[Edward Tinker]

Phil, most of the guys here who say that a restored is not worth as much as an original are correct. I do think a very nice restoration is a pretty thing, and no, it is not worth "only" a shooter price.

I have heard two ways to judge the value of a restored piece.

1. Take a well used example and have it restored, its now worth about the cost of a shooter, plus the restore cost. This is good for average priced items.

2. Rarer items, then you take the value of say an 80-85% original gun and its worth half the value.


Also, it depends on what you collect, it is much more acceptable to "semi-restore" a garand, or a 1911 or the like, because parts from the same era can be correct. Harder to do for lugers with the matched parts.


but to change the subject;
I am amazed at how many "collectors" are always looking for "pretty" guns. Well heck, the newest luger from WW2 is about 66 years old, while a 1900 model is from about 99 to 109 years old. Why in the world do we see so many "mint / extremly nice with strong strawing" lugers at shows and collections? That is crazy to me. Yes I have seen some very nice guns in collections, and they are usually proper and original.
But I sure wonder why I see so many that are so nice for sale over the years.

Me personally, as a collector I want to find the nicest original guns I can; because in 10-20 years, those will be worth a lot more than a restored gun. It doesn't mean I would by-pass a rare restored gun, but I am not going to go look for one. I'd rather have a 80% original with some blemishes than a 100%, no original finish gun. Its lost its history with the new blue, sanding, blueing, sanding; for 3 or 4 times to get that original color...


Ed