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.
want opinions
- Thread starter wizard
- Start date
- Status
*Klutch*
Member
just my opinion, you should never reblue a gun of that age. Let it show 100 year wear marks, it 100 years old.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,
Last edited:
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.
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.
easyg
Member
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.
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.
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.
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.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
