and in fact, that is what I primarily shoot through it.

If you want to shoot heavy loads, a longer barrel/heavier gun would be much more pleasant.
When I saw that jewel my very first thoghts were, "Man I sure would love to put some of my 44 Special Loads through that!" 240 LSWC and some VV340. My 629 LOVE's em. You found what the rest of us is looking for!

Jaymo
October 7, 2012, 02:39 PM
I don't like an ugly scratched up finish on a gun any more than I like it on a car.
I like for my guns to look good. I like my cars to look good.
I don't have any reservations about getting my guns or my cars professionally refinished.
Original finish is important for collector value, but not for shooter value.

I may even send my new .44 special blackhawk out for a high polish blue. The factory matte blue is ugly and cheap. Shame on Ruger for putting that crap on a gun and charging that much for it.

CraigC
October 7, 2012, 02:50 PM
$450 is a bargain for a new Ruger .44Spl. I don't like the brushed finish bluing either and would pay extra for a bright polish but can't argue with the price. Of course, this comes from spending three times that much to have one built. ;)

oldbear
October 7, 2012, 04:12 PM
Any refinish will lower the collectors value on any quality firearm. A factory refinish will not lower the value as much.

As all of my revolvers are working tools I kinda like them to show a LITTLE ware, not so much they look beat. yet enough to show they are working guns not just show girls.

harvester
October 7, 2012, 07:23 PM
As strange as it may at first sound collectors place a high value on the percent of original finish remaining on a handgun. When refinished the percentage remaining is zero so the value hits rock bottom. For a shooter handgun like that New Service it is hard to tell but it looked like it was pretty bad and may be better now. As far as value you almost always loose money on a refinish of a handgun. I like shooters too and that New Service looks like a dandy, I would leave the Smith and Wesson alone since as a shooter it is fine and will not gain in value if refinished.

SGW42
October 7, 2012, 09:47 PM
I sent my gun back to S&W for a refinish, and glad I did. The wear on my example was not honest, it was not a collectable, I didn't want to sell it, and I wanted to shoot it. After the refinish, I have much more pride in it. They did a terrific job. The roll marks were dulled a little (or worn off and replaced), but otherwise, looks like a new gun.

highpower
October 7, 2012, 10:18 PM
It is something of a dilemma for me as I like my guns to be nice, but they do not have to be pristine. The New Service is perfect as a woods carry gun as it shoots a fairly powerful round and I know that short of throwing it off a cliff, I really can't hurt it cosmetically.

The model 29 is definitely not going to be a safe queen and while I am going to shoot it, I do not intend for it to be a carry gun. I am not going to ever sell it, so the argument that it will not be worth as much as the refinish will cost is a moot point for me. Besides I bought it so reasonably, I don't think I would be upside down even if I did pay top dollar for a refinish. Also, if value alone is being considered, most collectors would turn their nose up at it anyway due the the amount of finish wear it currently has.

My question still remains: If the same factory/company that made the firearm does the refinish to the same standards that it came with originally, why does that hurt the value?
And as a corollary to that question: Just how much does it lesson the value over, say an 85% gun?

I realize that the answer to that question is due to the very subjective nature of the whole value of a particular gun thing. I would think that in the case of a badly deteriorated, but otherwise valuable, firearm that a quality restoration would be a good thing.

ColtPythonElite
October 7, 2012, 10:46 PM
harvester,

Where can I find some factory refinished Pythons priced at the lowest blue book value? I would like a dozen.

BSA1
October 7, 2012, 11:25 PM
Based on the comments I have read on various forums;

1. All old guns are collectable.

2. Refinishing a old gun destroys it's use and any value it has if you try to resale it.

3. All old guns are worth more regardless of how poor of condition they are in.

4. Leaving your old as described in #3 shows "character" whatever the heck that means. I have seen it commonly used with describing well used pocket knives that have little value.

5. No matter how much or how little you have invested in your gun there is ALWAYS a better deal out there and you are foolish to spend any money on your gun.

6. Ask all of the naysayers how much more they will give you for not refinishing your roscoe.

7. All of that said I agree that you should be very careful who you pick to reblue/refinish your gun. Overbuffing will ruin the appearance of it. This is one area where the lowest price is probably the worse choice.

HKGuns
October 7, 2012, 11:54 PM
I'm firmly in the camp of it is YOUR pistol, do what YOU want to it and ignore advice from any and all well intentioned passers by.......

Folks don't bat an eye sending their auto's to have them NP3'd, hard chromed or any of the other available finishes applied. Those finishes don't appear to affect their value a whole heck of a lot. In fact, in some cases the sellers actually get more for them than they would with the original finish.

Hard for me to understand why revolvers would be "that" different. But I'm very new to the revolver world, so what do I know.....

But I don't ask for or take advice very often and spend my money how I want.

CraigC
October 8, 2012, 12:13 PM
After the refinish, I have much more pride in it.
That's what's important and 'should' trump "collector value". A term which is often thrown around without so much as a clue as to what it really means.

788Ham
October 8, 2012, 12:28 PM
BSA1,

You've got me a little confused here with your statement, "Refinishing an old gun destroys its use." How can that be? Does the piece still fire, isn't it totally functional, can it be used in a SD situation? A club is still a club, unsanded or not, bark left on it or stripped. Just can't grasp your contention of it being destroyed. I've got an older 1937 S&W 38-44 Outdoorsman .38 spl., no, it doesn't have the factory finish it did back then, but it still shoots, I wouldn't want to be on the opposite end when "its used", if it was re-blued, it won't function anymore?

harvester
October 8, 2012, 03:45 PM
The thing about a refinish is not lowering the value as much as not raising it. For example, take a 450 dollar N frame revolver, add a 300 dollar refinish and you still have a 450 dollar N frame that you have spent 750 on. If you sold the 450 dollar gun and put 300 with it to by a nicer example you would be ahead in my opinion. I hope that clears it up. Some one will say 300 is too high for a refinish but add shipping, taxes and all costs and it will not be high.

