I would like to open a topic that I haven't seen discussed much on this forum. That is the ethical considerations of restoring old firearms. I have done a couple of rolling blocks, a #2 and a #4, and two Stevens mod. 44's. All of these were wrecks and I felt that I was justified in restoring them. 

I have just acquired a Marlin Ballard that is in better condition than my previous projects. Let me give a brief description and then the learned readers of this forum can provide their input. The rifle is .32 cal, it has no finish on the metal but no rust pits. The bore looks like the inside of a sewer pipe. The action works ok but needs some work to be first class. It has the original barrel sights. The stock is cracked at the wrist with a fairly large chip missing. The forearm is intact but shows its age as, of course, does the stock.

This peice is certainly no collector grade rifle. In fact it really is not shootable in its present condition. Cut loose and help me decide what to do.

Bill

I would say go with your instincts.  These guns were mass-produced items of manufacture.  There was no "school" of influence (as with hand-made guns) which chain would be broken forever if a single specimen might be changed in the smallest amount.  My guidelines for myself are inconsistent sometimes, even contradictory, but they work fine for me.

Unless they were a rare factory variation, guns with no finish, mechanical damage, rust, or bad wood cannot be reduced in value by intelligent and careful rebuilding or restoration.  Even if it is a rare factory variation, certainly relining or reboring a shot-out bore so the rifle can be used will enhance its value, or at least make its value more liquid and make it appeal to a larger market of possible buyers.  If the specimen is pitted or badly damaged, refinishing probably would enhance its value as well.

Bits of original fabric are kind of a toss up.  I try to fix broken original stocks rather than replacing them with modern wood, for instance, up to a point.  The point is sometimes kind of hard to fix.  Even some damage is, as far as I'm concerned, worth preserving.  I took a hand-filed tang sight off a Savage repeating rifle but kept it for a "future collector" (and me) because the rifle shot right to the sight and the idea of some guy, away from civilization, making do for himself that way added to the historical charm of the gun.  On the other hand, I had no qualms about relining the barrel and repairing the stock, because the thing was, as received, not in working order.  I thought of welding up a Winchester barrel which had some saw cuts on it where the owner obviously planned to shorten it (and then chickened out), but have never had the heart to do it.  I can see that guy, fussing and worrying about his rifle, and feel a sort of kinship with him across the years even though we've never met.  The faded case colors on a High-Wall and a Stevens 44 frame I have might as well be polished and reblued--I doubt if they'd grade more than 20%--but I like to look at them better than I'd like to look at a refinish, and after all, they're my guns.  Mine.  That "future generations" thing doesn't ring true to me.  "Future generations" might be consigning all of them to a blast furnace under the loving eyes of the World Government, for all we know.

Most important of all--remember YOU are a collector, too.  You maybe can't afford the museum grade specimens, but that does not necessarily make you a vandal or a philistine, anymore than the possession of a mint Remington Creedmoor makes the guy belittling your choices a "collector."  After 35 years of scrounging single shots and fixing them up, I never preface sentences with "A collector told me..." anymore.  Anybody who sneers at the "damage" I did to a "collector's item" by my reline or refinish would sneer at the original condition I found the gun in as well.  Most of these people aren't real "collectors" anyway--not in the sense that they appreciate and study the designs and history and mechanics of the things.  Most of the most voluble ones, IMNSHO and experience, are gun hustlers, trying to beat others out of their hard-won and hard-worked-on treasures at a fat discount.  The various lectures on the worth of "collectors' items," as ssdave so astutely remarks, are never backed up with the cash such lectures would seem to indicate are in order; I offer this as evidence of my claim.

Go to shows, go to matches, ogle all the guns you can, get experience in looking at stuff, develop your aesthetics and skills and sense of history.  You won't need to worry about what "collectors" think.

Marty, that wasn't the best laugh I had today, but it was darn close!

I have a big problem with Schoyen Pope and Zeeshang.  

They didnt mess up and customize enough of them !!  

                                                                                         Joe.

