Are opinion changing on restoring a shotgun?
 

I used to be one of those old school guys that said a rusty old shotgun is always better than a restored shotgun, but views views are evolving after seeing some correctly restored shotguns. By correcting restored I personally mean a gun that has been faithfully bought back to the way it left the factory in every aspect.

What are the current opinions on the following question: If you have a Parker with no factory finish on the frame or wood (the barrels usually have at least some) and its overall condition is worn and need of some TLC, do you object to correctly restoring it? If so, why? If not, why?

I won't wade into that argument, but I'll say this much - there are a lot more guns out there that have had work done on them than people like to acknowledge.

My personal philosophy with my guns is to (1) leave guns with honest wear alone (2) repair and/or restore guns that have issues which affect their cosmetic and/or functional value. Those are subjective determinations for me to make on my own guns. How far to go (repair parts or full restoration) is also subjective. Once the decision to repair or restore is made, it should be done right and a gunsmith that specializes in the gun to be restored should be used.

We all like original guns, but as the first poster said, most are not all original. Also, there are some incredible gunsmiths out there that do great work which has value in and of itself. The fact a gun was restored by Del Grego, Bachelder or Oscar Gaddy would get my attention if I was considering a purchase. You need only surf this forum to see some incredible work.

I bought one 20 gauge parker that was fully restored and I believe very well done. I believe it's collector value is less than the price I paid. A major consideration for me was that I felt this gun was far more pleasing, and an equal or better deal than what was available in modern guns in the same price range. I wouldn't be hesitant to do it again if the fit, gauge, dimensions etc were what I was looking for in a SxS. Just my opinion.

I think it's a gun by gun thought process that goes into it, family gun.. Maybe. .For your enjoyment..maybe... But not for profit. A guns history has a lot to do with it, maybe one or more restored for yourself that really show the class that it brings to the gun, as said there are some great looking restored guns on here and with the knowledge on here one not going to slide by. We have a few great restorers on here with some very nice looking work.I have not had one done but plan too, couple of 0 and 1 grade guns, I don't care if I have 3 grand into it.I'll be carrying and shooting it just the same but it's sure going to look good, same as the one that's seen a life of field use having that boat bump and/or ding that that guy put in it 90 years ago. A gun that I will have done will be researched fully before any thing is done to it. With all the resources we have it should not be that hard.

I don't believe some or most guns need it and stand on they're own, which needs be original. But one I will have had done I will tell the less knowing public that it has been restored, as some have done. I brought one restored gun and does it draw looks in the field, I tell them that it's been restored and when it was born then just step back and let them talk.

Craig

I have noticed that in other countrys like englind and australia restored guns seem to be prefurred to well used guns. A lot of sights advertise all there guns as being refinished and reprofed before sale. I read on nitro express that the aussi's don't put near as much stock as far as resale in wether a gun has had work done on it or not. This may be because these guns are wearing out and if we want to use them then we are going to have to fix them. Just my opionion.

Profit shouldn't enter into it. It's pimping. Older guns with a look of care and love are as desirable as women of a certain age. No one neglects a companion worn by honourable living to say she or he is original. Cosmetics are integral to arm candy of any age. The difference between collectors and Parker enthusiasts is collectors are serial lovers.

Ray, there is a huge difference between quality of so-called restorations. I really think that to fully deal with your question, you should go to several Parker meetings, talk candidly and non-publicly to people and inspect for yourself a lot of Parkers. I think it will be exceedingly difficult to learn about these matters without hands on and face to face discussions. You see a number of assertions on this forum that experienced Parker people would take issue with in private.

From my view, some restorations are spot on, but most are not. The main problems are in case colors and stock work. I have attempted to provide forum viewers with examples of original or mostly original Parkers and a person can compare those to some of the restoration work that is seen.

Well said Bruce and King. I agree Bruce, the case coloring done today will never match original Parker coloring, although some of it is done by some very talented people. I have a late P grade with original case, wood and bluing. The gun looks as if it had been placed in a time capsule. When I handle a refinished Parker it feels to me as if the soul of the gun has been removed. That's just how I feel, as I'm not a true "collector", I feel as though I'm just taking care of these guns for a while.Their originality is what I love about them.

I have a GH 20 with 30 inch damascuss barrels which in itself is a rareity. Doug Turnbull completely restored this gun to include recutting the engraveing. This was all done befor I bought the gun but I considered it in my offer which was substantilly less than the asking price but we came to terms and its a very nice gun. i see no harm is cleaning up an oil soaked stock, refinishing it and recutting worn checkering or haveing the damascuss barrels redone. Most of these guns are 100+ years old and a little TLC IMHO doesn't hurt them.

I actually agree with almost everyone has said. It probably should be a descision that is made on a gun by gun basis. For me, it is not an emotional thing. If a gun is totally worn out, I'd have no problem restroing it if I wanted to, although I can appreciate an old worn out gun too. it is a personal descision.

I agree with Bruce that most restorations, by some well known gunsmiths, do not match the many great origianl guns he has shown us here.

I disagree that colors cannot be properly reproduced. If Parker did it then it can be done now. And some gunsmiths are getting it right. I think the reason even the right colors on a restored gun don't look like they do on a 100 year old 98% gun is that what cannot be reproduced is a 100 years of aging. Those old guns just have a mellow look. They didn't look like that when new. It took a 100 years to look like that.

I haven't seen as many restored guns as others. I haven't seen one perfectly restored. Seems like there are always little things that are overlooked.

In the final analysis for me, there is no problem perfectly restoring an old worn out gun and bring it back to life. While it may have some charm from being carried through the woods for 100 years, bringing it back to life has value (and I don't mean money). On the other hand, old worn out guns are cool too. Do whatever hits your hot button.

Although not a "total restoration" here's an example of a little TLC on a GHE damascuss 20ga. Clean up 100 years of dirt,grime and recut the checkering and a nice piece of walnut was revealed. IMHO no harm done.

Here's one that was "restored" several years ago. The seller thought the colors are Creekside which would be Doug Turnbull's father. The damascuss bbls and the stock has been refinished as well. Its a GH 16 O frame. I must ask where's the harm?

Rich, I see no harm, and wow, what a great result!

Some have commented on the fact that sportman's in other countries routinely restore guns. and it is an accepted practice in those places. It is interesting how collectors here have opposed this view for so long. IMHO, there are some guns that should never be restored. For example, a gun that is known to have been used during the War Between the States, the great western times, etc. On the other hand, a Parker in any grade that was purchased and used in the normal course of sporting activities and is all worn out can be restored if that is what the owner thinks is best for him.

Some of us have a romantic view. All the dings and dangs represent the history of the gun, even if the history is not distinquished in any particular way. Some on the other hand, may see value to them in taking the old gal and restoring her to her youth. Not because they think she is going to look like a 100 year band new gun, but becasue they want her to look brand new (understanding a gun is only new once). I have to think she would be admired. After all, where does one go buy that gun new today? No repo is even close (which is an entirely other subject, but I always wondered why anyone would go through all the effort of producing a repo that is not faithful to the original. Makes absolutely no sense to me).

My problem is that I'm both romantic and practical but I have moved away from the never restore category.

I forgot to add the pics:whistle:

Restoration is the owner’s choice. Heck, the owner of the Invisibles could have them turned into lamps if they chose. I’d hope that they would not but that is what ownership is about, the owner may do whatever is legal to their property.

My opinion is that vintage guns with medium to high condition do not need restoration. Any work may in fact lower the value of such guns. Having faded Damascus patterns redone correctly probably enhances the value of most guns.

Low condition higher-grade guns are prime targets for accurate restorations. Accurate means for the manufacturer and period/year the gun was made. The end result should make experienced collectors take a close look to ascertain if the gun’s condition is original or restored.

The following are examples of full and accurate restorations by Brad Bachelder.
1. Parker B Grade Lifter Action in somewhat below medium condition with barrels redone in gray on grey and total restoration.
2. "Hard hunted" Super Fox. The wood was so oil soaked that one could indent the stock head with their thumb. Yes, Bachelder restored the original wood!
3. LC Smith 10 gauge Grade 2. Notice the pitted barrel lug in the before photo.

As with most things ,I always seem to have an opinion ,Generally ,I try to keep most to myself . This can be a real can of worms ,My personal opinion , is this very simply , If I choose to purchase a gun which has never been refinished ,apparently there was something about the gun ,I already liked and usually just give her a little clean up and use it the way I bought it ,now if this gun has been beaten up a bit and I can have bumps taken out of the wood ,checking recut or cleaned up and some new finish on the stocks to make it a bit nicer ,then I will go ahead and have it done as long as it is by a reputable smith that makes his best attempt to finish in an original style ,same with Damascus barrels ,I really like the patterns in the Twist and Dam. barrels and will not hesitate to have at least the barrels redone by a good Damascus Barrel Man! As for a total restoration ,even though ,I have had a few done ,and done by some of the top names in the business ,I never seem to be as happy with the gun as I would have been if the job had never been done even though it looks nice ,they are just not the same to me ! The one gun ,I owned was a 30" DHE 28 Ga. ,this gun had been refinished in the past and very poorly ,I purchased this gun knowing " FOOL " well ,I could never live with it the way it was but a 30" DHE 28 " WOW " how do you pass it up with a decent price tag on it , I had the gun completely refinished by one of the top refinishers in todays market and it was absolutely Gorgeous ,I carried it a bit and really never warmed up to it and eventually sold the gun ,lessons learned , I think guns with their Patina ,and Age are always going to be more desirable than a refinished gun and will always have a better following from true enthusiasts than a refinished gun which someone has attempted to bring back to it's former Glory ! Again ,just my two cents !

Mark, I could not have said it better and I totally share your view. Restoring that Parker is a close call IMHO, but the Fox and Smith are clearly better for their restorations, again IMHO. With that said, I think the value of the Parker, in more ways than one, was enhanced with the restoration.

Russ, I see your point of view also. As Mark stated, it is a personal choice the owner has to be happy with. At first, I didn't understand your statement that you had no problem doing a partial refinish but don't like a total restoration. My first thought was: what's the difference? But after tought, I think there can be a difference. The only problem is that for the purist, once a gun is messed with it is always messed with. There is no going back. So for them partially vs totally restored is still a messed with gun.

This is a partial restoration in which the "unwritten history" of this 32" EH 10 gauge was preserved.

Jerry Andrews repaired the bolt through the stock.

Brad Bachelder did a partial restoration on only the metal parts of the gun.

Oh, this Parker gets hunted! It has been with me many days in the layout boat!

Restoration is a term used too loosely in this industry. Often refinished guns are represented as "Restored". A fresh coat of poly and a blue job do not constitute a Restoration. A total Restoration is basicaly a complete remanufacture with the most strict diciplines applied in techniques and process. There are no shortcuts or quick fixes. Every American manufactured Double has its own set of signature nuances. Finishing marks, colors, patina, dimensions and function parimeters. To apply Fox techniques to a Parker will yield an incorrect Restoration. A refinished model 12 Is just that, a good field Gun, A restored model 12 is a great field Gun, but also a thing of beauty.
In ten years a properly Restored Double will look just like its untouched counterpart.
As for value consider what a properly restored Corvette will fetch at auction.
We don't own our Guns, we are temporary stewards at best. We love our Doubles because they represent a very important part of the history of American Craftsmanship.
Pristine to good original condition Guns should be left untouched. Distressed and poorly maintained Guns can be brought back if done properly.
As stewards we can take great pride in saving these beautiful machines for our enjoyment as well as future generations.

Brad

As a former Bloomington Gold and NCRS judge, I can speak to the point made by Brad regarding Corvettes. A Vette restored to typical factory production condition is always worth more, a lot more, than a worn out unrestored example; except in very, very limited circumstances. Interestingly, "survivors", as they are called in the Vette world, have only been recognized in the last 10 years or so. Probably because so many Vettes had been restored there were not many unrestored cars left! For an unrestored Vette to be worth as much as a restored Vette it would have to be 90% original and have near perfect original paint. Very difficult to find in a 40-50 year old auto.

Some like restored guns some don't---there is room for both in our hobby. The restorers will never convince the leave it original crowd to like restored guns and vise versa. So if you want to properly restore a gun---have at it and have fun----just realize that not everyone will be impressed or like the finished product regardless of the quality of the craftsmanship.

The Mona Lisa, Statue of Liberty, Washington Memorial, Mount Rushmore and many others have all had restoration work done. Their Value.....PRICELESS. (when done by competent restoration artists).....

[QUOTE=Mark Ouellette;114642, the owner of the Invisibles could have them turned into lamps if they chose.]

I have NEVER seen an Invisible Parker, IF they made lamp shades would you only see the shade???:biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::b iglaugh::biglaugh:
Sorry Mark I couldn't resist your typo:duck:

I don't think I would ever restore a original gun in high condition. but most of the beaters I see these days are begging for it, theres no shame in saving a old gun. and besides its fun.

This is one of the most interesting threads I have read on the forum since I became a PGCS member. I think a Parker is one of the best examples of American manufacturing craftsmenship from the late 1800's and early 1900's. A $150 1890 C grade Parker compares very favorably when layed next to far more expensive European doubles. I think, when the restoration is done using the original wood and metal on the gun, no historical significance is lost!!! If the specimen restored was in such a rough condition that wood and metal components need replacement, that is fine too. Just be ethical if you are doing it for monetary purposes and disclose what has been done and why. IMHO.

Rich, that is probably the most perfectly refinished Parker I have ever handled. It almost had me fooled completely.

Guys they don't make them anymore! I have a Parker lifter 10 gage with some issues but mechanically it's all there. It's an 1878 with the keyed forend and beautiful fiddle back wood. The back end is about 70% and I plan to have Kirk Merrington work the barrels over only to the point of making it shootable. It is not going to ever be an as new restoration only enough to bring it back to 100 year plus old character marked rarity. Lee.:bigbye:

Thats exactly why a little TLC will keep them around and serviceable for another 100 years.

Unfortunately, I agree with everything that's been said. Let me change or ask a slightly different question. Assuming the restoration was done correctly (and this is a big open assumption), if you were to purchase the gun, how would you value the gun?

For example, is the restored gun 50% of a similar gun (grade, barrel length, stock, etc) in 90% condition?

Thanks
Ken

Ken I think each gun would have to be valued on it's own merits or the lack thereof. Small bores bring more regardless. Look at the GH 16 O frame I posted pictures of, I don't think that gun lost anything value wise because it was restored and probably it's value increased.

Ken, great question. I think when a restoration is done because the owner wants his Parker to reflect the fine workmanship and beauty of the factory Parker, he will get great enjoyment owning the restored Parker. When a restoration is done for the purpose of enhancing value, I am very doutful it can be done for much profit. A proper restoration by a Parker capable gunsmith is expensive. Usually the cost of the re-finished Parker when combined with acquisition costs will not yield a greater margin on the gun then if it is sold in it's original condition. You may sell it for more $$$ but you have more $$$ in it. I think this also holds true for old Winchesters and Sharps. Most who do it, do it, because they love the beauty of the original workmanship and enjoy owning a speciman that reflects that same workmanship.

Well, I just have to add my 2 cents, I believe that a gun speaks for itself, In that a rare gun in a low grade should be brought back to as close to original finish and fit as can be done, also any high grade guns that have had less TLC than they should have should be brought back to original fit and finish, TheMona Lisa has been cleaned! Parker made in my estimation the best side by side in this country, and some with beautiful engraving I think they are better enjoyed by the owner or collector if they are faithfully restored, You are going to get what a person is willing to pay and no more when time comes to sell, but look at the enjoyment it brings to you and all that see it Gary

I have had work done on more than a few of my Parkers. They are some great guns and would be loved by anyone who bought one. I have a great 28 gauge, blued all over and restocked. Some day that gun may go in the hopper for refinishing.

While those who have responded represents a very small number of the Parker collector community, it appears the weight of responses supports both partial and total restoration. (Interestingly, many of our most well-known members have not weighed in for whatever reason). I guess that is in keeping with the trend.

Many have claimed restorations may not have a positive effect on the value of a gun. I think that is probably true for partial restorations. I'm not sure about total restorations. If total restorations don't ultiminately have a positive effect on price, we may not see a great number of worn out gun being restored.

The end motive behind a gun owners decision to restore a gun has a lot to do with whether he plans to keep it, knowing he would enjoy it more because it was more pleasing to his own eye, as opposed to doing it to make it more desirable to potential buyers.
Without doubt, we've all seen 'restorations' done poorly. These become examples for those that would argue against such work. Top shelf work almost never comes without a substantial investment, and those few who are capable of this work are always busy; justifiably so.
Those who haven't had the opportunity to look at, and really study high condition original guns may be satisfied with a greater number of guns done by those who call themselves qualified. Likewise, when an owner really knows the details of color, fit and finish that left Parker Brothers, in my opinion, does the gun proud.
Guns which have been well cared for, and simply exhibit the evidence of loving use, may best be left alone, but a gun that has suffered from poor care, with deep scratches in the wood, dings in the tubes or pitting would likely give the owner greater pleasure with a good freshening at the minimum, to total restoration at the maximum. After all, doesn't the word 'Restoration' really imply bringing something back to it's original condition? When it's all done, and doesn't look like it did when it left Meriden, is it restored, or just reworked?
In short, I believe properly restored guns have real value. I don't think upgraded guns ever achieve that level of value and broad desirability.

Mr. Spencer makes a very good case on all sides.

But whether it is a Parker or a Purdey, I always try to first ask myself "does this gun need any work to be a prideful part of shooting once again?"

If I can't answer "yes" immediately, I leave it alone.

If the answer is yes, I then ask myself "how little will it take to achieve that status?"

And frankly, the answer to that is almost never a total restoration -- which in my view effectively obliterates the gun's value as an artifact of shooting history.

That's just my two cents... and some change.

I believe it's up to the owner what he does or doesn't do to the gun. I have two Remingtons Brad has restored because they were high grade guns that deserved it. Most my guns [ field grade Parkers ] I have refinished the stocks and have had Brad redo the damascus barrels. They are what most would call " beaters ". I'll never get the money back out of them, but I enjoy shooting them and showing my friends how beautiful damascus barrels look. Those guys shooting O/U's look in amazement at my old SxS's with redone barrels, some not believing they can still be shot, and sometimes if I'm lucky, shot well.

since we're throwing 2 cents around...here's mine. it depends on the gun & the guy. doing it for yourself or return. answer that & then decide. in my case , I have a BH.. original...used but cared for. I wouldn't think of touching it. I have a CH used & well worn. checkering almost gone in the grip area, Bernard barrels that you can't see the pattern on very well. it's going in for a total restoration by the best I can find. not for value but to bring this piece of history back to where it belongs so that when it's done...it will be around for the next 120 years to be appreciated by whomever the caretaker is at that time.

just my opinion.

ddp

I have three total restorations which didn't hurt the guns much. They are all VH grade guns. One 32" VH 12 came restored from gunbroker at a good price and was a wonderful job. One, a well worn VH 12 with no redeeming qualities, was done by at least a dozen workmen over a period of more than 30 years and is a story to tell. Doug Turnbull was the last stop and the gun came out great. It came from a wonderful couple who started me in collecting Parker paper, and the gun's faults were not marks of character. The third was not a gun that should have been restored, but it was, and I love it anyhow.