I personally don't care for refinished overpriced, overrated Pythons.

Remllez
October 8, 2012, 10:53 PM
If the model 29 of which you speak is the same one thats pictured, I don't see a need for refinishing. That gun is in very good shape for being over 50 years old!! If the mechanicals are as good as you say, just shoot it and enjoy.

45_auto
October 9, 2012, 09:18 AM
Get it refinished if it makes you happy. It's obviously not an un-turned collector grade gun that's never been shot.

If you're worried about resale value, it'll be worth more to non-collecters as a nice looking shooter than a beat-up looking shooter. Would you have paid less for it if it looked nicer? Either way, the amount you're talking about is only the price of a couple of tanks of gas in your car, a couple of meals in a nice restuaraunt, or a couple of boxes of factory ammo. Not worth worrying about in my book.

CraigC
October 9, 2012, 10:54 AM
The thing about a refinish is not lowering the value as much as not raising it. For example, take a 450 dollar N frame revolver, add a 300 dollar refinish and you still have a 450 dollar N frame that you have spent 750 on. If you sold the 450 dollar gun and put 300 with it to by a nicer example you would be ahead in my opinion. I hope that clears it up. Some one will say 300 is too high for a refinish but add shipping, taxes and all costs and it will not be high.
If the individual enjoys his newly refinished $450 N-frame then it is a worthy investment.

Why do people expect to be able to use and enjoy their firearms for free???

jimmyraythomason
October 9, 2012, 12:45 PM
I do my own high polish bluing(and very nicely IMHO)so it costs me very little to do since my equipment and materials were paid for long time ago. I have no problem bluing ANY gun other than a known (and proveable) historically significant piece. Having said that,I would leave that particular Model 29 alone because,in my personal estimation,it looks great for it's age!

Guillermo
October 9, 2012, 12:58 PM
I am a shooter and my guns reflect that.

Rather than spend the money on a refinish I choose to spend the money on another gun.

Example: I have a 1953 S&W K22 with a finish as dull as parkerizing. Instead of spending $275 with Ford's to have it refinished, I bought a Model 15.

Of course, some people get off on a perfect gun. I understand that...it is just not my decision.

If you want fewer, more perfect guns...by all means...go for it.

jimmyraythomason
October 9, 2012, 01:17 PM
Speaking of the Colt,it has obviously been glass beaded then blued. From the condition of the metal there was only a few options to make it look better. It could have been parkerized. It could have been dura-coted(or similar). It could have been plated or the finish that was eventually put on it. Well...it COULD have been high polished but so much metal would have had to have been removed....that would be the least preferrable option. My opinion is that the best option was chosen at,likely,the least cost.

Doc3402
October 9, 2012, 04:53 PM
I just bought a 6 inch S&W 19-4, and I fully intend to send it to S&W for refinishing. It looks about the same as yours finish wise and appears to be rust free. I paid $250 for it because of the way it looks, and got one heck of a deal. It has the model appropriate target trigger and hammer which would cost an easy $100 if I could find them.

My reason for sending it back is to get a better price on resale if I ever decide to get rid of it. People that are not collectors don't care about a refinish job. They see the beautiful blue Smith finish and want the gun.

In my opinion a gun with excessive wear will not be as appealing to a potential buyer if the intent is to shoot the gun. For someone that wants to use the gun it's much like painting a house to gain curb appeal. If it looks like it has been abused then in their mind it probably has been. If it's cosmetically pleasing in their mind it has probably been taken care of.

rswartsell
October 9, 2012, 09:26 PM
The original intent of blueing steel was to make it more resistant to corrosion not to enhance resale value. I have seen guns that because of their manufacture and shooting characteristics I would love to own and if I decided to do so I knew I needed to refinish for protection from rust. I have never done so because another such example with a better finish was a better economical equation.

The Smith in the pictures is not in such a state. The finish will still perform the desired corrosion protection to a very serviceable degree.

If however you want the pride of ownership and asthetic value a reblue will bring you and have the drachmas, go for it. As CraigC states, use bears cost and your money is never so well spent as when it brings you true satisfaction (everything within reasonable degrees of course).

Ash
October 10, 2012, 07:43 AM
So, a 1956 Ford Thunderbird in original, but faded paint, should be repainted?

Value is what it is, and if guys who know the value of an item in original condition compared to refinished condition caution or warn (or, heck, bemoan) the waste of refinishing and the loss of value that comes with it, they get trashed.

There is another side of that coin. Those who call them merely tools but then get their panties in a wad if there is a scratch and suddenly need to refinish them seem to place too much emphasis on that consumable. Me? I haven't refinished a toaster, TV, couch, or the like in my life. But, I do know quality, and a refinished plantation desk has much less value than one that has not been refinished. An 1876 Morgan dollar has more value unpolished than one that has been polished. An 1814 Curassier's sword is worth more with cracked grips and tarnished basket than one "refinished."

And the idea that I should buy a gun to throw away is also silly. Yeah, I do expect my firearms to last a long time - which is to say out live me. We take care of our stuff that way. They aren't a bic lighter. I throw my used up pens away. I also don't worry if they get nicked up.

I also know that a well-worn firearm bought, then refinished, means I could have gotten a better one. Why waste the money on inferior since I'm going to spend the money any way? Why buy a 1961 Impala only to drop another ten grand into having it purdied up when I could go ahead and buy a better one? The better one will cost the same and retain its value. I also don't wipe my butt with $5 bills.

But, I do believe in private property. If I give you a $5 Confederate bill from 1862, it's yours to burn to light your cigar. I may still call that unwise, I might even bemoan the needless destruction of the $5 bill, but it was yours to destroy. So, this isn't destruction we discuss? Okay, I might give you a tarnished 1840 Wrist Breaker. You can polish the guard and blade until it shines. It's yours. I won't say its a good idea. You want to use it as a machete? Fine by me. But, don't get too upset when I point out you are wasting money and losing value.

I find it odd, though, that many of the guys here to proclaim they are mere tools get so upset about weapons buy-back programs. If such a program makes a leftist or anti-gunner happy (the theme of the day at the present it seems), why would we care if they "take guns off the streets." The seller is happy, the anti-gunner is happy. Everyone is happy. Why would we care if they crush a ton of revolver, rifles, and gear with a steam roller? The guns are theirs to do with as they please. Makes mine worth more, right?

Remllez
October 10, 2012, 09:15 AM
The way I see it is a gun is only NEW once....when I see a refinished gun it makes me wonder what else is being hidden.

CraigC
October 10, 2012, 12:20 PM
As CraigC states, use bears cost and your money is never so well spent as when it brings you true satisfaction (everything within reasonable degrees of course).
Exactly!


So, a 1956 Ford Thunderbird in original, but faded paint, should be repainted?
If that is the owner's wish. If he wishes to tear out the engine and suspension to build a Pro-Touring T-Bird it is his business and nobody else's.


And the idea that I should buy a gun to throw away is also silly.
I agree but who suggested that???????


I haven't refinished a toaster, TV, couch, or the like in my life.
Me neither but I don't read books and daydream about them all day either. :rolleyes:


Why waste the money on inferior since I'm going to spend the money any way?
Who says it has to be inferior???


Why buy a 1961 Impala only to drop another ten grand into having it purdied up when I could go ahead and buy a better one?
Apples to oranges. Some folks like to "purdy-up" their own cars in their own way, rather than driving somebody else's version of "purdied-up".


Who in this thread has said they are mere tools??? Seems like because I favor refinishing I'm being lumped in with the "mere tools" mindset and that is not me.

Like I said, some folks are obsessed with monetary value and see no other. Yes, I expect my guns to last a long time too but I wouldn't keep a sixgun in well-worn condition, when I would rather have it refinished, just because I would lose a little money "IF" I sold it. Life is too short to worry about such things. The enjoyment I get while I am here is VASTLY more important than the value a collector will see when I'm gone. Jesus, is the quality of your life not worth a couple hundred bucks???

Americans are really strange about this sort of thing. I'm not talking about a local `smith hack-job but rather a proper refinishing. The Brits have never worried about such things and do not think twice about sending a shotgun or rifle that's worth tens of thousands of dollars back to Purdey or Holland & Holland for a complete refurbishing. Yet we are worried about losing a couple hundred bucks having our favorite sixgun refinished??? Very silly if you ask me.

Did I "waste" my money having this Ruger refinished? No. I invested it.
http://photos.imageevent.com/newfrontier45/sixgunsiii/large/IMG_0942b.jpg

Guillermo
October 10, 2012, 12:36 PM
Why waste the money on inferior since I'm going to spend the money any way?

inferior for what?

My K22 with the dull finish is not inferior in any way except cosmetic. And I bought it for $290.

I do agree that if one wants a pristine revolver it is almost always always better to pony up for one that is already pristine. Same thing with a car. You almost never can get your money out of a restoration.

I am happy with, I think Old Fuff called it my "ghetto k22". Cheaper than a Taurus...accurate as a laser and I don't have to baby it. I drop it into a crossdraw and take it with me whenever I am in the woods.

Best 300 bucks I ever spent on a gun
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/BillLoeb/K22-1.jpg

harvester
October 10, 2012, 02:07 PM
When a firearm begins to develop value beyond its "tool" status much of it comes from its historical preservation and manufacturing significance. In the art world we would probably not value a computer generated copy of a painting as much as an original or a print of an original. Guns begin to reflect this train of thought when collected, placed in museums etc. Certainly not all guns do this, or should. For many when you can look at a 100 year old Triple Lock and see its finish and fit it is possible to look past a few blemishes to see what was accomplished back in that period. Look back further on a 500 year old Beretta or a 150 year old Colt. There is room for many points of view but it is only original once which is what is enhancing the value.

CraigC
October 10, 2012, 02:52 PM
...it is only original once which is what is enhancing the value.
It depends on exactly what it is and what condition it's in. Many times "original" has little to no value to a collector. A well-worn "original" Colt may be worth $2000 and a restored blackpowder Colt may be worth ten times that. Old guns are wonderful and have an appeal all their own but some folks like to know what they were like when they were new. Because you can't buy a brand new Registered Magnum but you can have a model 27 tuned and refinished in carbona blue for a fraction of the cost of a minty RM. Virtually no blanket statements can be made. Like I said, it depends.....on everything.

I think when refinishing is brought up, some folks can't think past the overpolished butchery that plagues many guns on the used market. That is NOT what I'm referring to.

Ash
October 10, 2012, 06:16 PM
If I pay $800 for a new condition revolver, it is worth $800.

If I pay $500 for a used revolver and then drop $300 refinishing it, it is not worth $800.

It is not an investment if it cannot return value. It might look good, but it is not worth more money. Refinishing almost never returns value. I did have a Tanfoglio hard-chromed, but that was to increase wear resistance and make it less likely to rust in the swamps I carried it. The pistol is not worth what I have in it, but it is preserved for the rough service it gets.

As to throw-away, the point was made that firearms are consumables. That means that at some point, they will be worthless junk. Ergo, buy a gun to throw away.

Do with your property as you wish. Polish that sword hilt. Replace the worn grip. It's yours.

But it still devalues it if old, and if new, like a 10 year old SIG, the refinishing process will not pay for itself. That does not mean don't do it, but consider what you are doing and why.

As to a "restored" Colt being worth $20,000, what are you referring to?

In any case, I was really glad when a guy polished the hilt of this Klingenthaul Cuirassier's blade (right photo beneath the bonds). It made it much cheaper for me to get. In time, the "restoration" will be gone (only the patina was removed - thank goodness he left the grip alone) and its value will return. The British 1822's were unmolested and their value was greater.

ColtPythonElite
October 10, 2012, 07:33 PM
Well said, Craig C.

Doc3402
October 10, 2012, 07:51 PM
If I pay $500 for a used revolver and then drop $300 refinishing it, it is not worth $800.

That would depend on who your prospective buyer is. The value of anything is determined solely by what the buyer is willing to pay for it.

Like I said in an earlier post, I just paid $250 for a model 19-4 with a 6 inch barrel. The thing is a cosmetic disaster, but it has two parts I need to complete a reproduction of a gun I once had.

I needed a model appropriate target trigger and hammer, and they are obsolete parts. I have been unable to find them in spite of a two year search. Those two parts alone made the gun worth the money, even though the only things I wanted might have cost me $100 to $150 had they been available.

So what am I going to do with the gun? After I swap out the parts I'm going to send it to S&W, get it refinished, and sell it. Is it a pure numbers matching gun? No, but I would be willing to bet that I won't lose a dime on it plus I have the parts I want.

Ash
October 10, 2012, 07:52 PM
Good luck.

Doc3402
October 10, 2012, 07:59 PM
Thanks

Ash
October 10, 2012, 08:20 PM
By the way, that wasn't intended to be snarky. I have done similar, where I needed a specific part and then sold off something.

Doc3402
October 10, 2012, 08:22 PM
I didn't take it that way. I might have had more to say if I did. <grin>

CraigC
October 11, 2012, 12:49 AM
If I pay $800 for a new condition revolver, it is worth $800.

If I pay $500 for a used revolver and then drop $300 refinishing it, it is not worth $800.

It is not an investment if it cannot return value. It might look good, but it is not worth more money. Refinishing almost never returns value.
I never said what I was investing in. I could care not less what anybody else thinks it will be worth in dollars, although I would not lose much if any money on it. It's an investment in the quality of my life. One could say that cigars were a pitiful "investment" because they're only going to get burned. If you consider them to be one of the finer things in life to be relished and enjoyed, something that enriches your life, then it is a wise investment. Even if it does go up in smoke.

Like I said, some people can't see past the monetary value. Which is not the only kind of value an inanimate object can have.

Fishslayer
October 11, 2012, 02:49 AM
Firstly, I love the stocks on that gun. Beautiful!

EDIT: Never mind. I missed the '59 part. Duh. Got thrown by the later model stocks. They're still georgious tho.

That's nice condition for a '59. If it was mine I would leave it alone. Given $$$ I might consider factory refinish but it doesn't look that bad to me. I like holster wear. Knocks a nice shooter out of the big $$$ collector bracket.;)

Ash
October 11, 2012, 07:11 AM
Quality of life is also subjective, and I'm fine yours is so refined that a fine cigar and the aesthetics of your firearms defines yours. You find value beyond and in different realms than financial and that is fine - Ayn Rand approves. It doesn't change financial facts, but it does affect your outlook on an item. I certainly value my great great grandfather's Colt 1849 far greater than markets would as its worth is affected by more than finish. My Mossberg bolt action .410 is valued in a similar way, considering I would have to get 100 times what others might value it even to consider selling it.

But many, perhaps most, of those with money who purchase older arms value original finish over glitz and glamor of a new finish. True, Miltec and Mitchells have made a mountain of money on rifles (the former admits to refinishing, the latter separates the fool and his money) sold entirely on their appearance, but a Russian capture K98k in refinished condition is considerably less valuable to the Mauser collecting community than one in worse condition but original. A splendid condition Colt 1856 revolver will bring a mint. One that is refinished/restored to that condition will bring considerably less. Ditto for swords.

You like fine cigars and refinished arms? Fine by me. I've never said you shouldn't. I enjoy sitting in my library and decoding an indenture from King James of Scotland from the time of Henry the VIII. I don't find the need to clean the parchment of stains. My Basket-hilted broadsword lacks any material on its grip and I lose no sleep over its naked, worn appearance. My Israeli CZ-75 is really neat in original condition. Were I to refinish it to look factory new, I know that the value from what I paid would not likely go down since I got it for $330, but that that pistol will not increase its value commiserate to the price paid for refinishing. "Custom" firearms on Gunbroker rarely sell up to the break-even point. What a shame it would be for me to take the 1899 Tula M91 I have whose stock has battle damage and whose floorplate is retained by twine and "restore" it to like-new condition.

highpower
October 11, 2012, 09:51 AM
I knew I was going to kick over a hornets nest when I mentioned the very word "refinish". I am a great believer in leaving a guns finish alone under most circumstances. However the question I asked was not whether it was prudent to refinish, but why does a FACTORY refinish detract from the value of a firearm.

