Bubbas VS Purists.

Do a lot of guys out there feel they have a duty to preserve the milsurps? I don't particularly feel any need to buy something just to look at it occasionally and revel in the fact that "I OWN IT !!" Guns are built to be used and enjoyed and I intend to do that until I can't any longer. A friend sent me a very nice 03-A3 today and I intend to shoot it tomorrow...but if I were to decide to shorten the barrel, add different sights and stock, put a boss on the barrel, or whatever whimsy I could contrive....I would do it with no regrets and have fun with it. The friend that gave it to me would support my decision as we are both getting older and want to enjoy whatever we can in life while we still can.
I don't run a museum and have to desire to do such. In fact maybe some of the purists will enjoy the fact that their originals will appreciate more in value as the bubbas lower the supply of originals.
 
I have three surplus rifles and they get used more than my "civilian" rifles. They are far more fun to shoot and a lot more interesting.
As far as value my kids may benefit from any they might have but I simply do not sell my firearms once I buy them. I have regretted selling the few that I have sold and will not do it again.
I have a very strong interest in both the first and second world wars and these rifles were a big part of that history. As such yes I do feel that it is important to preserve them as much as possible.
The biggest joke of all is that Bubba's efforts rarely shoot as well as a properly set up military issue rifle.
 
Last edited:
I can't for the life of me understand why someone would want to alter, say, a Russian Mosin-Nagant that some Soviet soldier may have humped all the way to Berlin during WWII.

These relics were part of a history whose living descendants are disappearing now at a rapid pace, the last WWI veteran died a few years ago and WWII veterans are now at least in their 80s. Soon these non-living relics will be all we have left.

Just my opinion, worth every cent you paid for it.
 
It is an interesting part of human psychology that we ascribe significance to an inanimate object which was by pure happenstance in the possession of a person who did something we've deemed important.

Of equal interest to me is that there seems to be a certain lower class of object to which this significance no longer applies. For instance, we don't seem to care about the socks that the soldier wore.

We could easily manufacture those same firearms today, likely to a quality and aesthetic level far beyond anything available from the time period. More compelling, we could intentionally manufacture them to be virtually indistinguishable from the "genuine" antique firearms and yet there would be no mystique, no outcry if someone modified them.
 
To the OP – Great Thread!!!

Being a long time 03 FFL holder I hate to see any old battle rifle bubba’d but if a person converts one and does so in a competent professional manner then OK – it’s their gun.
I do cringe when I see some of the more rare examples modified.
I have no real issues when some one takes a bare receiver that was is in marginal condition and use that receiver to build a completely new firearm from it.
Example would be a K98 or Mosin receiver.
I have modified a few receivers into other calibers but they were built from basic parts guns.
The bottom line is – it is their gun and money and no matter how much chest beating and hollering we do that fact will not change.
 
csmsss said:
Ahhhh...I can see you've never met a Civil War reenactor.
Click to expand...

As a matter of authenticity, yes, but I don't see anyone preserving the socks worn in combat because soon they'll be all we have left. Even in reenactments, they're wearing replica socks, not genuine civil war socks that carry provenance because a soldier wore them at Gettysburg.
 
I can't for the life of me understand why someone would want to alter, say, a Russian Mosin-Nagant that some Soviet soldier may have humped all the way to Berlin during WWII.
Click to expand...

Because I can't tell the difference between one that was "carried to Berlin" and one that murdered Polish officers or stole food from peasants leaving them to starve, or one that spent its entire life guarding a gulag....

And it wasn't the rifle that did it, it just happened to be in the hands of PEOPLE who did those things (and more).

I don't hate Bubba for modifying what someone else sees as a sacred historical artifact, I hate Bubba for doing a crappy job of it.;)
 
Just for the sake of clarity when "Bubba" comes into a discussion about firearms to me there is the intimation of a high level incompetence.
In my mind there is a big difference between a "Bubba'd rifle and one that was tastefully and competently sporterized.
I've seen many sporterized military rifles that I would be very proud to own. Particularly from the late 1940s the 50s. In the pictures I posted above the top is all Bubba the bottom is a well done sporter.
I strongly believe that it is better to preserve the complete rifles still out there but "To each their own" as they say.
 
Last edited:
I bought a .303 that was chopped when I was younger. Somebody cut down the stock but left pretty much everything else the same. It really shot well considering there were so many stamps on it that it appeared to have been around the world 7 times. At the time I thought it was one of the worst military rifles to hunt deer with, but I remembered the cumbersome Russian I started out with. That .303 was really a good solid deer rifle and I would have taken that over a new Winchester or Marlin lever action in bad weather (Had a bad experience with a Marlin in the snow). Times were different when I was a kid. We were not the spoiled brats that are the youth of today. We pretty much worked and saved for our own deer rifle and a lot of adults were in the same boat. That is one of the reasons that so many surplus rifles became hunting rifles. It is no big deal. There are tens of thousands of pristine military rifles out there. The guns are in collections and you just are not aware of them. Cut up a Russian rifle? In a heartbeat. There will be plenty of them around for a long time. What the younger crowd does not realize is that they have been here a long time. The problem is they are so unadaptable to a hunting rifle that nobody wanted to cut them up. The only worse rifle from the military to turn into a deer rifle would be the MAS36, Maybe we should take a poll for the worst one.
 
actually if there was a decent sporter foregrip and a way to mount optics on one without permenantly modifying it I would sporter my MAS36 in an instant. it's got a bent bolt already and the action(at least on mine) is quite smooth and 7.5x54 is about the same as 7.62x54R ballistically.

but there is no such way so I'm stuck with my MAS36 and it's crappy sights
 
I converted an MAS36 into a rifled 20 Ga slug gun for a friend. Coming up with a decent safety that was not hokey was the worst part. I have seen articles on other caliber change overs for this rifle, but it is hardly a first choice by the majority for a deer rifle. It is a matter of what you want. My sister gave me a carcano that was in the barn when they bought the place. It is really ugly, but I scoped it (All you purists can breath now, I am sure Lee Harvey did not own it) and kill deer with it. Not my first choice to hunt with, but heck it was free. Good rifle for rainy days cause it won't look any worse than it does.
 
All numbers matching original finish of anything should not be touched. Too many re-arsenaled, botched bubbas, etc; are available.
I hate to see it done to some less common rifles also. A MN of with no special attributes? Best of luck to you, your hacksaw, and your file.
 
My father converted a 1903-A3 into a beautiful target rifle back in the 1960s... if I recall correctly, he kept a second 03A3 in original condition. Back then, these were very common, and I think the feeling was that they didn't ALL have to be saved original for posterity. If he were alive today and had the same two Springfields, I'm not sure if he would have done it - but he might, that's what he did. Personally, I think this job was worth donating a Springfield for... it's certainly more valuable to me than it would be in original condition, regardless of its value to others.

03a3-after.jpg
 
I'm new here but not new to C&R.
I started collecting C&R firearms back in '02 when I got my 03 license.
I managed to pick up some nice Enfields, SKSs, and handguns.
Out of all the Enfields, there was one that was really a dog, so I 'Bubba'ed' it.
Cut and crowned the barrel to 16.5", and moved all the hardware rearward. I used it as my truck gun. The results are below.




My collection back then.

 
That Enfield actually looks pretty good with the chopped off barrel. If the original gun was beat up anyway, I would even consider doing something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top