Would you restore a "sporterized" surplus rifle?

[Pahoo]

Some can never return !!!

I definitely would NOT choose to restore a sporterized rifle.

Sadly, some can never be restored without extensive work and just not worth the trouble. My most recent project is restoring an Eddystone. My parts guy and expert set me up with all "E" designated parts and did some of the most challenging restorations. It's not as "pretty" as when I first got it but it's back to being a classic. .....

Be Safe !!!

 

[Gunplummer]

Yeah Sevens, you pretty much said what I have been thinking in your parting shot. Where would all you restorers be with no junkers for parts? There are plenty of military guns out there. A serious collector will easily have over 100 guns. I traded with a guy that had over 300 Arisakas in his basement. It is people like the "Restorers" that drove the prices through the roof, not the casual deer hunter. Somewhere along the line guns stopped being a tool & recreational item and became an investment. It is a shame.

 

[BoogieMan]

I have a FN mauser that was sporterized in the 50s. Dad left it to me and I plan to restore it when I find time. Lots of life left in it.

 

[44 AMP]

While I understand the different points of view over ruining or improving a rifle, what I do not understand is how, in recent time the idea that ANY work done is a "Bubba" job has come to be. But I hear it being used that way.

"Bubba" is a generally derisive term for a hillbilly hacksaw job (and you find them all over, not just in the south). Shoddy workmanship, often to the extreme.

I don't get calling a classic sporter job a "Bubba" anything. Its not. Some of them are true functional works of art, and gunsmithing skill. And many of them, even some of the best done were not turned out by nationally recognized gunsmiths, but by talented amateurs. Guns from a "known smith" of the era still bring a couple of grand, or more. Guns with out that, today, you're lucky to get a quarter of that in today's market.

I've had a number of sporters built on milrsurps over the years, done a few myself. I would never really consider undoing one. There is simply, no point. If you want the rifle in issue condition (with or without historical wear) simply BUY ONE. They still exist, I have quite a few, and I still see them for sale commonly.

Now, if you don't want to PAY what the guy who has one wants, that's a different matter. Sorry we bought, sporterized, and "used up" all those valuable milsurps before you were born. I'm sorry you can't go into a hardware store and pick out an intact milsurp for $15 or a pristine one for $20 today. I'm also sorry I was born too late to have a tommygun mailed to me with no paperwork, too.

On the other hand, if we hadn't improved so many (and ruined a few as well) issue condition rifles wouldn't be worth what they are today, now would they?

 

[Nathan]

My dad has a 1917 that was nicely sporterized by a local gunsmith and himself. He let me hunt with it as a kid, which was hard on it.


I would like to restore it to it's former greatness. I will probably get the barreled action reblued, refinish or replace the stock, replace the trigger and get another 100 yrs out of it.

For me, it is not about value. It is about keeping it in the family and in use.... Even if that is 10 shots a year.


Hmmm...wonder if it should be converted to 280 Ackley improved??

 

[Nodak1858]

I would restore a rifle back to "original " configuration and I have done a couple. Last was a No1 MK4, even though they drilled it for a scope mount it looks nice now. Was it worth it financially? No but I had fun doing it and I'm happy to have it looking like it did. I know I could have spent less just buying one in original for but what fun would that be? I didn't get in this hobby to save money.

 

[BoogieMan]

Was the point of the thread about retiring a sported mil-surp? How can you ruin the value of something that has already been changed from original configuration wether Bubbed or artisan done. Like someone else mentioned, original historical milsurps are still readily available. Personally I wouldn't take one of them and sporterize it. I also wouldn't hold it against anyone whom did. None of us are planning on using a eddystone to go to war, so the only value it has is as sport use. The value of every original gun goes up just a little everytime someone sports one.

 

[F. Guffey]

It has to do with the critics, it must have all matching numbers and it can not be a mix-master etc..

I purchased a last ditch Mauser, the stock was finished in shoe polish, the metal was dipped in something that gave it a flat black finish, the stock was made up of more than one piece. Best of all the bands were made of tin strips.

I took it to the range, I thought the bullets were tumbling, the groups were cloverleafs. I needed a parts gun, I chose to apply the leaver policy, I lefter the way I founder.

I purchases a Remington M1917, the ugliest, what was he thinking type rifle. I took it to the range, there was little I could do to improve on the accuracy. I did not believe anyone could build a rifle that ugly without knowing what they were doing.

Along with the last ditch Mauser I purchases a Mexican Mauser, I am looking for an excuse to need it for parts. The bolt does not match.

Two receivers are going to get a new lease on life. I found two heavy 308 W/7.62 barrels for free that need to be road tested. Both have Mauser large shanks.

F. Guffey

 

[velocette]

What about if it is the result of two years of hand work, all but the checkering?
US rifle of 1917 AKA 1917 Enfield
Still with its original barrel with its flaming bomb, Dayton Traister trigger and cock on closing. shoots just under an inch @ 100 yds.

 

[10-96]

I've done a few, and I'll likely do another 03A3 with a drilled receiver. No, I won't make any money out of the deal, but that is the kind of work I enjoy and as long as I'm the one being made happy by my endeavors- that's all that really matters.