I don't get sporterizing...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jim, I just went and looked at all those pics of that absolutely BEAUTIFUL example of Mr. Owens fine craftsmanship. The man was a GOD among us mere mortals!! I make some pretty rifles but that man made magic!
 
In 1962 I ordered a 1903 Springfield and 600 rounds of military ammo for it from Montgomery Wards catalog. The total order came to $44. It arrived via parcel post (the good old days) packed in the original crate and pretty well submerged in Cosmoline. Once I got it out and cleaned up it turned out to be a brand new forty year old rifle, a good one with a four groove barrel and milled parts. I hunted with that rifle for a year, got five caribou and a moose with it. After the second year I sporterized it with a ready made sporter stock, new sights, and just generally cleaning it up an polishing it. That rifle served me well for over twenty years when I passed it on to a friend. At the time no one was considering those a collectors rifle, they were just cheap 30-06s. I never regretted modifying that rifle, carrying it in its original configuration was a bit more work than it had to be. After sporterizing it I'd guess it lost a pound and a half of weight. Much better for beating around the brush. Besides I wasn't planning on charging a moose with fixed bayonet.
 
I have some sort of old cap an ball type and gun from syria that my dad brough here 60 years ago. Lot of gold inlet, dont know what it might be worth but its pretty cool.
 
The old things that some poo-poo are actually quite valuable, go price that 8 track CB radio combo that was in a 77 Trans Am. Look at prices for a nice Pacer or Gremlin, they are what they cost new, more in some cases. People like old things because of what they are. That old pacer you think is a total POS is automotive history and I can see one in great shape and think wow that is a real nice example of a car that no one loved, it is nice well kept works well and is very nice...I am glad someone saved it, you just do not see them anymore. Same can be said for surplus rifles, that 91/30 is something that some with NO eye to what it was has no respect for, never has never will, and when they come across a rare example they have no idea what they see and are so un educated to what they are looking at that they just toss that into the scrap bucket, or butcher it...same difference, and think that those that do care for them are crazy and go to great length to justify their position. It does not matter if it is a westinghouse 91/30 or levi's pacer.

If you want to take something and butcher it be my guest, you will never see me drool over it...I see it as putting a mustache on the mona lisa.

Again I do not class what was done with "indian rifles" and rifles like the above poster talked about, those are in a different class, we are talking about bubba no matter how skilled working in the modern era.

That is all I am going to say about all this.
 
That's good.

To the rest of the old mil-spec rifle school - what do you suggest we do with rifles that have already been molested/modified? Just throw them away? Part them out? What ...?
 
It depends on what you want something for. If it's something you want to use and you don't have a lot of money it made a lot of sense in the 60s to sporterize military rifles. Obsolete military rifles were cheap and plentiful and in the calibers used in WWI and WWII were eminently useable for hunting. I understand why someone today wouldn't like to see these old guns being modified. I feel the same way about Model As. I hate to see hotrods being built out of Model As nowadays as there aren't all that many originals left. That wasn't true in the 50s and 60s because Model As were plentiful and cheap. You could buy a operating model A in my teens for $50 or less that would cost more than a hundred times as much now. Same for old military rifles. If I came across another 1903 I wouldn't modify it. Of course I wouldn't likely use it other than for a decorative wall display. Good used hunting rifles aren't all that expensive now. Not to mention that military rifles of today just aren't much to look at and don't lend themselves to sporterizing.
 
I hate to see hotrods being built out of Model As nowadays as there aren't all that many originals left. That wasn't true in the 50s and 60s because Model As were plentiful and cheap. You could buy a operating model A in my teens for $50 or less that would cost more than a hundred times as much now.
Click to expand...
i don't think i've seen a model A streetrod built from anything other than a rusted shell of a body in the last 25 years, or ever for that matter. i helped build at least 20 street rods during my teeneage years to help pay for my hot rod 72 chevy truck. the first chop top i ever did was on a 31 model A, took 6" out and made it look proper. that work payed for the work on my narrowed rear axle at the same time. i cut the tops on 5 model A's, a pair of 34 tudor sedans, a couple 32's, two 72 chevy trucks and a suburban. chopping tops is fun
 
BrocLuno said:
That's good.