                                                                     

I've been thinking about how to more clearly define my thoughts on restoring, rebuilding, or "butchering" old rifles...

I guess it's kinda like medicine... "do no harm."

Taking a mediocre or poor shape rifle and properly refinishing it is (in my opinion) a good thing.   
Taking a rifle with some original finish left, and giving it a "belt sand and tank dip" job.. well, that'd be a shame.

Taking a poor shape rifle, and painstakingly restoring it to "original" with new wood and careful attention to proper fits and finishes... that is something to be proud of.

Taking a poor shape rifle, and grinding it up, and slapping a lousy piece of wood on it, finishing it with a rasp and slopping on some cold blue... that's a tradgedy.

I've seen what once was a beautiful 1903 Springfield with 3 sets of holes drilled in it for lousy scope mounts, and the stock hacksawed roughly off.  That was a darn shame.
On the other hand, I've also seen a couple magnificent sporters made on 1903's.

And regarding "Collectors"...
I don't agree that they're all "buzzards"... although I know exactly the type you mean.
To me, a Collector acquires what he loves. Not becuase it's valuable, but because he loves it, and wants to preserve it as part of the past, and to enjoy in the present and future.
Some don't believe in touching, shooting, or modifying what they collect in ANY way.

On the other end of the spectrum are the "buzzards" as J Sells puts it... 
They buy because they want to make money on what they collect.  OK.. so maybe some of 'em are just cheap summanumbatches like me who can't afford what the "market" has driven some stuff up to.  But heck, even a cheapskate like me can't look himself in the mirror for offering 10 cents on the dollar for a really nice rifle, hoping to sucker someone.

The third kinda guy is the Shooter.  Not ALL shooters... but there are some guys that would take that pristine WWI dated Springfield 1903 and saw off a few inches of barrel, chop off the stock, and strap a scope to it, 'cause they can, and 'cause "it's their rifle and they'll do what they want with it"...
CAN they do what they want with it? Sure... but it's a damn shame to take away the beauty of a really NICE original piece... and destroy it's history and character forever.
There are lots of poor, mixed parts, 1903's to victimize... But some folks would just chop up the nice one for a deer gun.

That's not to say that taking an "original" but average rifle and rebuilding it into a highly accurate shooter is bad... just taking an otherwise nearly perfect example, or a rifle with particular history, or unique character, and mutilating it.... well... IMHO, that's just wrong.

Improving guns is good... even given that the very definition of "improving" is subject to debate.
Respect originality.. but don't be a slave to it.

Well..that's enough incoherent yammering from ME for the evening

Paul F.

Gentlemen, thanks for the input. Your thoughts pretty much parallel mine. The four guns that I have redone have all been put back as close to original as possible. One of the 44's was hot blued with a purple frame its now color cased and rust blued. I watched ebay for over two years for a butt plate for a #2 rolling block. However this Ballard will probably end up sporting a new caliber. Anyway, after your input I'll feel better doing the deed. It'll be useful too, not just a wall hanger. 

Bill

You are a very fortunate man, and those youngsters are perhaps even more fortunate. I spend much of my own time making custom guns for the offspring of my friends, and it's very satisfying for all concerned.
Regards, Joe

After reading completely through the comments here, I found myself wincing a bit, as a couple shots in the dark nearly hit me!
I'm one of those who hates to see a well worn gun that still looks and works well, get restored. But I'm also one of those who will take the time to restore a complete wreck to it's original glory; YES even replacing all the frame and barrel rollstamps so it looks 100% correct.
I've also taken guns that were sporterized and returned them to the original factory letter. Will they pass for originals? I suppose some day they might, but only a amateur would think so when they are first completed. Doesn't take an expert to look at a restored gun and figure it out in a few minutes examination.
I guess I'm in the camp that figures it's my gun, my money, and I enjoy them original, but if they're destroyed, I'll try to put them back to original.
Oh, and yes I do look for a bargain, but I wont steal guns from little old men, so you don't have to warn your kids about the boogey man collector.