doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Altering a shotgun vs future value?

Of course, if one were to purchase a gun that had already been altered in a "substandard" fashion (as I did)and the gun was not too badly "butchered" (my gun came close) then one has pretty much a clean canvas to make whatever "good gunsmithing" modifications one wants with a clean conscience. What's to hurt? In my case, I now have a gun that is even more useful than when it came from the factory at a price that cannot be matched by any "pristine" old gun, much less a new piece from "Old Blighty".

Don is correct in saying that refinish covers up the state of wear and abuse of a gun, something that should be of interest to any buyer of an expensive old gun. "British guns don't suffer in value from annual freshening." is an old wive's tale. An untouched Purdey sells for bags of more money than one freshened annually. Of course, some buyers are not aware of what their potential purchase is worth and pay the big buck for a ground down gun with a fresh shine on it. Oh well.

If you alter a gun to make it fit your needs while having the work down first class you should not hurt the gun value too much. Opening chokes to make the gun versatile and useful is no sin in my book. Cutting the barrels is a sin, you might as well port the barrels and ream the chambers to 3" with long forcing cones.

Most refinishing is done to keep a nice gun looking like a less worn gun. No sin but not going to improve value to any collector. When over done it does decrease the value to many knowledgeable buyers. It almost certain that you will never recover your investment in a total refinish job so do so only for your own enjoyment and let the next owner figure it out after you are dead.

I always felt that(1)it all depends on what you do to the gun and (2)what kind of gun it is- as to whether or not one has raised/lowered the value of a gun. Much like an antique car. If you took an old, original Fox in about 90% condition and put in screw in chokes, then I think the value of the gun will depreciated. But if you found the same gun in 25% condition and sent it to Doug Turnbull (or someone similar) to recondition the gun, you will definitely raise the value. A Model 12 with a 2" Moneymaker trap rib (I see one on ocassion) will go for a bit less than than the same gun in 95% condition. A BSS with screw in chokes added, won't really make a difference in my opinion. Just my opinion.

My knee-jerk reaction is to be a preservationist. But objectively..

Good guns always go up in value, but they rarely keep pace with a good stock portfolio. So when I buy a gun, my intent is to pass it along in as good a condition as I can, but in the meantime it is for my purpose & pleasure (shooting, admiring, whatever). After the purchase price, the cost I am most aware of is that of displaced funds that could have gone into a good stock (yeah, I know, I'd be golden right now if all my assets had been in fine guns a year ago). A $10,000 gun that can be expected to appreciate at 3-4% a year vs. a stock that appreciates at 8% a year is costing you $400-500 a year in "rental" fees. I guess it's the cost of having fun.

As L Brown noted, there are folks whose enjoyment is, what do you call it, keeping score with original condition. Each to his own.

In closing I will note that there are two kinds of gun modifiers that I don't understand. One is the guy who beats the crap out of his gun and then wants to refinish it so he can beat the crap out of it again. The other is the guy whose history is one of two or three new acquisitions every year, each one being the holy grail; the new purchase is then modified to make it more perfect before it is predictably discarded for the next grail. I don't get it.

"Untouched" Purdeys are pretty rare, unless bought by a collector and not a shooter--and gun collecting isn't as popular in Great Britain (they have less fascination with guns than we do, not to mention far tougher gun laws) as it is here. Compared to us Yanks, the Brits have always been far more in the mode of "preventive maintenance"--especially true of those that owned and USED high dollar guns. After the season . . . back to the maker for a checkup and whatever else it needed. In this country, seldom back to the maker (or a smith) unless something broke. Our guns--except the very high dollar ones--have always been regarded more as tools than toys; with the Brits, more likely toys than tools. So . . . compared to the Purdey that was used to shoot a lot of driven birds but not returned to Purdey for regular maintenance, vs one with the same amount of use but regular maintenance, I'm going to vote in favor of the latter holding a higher value. The Brits, plain and simple, don't have the same hangup on "original condition" as we do, as long as the work in question was properly done.

Yup, but that's big "as long as". I have gotten my take on that annual freshening by reading UK auction catalogs that are full of top maker guns with caveats like "wall thickness below recommended minimums" and the dreaded "only stock and action available, barrels out of proof". I don't believe all of those guns got that way at the corner gunsmith. These guns look great but the strikers are heavy handed even knowing that the gun will be back for blacking in a couple of years.

Eightbore, I doubt Purdey would've honed many barrels to such a point that a gun is no longer in proof. As far as wall thickness goes, a gunsmith I know contacted the maker (I believe H&H) about one of their 2" guns he had in the shop. He measured the walls and found them something like .018, if I recall. H&H had the original specs on the gun. Turns out the thin walls were that way when they left the factory.

Further on those out of proof barrels . . . assuming wall thickness is still above the recommended minimum (which it may well be, even if the gun is out of proof because it's .010 or more over standard), an auction house would be foolish to trash the barrels in question, because the gun would likely pass reproof at the next size up. Guns sold as "stock and action" are often sold with the barrels, for that very reason--and may be a very good buy, if someone measures the barrel walls. It's just that such a gun can't be sold as a gun, because it's out of proof. Doesn't mean, however, that the barrels go straight to the dumpster.

If the original chokes were straight tapered and then they were opened from the muzzle with parallel walls it would be pretty easy to tell, wouldn't it?

IMHO, the value of British guns lies in their craftsmanship, their performance. Maintaining them makes sense, it maintains value.

The value of American guns lies in their originality, their history. Refurbishing them diminishes value.

Recoil Rob, you are absolutely incorrect. If you think a $50,000 Purdey or Boss is being sold based on performance, you are smoking something the rest of us are not allowed to smoke. And Larry is out of touch with reality when he mentions "honing" as the problem. Honing can be measured. Promiscuous striking is the problem and Purdey, Boss, and Holland are as guilty as anyone. Invest in a good UK auction catalog and see what I mean. I have long suspected that many UK gunsmiths were Pennsylvania transplants.