Why is Bubba so despised??

vinver

vinver

Regular
Rating - 100%
174   0   0
Location
Enfield, NS
OK, so I know "sporterized" rifles are valued much less than original military specification. And I know that an Enfield with a cut-down barrel and modified for a scope or custom stock will never be returned to "original" spec. I get that. But what makes a sporter (in this case, an Enfield No 4. Mk 1* ) with original barrel, original front sight, not drilled for a scope or otherwise cut/drilled/modified worth any less than a beat up, FTR'd , worn out "original" once it is restored?
Original parts are available, many new old stock. Wood furniture, barrel bands, sights are mostly interchangeable, so it must be exceedingly rare to find a rifle in original, untouched , factory fresh configuration. Everything else, then, is non-original once it has been through a workshop and had parts replaced, which is probably 99% of th Enfield No 4's out there.
My rant is mainly based on a comment about a No 4 being restored and somebody commented "a bubba will always be a bubba" as if it would be much less valued. Other comments about restored rifles being worth less also confuse me.
It's my opinion, that a debubbafied (debubbafication?is that a word?) restored rifle, (done properly of course) should be no less regarded than a good original unmolested version. Also understanding that there many ways to go wrong and devalue something. but if the rifle has an original unmodified action and barrel, everything else is basically parts replacement, no?
 
A bubba WILL always be a bubba, even if restored. Work done in a UK armory is not identical to work you do at home. Bedding issues, non-matching numbers, etc. are the norm.

And really, many full wood No.4's are NOT clapped-out dogs. Many are in very nice original nick.
 
A original as it was made rifle will always be worth more than a rifle that was put together from bits and pieces.Is there anything wrong with restoring a uncut rifle with assorted parts?As far as I am concerned no,just don't expect to get your money back.I have a nice collection of rifles that were brought back from Bubbafication.Will I ever recoup my money?Not likely.Pristine wood and nice metal sure do look good but they will never represent the history of all the dings and scratches that a original been there and done that weapon has.
 
mr.e moose said:
A original as it was made rifle will always be worth more than a rifle that was put together from bits and pieces.Is there anything wrong with restoring a uncut rifle with assorted parts?As far as I am concerned no,just don't expect to get your money back.I have a nice collection of rifles that were brought back from Bubbafication.Will I ever recoup my money?Not likely.Pristine wood and nice metal sure do look good but they will never represent the history of all the dings and scratches that a original been there and done that weapon has.
Click to expand...

OK, understood. But does ANYBODY out there have a certificate of origin or history (provenance) for their rifles? How many debubbafied (there's that word again!) rifles are being passed off as original unrestored models, at a premium price? How many amateur restored rifles are being passed off as grandpa's war trophy, stored in a closet since the 1950's etc when in reality they've probably been taken apart and rebuilt dozens of times, and not likely by a certified gunsmith. I've been watching Enfield No 4's listed for sale for the last several months, some good, some great, some real bargains and some really overpriced ones too (all purely my opinion, as they all seem to sell eventually). How do we really know the history of a 70 year old rifle?
As an example, can anybody tell me if there is anything wrong here (extracted from an ad)-
"A 1944 Long Branch NO4 MK1*all matching numbers & wood,shiny 5 groove barrel,..." Should this example be regarded as any more valuable than a restored, debubbafied sporter?
 
stripperclipper said:
I've always thought everyone with a full wood Enfield should thank bubba. If none were ever sporterized, they would all be worth what sporters are going for now.
Click to expand...
So true, there were millions of them after the wars just sitting around. Not that some Sporters are not valuable (Churchill, Parker Hale models for example) but there seem to be many levels of sporterizing. From full cut, custom stocks as mentioned, to cut off forend wood (the easiest to debubbaficiate) models . Not that I want to thank Bubba- maybe thank him for keeping the Lee Enfield popular?
 
