How much does Reblueing or Reparkerizing a Pistol or Rifle affect Milsurp Value?

[Coyote Ugly]

The age old question from the dawn of time gets asked again.

You see everything from reblued and reparked 1911's, Garands, Lugers, K98's, etc for sale.

I know if it was a reblued K98 or Luger, it kills collector value.

Do people actually pay for "Pretty", because it looks nice and disregard common sense?

It can only be Original Once.

Your thoughts on refinishing, reblueing, reparking and collector value.

 

[purple]

Ranking of MILSURP values from a collector aspect;

1. Factory original "as issued" pieces retaining original parts and finish.

2. Military/Govt arsenal rebuilt/overhauled pieces.

3. Restorations which approximate original "as issued" condition.

Beyond that, actual condition and what appeals to the taste of the individual collector/buyer play a big part. For example, all other things being equal, would a M1903 Springfield with an original barrel having a poor bore be worth more than one with a brand new GI replacement barrel? A buyer who wants to shoot it would obviously value the replacement barrel more, but the highly anal collector would put a higher value on the original barrel. Most military small arms saw a number of parts replaced and one or more overhauls/refinishings while in service. Re-parkerizing is a tough one to sort out. For the past 36 yrs I have owned a pristine condition Letterkenny Arsenal 1969 dated re-built 1942 Garand with a replacement 1966 dated Springfield barrel and mixed US GI parts. I would have a very tough time distinguishing between it and another two Springfield Garand receivers that I re-parkerized and re-barrelled with NOS GI barrels a couple of years ago. The only real distinction among them would be the electro-pencilled Letterkenny re-build mark that was applied to the receiver leg. In this case both receivers had little to no finish remaining, but were in entirely sound and unpitted condition, so re-parkerizing made sense to me and suited my personal tastes, especially when I planned to install new barrels and other parts on them. 1940s/50s arsenal rebuilt Garands for the most part had rebuild marks applied to the stocks, rather than to the receivers, so it would be tough to distinguish between them and a current re-park/restoration if the stock was removed or had been replaced.

Ultimately it boils down to the tastes/preferences of the potential buyer.

 

[Tinman204]

I agree with purple. I'm a new shooter that is looking for milsurps that I can shoot and collect so to me I will pay more for a gun that is in shootable condition. But if I was collecting milsurps for historical value I would want "original" condition guns.


Steve

 

[Coyote Ugly]

Ranking of MILSURP values from a collector aspect;

1. Factory original "as issued" pieces retaining original parts and finish. Most Desireable and Collectable

2. Military/Govt arsenal rebuilt/overhauled pieces. Shooter Grade

3. Restorations which approximate original "as issued" condition. Big Pimpin' like Mitchells Mausers and Backyard Bubbas

1. Best

2. Better

3. Good

 

[Steve1987]

I agree that a pistol can only be original once.

Having an original finish milsurp re-finished is typically a bad idea, unless it's in really poor condition or a parts mixmaster with little value anyway.

I have noticed Canadian collectors seem to care less about originality than collectors in the United States.

In the U.S. a nicely refinished M1911A1 is only worth about $600-700 and not considered collectible, unless it's something really rare. In Canada, I have watched refinished guns sell for as much or more than originals. The only way I can understand this is that we just don't have enough milsurps on the market, and people are happy to buy something when it's for sale regardless of originality. There just isn't enough to choose from. Also, I think the guys who refinish milsurps in Canada charge significantly more than American gunsmiths, and when the person who has gotten the work done goes to sell they need to recover their costs.

So while originality SHOULD affect value, it certainly seems like that is not always the case, just watch the EE!

-Steve

 

[flying pig]

Here's the one I've had most trouble with recently. What if bubba sanded off the blueing on a barrel etc? In my eyes re bluing in that case is a matter of preserving the piece and restoring its dignity. What do you guys think? I have two rifles set to restore that are in this kind of shape...they both are extremely collectible either way and won't be leaving my collection for hopefully at least another 50 years.

 

[Steve1987]

Here's the one I've had most trouble with recently. What if bubba sanded off the blueing on a barrel etc? In my eyes re bluing in that case is a matter of preserving the piece and restoring its dignity. What do you guys think? I have two rifles set to restore that are in this kind of shape...they both are extremely collectible either way and won't be leaving my collection for hopefully at least another 50 years.

Since the bluing has been sanded off, re-bluing won't further hurt the value. The damage has already been done.

-Steve

 

[Claven2]

There are exceptions to any rule. Point in case, James River Armory has no problem selling modern rebuilds of M1s with refinished GI parts and new Boyds wood with fake arsenal stamps at over $1800 canadian. You can get a decent original finish gun for what? $1200?

