I was looking on gunbroker and arms list and saw some colt police positive for relatively cheap, but most of their original finish was gone. Would refinishing affect their collector value and if not now much would it cost? I don't think it'd be that big of a deal considering most of their original finish is gone anyways.
Refinishing an antique?
- Thread starter gav1230
- Start date
tahunua001
New member
yes it would adversely affect the collectors value but it may improve aesthetic value especially if you use the correct type of refinish. if you were to oil the grips rather than stain and clear coat then it would be more pleasing to a person who apreciates historical accuracy, if not historical correctness.
Bill DeShivs
New member
Refinishing a gun is best left to professionals. The home cold bluing kits will not give you an adequate or proper finish. You could rust blue the gun, but that is rather labor intensive.
Why do you feel the gun even needs a new finish? They will work just fine without it.
Why do you feel the gun even needs a new finish? They will work just fine without it.
Andy Griffith
New member
It certainly is possible to replicate the original finish (Rust, charcoal, bone case and carbonia) and make it look like it just came out of the factory, however, it will will cost you much more than the gun is worth.
Police positives in 90% condition or better will be less than having one restored correctly. Bluing one, excluding polishing would likely be about $300. Quality polishing may cost you more than this- a good bit more.
There are places that really can do it, like Doug Turnbull and Ron's Gun Shop (RGS). Do not confuse with Rick's Restoration.
Some people have had good results from Ford's in Florida, and they will make it look good for a lot less than the other two mentioned, but not quite the same level.
The problem is- it isn't cost effective on a $300 to $1000 gun, unless it has sentimental value, or the gun is worth considerably more restored than in as-is condition.
I have had one gun done by Turnbull when he was more affordable than now, but his work is exceptional. He figured it out, and charges accordingly now.
Purchased another gun done by him, and I came out way ahead than if I had it done.
If you have a Colt SAA with a martially marked frame, and everything else is completely shot (barrel cut off in front of cylinder pin, bent and mangled grip frame and missing major parts), then a full restoration will add to the value. A full restoration for a gun like this would likely be in the $3500.+ range
Police positives in 90% condition or better will be less than having one restored correctly. Bluing one, excluding polishing would likely be about $300. Quality polishing may cost you more than this- a good bit more.
There are places that really can do it, like Doug Turnbull and Ron's Gun Shop (RGS). Do not confuse with Rick's Restoration.
Some people have had good results from Ford's in Florida, and they will make it look good for a lot less than the other two mentioned, but not quite the same level.The problem is- it isn't cost effective on a $300 to $1000 gun, unless it has sentimental value, or the gun is worth considerably more restored than in as-is condition.
I have had one gun done by Turnbull when he was more affordable than now, but his work is exceptional. He figured it out, and charges accordingly now.
Purchased another gun done by him, and I came out way ahead than if I had it done.
If you have a Colt SAA with a martially marked frame, and everything else is completely shot (barrel cut off in front of cylinder pin, bent and mangled grip frame and missing major parts), then a full restoration will add to the value. A full restoration for a gun like this would likely be in the $3500.+ range
Last edited:
The biggest mistake most rebluers make is overpolishing, giving the gun a shiny black finish the gun didn't have originally. Everyone thinks a super high polish is needed to make a gun look like factory, but the fact is that factories didn't polish the guns that much (time and money, the old problems). (OK, Weatherby is an exception, but darned few factory guns look like Weatherbys.)
Jim
Jim
Winchester_73
New member
Given the model of the gun, I would think you could find one relatively cheap that had a respectable amount of original finish. They're not rare at all.
I fought with this same issue a while back. I have a pistol that is all original and somewhat rare but not particularly valuable. In my case blueing would not add to or detract any great deal from value. Mine is in good condition with little blueing. I decided to let it go. IMO old guns should look there age. As others said a good refinish will run you more than the combined cost of gun and job are worth in resale, If you want it to look good for you than go for it. Just dont consider it to be a good financial decision.
Andy Griffith
New member
This ^^ I agree with 100%!!!
If not overpolishing, bad polishing, or wrong polishing.
If they thinned the markings or left screws in and made the tops of them flat, it's just a reblue, not a restoration.
You get what you pay for
Short answer, yes. Always. Even a refinish from the original manufacturer will affect what a collector is willing to pay. Collectors pay top money for one thing, a certain make, model, and caliber gun, in the best original condition they can get.
Anything that changes that lowers what collectors will pay. Changes in the finish, mis matched parts #s, or maker codes, all theses things mean that the gun is no longer fully original. Doesn't mean anything to the use or function of the gun, just that its not what the collectors want most.
Example; WWII Walther P.38 in a local shop (GI bringback, widow consignment), complete with matching year holster. They were asking $900. Only trouble was at sometime, the owner had the gun nickel plated. Very well done, but it made it poison for a collector. No different than a 1970s Walther police surplus P.1 for value. IN other words, gun only has its value as a shooter, because of the refinish. The holster is worth more, to a collector. I've got a 36 Luger, gun looks new. Was told it was refinished by the maker, during the war (but you get told lots of stuff....). one mismatched # part. Gun is worth (and I paid) about 1/3 the value of a gun in the same condition with original finish and all matching part #s.