To the rest of the old mil-spec rifle school - what do you suggest we do with rifles that have already been molested/modified? Just throw them away? Part them out? What ...?
Click to expand...
No enjoy them for what they are. I think I said I have a Krag rifle that the father in law and wifes uncle pitched in and bought for $25 years and years ago (funny a box of 30-40 will cost you about that now). They used it in the mountains of Tenn. to hunt deer. They where a dirt poor family with 8 kids, that worked in cotton fields....the entire poor stereotype that comes to mind. I kringe when I see it but understand why it was done. Same with american indian modified rifles and rifles like a poster talked about with his cap and ball rifle from the mid east. Those rifles have a history already made. Back in the 50's when you where in a family where you got one pair of shoes every two years and stuffed newspapers in them because they where bought too big because you would grow into them....and you bought a rifle to put food on the table.

But to do it now...it is just flat stupid.
 
The invisible hand of economics will solve the problem. When a milsurp is worth more as an original than as a source of sporter parts, sporterizing will cease. Bubba understands cash on the barrel head. That is already happening with some models.

Those who want things altogether original will need to put their money where their historical argument is. But that is the way it always works; consider the Trapdoor Springfield. Used to be really cheap and a number of them were modded. Some were carbinized and some were buffaloized. People quit doing that at some point. Some of those old adaptations show ingenuity and have a certain charm today, or at least it seems so to me.
 
The invisible hand of economics will solve the problem. When a milsurp is worth more as an original than as a source of sporter parts, sporterizing will cease
Click to expand...
No it won't. To some it was about saving money in previous years but no longer. It is a fact that building a quality sporter from mil-surp parts often costs several times more than a new commercial rifle. If anyone still thinks it's about saving money then you haven't read the previous posts or are just ignoring what has been said.
 
If you want a really nice Mauser 98 sporter, money no object, you can buy one directly from Mauser. http://www.mauser.com/M-98.64.0.html?&L=1

At some point common sense takes over. If you want to build a certain rifle with a certain action you will have to count the cost. It's your decision where the price point falls, where you would not think it worthwhile to sacrifice a costly original for its parts. If I were going to build a Trapdoor Springfield sporter today, I would start with a repro, or a junker, not a collectible original.
 
See this here rifle?
standard.gif
It is what is left of a BCD 43 Mauser K98 rifle.
What's left of the barrel, the receiver, bolt, and magazine assembly are all matching and the gun was in excellent shape before it was butchered.
I bought it for $125 and it has been sitting in my barn for about six years.
One of these days I am going to rebarrel it in .250 Savage and put it in a German walnut Mannlicher stock I have been sitting on.
Why sporterize?
Because I could not restore this rifle to its original condition without spending more than I will to redo it as a sporter, that's the best way I can sum it up for you.
There are tons of rifles that have been butchered out there.
Something has to be done with them!:)
 
Send me the current stock when you do, I have a project for it :)

And, I suppose some of you'all are going to get upset when I convert my 5M serial number Garand to 7.62 NATO? Never mind that I have a 1M serial number that I'll keep in 06. Sometimes I just can't stop myself from tinkering :)

Oh, and as I write this, I'm opening a box from a pawn shop in Las Vegas with an Arisaka 7.7 Type 99 that has been whacked. I paid $77 for this one. Some parts will go on eBay. Some on GB and the rest will drop into a stock I already have. Dam, another 303 Jap sporter is coming together. Shame that they are such light handy rifles for brush hunting. It'd be way better if they were 10 lbs and 5 ft long, but that's not the way it works out :)
 
Last edited:
I just wonder how some of these History buffs think you can return ANY milsurp back to original. Definition of original means ALL MATCHING NUMBERS!!! 75% or more of the 1903's were arsenal refurbished and do NOT have matching numbers. Like the one in this thread http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=625806

While it is an excellent representation of an 03, it is a mix master. Any TRUE collectible value is gone except to a few who know little and have extra bucks to waste. Many of these milsurps are the same way. Great looking refurbishes but to a TRUE purist, no value. But then again, many of these "purists" tend to say "Well if it was an arsenal refurbish that doesn't count and it's still "historical" " I have to laugh at this double standard. It's ok if the arsenal put on a BETTER barrel but not the hunter. It's ok if the arsenal puts on a more functional stock but not a hunter. So on and so an.

