restorations

[collector]

https://www.turnbullrestoration.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/brotherskeeper1.pdf

 

For me all the character is now gone, it's like buying a new gun. The pre-restoration Rem UMC pistol looked great to me, especially given the questionable blueing on those.

Maybe I would not regret it so much if it had been a commoner maker.

I know for some others the mint look is desirable, and they certainly did a super job. 

I know collector cars are sometimes heavily restored, I wonder if it's different with cars maybe.

 

[OLDNAVYNUKESPOOK]

I concur.  In the collector car world, the saying goes "It's only original once." Granted, had it really been in bad shape, I can understand the rationale to restore but this seemed far from it.  

[GWS]

   I understand your dilemma.  I gave up on "minty" anything years ago, not that I didn't acquire a few minty items before then, I did. But I guess I saw too many cars, guns and other things that were refinished, rebuilt or even modified to make them more attractive or look "just like new".  I discovered that the beauty of an item was its history, scratches, dents, wear and all.

Anything is only original once. Anything done after that to make it appear better than it was originally only detracts from that original beauty. Yet, I've seen  historical items, family heirlooms, and just about anything one would want in it's original, hand-me-down, worn around the edges, and used by great grandpa condition ruined by someone wanting to make it look new again.  Anyway, just my 2 cents worth. Thanks for listening.

 

                                                                                                            Steve

   PS-They did a first class job, it does look new!  If thats what you wanted.

[thorin6]

Turnbull restorations appeal to a select group of people.  I know a guy who sent a US&S M1911A1 pistol to him for restoration and loved it.

I personally would never do that, but I understand those that do.

As an aside, I have a Pre-Victory model S&W in .38 caliber that was a bring back from Afghanistan that is badly pitted on the outside, but is in excellent working condition and internal parts and bore are really nice.  It would look really nice restored, but that would lose it's history.

[ottodog8]

In terms of value, I have always believed in the theory that a gun is worth the same before and after restoration. 

[GWS]

2 hours ago, ottodog8 said:

In terms of value, I have always believed in the theory that a gun is worth the same before and after restoration. 

 

     Not trying to be contrary or start a pi**ing contest here, but that "theory" is definitely not supported by anyone in the more serious fields of arms collecting.  Would a refinished or restored Colt Walker revolver ever be worth more than a well used and worn original? Absolutely not.  Would a "restored" Custer range Trapdoor Carbine or Colt SAA  bring more than an original? Don't think so. Would you replace the original "notched" grips with nice new ones on a Billy the Kid attributed six gun?  Hardly.  This isn't just a matter of just my opinion vs. yours, it's a fact that any knowledgeable collector or collectable arms dealer will attest to.  Your mileage may very. Thanks,

 

                                                                                                                                        Steve

[ottodog8]

4 hours ago, GWS said:

 

     Not trying to be contrary or start a pi**ing contest here, but that "theory" is definitely not supported by anyone in the more serious fields of arms collecting.  Would a refinished or restored Colt Walker revolver ever be worth more than a well used and worn original? Absolutely not.  Would a "restored" Custer range Trapdoor Carbine or Colt SAA  bring more than an original? Don't think so. Would you replace the original "notched" grips with nice new ones on a Billy the Kid attributed six gun?  Hardly.  This isn't just a matter of just my opinion vs. yours, it's a fact that any knowledgeable collector or collectable arms dealer will attest to.  Your mileage may very. Thanks,

 

                                                                                                                                        Steve

 

 

I didn't make myself clear. I agree with you. If you took a Remington UMC M1911 in 20% original condition and had it "restored" (not just refinished) even by Turnbull, it would be worth about the same before as after you paid for the restoration. My point is even a proper "restoration" is rarely if ever worth the expense, without even getting into the question of altering a gun's history. I once owned one of the Lee straight pulls that was recovered from the USS Maine in 1898. It had been poorly refinished, as they all were, over pitting by the Navy at the time. They also heavily sanded the stock. It was not a pretty gun, but what a piece of history. I wouldn't dream of touching it or any of my firearms for that matter. I was fortunate to have a mentor in the early 1970s who schooled me on originality of wood and metal, matching numbers, etc. etc.

[GWS]

 

  Ottodog8--Ok,, good, now I understand what you meant.  Could be I just read it differently than you intended, but it seems that you and I are in agreement on this. Your point on the cost of a really good restoration(like Turnbulls)which is very expensive and will probably never be recovered when sold is well taken.  This situation pretty much mirrors most auto restorations, though  I think with more exceptions than with guns.  Who wouldn't want a showroom new looking '68 Camaro or a Boss 302 Mustang to bomb around in? Well, maybe not the guy who inherited one from his uncle that still has original paint and pretty good original mechanicals. Still, most of us aren't so lucky and end up doing what we can to get an old beater back on the road.  Back to the gun analogy, I remember someone at a gun show long ago saying that if he brought in his 80 year old grandma dressed in short shorts and a tank top it wouldn't make her look 20 years old again. I think he was looking at a rather poorly refinished Winchester at the time. Thanks,

 

                                                                                                                                                                   Steve

[BryanJ]

For some reason I thought the average Turnbull 1911 restoration was significantly more than $2500.  I have a 1918 M1911 Colt that I have thought about restoring.  $2500 might make me consider a restoration, $3500+ would be a no-go.  The gun has maybe 10% bluing remaining, it’s pitted and rusted, and 1918’s are probably the most common 1911’s.  

[collector]

17 hours ago, BryanJ said:

For some reason I thought the average Turnbull 1911 restoration was significantly more than $2500.  I have a 1918 M1911 Colt that I have thought about restoring.  $2500 might make me consider a restoration, $3500+ would be a no-go.  The gun has maybe 10% bluing remaining, it’s pitted and rusted, and 1918’s are probably the most common 1911’s.  

 

Don't know how old the article is, maybe 2006. Can anyone pick up an GI 1911A1 (maybe arsenal refurb) unrestored for $2500 these days?  The 1918 might be a fun shooter, you would have both.

[BryanJ]

Yes, not a particularly good investment to refurb it.  Sure would look nice, get reheat treated.  Even the Mona Lisa got a refurb years ago.

[collector]

Well Mona Lisa would have just been cleaned.

 

Just looked around, there seem to be WW2 vintage 1911A1s around for what you might pay to completely resurface your old one. And what I meant by a refurb is US Arsenal refurb, some of which are a bit less expensive but still all GI. Then you would have two, and as some of us know, you can't have too many.