So, take that old Colt, and do what you think best, its your gun, and while not common anymore, they aren't super rare. Just don't expect a collector to think its worth top dollar if you have it refinished or repaired in any way.
Best to make sure its not some uber rare variation before you have anything done to it. A really rare variation of a collectable gun in poor condition, but all original, including wear and flaws from use, might be worth more than a more common model in good shape. Collectors are funny folk about things like that.
Bill DeShivs
New member
My suggestion with most refinishes is to upgrade the finish to something more durable than bluing. If the gun is to be used and the finish is for protection from rust, a hard chromed Police Positive would be pretty neat.
That is- if you ARE going to refinish anyway.
That is- if you ARE going to refinish anyway.
Andy Griffith
New member
The other route to go is customization.
Of course, then it's no longer a C&R, and the value will be based upon the quality of the work, features, firearm it is based upon and the individual taste of the work.
A custom gun isn't something you are going to sell.
Take a look at Bowen's website to see some very tastefully done customizations. Something like that on a PP might be a way to go if you just really like the little gun, but it might not be something he'd work on- have to call to find out, and be prepared to wait a good while to get anything back.
Patience is a virtue.
I've seen some "restored" guns that were almost restored, and they made me angry. What made my blood boil was the fact that they did an excellent job overall, but the little details killed them on it, so anyone could see that it was restored. The sign of a effective restoration is when you have collectors thinking it is original.
Of course, then it's no longer a C&R, and the value will be based upon the quality of the work, features, firearm it is based upon and the individual taste of the work.
A custom gun isn't something you are going to sell.
Take a look at Bowen's website to see some very tastefully done customizations. Something like that on a PP might be a way to go if you just really like the little gun, but it might not be something he'd work on- have to call to find out, and be prepared to wait a good while to get anything back.
Patience is a virtue.
I've seen some "restored" guns that were almost restored, and they made me angry. What made my blood boil was the fact that they did an excellent job overall, but the little details killed them on it, so anyone could see that it was restored. The sign of a effective restoration is when you have collectors thinking it is original.
Last edited:
That's true enough, but it should be "having the collectors thinking its original", at first glance.
There should always be some id mark of some kind (somewhere) on the gun to indicate a restoration. Even original manufactures usually do this. S&W puts a small stamp on the frame on refinished guns, for example.
So, sometimes, little details gotten "wrong" in a restoration might be deliberate, to keep someone from faking a claim of it being fully original.
Personally, I think its best to correctly restore the gun fully, and properly, and then put an ID mark in a normally non visible place (like under the grip). Someone else might decide its better to have some easily visible indication its not original, to prevent fraud. Its possible.
(although its more likely they just didn't do the best job possible on the restoration).
bedbugbilly
New member
Some excellent points made . . .
For me, a "reblue is a reblue" . . . regardless of how good it is. Too often though, markings are damaged by over polishing, etc. Even if you spend the bucks on a truly professional job . . . why? Why not just put that money into a specimen that has all of the original blue or most of it?
I like the "vintage" revolvers - I have a 1910 Colt Army Special and a 1920 something S & W M & P Target - both have "honest wear" and it doesn't bother me at all - it's part of their character. Both are excellent shooters. I admire each one when I shoot them and I often wished I knew their histories . . . the wear indicates to me that the previous owner or owners must have loved them as much as I do.
As far as "collecting" though . . . mine are far from perfect but I bought them to shoot. If I was going to "collect" and not shoot (let's face it, you have a pristine pistol and shoot it often, it's going to eventually show wear) . . . I'd rather have 3 different models that were as close to 100% than a half a dozen that were either well worn or reblued. But . . . that's just the way I look at it and others certainly have their own views.
To me, there is a very fine line between "reblue" and "restoration". If it has rust that must be stopped/removed or parts replaced to make it functional (with original parts) that is one thing. To take a pistol and "restore" it - even if sent back to the original mfg. for a "refinish" job . . . you are erasing the honest history of that piece in an effort to make it look like "new".
For me, a "reblue is a reblue" . . . regardless of how good it is. Too often though, markings are damaged by over polishing, etc. Even if you spend the bucks on a truly professional job . . . why? Why not just put that money into a specimen that has all of the original blue or most of it?
I like the "vintage" revolvers - I have a 1910 Colt Army Special and a 1920 something S & W M & P Target - both have "honest wear" and it doesn't bother me at all - it's part of their character. Both are excellent shooters. I admire each one when I shoot them and I often wished I knew their histories . . . the wear indicates to me that the previous owner or owners must have loved them as much as I do.
As far as "collecting" though . . . mine are far from perfect but I bought them to shoot. If I was going to "collect" and not shoot (let's face it, you have a pristine pistol and shoot it often, it's going to eventually show wear) . . . I'd rather have 3 different models that were as close to 100% than a half a dozen that were either well worn or reblued. But . . . that's just the way I look at it and others certainly have their own views.
To me, there is a very fine line between "reblue" and "restoration". If it has rust that must be stopped/removed or parts replaced to make it functional (with original parts) that is one thing. To take a pistol and "restore" it - even if sent back to the original mfg. for a "refinish" job . . . you are erasing the honest history of that piece in an effort to make it look like "new".