Some of you guys need to come to grips with reality. A rifle is a tool. Some are built to fit an average guy with military targets in mind. While these rifles were fine for their time and types of battles, they are basically useless in todays world for anything more than hanging on a wall or hidden in a safe. To me, that is the most disrespectful thing you can do to these fine old actions. The MOST respect one can give one of these rifles is to breathe new life in them by fixing them up with a new, more functional, stock, trigger, and barrel if needed, and take the damn thing out and USE it! How can one be shown MORE respect? It can't!
 
sacrifice a costly original for its parts
Click to expand...
See...that's the thing,they aren't ''costly originals". They are "Parts Guns","Gunsmith's Specials" and in most cases just a stripped receiver,having been parted out as the only usable parts from an otherwise trashed gun.
If you want a really nice Mauser 98 sporter, money no object, you can buy one directly from Mauser.
Click to expand...
That is still a production gun and not one I built myself. Personal satisfaction is the objective here,not saving money not "just to have" a Mauser action rifle. Doing it myself,to my specifications,to fill my needs for a rifle either for hunting of target shooting is what is accomplished by my sporterizing. I have several production rifles as well as un-molested mil-surps(98 Mausers,Finn Mosin Nagant,SKS,M1 carbine) in my gun safe. None of them accomplish what my self built mauser sporters can do and that is to put a big smile on my face.
 
Too bad some people don't understant that what a battle rifle was made for is to be used in war. If something broke it was replaced and put backinto service.

Collector value is not "gone" if the rifle is a mix master, there was a pretty good thread on this over on one of the garand forums years ago. Does a blue sky M1, or just about any M1 carbine worth less because they where repaired and put back into battle. The general consensus is no, that rifle in its current condition was in battle, has a history already there. This is how the soldier carried the weapon, he did not care if all parts where from Winchester, IBM, IH....whoever....all he cared about is how well it worked.
Actually people will raise an eyebrow at some rifles that are all shiny and matching numbers....do a quick search on Mitchel's Mausers and you will see how true collectors feel about weapons that come from him.

Some people are clearly out of touch with what true military collectors are after. And those that think they are usless and should be hanging on a wall need to get out to a John C Garand match, or any of the long range steel games that require wood military rifles.....A most ignorant and uninformed statement.

If some people think a rifle is a socket, or screw driver then fine. But before you destroy something you might want to find out what you have first....you just may have something that you could but 10 Remmington 700's for with the money you would get from that old wall hanger club that your grandfather put his life on the line for.
 
I can't help but wonder how many of these milsurp snobs who rant on about the history and honor of the battle rifle actually carried one the in service. It's been my experience that most men my age managed to let someone else serve when I enlisted after the military went volunteer. Now I ask some of these guys what branch they were in, and they hem and haw around before they can think up some important reason why they never served, but they can still gripe about my sporterized Mosin-Nagant that outshoots most of their pristine examples.
 
Clipper said:
I can't help but wonder how many of these milsurp snobs who rant on about the history and honor of the battle rifle actually carried one the in service. It's been my experience that most men my age managed to let someone else serve when I enlisted after the military went volunteer. Now I ask some of these guys what branch they were in, and they hem and haw around before they can think up some important reason why they never served, but they can still gripe about my sporterized Mosin-Nagant that outshoots most of their pristine examples.
Click to expand...
Milsurp snobs...pretty funny, is it not strange how when in an undefenceable position the name calling and attacks in character then starts.

As far as the 1917 goes....That weapon is worth ~$1000...I have seen good examples go for quite a bit north of that figure....I don't see anyone doing something to a pistol worth that kind of money, in even the last 15-20 or so years....my point is why would you? I also doubt that the revolver pictured above would bring over a grand.