I recently built a nice M1903 shooter on a high-number SA receiver with all NOS USGI parts and I would not part with it for under $1400, maybe more. It's as arsenal new though and shoots MOA to prove it. This was a guilt-free project because I started with an orphan action and a low-number sporter I robbed some parts from and got the rest of the parts new-in-wrap (including a new-in-wrap GI barrel) from various sources - no collectible guns were sacrificed to make my sweetheart

If you could find an original M1 looking as though it left the factory yesterday, it would sell for more than the JRA M1, same for my M1903 - but in these cases an as-new example is not available anywhere to anyone.

Of course, these are US arms with minimal serial number stamps so even rebuilds aren't "mismatched" per se.

I believe US long-arms are a bit of an exception. As-new civilian rebuilds seem to command a high price if done nicely.

In most every other instance though, a refinish de-values the gun.

 

[drm3m]

Steve,

I think you hit the nail on the head.

"Since the bluing has been sanded off, re-bluing won't further hurt the value. The damage has already been done."

IMHO these guns fit 'generally' into two categories.....a shooter ...or a collector piece.
Arsenal refinished is in its own category....it is not original as issued.....but they certainly have their place.

It is possible to turn these guns into whatever someone wants them to be.....and often very nicely redone.

But that is what they are... 'a refurbed or rebuilt gun' much like most of the Moisan Nagants that have flooded the North American market.

Nothing wrong with that as long as they are viewed and valued for what they are.

David

I only own one M1 Garand rifle, it has not been refinished, and two of the drawing numbers are too early or too late for this EMcF inspected rifle according to Bruce Canfield.
I suppose that I could try any and rectify that but I won't....it is what it is.
I will just leave it as it is.
There a no arsenal refurbishing stamp on this rifle.

I feel the same way about two 1943 dated Bavarian marked M1 carbines that I own.
As my friend Jim Mock that runs the Bavarian Carbine web site says...leave them alone....that is their history.

Both of these carbines are Inland manufactured in 1943....They became Bavaria Rural Police carbines.

One has an Inland inspected stock.

The German stock markings. 2099 S/N added by the Germans on an IO stock.

The other one has a Rock-Ola inspected stock.

That is the wonderful world of Bavarian marked post war M1 carbines.
Some close to GI issued ...others ....mixed and matched.

 

[Nyles]

Personally a government / arsenal rebuilt gun doesn't bother me - after all, refurbished rifles were used in many wars, they still have lots of history to them. I don't think I'd pay as much for one as a factory original one, because the factory original one commands a higher market value and I don't like getting ripped off, but I'm generally nearly as happy with one as the other. One refinished after it leaves military service is of no interest to me, because I collect mainly for historic value - I do shoot them and enjoy it, but that's not why I own them.

The exception is for something that's so rare I could never find or afford an original one, in which case I'll live with it. I mean, I certainly wish my Colt 1905 auto was original, but seeing as the chances of owning an original are pretty slim I'm prepared to live with it.

 

[BCRider]

My own thoughts are that there is a "trigger point" at which the damage from wear and tear and storage becomes significant enough that re-storing and re-finishing the gun can only keep or improve the value. The trick is knowing where that point is reached since with war time guns the "wear and tear" portion is part of their history. So unless it is well known that the damage occured later on then "re-storing" them is like throwing their history into the dumpster.

 

[kirkf]

So how about something like a pre 64 win 94?
They were all just regular everyday use guns. Is it a sin to have the metal refinished?


Kirk

 

[CanadianAR]

Yes, like previously mentioned guns are only original once. No matter what it is, reblued, is reblued.

My opinion is if its a documented repair, ok. But rebluing a milsurp in general destroys its value(I'm talking originals only). Example: if I found an all matching K98K that had been reblued.....it would be a shooter while my original bolt mm's would become safe queens.

But if its been bubbad or whathaveyou, then fix it.

 

[Mike Webb]

To me there are two kinds of milsurp enthusiasts, purists and the rest of us. Any gun that has been refinished in any way(not in a government arsenal) has been severely devalued to a purist, to the point that they would not be interested in purchasing it. But I have seen ads posted by guys wanting nearly 100 year ols service rifles in "unissued" condition, this is a tall order. Particularly with U.S. martial arms, the U.S. armorers continually repaired, changed out parts etc. with understandably no regard for keeping parts of original manufacture on the rifle. Like putting Winchester made parts on a SA Garand or Rock Island parts on a SA Springfield. I would consider a U.S. rifle with mixed parts through armorer repairs original but not as issued, if that makes any sense.

 

[flying pig]

Perhaps not as last issued but definitely as last in service

 

[Remembering]

I prefer original finish, even if there is none left. I like the well worn look as long as it's not beat to sh!t. In fact one of the coolest looking guns I've seen lately was a VZ-24 with no bluing and only small stock dents. It has no rifling left but I might buy it just for the wall.