Michael,
I was wondering whether you would care to address the subject of restoration a little more. You have in the past shown us several examples of fine rifles that you or people you know have worked on. But many of the internet auction rifles people show on this forum may have once been fine rifles, but don't look to be in very good shape now. So my question is this: what is possible or desirable with some of these guns.
As you see there is no one answer to your question. We all have our reasons to do restoration or how much is appropriate.
I would like to find rifles that need nothing done to them but that is not always the case for me. After years of looking I know that fixing a problem or two might be my only chance to get a rifle by that maker.
About thirty years ago I bought a Eric Johnson Ardmore, OK 1903 and when I got it I did not care for the amount of "Patina" on it and sent it back. I think I have sent back no more then three rifles in my life. After many years and not finding another I bought the same rifle again. I still don't know of another.
The most common problem I am faced with is the mounting of a modern scope on the top of the rifle which normally means a bent bolt. When this is done the stock is then cut out for the bent bolt. Like all restorations if this is done wrong it will look worse than if I had just left it alone. There are some bad restorations out there done by folks who should know better.
Because I not only collect but report on the maker I do not want a rifle with a refinished stock. Now folks do this all the time and the ONLY way I know to stop this is to invoke what the loss in money will be. Kind of like watching the Antique Roadshow when one of Kenos will say "Your high-boy is worth $100,000.....if you had not refinished it it would be worth $500,000".
This does not stop everyone, but I try. A while back a gunmaker got a hold of me because he had to buy a John Dubiel rifle to stop a custom from ruining it.
I'm having a rifle worked on now that was made by B.J. Toothman. I would have never bought it with the problems it has but I don't know where I would find another.
Rifles by makers who made just a few or historical rifles are worth a little more time, money and effort to restore and preserve them.
Townsend Whelen's Wundhammer Springfield is in my collection, it has a cracked stock and the checkering is about worn smooth. It's one that I'll leave it as I found it.
We all have to decide what is right for ourselves, some folks don't care, others do. One man that does is getting on a plane with his rifle in the morning down in Texas and flying north to interview a man who he would like to restore his early G&H. I wish them both luck.