All that said I am not saying that it is not nice and well done...what I am saying is the historical spirit (for lack of a better word) is now gone. The revolver brings nothing to the table over a modern revolver would bring....so why would someone buy it?....because it looks cool...well I saw a S&W 29 be bought for $500 just this week (yes the guy that bought it went skipping out the door). Point is a modern revolver could be bought and personalized for less then a grand. Why would someone spend that kind of money on that pistol....because of WHAT IT WAS, and was is the word here, what made it valuable (as in cash money valuable) is now gone...it may have great personal value to the owner, that is different.

Again I am not trying to dissrespect the above owner, not my intent in any way shape or form.

For me shooting an old, classic firearm of anykind is part of the experence....and I think it is for a great many people, if not companies like Dixie, Uberti, Piettea....and all the others that make black powder replicas would be out of business...or never in business in the first place. Do you think that if someone could own and shoot a vintage Sharps, or remmington new army and such they would not snatch them in in a second....do you think they would then cut down stocks, or alter them in any way shape or form?

Now if you are taking a old military rifle and modify it you are doing it for two reasons, you can and it is cheap....tell you what why not next time don't pickup a $89 mosin, pick yourself up a nice Wather G41, Johnson, or even an SVT-40....what you don't have the $6000 to spend on a rifle or even the $1000 for an SVT...that and if you made it a sporter it would ruin the value....oh wait it would not ruin the value....but wait these are cheap...so where 03 springfields and Krags at one time...see the point here?.......no.....I did not think so.....sigh
 
Last edited:
So by nearly 200 posts maybe we can have figured out that some folks enjoy building rifles they like from old milsurps, and others think it is anathema. I doubt we will ever find much common ground on that subject, but we can sure find common ground on scores of others.
 
Soldotna - way cool place - literally and figuratively :)

You, said it. Oh Well - for those that keep thinking I'm whacking perfect examples - I guess they didn't see the posts? For those that have an old action on the bench right now - carry on :)
 
I ain't been disrespected

As far as the 1917 goes....That weapon is worth ~$1000...I have seen good examples go for quite a bit north of that figure....I don't see anyone doing something to a pistol worth that kind of money, in even the last 15-20 or so years....my point is why would you? I also doubt that the revolver pictured above would bring over a grand.

All that said I am not saying that it is not nice and well done...what I am saying is the historical spirit (for lack of a better word) is now gone. The revolver brings nothing to the table over a modern revolver would bring....so why would someone buy it?....because it looks cool...well I saw a S&W 29 be bought for $500 just this week (yes the guy that bought it went skipping out the door). Point is a modern revolver could be bought and personalized for less then a grand. Why would someone spend that kind of money on that pistol....because of WHAT IT WAS, and was is the word here, what made it valuable (as in cash money valuable) is now gone...it may have great personal value to the owner, that is different.

Again I am not trying to dissrespect the above owner, not my intent in any way shape or form.
Click to expand...

No disrespect felt here. That Colt 1917 snub was built in the early 1970's by John B. Williams Gunsmithing in Fullerton CA. It appears in several of now deceased gun writer Dean Grennell's books..."Book of the .45", "Pistol and Revolver Digest", etc. It was owned by Dean's brother at that time.

Just another example from when the 1917 .45 service revolvers were inexpensive.

The S&W...I don't know any history on it. Sure does shoot fine though. Nice nickel job plus whoever nickled it didn't buff the roll marks away and they left the trigger, hammer, and extractor case colored.

I added the Sambar Stag to both.

332993789.jpg

332993796.jpg :cool:
 
sayak said:
So by nearly 200 posts maybe we can have figured out that some folks enjoy building rifles they like from old milsurps, and others think it is anathema. I doubt we will ever find much common ground on that subject, but we can sure find common ground on scores of others.
Click to expand...
Yes it is a very polarizing topic. Fun to talk about tho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
Find of the Month!
Replies
3
Views
556
HP
H
Mullo98
  • Locked
Mosin Sporter
Replies
15
Views
442
Mullo98
Mullo98
M5-Shogun
  • Locked
Type 99 7.7 Sporter - Ideas?
2
Replies
29
Views
947
LoonWulf
LoonWulf
C
  • Locked
why sporterize?
2 3 4 5
Replies
121
Views
6K
Art Eatman
A
MachIVshooter
  • Locked
Picked up a rolling block
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
dave951
dave951
Back
Top