In for sale, a member has a fairly nice low wall with excellent barrel that has been tapped for scope blocks.  Comment that too bad was tapped, several others say it adds value to the rifle.  Apparently, from the lack of sale, it hasn't; the rifle unaltered would bring maybe $1600, he's asking $1700 with holes, and it hasn't sold.  I'd guess it'll have to discount $150 or so to sell because of holes.

I have never seen that add value, no matter to whom.  

Every "shooter" that I have seen taking a collectible original that has been damaged by holes has said "I don't care that it's been drilled, because I want to shoot it and that saves me money".  I've never seen one say "Wow, that one has holes in it, I'll pay $50 more per hole for it over undamaged collectible value".

The owner that drilled that barrel decided to prioritize usefulness over value, probably recognized it was costing them, but made the rifle better for their use.  It may have been when the rifle wasn't particularly collectible and valuable, so the loss at that time may have been minimal.  

Rarity that cannot be duplicated or created makes for value.  Once tapped, that is one less original rifle that is available, and the value of the undamaged ones goes up.  You can always take an undamaged one and convert it to a drilled one, so no extra value to a drilled one.  

I've taken apart and rebuilt collectible rifles, knowing I'm destroying the collectible value.  But, that makes more sense than working with something poor.  I've offered on here several times to trade an original rifle that I was going to break down for a new action, quality barrel, and a new semi-inletted stock set.  Never had a taker.

The reality for a gun builder is that starting with a nice 75% condition rifle is much more cost effective than putting in the labor to start with a worn to hell relic original.  Just a quick re-polish and re-finish on the 75% one, many hours or even days of labor to rebuild a junker. 

Same with the guy that has a rifle, wants to shoot it, but needs scope for his eyes.  He could sell his rifle, buy back one already tapped, and shoot it.  But, he's taking a chance on bore being good, on action working, etc.  Plus having to work up loads for it.  Better to just drill his rifle and use it instead of going to a lot of bother to find that he doesn't end up with a usable rifle anyway.  So, even if he loses value, he's ahead.

Thought I'd bring it up here to discuss.  I'll post some examples below.

I have three Winchester High Walls that are good examples of this in my safe at the moment, all bought for the actions.

#1 is a double set trigger in .25-20SS.  Excellent bore, 80% #3 barrel and stock finish, good action but only traces of case.  Tang sight and Beech front.  Nice action.  Will make excellent rifle; can sell original barrel, sights, and stocks for $1000+ on ebay.  I'd guess at $1750 value for the rifle as is.  So, can keep the action for $750 to build from.

#2 is a #1 .22 WCF single set.  Refinished throughout.  Junk bore.  Small shank.  Nice looking rifle, no originality.  Maybe a $1100 rifle.  Stocks, barrel and sights worth $450 on ebay.  Makes for a $650 action if it's stripped and sold.

#3 is a #2 .32-20 rifle.  20% barrel and action finish, good stocks untouched.  Small shank.  Nice looking rifle, all original, poor finish condition.  Maybe $1200 rifle.  Stocks, barrel and sights worth $500 on ebay.  Makes for a $700 action if it's stripped and sold.  The stocks switched onto another rifle that has been damaged or refinished would add greatly to the value of it.  

All three of these are fairly rare high wall configurations.  None are particularly desirable as a rifle, so value is low as a collectible.  Stripping them for parts makes economic sense.  I haven't done it so far because I've got somewhere between 6 and 10 high walls in my parts cabinet to use already.

I also have a #3 barrel, 28" long, in .22 short.  Bad bore, but near excellent externals, except someone chemically stripped the blue.  Rare configuration.

I also have a #1 barrel, half round/half oct, in .22 wcf.  Really rare configuration.  

Figuring out what to do with this kind of stuff is hard.  The .22 short #3 should be relined, and re-assembled.  I have an appropriate action, with a high serial # lower tang and coil spring I could use along with an original .22 high wall block.  I could re-assemble an unusual configuration rifle with restored finish and bore.  

The #1 half round barrel in .22 wcf I would like to line and re-assemble with the #2 high wall above, and switch in better wood.  Restore barrel and action finish to original.  But, I already have .22 hornets to use, and final rifle would be worth less than the parts.  A restoration using original barrel lined would be more appropriate so it would letter, but it's all refinished anyway, so doesn't matter.

