Are opinion changing on restoring a shotgun?

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Rich Anderson

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.

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

[Alligator]

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.

[Ray Masciarella]

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.

[C.O.B.]

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.

[C.O.B.]

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?

[C.O.B.]

I forgot to add the pics

[Ray Masciarella]

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.

[Big Friend Ten (BFT)]

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.

[C.O.B.]

[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???:b iglaugh:
Sorry Mark I couldn't resist your typo

[Brush Buster]

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 !