In the US we seem to have an aversion to the idea of rebluing, refinishing the stock or otherwise restoring an old classic, whereas it’s no big deal in England. A 1920s gun that has gone grey with a beat up stock and or bad barrels can be re-stocked or refinished, barrels can be sleeved to the point that you can hardly tell and gun parts reblackened, and nobody calls the vintage police.

One thing you rarely see over there is a re-color case hardened action, probably because even lesser guns over there are much more finely engraved than our lower grade guns here.

It is the lack of collecting culture over there that is the difference. Buyers are going to use a gun and will invest in regular maintenance or improvements. In the US there has been a group of buyers who are obsessed with owing as near to original mint condition as possible with no interest in shooting a gun because from their viewpoint wear destroys a guns value. I know of Browning and Winchester who will buy a gun based on high original condition but would never think of shooting it. In fact many never shoot at all anymore.

As to re-case coloring it has gotten a bad rap in some circles. Colors not true to original colors and the possibility of warping the frame are seen as reasons many here no longer want to re-case color guns. But I always thought a owner was free to do what ever he wanted with his gun.

The collecting in England is the same as here in the states. A high original gun will command a premium over a redone gun (look at Rocketman's spreadsheet). Guns that are restocked need to be done to same level as the original or the price takes a bigger hit. Sleeved guns, even though, still very serviceable will take a bigger hit than original barrels (there is still somewhat of a negative stigma with sleeved barrels even ones that are undetectable). Re-case hardening has to be done very well (to include potential pick-up of engraving) or it sticks out like a sore thumb (see this article Re-Case. There really isn't a lot of difference except of barrel bluing and a minor stock refinish.

Ken

I will pose the same question I have so many times in the past. How many can tell that a gun has been perfectly redone and used for a dozen years or so, is not an original in high, but used, condition? I have seen guns that were in very high condition, claimed to be original, that I believe cannot be absolutely determined to be so. They could have been reblued, and the wood refinished, even had the action recased, used for some seasons afterward, and look like a slightly used but well cared for original.

The persons who can tell the difference are exceedingly rare, IMO.

wise collectors used to have "bench mark" guns, original examples that exhibit factory original finishes, not as when they left the factory, but now, as they exist, after many years of natural aging...

for example, the wood finish on a 100 year old gun is not going to look the same now, as it did 100 years ago...it will most likely be darker and perhaps have some crazing of the varnish...

thanks to modern color photography, we now have printed or digital images that take the place of the traditional benchmark gun...

also, perfectly redone guns are easy to spot...their very perfection is a big clue that they are not original...an old, original gun, should have some flaws... a ding here, a scratch there, a little case wear, all good indicators of originality...i jes luv to see crazed varnish...but like stan said, it gets difficult, when a well redone gun has some age to it...

there is no substitute for experience, guided by skepticism...

"if it looks too good to be true, it probably aint"...

Serious collecting implies some kind of classification and indexing. It is not simply amassing a number of objects.

Is it possible to classify and index bespoke items? I wonder

That lead me to wonder what percentage of us are collector, shooters, hunters, all three. Personally I’m much more a hunter though I shoot sporting clays a few times a year to keep my skids up, and I own more than one shotgun so that makes me a bit of a collector. That said, every gun I buy, I buy with an eye toward hunting with it.

Regarding my “collection” I have three for sentimental reasons; my dad’s 1949 (year I was born) 16 ga Model twelve. That field grade gun with its pretty wood-straight stock is perfect upland gun if you don’t mind repeaters. I also have a very early Parker GH that was my father in law’s grandfather’s gun. It’s super heavy and had way too much drop at heel for me to shoot, finally I still have my first gun, a lowly Winchester Model 1200 I got in high school that fits me like a glove.

Beyond that I own a Sterlingworth pin gun, LC Smith 12ga featherweight, just bought a Parker VH, I have my Ruger Red Lable Sporting Clays since 1994 and that’s it.

Here in the U.K. a gun in good original condition will always command a higher price than a similar one that has been restored. I think the thing is that most American made guns are machine factory made and to a collector one unused and in its original box will be the ultimate aim as each gun is more or less identical otherwise. In the U.K. each gun is a one off so one that has been restored back into good shootable condition is no big deal. Lagopus…..