Lots of dilemmas when you start talking about altered original rifles.

My last two walls *not counting the Amoskeag one that is NOT HERE YET were the only ones of the dozen that I have bought that had original wood and barrels.  Both were modified for scope blocks which suited me fine.  One is a LW in 32-20 that I picked up at auction for a decent price that had an excellent bore and is now sporting an old 10x Targetspot (not Jr or Super) and so far I have a load that shoots 1" at 50 yds consistently.  The other is a HW Winder in 22LR that I picked up at the Oregon Arms Colletors show that had a 4x scope and a very good bore.  It happens to be my only coil spring.  So far.
In both cases, I was looking for a good price and a shooter, not a collectible.   
My thinking now is to dispose of a couple of rifles that I no longer want and to save up for a well-researched original unmodified 32-40 HW.   

Jack

Stevens 44 1/2’s were also modified in the last century into mostly varmint rifles. I have four 44 1/2’s that were made into varmint guns, a .219 zipper, a .218 bee, a .222 magnum, which is a recent addition, and lastly from Amoskeag a 5 mm hornet.
The .219 zipper is now my .28-30, the .218 bee is now my .32-20.
I am not sure what I am going to do with the 5 mm hornet.
The .222 magnum kind of threw me because the top tang was shortened about a half an inch and the bottom tang was bent for a pistol grip. It also seemed strange in .222 magnum due to being a rimless case. The stock has very nice figure, and has a through bolt modification. With the shortened top tang I guess I will keep that stock rather than replacing it with a factory looking one. The rifle now has an original .25-21 barrel on it. I am sure the .25-21 barrel is a take off barrel from a rifle that was turned into a varmint gun.
I prefer to modify these varmint rifles back to more original configuration, is that wrong?
My .25-21, a work in progress.

Interesting thread – and one I have thought about some.  I have two 1885’s that sort of fit the bill, one a LW originally in .22 Long (pre LR) that may have been one of the first LW’s that left Winchester (#2879 – June 2, 1886) This one has special meaning to me; it was my great Grandpas rifle (although we suspect he wasn’t the original owner). I wanted to get it shooting again – it had a sewer for a bore, and a really pitted extractor, but didn’t want to lose the value or change the keepsake, so we found an original barrel that had been sleeved and a replacement extractor. We kept the transitional block in, and I have all the original parts to ‘restore’ the rifle if wanted. So, I felt okay with the changes. 

I was also lucky enough at an auction to pick up highwall #303 in original as shipped condition, which interestingly left Winchester a month after Grandpa’s rifle (so much for serial number sequence – I know the Winchester factory story). It was originally a 32 WCF, #1 barrel and the stock and outside metal looked like it spent 99% of its life in a scabbard.  Inside it was pristine with more than a trace of color! Again, we kept all the parts whole and original, but put another barrel and re-chambered to 25-35. With that I found the old-style firing pin was allowing the pressure of the ‘new’ chambering to blow primers. I did not want to convert/change the block to solve the problem, so I found a block (new MVA) we fitted to work. But I left that glorious old wood on her to tell her story as much as we can.

Changing an original for me has been okay – as long as I keep and preserve the original parts… we are just temporary keepers of this history, and I don’t want to be remember as ‘that-guy’ – but I do so enjoy shooting these great rifles!

To me, if the rifle is in 70-80% condition and is original I wouldn't mess with it in any way, just because they don't make 'em anymore, and most times modified rifles are screwed up in one way or another.

An example of something bad was a "takedown" highwall I saw on a collectors table recently.  I think he was just clearing out some non-original stuff or maybe he picked it up cheap to sell at a gun show.  The rifle was no longer a takedown, and had been restocked and turned into a 219 Wasp. 

Chris.