vinver said:
So true, there were millions of them after the wars just sitting around. Not that some Sporters are not valuable (Churchill, Parker Hale models for example) but there seem to be many levels of sporterizing. From full cut, custom stocks as mentioned, to cut off forend wood (the easiest to debubbaficiate) models . Not that I want to thank Bubba- maybe thank him for keeping the Lee Enfield popular?
Click to expand...

i have seen a couple of no1 mk3 sporters with one piece stocks, one was a hand filed receiver and reblue job, with ivory inlay in the stock and the other was done with a mill and made to fit an existing stock that was also modifed
 
Reason #1 why you should always check your head space. If you don't know how to do this take your rifle to a "competent gunsmith and have it checked.Carefully inspect the chamber for a botched scope tap or even worse a DP receiver.These rifles have been around for over a hundred years and numerous examples have been worked on by Bubba's finest.After finding out these important factors look down the barrel.Shiny with rifling or just shiny?Most of use would like the former but if the rifle is marked with regimental stamps from a notable period in time then it is a collectible.It is a personal decision on what you want to collect.I love my shooters but I also love my collectors. Some of them I wouldn't want my head within a country mile of the breech with a live round in the chamber.
 
I think as issued or as last in service is the key to value. Not only has it been there and done that but the people who learned the little tricks and tweaks that made them work their best were the ones who did the work. I don't trust a highschool shop student to build me a high horsepower motor, I trust that to a machinist with many many years in the trade. Same with rifles, one that I have rebuilt may be nice but one that has been through a soldiers hands, fitted to him by experienced armorers and fielded will work better (for him for sure) and carry its own history than something I have put together. It is what it is. Restored rifles can make good shooters dont get me wrong, many guys who do it do a great job too, maybe as good as the military staff who used to even, but you still don't get the leftovers of all of those years and different conflicts and the evidence of our worlds history written on them. For me when I pick up an original Canadian arm I always seem to wonder, did my Grandpa ever meet the man who carried this rifle in Italy, France to Germany? Maybe he unknowingly walked by the very rifle that now lives in my house some 70 years ago. Makes those things seem much more real to me, makes me remember what they all did.
 
vinver said:
OK, understood. But does ANYBODY out there have a certificate of origin or history (provenance) for their rifles? How many debubbafied (there's that word again!) rifles are being passed off as original unrestored models, at a premium price? How many amateur restored rifles are being passed off as grandpa's war trophy, stored in a closet since the 1950's etc when in reality they've probably been taken apart and rebuilt dozens of times, and not likely by a certified gunsmith. I've been watching Enfield No 4's listed for sale for the last several months, some good, some great, some real bargains and some really overpriced ones too (all purely my opinion, as they all seem to sell eventually). How do we really know the history of a 70 year old rifle?
As an example, can anybody tell me if there is anything wrong here (extracted from an ad)-
"A 1944 Long Branch NO4 MK1*all matching numbers & wood,shiny 5 groove barrel,..." Should this example be regarded as any more valuable than a restored, debubbafied sporter?
Click to expand...

Found it.Pretty nice shape seeing when it was made.It almost seems as if it was used by a General in the latter part of the war,one that never made it out of Canada.
 
Here's a couple sported examples I picked up recently- 1944 ish Savage, in very good original condition, little wear. Not cut or modified, but had the US Property script ground off the top. Matching bolt. Restored value?? How about a sported Long Branch, 1942. Not cut, but tapped for a scope. Does not appear to have been done wrong- but obviously will significantly affect value. However, it has a N/l\Z stamp, and a star stamped on top- if only it could talk!! Obviously some historical value, but due to the tapped holes for the scope, seriously reduced dollar value?
If you want to read an interesting story on restoration, look up the tale of Ginga Din the Vincent ..
“Tho’ I’ve belted you an’ flayed you,
By the livin’ Gawd that made you,
You’re a better man than I am, Gunga Din!”
Kinda like a trusty old rifle..

