Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

Marty's guns are quite nice, well up to my standards. I have had one gun recased by Turnbull and it is beautiful, in my opinion. It was the final step in a restoration of a VH that started in the early seventies and involved more than a half dozen craftsmen. Doug's bill was a bit high, but he (or Jason Burden who handled my job) insisted on improving on some engraving restoration that had already been done by another engraver. I also sent the gun assembled and his prices are lower if you send the parts disassembled. You get what you pay for and I am satisfied with the end result. Now that we can't conveniently use Brad's services, Turnbull represents the safest road.

Not sure what you mean by that. Care that elaborate?

JDG

About 8 or 9 yrs ago I had DelGrego fully restore my 16 ga VH. The colors came out very well. I think Turnbull may have done them but I'm not certain. They look like his colors. But it could have been someone else.

Jay, after almost four years, I still don't know how to answer your question.

My guess would be that after what we now refer to as the classic manufacturers (Fox, Lefever, Hunter Arms, Parker, etc.) ceased operations, most owners were not all that concerned with or wrapped up in restorations. Most guys bought those guns to use and hunt with, most took good care of them, and the collectors did a good job maintaining their guns for that purpose.

I doubt that there was much if any focus on "restoration" during World War II, with the focus on repair and keeping them working in the field and marsh since manufacturing was directed towards the war effort.

As has been written many times, the returning Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airman shifted their interest to autoloading rifles and shotguns.

When I became interested in hunting and shooting in the early to mid-1970's my friends and I all coveted either a Remington Model 870 or Ithaca Model 37. A Browning Auto-5 was viewed as a "money gun." It was the then "old-timers" that had double-guns and again, they were viewed as a tool.

Seeing nice trap guns at the range usually meant Ithaca or L.C. Smith. My memory is they cared about shooting well and winning, not getting them re-case colored.

So, in my opinion towards the original question I think that there was probably a small cottage industry of guys who did that type of work and I'm sure Colt and S&W offered this type of service. But what we refer to today as a complete or historically accurate restoration of classic double-guns is a fairly recent phenomenon I would guess.

I think Doug T. left his Dad's shop around the late 1990's to go his own way and build what it is today.

Was not Oscar Gaddy considered one of the best a few years back?

Yes he was Gerald, and he did a very nice restoration of composite barrels as well.





.

Frank LeFever Gunsmiths of Lee Center, NY use to flame color receivers for $40 or have Delgrego cyanide them at Remington in the early 1970's.

Guys all this talk of originality honestly baffles me,how do anyone know today what was original 120 years ago ? Sure something could've been written down ,someone else can discover it and follow directions word for word,but with something like cch were all subtle nuances followed directly ? Are the materials in use from the water to charcoal to heat source the exact same? There's been documented finds of pristine unused guns ,but was the same person there when the gun was bought 100 years ago are they the same person who finds it in a closet looking through the same eyes? Has time taken no effect ? Did someone in the 1960s start up cch as there was a personal desire or sound need for the long forgotten service ,could they not claim that thier rediscovery of the process is exactly like the original? Who the hell could argue? Great tactic if you ask me ...there are subtle things in particular makers that are of note, like the lighter center of the Parker floorplate ....a clear lacquer can be used gloss or satin ,colors can be buffed out before lacquer like I pretty sure was done in Michigan
Same goes for any of the restoration process ,it's very difficult to exactly duplicate what was done so long ago metal or wood ,good work and process does ,although speak for itself ...if you want a gun to look as good as possible don't hold back on the restoration process ,and in the end if the individual is happy with thier "new " gun that's really all that counts and any of the old relics saved and put back in use is a battle won for the future of our pastime