[Ron Wood]

I am somewhat at a loss to accept that a 1900 Bulgarian that is in "only average condition" should be considered for a professional restoration. Considering that there were only perhaps 500 to 1000 of these early Bulgarian contract Lugers produced, many of which have been lost to attrition and a majority of the surviving examples converted to 9mm (as were the equally scarce 1906 examples), to find an unaltered 7.65 specimen at all is a relative rarity in the collecting field and "only average condition" doesn't seem to apply.

I have observed that European collectors are not as reluctant to restore firearms as their "purist" US counterpart. I do not necessarilly side with either camp across the board. However, I do tend to believe that a really rare piece that lacks significant (you use your standard as to what is "significant") pitting and retains better than 90% to 95% original finish should under no circumstance be subjected to a cosmetic upgrade just to make it prettier in one's display case.

I do not shun acquiring a restored rare item at a reasonable price since with my modest resources I may never be able to own any other example for my collection. However, I believe that the standard should be that a rare piece should not be restored unless it was in such a deplorable condition that much of its intrinsic worth as a historical item has been lost.

I remain of the opinion that if this 1900 Bulgarian is matching and original, it should not be restored. Perhaps photographs will change my mind.

Respectfully submitted,
Ron