Read more: http://www.motorcycleclassics.com/c...c-vincent-gunga-din.aspx?page=5#ixzz2ELHkdobM
 
Personally I have owned more of enfields than you have likely ever held. I can always spot a put together over an original within a couple minutes or less in-hand.

I don't buy someone's basement restorations. Period.

MANY collectors feel as I do. YMMV.
 
So what is your deal? Are you trying to restore sporterized LE's? Have you be caught for trying to pass these off as un restored LE firearm? Are you trying to drop the value of all original LE's? Have you been burnt on a bad deal?
I really do not understand your issue, a modified or bubba'd rifle will never be the same, cut barrel, removed sights, replacement wood, D&T job.....like stated before are you sure a gunsmith did this? A beginner into this hobby or a competent rifle owner that has been doing it for years? Can you tell what you are getting?

You can spot the butcher jobs a mile away, hacksaw barrel with no -recrown, poorly fitted wood that will effect accuracy, and plugged holes.........to me sporters are NOT in the same class.....

"But does ANYBODY out there have a certificate of origin or history (provenance) for their rifles?" no......proof is in the pudding......wrist markings, refurb stamps, matching numbers.....etc.....list goes on.

I do not mind the restored ones, I love them, I have them, I build them but they are not the same.
A unmodified, untouched, un-bubba'd LE has perhaps been there and back, and holds a story. Can your bubba say that?
 
Last edited:
Many points presented in this thread is the reason why I always mention to a buyer when I sell a "desporterized" that it is, indeed, a desporterized. There IS an important difference between that and a never-sporterized one. As Claven mentioned, the trained eye can usually tell the difference between both, upon close inspection.
 
mosin_pistol-450x195.jpg


'NUFF SAID?
 
vinver said:
OK, understood. But does ANYBODY out there have a certificate of origin or history (provenance) for their rifles? How many debubbafied (there's that word again!) rifles are being passed off as original unrestored models, at a premium price? How many amateur restored rifles are being passed off as grandpa's war trophy, stored in a closet since the 1950's etc when in reality they've probably been taken apart and rebuilt dozens of times, and not likely by a certified gunsmith. I've been watching Enfield No 4's listed for sale for the last several months, some good, some great, some real bargains and some really overpriced ones too (all purely my opinion, as they all seem to sell eventually). How do we really know the history of a 70 year old rifle?
As an example, can anybody tell me if there is anything wrong here (extracted from an ad)-
"A 1944 Long Branch NO4 MK1*all matching numbers & wood,shiny 5 groove barrel,..." Should this example be regarded as any more valuable than a restored, debubbafied sporter?
Click to expand...

i dont need a cert for my no 4 mk 1 it was used by my great grandfather

a restoed rifle is worth a little more then a bubba in my mind even a cut barrel could be fixed but a receiver that has have just about everything milld/ground/filed off well thats not restorable and that needs to be made into a nice sporter

the idea of replacing parts to restore a bubbaed rifle is to bring more full military rifles into the pool
 
Yes, any real collector can spot a basement restored rifle in seconds. The genuine article is always preferred and getting one in mint condition is the Holy Grail.
Most collectors who do find those hang on to them till the end so they are scare to find.
It's always puzzling to me to find a mint condition K98k with all the dirty birds all chopped with a cheap Bushnell scope drilled and tapped on it. You could have bought a hunting rifle for less money. Like the others said, restored is OK, but only to the restorer.

It really bothers me to see a lot of basement Garands going for thousands, but the market demands it now. We have the Mitchell Mausers and others jumping in to produce mint condition "restored" rifles cause they know the buyers are out there.

I recently bought a refurbed M91/30 sniper from the latest batch brought in. It's the real deal refurbed by the Russian Armory, not a reproduction. It's also not the prettiest thing, but it's they way they built them back then. For that I can respect it and glad I got it that way. No need to refinish the stock. It looks rough and will stay that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom