Stock stamps

[Dick Hosmer]

This has been a truly interesting discussion.

Everything has its' shades and nuances - what is OK for one is not for another, and there sometimes is a VERY fine line. For me:

Repairs, with original parts, are OK. Replacing screws is OK. Stock-stretching is OK with disclosure. Cleaning and re-oiling wood is OK.

Refinishing of original (obviously you have to do a stretcher) wood, especially with a non-original material, varnish, synthetic, etc. is wrong. Rebluing is frowned on - over-buffing and applying a modern 'black chrome' finish should be a felony.

Adding marks is wrong (and kinda self-delusional in a way). Changing parts to create a scarce variant is wrong.

Of course, when one starts with a butchered gun, a lot more can be tolerated because one is actually making a net improvement - I guess where I draw the line is screwing around with a complete, correct original, whose only sin is showing its age.

I could write several pages.

[Dick Hosmer]

Here is an even more interesting hypothetical, what if a gun does have historical significance, but it was altered along it's way significantly. Would it's restoration be acceptable, and I mean a complete documented restoration, stamps, finishes, as if it just came out of the factory...
And if you do accept this, can you still say no to one without the history, assuming the same transparency

I this case I would frown heavily on restoration, beyond cleaning and oiling.

I see where you are going, but, to me, the case is somehow "different".

Mitchell's Mausers are in a niche by themselves. They are what they are. I will say, that 200 years from now, I'll bet some guys will be arguing about their authenticity!

[psteinmayer]

I guess I would have to liken it to a Bannerman. I have a Bannerman Trapdoor. Does it look correct? To an untrained eye, yes (it fooled me and my dad). Is it correct? Not by any stretch of the imagination. By the way, Dick is the one that helped me to correctly determine it as a Bannerman Trapdoor.

[reincarnated]

My tuppence in the pot. I'm mostly into single shots, smallbore target rifles, Winchesters & Krags. I ground my teeth when I found out that someone makes roll stamps to be used in "restoring" or reproducing original 19th-Century Winchester (and other) barrels. The stock stamps are much the same. Unethical IMHO. Hopefully, our rifles will outlast us and our grandchildren. Somewhere along the line, those restorations will be passed off as the real thing. Has Turnbull done any Krags?

Are Mitchell's Mausers any different than Bannerman or Sedgely military-pattern rifles?