I'm not sure if the original post here is meant to be a comment or a complaint. But the fact remains that if you refinish a collectible gun, you will adversely affect the value, whether the gun is American or British. The same rule will also apply to most other collectibles, be they stamps, coins, automobiles, furniture, baseball cards, etc. That's just the way it is, because high original condition is a scarce and desired commodity.

I partially agree with Stan's comment, but we must consider that there is a huge difference between restoration and refinishing. With guns, there are few gunsmiths who can truly pull off a period correct restoration that is good enough to fool an astute collector. Those that do it well tend to specialize in one or two makes, because there is a lot of variation of finishing techniques between different manufacturers, and those techniques may have changed over time. The best thing they have going for them is that there are also relatively few really astute collectors who are educated enough to spot the clues that are virtually always there. A near perfect restoration will cost a lot of money because it takes a lot of skill and knowledge to pull off. But Stan was correct to observe that a decade or so of use and aging will make it tougher to immediately spot the restoration or refinishing work. On the other side of the coin, there are plenty of gun buyers who are easily fooled by a half decent restoration. And many are simply attracted by a new and shiny finish, no matter how bad or incorrect it is. The E Grade Lefever two barrel set that was recently shown here is a good example. It probably would have sold for more money if it had been in average un-refinished condition. But a bunch of guys still ran the price up far beyond what I ever expected, considering how incorrectly it was refinished, and how dishonestly it had been represented by the seller.

Glacierjohn, I saw that nice original Parker VH you just bought for the Buy-it-Now price. I don't think you would have been so quick to pull the trigger on that purchase if it was an obviously refinished gun, and I think that was a wise decision. Examples like that just are not that common, although a lot of VH Parkers were built. It would have been interesting to see how high it would have went if the auction went full course. You are now the current custodian, and it is up to you whether to keep it in prime original condition, or to alter it or wear it out. If you choose the latter course, you will help to increase the value of the ever smaller pool of unmolested Parkers.

Lagopus does have it absolutely correct, a gun in superb original condition will command a much higher price than the same gun fully restored. Though there are levels of restoration and until recently most people restored to usable condition because over and above having the gun safe to shoot the law of diminishing returns comes into play. I would also like to say that action re colour case hardening can be fraught with problems enough to write a gun off if the action should crack also warping can be a big headache, to the point that it can be too big a risk for a vintage top maker offering plus the loss of all that cash. I also be leave that a gun is only original once and restoration can never take a gun to the time it came off the craft mans bench.
Now for my restored London offering in the first photograph its looks are good enough but it is far from a perfect restore because it was only restored to the point of shoot ability, and I do feel it is no worse for it. The gun was never intended to be a cased look at me only gun in fact quite the posit since it was made shootable in the 1960s that is all to the present day. If you look close the barrel browning is showing signs ware the hammers and trigger guard opening leaver where blued because when all the rust was removed they where bright silver it was either re blue or risk colour hardening. The thumb leaver had had a very old repair having a larger bottom anti slip ridge added by Brazing, the barrels where re browned because they where bright silver after the rust was removed and dents lifted.
In the second picture you can see the top action pin has had its slot re cut so it looks like the Grand Canyon, it was not replaced because the gun functions perfectly with it and it is original showing the guns history, also the pin holding both locks has had the same slot treatment. The last photograph shows the trigger guard strap with the finish complacently missing from use, it could be touched up but why bother the gun wont shoot any better and I will miss just the same as you can see by the slightly worn engraving.
The gun has been restored showing a little of its true age and I do hope the next owner will continue to let it grow old gracefully rather turning it into an over restored look at me sad version of the real thing.

That screw shows the gun's history alright. History with a bad screwdriver. I think I would have bit the bullet and fixed it. No offense, it's a great gun.

