Are opinion changing on restoring a shotgun?

[Harry Reed]

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.

[Hammer Gun]

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

[Bill Murphy]

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.

[Ray Masciarella]

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.

[edgarspencer]

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.

[Kensal Rise]

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.

[Paul Harm]

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.

[ddp]

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

[Bill Murphy]

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.

[Ray Masciarella]

Bill, with regards to the gun you said should not have been restored, can you tell us why you feel that way? What attributes did the gun have warranting no restoration? Thx, Ray