In the past it was always a point that buyers made note when looking at any collectible firearm if it had extra holes of any kind. So it wasn't uncommon for picky collectors to not want a gun with extra holes at all, or want a big discount for extra holes.
But in recent years I've seen a number of buyers happy to buy an old single shot with scope bases, especially if those rifles had period scopes on them. And if the guns were any made by the well known custom gunsmiths that are revered by many, it was even expected they'd have scope bases.
I've seen a number of old single shots with no dovetails in the barrels that were built specifically to be scoped. I own a Ballard with Stevens-Pope barrel that has no dovetails, and rollstamps are on the 45 degree flats, so obviously the owner intended it to be scoped, or he'd at least have had a front dovetail on the barrel.
I do agree that holes affect the value negatively, but not as much so as they did a couple decades ago. I've got a friend who only collects old single shot rifles with period scopes on them. He passes up most that don't have holes for scope bases, as they don't fit his collecting interest. And when one is too neat to pass up, he usually is disappointed he can't D&T it for a scope.

I see extra holes as merely a bargaining chip when agreeing on a price. At the end of the day scope block holes on a barrel don't bother me in the least. But, I'm strictly a shooter and not looking at redeemable value at a later date - what will I care, I'll be dead!

What does bother me is a recoil pad. For some reason I can't see past it even if the rest of the gun is a pristine original.

I've been running a rifle orphanage for years. The problem that I have is when I see a rifle that is nice but misidentified and outrageously priced.

I just bought a one of a kind Prototype rifle, certainly a rarety. It has been drilled and tapped and had the scope blocks in place. Didn't bother me a bit as I planned to shoot it and already have. I would not have done it if it had been left original but someone else wanted a scope on it.

I have other rifles that I would not modify. On one Maynard I made a new barrel for it so I could drill and tap the new barrel and leave the super nice original barrel intact. They are so easy to change out and not change the original configuration at all.

Deadeye Bly wrote on Apr 10^th, 2023 at 8:44am:


If your one of a kind prototype rifle is the same one in Grant’s book, it was drilled and tapped for scope blocks pre 1967, as the rifle pictured in the book has scope blocks on it.

ndnchf wrote on Apr 10^th, 2023 at 11:38am:


Should be able to reline the chamber only to get it back working in original caliber.

SSDave, how is a chamber re-lining done?  I have super nice left handed 1885 Special Single Shot in 32-40 that is in excellent shape other than the fact that someone damaged the chamber.  Maybe multiple case head separations or something.  The chamber looks quite bad,  not rings, but gouges and what might be gas cuts in the steel. The rifle does shoot and eject brass just fine when loaded with black powder, but I'm hesitant to even try light loads of 4227 in it.   

Chris.

Sad story, in 1990 I decided my wife needed an offhand rifle. This started life as a DST 22lr ladies model, I think that was a model 56.
It is now a 28-30 and she does not shoot it as it is too heavy for her.
Mike

It is of course ruined.

If you're talking only about about originality, perhaps "ruined" is justified.  But even in that sense, I'd be another who would have the chamber sleeved and reamed back to .25-25.  My logic would be "It's the least destructive way to return the rifle to its original (and rare) caliber."

Bill Lawrence

All righty, fellow ASSRA followers, who could so this .25-25 chamber rebuild - i.e., who has the reamer?

Bill Lawrence

I sold my .25-25 reamer to somebody several years ago.  You might post a WTB/B/R and see if he’s still around and done with it.  Can’t remember if it was here or Cast Boolits.

I would think somebody good with boring tools (like a lathebore mould maker) could reproduce the straight taper in the rear of your sleeved chamber and blend it in with the remaining front part.  Or you could make a “D” reamer to accomplish same.

I fixed the mangled rear of a .22-15-60 chamber by drilling/boring the bad part out to fit a 3/8” diameter piece of turned .22 caliber barrel steel.  It was maybe 1” long, turned concentric with the worn-out bore.

I turned a piece of graphite rod (“borrowed” from our Glass Shop) to fit the remaining chamber and bore, and to fit the .22 barrel.  I tinned the surfaces, put in the graphite rod, heated the pieces, and pressed the bushing home, with the graphite keeping everything concentric.

When the setup was cool, I drilled/busted the graphite up, set the lathe compound to the angle specified on the .22-15 chamber drawing in Kelver’s Pope book and bored it out until it was continuous with the remaining chamber in front.  The rim seat was cut with a lathe tool as well.