Eightbore I do fully agree with you now though I was trying to point out that at the time we Brits where only interested in making the gun usable and not going down the road of a full restoration well the gun in question at that time was a scrapper and actually not spending ant money on unless you where a young man like myself with more money than sense willing to take a risk on the gun being made workable. A couple of years back I did visit a gunsmith with thoughts of having new pins made and engraved.. Now I do not know if the top maker factor of charging for work is prevalent on your side of the pond but it is alive and well here. They take one look at the name on the gun and the price is adjusted upward accordingly, the cost went to the point that my thoughts went to "the gun has worked flawlessly for all this time with the original pins" given that I was not about to start on the path of diminishing returns because the cost of the work would not be recouped when I pass the gun on to the next owner. Also I have realized that a new owner of an item always wants to put their stamp on their latest purchase, so they can have the pleasure of having them replaced . Well I spent a good deal of money in the 1960s to put the gun in the condition it is now,

"They take one look at the name on the gun and the price is adjusted upward accordingly,"

Priceless quote.

[quote=keith

Glacierjohn, I saw that nice original Parker VH you just bought for the Buy-it-Now price. I don't think you would have been so quick to pull the trigger on that purchase if it was an obviously refinished gun, and I think that was a wise decision. Examples like that just are not that common, although a lot of VH Parkers were built. It would have been interesting to see how high it would have went if the auction went full course. You are now the current custodian, and it is up to you whether to keep it in prime original condition, or to alter it or wear it out. If you choose the latter course, you will help to increase the value of the ever smaller pool of unmolested Parkers.[/quote]

My OP was mostly an observation and questioning why. I learned a few things, one, the same rule does apply in Britain but that doesn’t mean they don’t “freshen up” their guns. Regarding that VH, it’s not mint condition just very good condition, which is perfect for me as I expect it to become my daily driver duck hunting gun. I may put a period correct pad on it to lengthen the lop and store the original but plate, I’ll try it on with my duck hunting parka to see if that’s even necessary.

The most controversial thing I’m considering, is opening up that one .45 choke to something closer to .30, what are your thoughts on that? Then I’d have .30 and .35, but backwards. Tighter on right, but ostensibly still full and full. Thoughts?

That's always a tough call, but I am generally against making any alterations to high condition original vintage shotguns. The higher the condition, the less I'd be inclined to make any changes. There are plenty of lower condition or non-original guns out there that really can't have their value hurt so badly. Many here will give the reply that it is your gun, so you have the right to do whatever you wish to it. That is true, but that is what also makes the pool of unmolested guns smaller with each passing year, and increases the value of high original condition specimens.

It is true that the British often freshen up their guns. But there are tons of American guns that are redone too... and often they would have been better left alone. It seems we just don't have the same percentage of gunsmiths here who are competent enough to properly restore a double, and that doesn't even consider the really bad Bubba do-it-yourself jobs. Then you see those fantastic restorations done by guys like CJO, and it becomes hard to say it shouldn't ever be done.

Me, I'd just buy one that had the chokes I wanted, and keep the other gun original. Once that metal is removed, there is nobody that can put it back. There is also the chance that harmonics or reamer chatter could pop a rib solder joint. Then we also see the complaints from guys who had their choke opening job botched so that the patterns are not regulated. But no matter what you decide, you should shoot some different loads at the pattern board to see actual performance. You may find that it is just fine as is with certain loads. You may also find that .030" and .035" chokes are too tight for steel shot. I am not a duck hunter, so won't comment on things I don't know.

You’re right about the steel shot, but bismuth works well, acts pretty much like lead. I started duck hunting in the mid 60s with a pump shotgun before choke tubes. A 30” full choke barrel was pretty standard for ducks, so I’m not too freaked at the thought of full and full. I will definitely pattern both barrels with fives, sixes and 7-1/2, but I’m pretty sure .45 is way too tight, even with spreader loads.

Regarding just buying another gun, I’m not rich and married to boot lol, this gun is in good condition but certainly not mint so I wouldn’t feel guilty using it in rough conditions. I would never buy a gun and not use it. My hope is to own too fine shotguns, this one for waterfowl and I hope to find a nice light 16 or 12 for pheasants. My two current guns are an LC Smith featherweight 12 that weighs 6#-9oz for pheasants and a Sterlingworth Pin gun for ducks...

I should never suggest what people should do about the tight chokes in their guns, having made a mistake with one once myself. But, since you asked I will relate my feelings about the two times I had a vintage double's chokes modified.

First time was a 32" barreled, beautiful, graded S X S that had the original tight chokes, in the .035" range. A fine duck gun as it was, though restocked. I had both chokes relieved to .020" to use it on clays, and have regretted that decision for many years. I'm doing penance, of sorts, for my mistake.