People have been tinkering with the looks of their guns since they were invented. All sorts of things have been done from carving on the stocks to engraving the metal. Look at guns from the old west, a Hawken rifle with tacks in the stock did not come that way from the maker, but they are looked at as period user modifications and detract nothing from the value.

In the case of my Model 29, I never said that I was going to refinish it, I merely asked, Why does a factory refinish detract from the value?

As was mentioned, there are a great many guns that were refinished by hacks and that has certainly colored our opinion when the subject of refinishing a gun is brought up.

I abhor the Bubbas that take a decent gun and attack it with a hacksaw and a file and have restored many military rifles back to their original configuration. I have a thread over in the rifles section on some '03 Springfields that I saved, so I am no stranger to looking at a gun and going "oh my god, what were they thinking".

I too think like some of the posters, that the decision to change the way MY gun looks is totally up to me. If I want to engrave it with a electric engraver and then gold plate it (not that I would be so rude to a gun), it is mine to do with as I please. I am not a collector of guns that I expect to go up in value, I happy if they do, but it is not why acquire them.

I don't really mind it if a gun has a certain amount of honest wear and I have many that do show signs of use. I also have a couple that have turned into safe queens and I don't mind that either.

In the final analysis, it is a personal decision based on what an individual wants his firearm to look like.

AABEN
October 11, 2012, 10:30 AM
The recoil is stout with 240grn factory .44mag ammo and the muzzle blast is fierce. It is not a gun to shoot full house loads in all day. However, it is quite manageable and accurate with .44 special level ammo and in fact, that is what I primarily shoot through it.

If you want to shoot heavy loads, a longer barrel/heavier gun would be much more pleasant.
You can drop down to a 180 grane bullet that will cut down on recorel. I shoot a lot of 180 in my 44mag.

CraigC
October 11, 2012, 11:41 AM
You like fine cigars and refinished arms?
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said "refinish everything!" and I've also said "it depends" in every post. We're also not talking about antique swords, antique texts, antique furniture or old cars. Nor am I talking about Bubba and his buffing wheel.


"Custom" firearms on Gunbroker rarely sell up to the break-even point.
Apparently you've never tried to sell a custom revolver from one of the well-known gunsmiths. Folks aren't losing any money.

ColtPythonElite
October 11, 2012, 01:58 PM
I like professionally refinished firearms, like Fords or the factories turn out.....I still trying to where I can find them with the work already done, but priced to sell at zero finish book price.

Fishslayer
October 11, 2012, 02:24 PM
but why does a FACTORY refinish detract from the value of a firearm.

Depends on how bad it was and who's buying. Hardcore "collectors" want NIB condition and all original. It probably wouldn't detract from the value for someone like me that's going to shoot it & yeah... I enjoy looking & fondling, too. ;) I would shy away though, from a Bubba job with rounded off rollmarks & frame/sideplate edges.

People have been tinkering with the looks of their guns since they were invented. All sorts of things have been done from carving on the stocks to engraving the metal.

And you've undoubtedy seen some of their work & cringed...:barf:

Ash
October 11, 2012, 08:06 PM
Craig, you just put words in my mouth. And you did indeed talk about antique arms: "Would you send a blackpowder era Colt, Winchester or Marlin to the manufacturer for restoration or would you be better off sending it to a shop like Turnbull's" as well as "A well-worn "original" Colt may be worth $2000 and a restored blackpowder Colt may be worth ten times that."

I own black powder Colts, by the way, or at least one, and I haven't seen refinished Colts cost $20,000. Which one are you referring to?

jimmyraythomason
October 11, 2012, 09:57 PM
The value of anything is determined solely by what the buyer is willing to pay for it. Exactly! Collectors are trend followers. What is in vogue today,bringing 5 digit prices,may not bring a fraction of that price in the future. Most gun buyers are shooters not collectors and will pay more for a nice looking gun than for one that looks worn. Get away from THR and some other gun forums and you will find that the mainstream gun owner doesn't care about matching numbers or pedigree just "does it look good and will it shoot"?.

Ash
October 11, 2012, 10:05 PM
And what greater vanity is it to base demand on looks? Your interests may be different, and fellows don't collect 1980's Savage rifles or Remington 710's, but the greatest value a firearm possesses far exceeds its mere shooting qualities. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain how an old black-powder in original condition, or a Chinese NDN-86, can be worth more than four grand when compared to a new Howa and yet be neither as comely or accurate. It remains a solid fact that collectors drive value far greater than shooters.

Interest in an arm depends on a great many things and in the great wide world of gun ownership, there are many types. Or do you think that Mauser owners are interested in merely pretty guns? Indeed, if it remains largely the best shooting arms, then no military surplus arms would ever be considered as a commercial hunting rifle is virtually always superior.

jimmyraythomason
October 11, 2012, 10:34 PM
It remains a solid fact that collectors drive value far greater than shooters.
Only to other collectors. Shooters don't care what collectors are buying or what they are paying for it.

Mr.Revolverguy
October 12, 2012, 01:00 AM
There is a long story of how my grandfathers model 10 got this way, basically being locked in a foam case for over a decade with no care before I inherited it.

Knowing how my grandfather was about this model 10 which he taught me to shoot on I could not in good conscience leave it this way though it shot fine.
http://www.dayattherange.com/weapons/model10before.jpg

So I sent it back to S&W but called before I did and told them what it meant to me and what I was looking for. The very nice gentlemen said not to worry they would take good care of me and the model 10. For a little over $200 they replaced all of the internal parts and reblued it. Two weeks later this is what I got in return.

Bluing so deep it looks wavy in the sun or bright lights.
http://www.dayattherange.com/weapons/model10after.jpg

ColtPythonElite
October 12, 2012, 01:02 AM
They did a beautiful job, too.

Ash
October 12, 2012, 07:46 AM
"Only to other collectors. Shooters don't care what collectors are buying or what they are paying for it."

And it was stated in this thread that value is what folks will pay for it. Collectors pay more than shooters. They are, then by definition, what drives the value. Indeed, collectors have a term: "shooter's grade." That means a firearm, usually mis-matched or refinished, whose value as a collector is lost leaving only its value as a shooting arm. Many collectors buy them precisely because collectors are also shooters. But a shooter's grade arm is generally 50% to far less than 50% value of an arm whose value is derived from rarity or historical significance. A 1903 that is worn but with Guadalcanal provenance has greater value than one that is pretty but came from a rack at a national guard armory.

And even then, it seems shooters do not merely buy for shooting qualities. Otherwise it would be absurd to pay more for a refinished piece that does not shoot any better than a worn piece. Refinishing by its very nature makes no improvement to accuracy and thus a shooter wastes no time in that.

So, there exists a third person, the aesthetic. They want it to shoot well, of course, but they want it to be pretty. That is the whole point, it seems, of the discussion. A man who needs a pretty gun has reasons that can be justified by him and those like him, but they have nothing to do with being a "shooter." That is mere justification. That need not be wrong or bad, but it is also no more superior than others.

"I am a shooter, but my things need to be pretty. I'll pay more money for pretty."

That may be no more superior than a collector saying, "I am a collector and I want my things to be rare or have history. I'll pay more money for rare or experienced."

Or, who here would not pay more for George S. Patton's Remington model 51 even if it were to be worn? Who here, on that same token, would refinish said pistol? In any case, to pretend that a shooter's perspective is somehow more noble or superior to any other is just another justification for an opinion or a point of view.

jimmyraythomason
October 12, 2012, 09:19 AM
, to pretend that a shooter's perspective is somehow more noble or superior to any other is just another justification for an opinion or a point of view.
I never said it was superior nor inferior but equal. What I'm saying (and you have said as well)is whether to refinish or not need only be justified to the owner's satisfaction, not what some collector would have paid for it.

Ash
October 12, 2012, 06:18 PM
Yet a return on value, which is my point, is not likely.

In other words, don't refinish expecting to get your money out of it. Rarely does a refinish justify its cost in actual dollars and cents.

CraigC
October 12, 2012, 06:26 PM
Craig, you just put words in my mouth. And you did indeed talk about antique arms
Yes, I did make a reference to antique guns and never said I didn't. :confused:


I own black powder Colts, by the way, or at least one, and I haven't seen refinished Colts cost $20,000. Which one are you referring to?
It was an exaggerated example to make a point. The point being that not all money put into refinishing, or more accurately restoration, is wasted.


Yet a return on value, which is my point, is not likely.

In other words, don't refinish expecting to get your money out of it. Rarely does a refinish justify its cost in actual dollars and cents.
Like I said, it depends and there are few accurate blanket statements to be made. Methinks most this rhetoric is assuming you're paying too much for a well-used sixgun and then a local hack job to go at it on the buffer like a cracked out gorilla. You spend $200 on a decent sixgun and have Turnbull refinish it, it WILL be worth more, a lot more. You spend $400 on a $200 sixgun and have Bubba polish the piss out of it, it will be worth less. I have four custom Rugers built by big name gunsmiths and I could get 90% of my money out of any of them.


PS, your tone is typical of egotistical, arrogant, elitist collectors who never fail to rub me the wrong way.

jimmyraythomason
October 12, 2012, 06:28 PM
don't refinish expecting to get your money out of it That we can agree on..in theory,at least, but it isn't an absolute. If the piece is aquired at a low enough cost and I do my own bluing, I can expect to see an increase beyond the investment. I've done this several times.

Guillermo
October 12, 2012, 10:26 PM
I could get 90% of my money out of any of them

which is not recouping your investment

highpower
October 12, 2012, 11:59 PM
Mr. Revolverguy, when did you send that back to the factory? It looks like a new gun.

CraigC
October 13, 2012, 07:44 AM
which is not recouping your investment
Like any other used gun, it's no longer 100%.

Doc3402
October 13, 2012, 08:40 AM
Let me see if I have this right, and I am referring solely to the gun I wrote about in Post 29 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=8448035&postcount=29)

1. Initial investment: Used S&W Mod 19-4 6" - $250
2. S&W refinish high bright blue - $275
3. Shipping and insurance - guesstimate of - $50

At $575 that would be close, but within the $500 to $600 model 19s in good shape bring around here. If I knock the finish back to the standard finish and blue that would save $55 for a total of $520. That's doable.

Now, my reason for buying the gun was to harvest the target trigger and hammer for another 19 I have. By swapping out these two items I am saving just over $100 if I was even able to find these two obsolete parts. Let's do the numbers again with that figured in.

$575 minus the $100 savings for parts gives me a net of $475 invested in a gun that will sell in my market for $500 to $600, That's a profit. Switch to standard polish and bluing at S&W and it's $420 for a market price of between $500 and $600. That's a real profit.

This will not work with every gun, and I freely admit it, but saying it can't be done at all is just wrong. You need to have a good bargain to start with before it routinely becomes profitable.

Ash
October 13, 2012, 05:17 PM
Craig, sorry for looking down on you. I don't. You don't even begin to know me nor my nature. Sorry, too, if my objective view of the facts bothers you. Many have trouble when truth gets in the way of their likes. However, you were the one who got arrogant and elitist with your cigars and fine finishes and how life is better lived in luxury rather than living with an arm with a crappy finish. Me condescending? To thine own self be true.

What have I said to you that was elitist or condescending?

Guillermo
October 13, 2012, 06:07 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sONfxPCTU0

(I crack me up!!!)

jimmyraythomason
October 13, 2012, 09:34 PM
Which of these 2 Ruger GP100s would you pay more for?

CraigC
October 13, 2012, 09:35 PM
Craig, sorry for looking down on you. I don't. You don't even begin to know me nor my nature. Sorry, too, if my objective view of the facts bothers you. Many have trouble when truth gets in the way of their likes. However, you were the one who got arrogant and elitist with your cigars and fine finishes and how life is better lived in luxury rather than living with an arm with a crappy finish. Me condescending? To thine own self be true.

What have I said to you that was elitist or condescending?
Relax dude, I didn't spit on your dog or call you a bad name. You've obviously missed every point I've tried to make.....so nevermind. :rolleyes:

ColtPythonElite
October 13, 2012, 09:40 PM
#1 has it's original finish, so it must be worth more than #2 with it's refinish.....I know this for a fact, because I read it on the internet.

Doc3402
October 13, 2012, 09:44 PM
Which of these 2 Ruger GP100s would you pay more for?

Is the plastic box part of the deal? Being original like that I'm not sure I could afford it if I have to buy the box, too.

44-henry
October 13, 2012, 10:26 PM
It is your gun and you need to do with it whatever feels right, if it were me, I would leave the 29 alone. I have one about the same vintage in about the same condition, mine still wears the original coke grips, but they aren't perfect either. In my mind the wear adds to its charm. The gun itself still functions perfectly and I have taken deer with it on a few occasions.

In any event I doubt I will look as good as your 29 does after 50 years. Shoot it and enjoy it is what I would do.

Ash
October 14, 2012, 07:44 AM
"PS, your tone is typical of egotistical, arrogant, elitist collectors who never fail to rub me the wrong way."

I'm nice and relaxed. Just responded to that message above. But there does come a point where egos and the like can get in the way of discussion and am willing to call off dogs in that hunt. I'm not against you, I pointed out early that people have different objectives and that pretty can be fine. I'm swayed by historically significant things and value things not customized or altered. Hot Rods don't impress me, an all original 1940 Chrysler Super Deluxe does.

Part of that is having seen all sorts of hack jobs called "customizations" done to all sorts of things - a desk made in 1820 only to be painted pink and put in a kids room, an ultra rare VKT M27 chopped, diced, and sporterized only to be abandoned at the pawn shop, the Krag rifle trashed on "American Guns," a cuirassier's sword almost certainly from Waterloo polished and buffed to look new, or General Stephen D. Lee's home modernized, with the original hand-painted decorations on the walls (instead of wall paper) painted over, the original books sold off, and new doors cut through original walls. The word "refinish" seldom rises to the level you focus on. I'll grant you have all along not been referring to that.

I'm for private property, and the examples I have described (all true examples by the way) were legal and the right of the owners. Even so, it showed a callous disregard for the thing and its future, which will out last us. I'm just glad at least one owner of the Declaration of Independence didn't use it to line the bird cage or for paper air planes. I urge folks to not permanently alter many things for that reason. There is a far bigger picture. I also urge guys not to pour out oil on their property, not because I'm an eco-nut, but because somebody else will own that property one day and you're just leaving a mess for them.

I also do financial planning for clients - I'm a Forestry Consultant among many things. I consider the value of actions, and don't recommend actions that bring no return to their forest. The land is theirs, and if they want to do in-woods mulching even though a slow fire will accomplish the same result at a tithe the cost (plus the fact that in the south, most forests are fire dependent ecosystems that see more benefits than merely removing brush from fire), then fine by me. I know a number of contractors to take the job.

So, you say "refinish if it makes you happy, life is too short for ugly guns and having a comely weapon brings fulfillment." I say "don't refinish because it almost never justifies the cost and might really degrade the value of an item. Just spend that money on a better version of what ever you are looking at."

I'm fine with your advice. Be fine with my counter point. In the end, we're on the same team anyway.

And Jimmy, anyone might pay more for the refinished one, but I won't pay the same price as if it were new. I won't pay $200 more for the refinished revolver, and the biggest danger is I don't know what else might be up with it. Perhaps that's because around here, many refinished guns spent time under salt water with Katrina and have all sorts of hidden problems. Kind of like a used-car salesman using paint to cover up all sorts of problems with a car he is selling.

jimmyraythomason
October 14, 2012, 11:18 AM
anyone might pay more for the refinished one, but I won't pay the same price as if it were newNew price doesn't figure into it. The point is that refinishing doesn't always lessen resale value.

HKGuns
October 14, 2012, 11:50 AM
Wow, this is really important to a few of you.....Frankly, I have a hard time getting worked up about it.

Old Fuff
October 14, 2012, 01:24 PM
We have collectors, and then we have shooters, and after that a lot of folks that fall somewhere between.

True collectables have a special value (or potential value) above an ordinary user, and especially if they are a classic or antique that were finished using a process that is no longer available, probably shouldn't be refinished if the owner has any intention of maintaining they're value, but to a degree it depends on how one wants to spend their money.

