New collector pitfalls

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by Edward Tinker

OK, I read through almost all of this and it's very obvious that Kyrie has strong opinions on the subject.

It would appear that Kyrie is an example of the high-end Luger collector, in that nothing less than 100% original is acceptable. Wear and effects of time would be secondary. Interesting, and food for thought.

Bill Munis...reasoning was that if you found a piece that was numbered in that time period, that it would be logical to use it, if needed. Armors or depots would take a new part and number it, but an armorer could very well have simply used another part whether correctly numbered or not, the purpose was to get a gun working.

That would seem to be a lower level of collectibility compared to the 100% original. With overall appearance/finish being of more importance than originality.

In many collecting fields it is acceptable to refinish. Such as, Cars...

From watching the several different collector car auctions on TV, I would say that is incorrect. The 100% original/preserved vintage cars demand a much higher premium than 'restored' cars. Not a 'barn find' that has languished in some farmers possession, untouched and neglected since he parked it; but rather one of the many collections, from museums and private individuals who have carefully preserved them over the years and which are now being sold off for whatever reasons. Those would seem to me to be examples of Kyrie's collectibles.

On the other end of the collector scale, I favor the Lugers that have been repaired and returned to service, by qualified armorers or original repair facilities. These would include post-WW I rebuilds, WW II rebuilds, and RC/VoPo rebuilds. I especially favor the rebuilds done after WW II to return Lugers to service long after their 'planned obsolescence'. Matching numbers mean little to me; functionality is dominant. And provenance is more important than 100% originality, to me at least. I would rather have a worn, rebuilt Luger with proven history than an unused barracks queen with little or no wear.

I'm a romantic.

[gunbugs]

My opinion, and it is only that, so it means little in the long run except to me....is that I'm kinda middle of the road on this subject. I've had the opportunity to be educated/mentored over the years by an advanced "collector" who lives near to me. Recently, I have turned my attention to aquiring a few lugers, primarily Mauser WW2 guns. Most of what I have bought has been "matching" except for the magazines, and I have had to acquire holsters separately. One of the Lugers, an S/42 1939 date, has a mismatched firing pin, this doesn't really "bother" me, but I am not averse to obtaining one with a "matching" number. I don't feel this is "dishonest" in any way, and will not affect the "originality" of the gun any more than the mismatched part that is in it. If, and when, I sell off that particular gun, I'll let the buyer know what I've done. But that, in the end, is just how I do things. I do try to be aware of my surroundings when I buy expensive guns, and perform my due diligence. In the end, "Caveat Emptor".