I had to make a reamer of sorts to take out an invisible obstruction (best guess a little solder that had come up out of the front of the bushing), but after that, my precious hoard of shells chambered, fired and extracted normally and with no marks on them.

I will have to say, as an Experienced Shooter of the class of freakishly long cartridges (.22-15-60, .25-25 and .40-90-3-1/4”), trying to make target quality loads in these calibers will soon dispel any anguish about how Original the specimen you’re playing around with is.  You will have other and much more annoying fish to fry.

Try John Taylor

I think that 25-20 SS Dave has was mine. I remember shipping something to Oregon. Got that at a shop on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.

A friend of mine was immediately telling me I should rebuild it into 'something useful' ... 40-65, 45-70. Whatever ...

I shot it a little bit. Bertram brass available at the time was useless.

Irrelevant with regard to this ... but a gun shop we frequented had 2 Ruger 30 carbine Blackhawks, old models. Store policy was any old models traded in went to Ruger for the mod'. We each bought one. After picking them up, back to his house, he immediately got his screwdrivers out to put the original parts back in. Kept telling me, 'you gotta switch yours too' ... umm, why? I was dry firing it, thinking it's the best SA trigger I've ever felt. I'm not touching it. And it's a 3 digit SN.

Last step of assy was the cylinder, when he discovered the base pin was from a Single Six ... put the 'original' in instead. Horrible trigger pull, timing seemed 'iffy' ...

He decided they must throw the original parts in a bin and pull the correct number of each at random to ship them back.

He didn't even put the conversion parts back in, just threw it in his safe ... disgusted. I should have offered to buy it from him ... on 'payments' ... after I checked it out with the conversion parts back in.

Waterman here's my high wall by Farr. Otony, the reason for it was simple. Back in the late 30's and early 40's when the woodchuck hunters turned to target shooting against each other in the off seasons, the bolt actions were outshooting the singleshots and Farr found the answer was to put one piece stocks on the high walls. Mine, in 30-40, while obviously not for woodchucks, was made up as a nice light weight accurate (5/8 inch at 100 with the iron sights) hunting rifle. It came from a serious single shot rifle collector's collection a few years ago.

SS, there is no obvious sign of glass bedding (which would have been a later mod) but note that it shot so well as is that I have not taken the chance of removing the stock to see how it was done. The tangs have been shortened.

If that # 4 barrel is still 32" long after being fitted to the Borchardt, it makes me sad to think how long - and rare- it was beforehand.

In any case, and despite my surprise that you of all people would pose your question, I'd say that scope blocks could only enhance the rifle's value as a shooter.  And since the itss value as a collectible has already been seriously compromised, that enhancement would certainly be justifiable.

Bill Lawrence

Ah, this gives me an opportunity to wax poetic. My father had a few single-shots but the only one I remember shooting very much was an 1884 Springfield, which as I recall, shot very well. Sometime later, in the 1970's I decided that I wanted a proper single-shot preferably a schuetzen model, but those were not usually available. Undaunted, and constantly inundated by creepy lying grasping losers "ohyeahlemeseethat!" I was able to procure a Winchester Hiwall barreled action in 32-40, and with the help of Paul Shuttleworth, I stocked it up with a Laudensack stock. It actually came out pretty nicely. I started shooting my new rifle, and people often yelled strange things at me "whakinaguniszat?" "I ain't never seen no Winchester that looked that!" "That ain't original!" I got the impression that most of the folks out there were hardcore assholes! And yaknow, I was right. But I digress, that was fifty years ago. There are very few factory original rifles (single-shot rifles) out there. Most guns I owned were abused by some of the idiots I described above. I know that some of the "original" rifles in collections have been around the bubba-barn a few times. Oh well....

I also have one like that but its 40-70 bottle neck. Still like it came from the factory.

Wes, as I recall, I sold that rifle to Wes Miller, but then Wes died and I think Tony Heitz bought it at auction, Tony told me that he sold it to someone in the bay area. It was a nice rifle, #4 half octagon Winchester barrel with a very nice Mann-Niedner firing pin. I don't have any good photos of it, but this is me shooting it at the Coors Match in 1983. Photo was taken by Barry Darr.