For example, in many cases you can buy an older gun that has 99% of the original finish intact, for less money then paying for a cosmetically distressed one - plus the cost of a top quality or original manufacturer refinish. If one is concerned about any real or potential collector's value they should sell the worn one they have, and use the proceeds plus refinishing cost to buy another one that has all the original finish to start with.

The advantage of getting an original manufacturer's refinish is that what really makes the difference is the way the parts are polished, and in many cases the gun maker has special custom-made polishing wheels that are shaped to exactly match the flats and contoures of the parts being polished. This is less likely to happen with those who refinish anything and everything.

But then we have those that want to upgrade a finish, say for a Colt Government Model .45 or a Detective Special or Diamondback that were originally finished in "Standard Blue," to a higher level "Royal Blue." Depending on what the particular gun is, the cost of the finer finish may come close to the present value of the gun, "as is," but if this floats your boat and you have the money to burn - have at it!

One should always keep in mind that if they plan to actively use a refinished gun it may not have that "new look" for long. This may or may not make a difference in one's thinking, but it should be a consideration. You may be spending a lot of cash to make it perfect, and then through use return it to what it was.

Concerning the S&W .44 Magnum currently under consideration. My course of action would depend on how much use I expected to give it. If it was to become an every-day user I would set aside the like-new stocks and wear some more of the original finish off. On the other hand if it would be an occasional user or be parked in a safe I would send it in to S&W to be checked over and refinished. If it was a common model 10 M&P .38 I would either leave it as it was, or settle for a new (inexpensive) bead-blast and Parkerize job.

But to each their own... :cool:

Guillermo
October 14, 2012, 01:50 PM
BTW

Earlier I mentioned that I was not likely to refinish a worn finish on a firearm.

What I failed to mention is that I will pay to fix abuse. I have an early Diamondback snub (I forget but if memory serves, inside of 200 had been made). It appears that the former owner took steel wool to it.

I can't stand to look at it. It is going to take a trip to Ford's.

Honest holster wear...I am not only fine with it...but appreciate it.
Abuse should be remedied.

Ash
October 14, 2012, 07:15 PM
Jimmy, my point is that the cost of the arm plus the cost of refinishing does not pay. Your example provided no costs, but I wouldn't pay $450 for that Ruger, assuming $200 for the pistol and $250 for the refinishing job.

jimmyraythomason
October 14, 2012, 08:56 PM
Ash,I traded a Ruger KP-90 (worth about $350) for the GP-100. I did the bluing myself at practically no cost. What you would or would not pay for it is irrelevant. It would easily sell for $500 where I live.

Ash
October 14, 2012, 09:48 PM
Jimmy, practically no cost? No materials, no tanks, nothing? Really? Irrelevant? Okay, I'll bite. How does one actually do bluing without spending money?

And I'm from Alabama. Where do you live? I know Hartselle/Huntsville, Gasden, Anniston/Heflin/Oxford (great hiking), Montgomery, and Mobile. Dad worked TV in Birgmingham and Mobile (NBC). I graduated high school in Baldwin County. Unless you are Pheonix City or Auburn, where exactly are blued Rugers running greater than 5 C-notes?

Really, I'm not trying to be contrary.

ColtPythonElite
October 14, 2012, 09:49 PM
Reblued GP100's bring $500 in Alabama? Heck, a brand new one not much more than that.

jimmyraythomason
October 14, 2012, 10:09 PM
I'm in Oneonta,that's about 35 mi north of B'ham. Blued GP-100s are selling for $650 on the boards here as are the SS ones(original finishes of course. I can do it for almost no cost because I have all the equipment left over from when I had a gun shop. I did have to fill the gas bottle(I borrowed it from my grill)but didn't use much of it at all. I have a large air compressor and blast cabinet in me shop for metal prep. I have left over Oxynate 7 salts and 909 cleaner. All were paid for a long time ago(and have paid for themselves). I do have about 8 hours of my free time invested in it though.

jimmyraythomason
October 14, 2012, 10:16 PM
I also bought a Century Gp1975 AK that had been painted an ugly tan color for $450. I mean everything had been painted,metal,furniture....everything. I did the same bead blast blue on it and traded it for a Ruger Mini-30 with Hogue overmold stock,7 factory mags(1x5,2x10 and 5x20) plus 500 rounds of 7.62x39 ammo. Minis are selling here used @$500-600 and new @ Wally world at just under $700 for .223. You can't even find a Mini-30. My Browning BDM 9mm is a gun metal grey color (looks like faded bluing) that I wont touch because I LIKE the way it looksas is and am not concerned with what some-one would pay for it.

Ash
October 14, 2012, 10:31 PM
My border collie came from Oneonta, and I did a signing at the gaming shop down town, a real relaxed sort of place.

jimmyraythomason
October 14, 2012, 10:34 PM
gaming shop down townSorry,I'm not into games so I didn't even know there was such a shop in "tin town".

Ash
October 15, 2012, 07:33 AM
Nor am I, but they buy books and I made some good money and drank some decent coffee there. Don't get down town often? Where are the shops you visit?

jimmyraythomason
October 15, 2012, 09:30 AM
The only shop on main street (1st avenue) that I visit is my barber. The ONLY firearms and ammunition dealer in Oneonta is WalMart and I only go there if I absolutely HAVE to. I will drive to one of the neighboring towns to buy guns and/ammo. Private sales of same are very big here via a dozen or more online gun trade sites.

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