The other is a 20 ga. Fox Sterlingworth Ejector that I traded for, intending it to become my go to quail and woodcock gun. I had the chambers lengthened to 2 3/4" and had Dean Harris open the chokes to .006" right and .016" left. I added a Silvers pad to get the LOP right for me, and faced it with a piece of leather from my Grandad's old defunct leather hunting coat. First two shells fired out of it on the first covey rise netted two quail with the right barrel and one with the left. I've used it enough in the past year on quail to know that what I did to it was spot on, for me. Thursday afternoon we hunted with it again and I went 8 quail for 9 shots fired. No regrets.

So, I'm left with no grounds to recommend anything to anyone about this subject. I do know this, though. This old boy will never open the tight chokes on a fine old duck gun again, for any reason. My wants and wishes are just too apt to change in time, and there's no way to put those barrels back to their original condition once mucked with. If I had known then what I know now about using spreaders to open the patterns I wouldn't even entertain the thought of putting a reamer to it.

Lots for a reader to learn in your story Stan. Open chokes certainly have a place, especially in a light upland gun but you are quite correct in that putting the choke back in place is much harder than removing it. Soldered in choke tubes are an option as is back boring if you have adequate wall thickness.

It sounds like Glacier John has a good understanding of his needs and choke constrictions. I would agree with him that .045" is more choke than is needed for the vast majority of shotguning.

Steve, do you have any pics of the muzzles of a gun that has had a permanent choke tube soldered in? I've always been curious about them, mostly wondering how obvious they are.

SRH

Stan, I do not have pictures to share.

I can tell you that the machining on the Teague liners I was the rep for was superb and the joint was barely detectable. Others issues prevented the lining process from becoming sustainable but the joints were wonderfully done.

Thank you. I've seen pics of the Teague chokes, and agree that they were well done.

I'm wondering how much more the joint line would be hidden by a good soldering job, as in a permanent choke sleeve.

I have lined several rifles myself soldering the liner in place. If the hole and the insert are closely fit the joint is very hard to see. On a rifle you have more material to work with and you can peen the liner before final dressing down and make it all but invisible. A shotgun and choke insert would not have enough material to peen but you could still end up with a very tidy joint with careful work. Mike Orlean has offered them in the past.

Steve

If it has not been tried at the pattern board yet, that could be a good step before choke work. A western duck gun can be pushed out to deceptively long ranges. If the bismuth are hand loads, might consider dropping an eighth of an ounce, if the patterns are actually too dense. In my mind, it does not really mattering if it meant a few less ducks over a season. By chance, I’ve happened to do the majority of my recent practicing at fairly close range clays with f/f guns, plenty enough fun and doable.

Thanks again, Steve.

Best, Stan

First of all, I thank everybody for their reasoned, non lecturing guidance, I find it all valuable and enlightening. I’m not going to do anything rash, but it is my intention to hunt with this gun, not simply rotate it into the lineup. But regularly, like 2-3 times a week from October to January. I take good care of my guns, but buy them to use them.

Regarding this particular gun, it was pointed out to me by a forum member, thank you Limapapa for that, it is a nice gun in good shape for a fair price, but it’s not a holy grail gun. It’s a standard VH in better than average original condition, it’s not a graded gun or even a VHE, that said If it was a normal full and full, I wouldn’t even consider opening the choke. Notice I said choke, I’m not talking about converting it to IC and Mod, I’m talking about making it full and full by opening up the .045 barrel to match the other .035 barrel.

The way I look at it is I have three choices; 1) Try patterning the gun as is with various loads including spreader loads and possibly shoot it as is. 2) Having tried that and determined the .045 is just too dang tight, open it to .035-.035 and enjoy it in a configuration that would have even been more practical in 1929 when the gun was made, or 3) Sell the gun for a profit and buy a nice gun the way I need it. The problem with the last option is the next owner could end up doing crazy stuff to the gun, way beyond opening one choke slightly. He might think it’s a good candidate to restock with nice wood, engrave a D pattern and re-color case harden it.

Regardless, I won’t do anything rash. I’m renewing my Parker membership to get the letter on the gun, and I’ll try it the way it is first. Again, thank you for all the great comments.