I'm amused at the opinions about restoring model 1917 revolvers. Who the heck sets the rules on what one should do with their own property, is there antiquity laws by gun archyologist who demand such.
No, past prices paid for particular guns in a particular condition are usually used as a precedent for prices that are presently paid. As the availability of popular models drops due to wear and tear, destruction, and collectors socking them away speculating on the future, prices tend to go up. The higher condition guns go up the quickest, because their numbers drop the most over time. A 98% gun becomes a 90%, then an 80% and etc as time goes by. No gun returns to 100% original finish. As collectors continue to accumulate guns in lower conditions, they run out of variations. Then they join the condition race, chasing after the ever more elusive examples in higher conditions, simply to continue the joy of collecting. Most must sell in order to continue to acquire, and they have discovered what they like. Often, to contine collecting, these folks go after condition rather than variation. There is nothing wrong with that.
Collecting guns is not about making a personal mountain of blued steel and walnut that you can not take with you when you die. It's about making friends, enjoying each other's company, and shooting historical firearms. It's a pleasurable pastime, much the same as that of people who enjoy antiques, vintage automobiles or and other acquisition type endeavor. Some do collect in seclusion, packing stuff away like a rat, but most collect as a type of social endeavor with people who share common interests. This is why you still find collectors at gun shows talking to each other rather than simply scanning the pages of Gun Broker every night.
Now don't get your shorts in a bunch, its my property and my money that went into restoration. When I kick the bucket they can throw it in the pine box with me...bound to be some of you out there wanting to dig this one up.
Are you looking for someone to get their shorts in a bunch sir? Frankly, nobody really cares what you do with your property.
the obvious assumption of the collectors is that it is ruined.
No, to a collector, it is refinished. There is a difference.
Ruined for them, but not to everyone who favors a good gun to own and shoot.
Non sequitur. You assume collectors do not favor a good gun to own and shoot.
I realize there are those who would be perfectly happy to own a scared up dented, nicked, slightly rusty, pitted barrel, working gun...but I don't happen to care for firearms in that condition.
That does not mean that others are wrong for not caring whether their gun has a battered but oiled finish rather a re-blue, just as you are not wrong for making the decision to re-blue your firearm. Others do not have to follow your lead with their property.
I doubt very much my old revolver would have brought in the price Onmilo's refinished NS got...before I had it polished, re-blued, and regripped...$250 would have been about tops if you weren't too fussy...but everyone is who is buying a gun. They have to beat you down on your price. 'Hey! You want how much for that scared up, dented, rusty POS.'
Just tell 'em it's not for sale and go on your merry way. There is no need to re-blue a gun just because of what someone might say, just as there is no need to refrain from doing so because of what someone might think.
Another thing, I didn't chop and channel my gun, like your auto description so profusely illustrated...I tried to restore it to its original condition so I could look upon it and admire it while shooting it. It was a scratched up mess that had more nicks and dents than a German tank on the Russian front lines, it looked pitiful but worked fine.
I don't think I said anything about chopping and channeling a Jeep or a Porsche. I spoke of them being repainted, different tires being installed, and having pom poms dancing about the canvas top. No chopping or channeling is required for that. Of course, you could if you wanted to.
Actually Jim, your Model of 1917 looks pretty nice to me, and I told you so. You might also check back and see that I suggested that the original poster consider a hard chrome job on his gun, which would be a more durable finish for his intended use. Not what I would do, not what you did, but what might work better for his purpose. Now tell me Jim, do you really think I am a hard headed collector type trying to mandate what people do with their own property?
Prices are arrived at through an agreement between a buyer and a seller. They may use past experiences and references based on compiled data to assist them in a fair market price. Simply because a person pays a price for a firearm greater than what it sold for thirty years ago does not make them a "chump" or a "sucker." Implying such is insulting.
This thread was started as a member's request for the general market value of a used firearm. It has degenerated into the same old argument over whether one should re-blue or refinish old guns. There are valid arguments pro and con.
On THR's Revolver Forum, we historically behave like gentlemen. Name calling and sarcasm is frowned upon. Boorish behavior is not mitigated by emoticons. I would like to see it stay that way.
