Don’t shoot it ‘cause it might break, and then no parts available.

[22250Rem]

Picked up a Winchester Model 121-D single shot .22 back in 1994. It was mint but the stock needed refinishing. Did that and gave it to my son for his 12th birthday in 1995. He used it for a few years and traded it back to me for something else. Since the mid 1990's I've noticed that the Numrich Arms parts listing for these guns has a lot more items "Out Of Stock" than they formerly did. Parts like the extractors that are just thin, stamped steel and are fragile. The bolt has a number of small, unique parts that wear and those are sold out also. Since I've learned that these guns wear out here and there and parts are getting scarce I'm kind of scared that I'll wind up with a mint little .22 that is broken. That model was only made from 1964 to 1967 so there aren't exactly tons of them out there so it's probably not economically feasible to produce replacement parts for an almost unknown, low production .22. It's now relegated to retirement in the safe because I've got plenty of other .22's that I can get parts for, if needed. It's a great shooter but now I wanna keep it operable. If I ever sell it I'll tell any prospective buyer about the parts situation. It's a very nice example of the .22 that replaced Winchester's model 67 series in 1964 but not exactly a collector's dream.

 

[lysanderxiii]

Some things have value beyond their simple designed utility. A 1900 Liberty head nickel is worth 5 cent, or $5 depending if you “use it as it was intended”, or keep it as a collectible piece of history....

Your choice, but as people use old, rare stuff and break parts, the value of the few pristine ones just goes up. I appreciate the effort many of you are taking to enhance the value of my collection.

 

[Kaeto]

I routinely shoot my Enfield Mk VI revolver that was made in 1926. If I had been able to restore the Savage-North revolver I had I'd have shot it as well. Just because something is old and you might not be able to get parts for it is no reason to relegate it to life on a shelf.

 

[silicosys4]

I've got a safe queen, and a few guns I don't shoot that often because any breakage would pretty much permanently disable the gun. One in particular is an Astra Terminator. While its a quality gun, it's not the most robust design, being about the same frame size as a s&w M29. That is to say, there is a definite lifespan. While i could perhaps salvage parts off of another .44 astra, finding one would be a chore. Then there is the problem of frame stretch. That would be a game over situation. So it sits in the safe and is fed .44 specials in the occasions that it comes out.

Another gun I have and will only shoot once is a ww2 ppk I have. Even though it's a long shot, I don't want to risk a factory overload destroying the most historically significant firearm I own.

The safe queen is a s&w m36 flat latch.
It's a sock drawer gun, in its box with factory paperwork, never been shot, and is so fresh that there are still traces of sawdust in the checkering of the mint diamond grips. Looks like it was made yesterday.

 

[Ignition Override]

George P:
Well, that makes sense. Some guns such as the original P228 are popular/preferred over US-made versions: read about certain present issues with some US-made Sig types (I had some in a brand-new retail M11 A-1 bought last Feb.).
Even some 100% German P-series aren't yet known as collectors, including my near-pristine Sig P6, which has the German state "NRW" police (or federal) stamp etc.

There are so many variables when selling a gun that we probably should not assume that it would sell for much more in the present condition, compared to selling it after having 1,000-2,000 rds. through it (?).
Maybe this is a very common outlook.

And anybody who inherits either of these from me (now age 62) would probably sell them for always-needed cash and wouldn't enjoy them.

 

[BWS]

Parts don't concern me one bit.Can make every part of a gun with exception of rifling brrl..... and even that's "doable",if it came right down to it.

 

[Archie]

I think it is unwise to employ a weapon in a serious venture under such conditions.

One's only defense sidearm should not be a curio. I have a collection of .32 ACP (or 7.65 Browning) pistols. I shoot them at least for initial testing and the occasional mad moment. If they break, I'm not happy but I'm not really jammed up, either.

One's only hunting rifle should not require a highly trained elf with a full machine shop to make a replacement part.

As DPris points out, a firearm kept for collector value (or even Dad or Uncle's old heater) should probably be maintained in 'original' condition.

On the other hand, I like Smith & Wesson revolvers. But I'm not having any of the recent crap.

 

[brennok]

Smith & Wesson's 2nd and 3rd generation metal pistols are almost bullet proof but they break a part occasionally and need springs and mags. Yet Smith has decided to alienate everybody who ever bought one and has stopped supporting them.

I wasn't into guns when they were around, but this issue keeps stopping me every time I am about to pull the trigger on one. I instead look to buying something new that is still supported since there is more than enough supported pieces out there that I may never find the time to shoot.

 

[AlexanderA]

Guns aren't much fun if you don't shoot them.

There are at least two types of gun owners: shooters, and collectors. To a collector, the fun comes from completing his designated collecting goals. Whether he actually shoots the guns is irrelevant.

I used to have a rule that every gun I bought had to be at least shootable. That meant that for the early ones (muzzleloaders) I settled for good reproductions. Later I realized that this was a mistake. Whether something was an original or a theoretically shootable reproduction didn't matter if you didn't actually shoot it. Of course, by that stage in my collecting, the prices of originals were many times greater than what they were when I first had a chance to buy them. (Ironically, those reproductions themselves have become collectible and have been increasing in value. Who would have thought, for instance, that a Pedersoli Brown Bess would be worth nearly as much as an original Brown Bess.)

 

[Bushpilot]

Same with me, always looking for a Luger P08. I love them, I want one, but if I shoot an all matching one and break something....yah..

I have guns for different reasons or purposes. Some of the guns that I have are simply tools that I use and if needs be I even abuse by hunting in the rain and snow for example or leaving them out in the barn for the sake of convenience... I also have guns that I use but take very good care of, this group represents the majority of my guns. The last group are the guns that I have either never shot and likely never will or that I have shot once or twice just to see how they function and "experience" shooting them and then may never shoot them again...

For example, just Like MosinT53, I always wanted a nice Luger. I was lucky enough to find a great deal on an exceptionally clean WWII GI bring back that was in about 97 or 98% condition right down to the matching serial number magazine... I took it out shooting one time and then put it away. I have several 9mm pistols so I have no real need to shoot it again but I do enjoy owning it and when I sell it it will be pristine and original... Same story goes for my WWII P-38 except I've yet to even fire it....

 

[Bushpilot]

I used to have a rule that every gun I bought had to be at least shootable.

I used to have the same rule and then I found a 1860 Spencer rifle and that rule went by the wayside.. Since then I've found others that either aren't shootable or would be very difficult to shoot and I still enjoy just owning them...

 

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

There's something to be said about having guns like a 10/22---870----1911---Glock--AR15 etc...…..

There are so many out there and so many aftermarket parts that you would have little trouble fixing it----even if the original manufacturer were to go belly up.