Re-stocking, if improperly done, is very detrimental to the value of the gun in the eyes of someone who can spot it.
I have often found myself advising a client that a gun has been re-stocked and the stocker got something wrong regarding the stock shape, forend profile, wrist shape, comb shape, chequering border or style.
This matters where the gun is a standard type, such as a Purdey game gun on the Beesley action or a Holland & Holland 'Royal'. Each has a house style and if an otherwise typical gun, perhaps in very good condition which suffered an accident and damaged the stock, has a replacement which looks out of place, it will weaken the appeal of the gun to the knowledgeable.
A stock with poor inletting, clumsy drop-points etc also weakens it, as will one of odd colour or figure or shape. I have a Westley droplock just come in and I won't let one of my clients buy it because he is a collector and needs a good representation of a droplock.
This one has lovely wood with great figure and a matching forend, all done by a man who could work wood very well. The work to metal fit, the finish etc is all excellent. But the stock is wrong for the gun. Many buyers would not know. They would just see a lovely figured stock and a gun that they could shoot well.
The gun will suit someone who ants a nice gun and wants to shoot it and likes it for what it is. It is not a gun for a collection.
In many respects, the distinction is not if the gun is worth more or less because of re-stocking. More it is to decide if it is a gun which will appeal to a shooter or a collector. Potentially the gun will make the same money but will sell to a different kind of buyer.
If a new stock has been done absolutely correctly, forend too, it will not adversely affect the value of the gun.
