Question re restoration and value

[mobirdhunter]

Originally Posted by allen newell

Just wondering. I see classic car restorations on various tv shows bringing big bucks at auction. While i can understand that an all original parker would be most desirable and priced accordingly, why would a parker that has been restored to origonal spec be worth considerably less? Why would they be viewed any differently than a classic car restoration?

I'm sure you'll get opinions on this (great) question. I'll let those with more strongly held opinions weigh in, but I do want to point out that since I've been keeping track over the past 5-7 years I've seen (well-) restored guns bring higher and higher prices (as a percentage of what an original would bring). When I visited with Brad Bachelder last summer we talked about this. He told me that his restored guns were averaging about 85+% of what a gun in strong original condition would bring.

I base my observations on what I have seen restored guns advertised for and what they go for at auction (Of course not all restorations are equal). Certainly not methodologically perfect, but it serves a purpose. I have no way of knowing the sale price of those dealer held, restored guns.

I worked in an art conservation lab for years, and I can tell you that when you visit a museum the paintings on display there (my area was painting, so I can't speak to other media) in all likelihood had had some either conservation or restoration (there IS a difference) work done to them at a rate of nearly 90% IF the piece was at least 60+ years old. I've always found it intriguing that for art of value, good conservation work (again, different from restoration) brings the premium.

Certainly a gun that has issues brought back to high condition by someone who knows what he's doing should (and does as far as I have observed) bring a higher price. The gun collecting community is evolving.

...And then there is the English gun, which, if it has any age on it, has very likely been sent to a smith regularly for barrel and stock work.

Collecting is what it is...

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Garry L Gordon

When I visited with Brad Bachelder last summer we talked about this. He told me that his restored guns were averaging about 85+% of what a gun in strong original condition would bring.

I humbly, and with all due respect to Brad and his legacy, must disagree with that statement.

Lets take, for example, an 1893 Grade-1 16 gauge top-action hammer gun with the 'fish tail' lever and with 28" Laminated Steel barrels on the lightened 0-frame with absolutely perfect screws. Add to this 99% original barrel finish and 98% original case color and the wood is 100% original finish with just three or four very tiny dents from handling. This is a benchmark gun in every way....

Now lets take a gun of the exact same configuration that has been completely restored by Brad's shop, or any reputable shop for that matter. I have seen and handled dozens of restorations done by such shops - and they are very good at what they do! - but there is an obvious difference between the two guns. We have a benchmark original gun - and we have a professionally done attempt to bring a used and worn gun to "like new" condition... operative word, "like". But several nuances of the benchmark gun have been overlooked on the restored gun and don't look nearly as nice as the benchmark gun - such things as checkering; buffed or worn-from-use hammer knurling (for lack of a better word) worn engraving - even if the engraving has been 'picked up' or recut it still doesn't have the same crispness of the benchmark gun. Butt plates and grip caps may have been replaced by plastic reproductions or simply the checkering of the DHBP may have been recut. Some of the screws may have had their slots recut (sometimes too wide maybe?) or repaired and polished (edges rounded) before recoloring.

I could go on, but I won't. I will say that despite the efforts of the shop that attempts to bring a gun back to look like a 99% or 100% gun... it still falls short and it's value might only approach 50% of the benchmark gun... IMHO.






.

[mobirdhunter]

Hi, Dean,

No need to be humble -- I'm sure your experience has earned you an informed base for your observation. Frankly, [I]I[I]don't have the experience or expertise to draw any conclusion about what a gun in whatever condition is worth...except that I'm sure I've paid more than a gun was worth because I fell in love with it, regardless of whether or not it was restored. I certainly look with interest at some dealers of nice American guns that seem pretty darned high based on the fact that they were in part or whole "restored." As far as Brad's observation, I assume he was basing it on his observation. We all have bias. I know I do.

I do think the valuing of American guns to be intriguing. I hope someday to find one I love that I can buy for what I -- and maybe some more informed folks -- deem to be a great bargain. In the meantime, I'll muddle through trying to find the next ideal gun for my collecting/shooting interests.

For what little it's worth, I know (and care) nothing for the price and value of old cars. I can't keep up with guns, not to mention cars.

[Bill Murphy]

Benchmark guns will always be more interesting to collectors than professionally restored guns when we discount the couple of sales that are completed while uninformed buyers bid on these restored guns while the benchmark guns rest with their owners, waiting for the next buyer. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

[C grade]

I completely agree with Dean. A well restored gun is more difficult to sell and worth about 50% to an original
David

[edgarspencer]

I agree with David's estimate. A restored gun, compared to an equal condition, original gun is not worth 80%, but closer to 50%.

[mobirdhunter]

Originally Posted by David Dwyer

I completely agree with Dean. A well restored gun is more difficult to sell and worth about 50% to an original
David

It sure would be informative -- and interesting -- to know what some of the higher priced restored guns actually go for. We can see this at the auction sites that post the sale price, but don't have that information from the dealers. One would think they put the price somewhere near what they think they can get. How near?

It also begs the question, is a gun's value what it sells for or what experts think it's worth? I could argue both ways...but will leave that to others.