The gunsmith you choose matters

[Cyrano4747]

I appreciate several things from Mark, first of all he is bringing attention to vintage guns in the same way that C&R Arsenal is. (owned/managed/produced by the same person as I understand it) Second, Mark may be an internet "celebrity" in our obscure corner of the world (the kid my kids watch play minecraft makes $7-10 MILLION a year, Mark's a nobody in reality) he made no attempt to use that when he bought parts from me for a Gewehr 88 restoration. Many influencers would have asked for those parts for free (I've had it and worse happen).

Generally speaking though, I have to agree, his "restoration" videos are often quite bad. However, the simple fact of the matter is, nearly every single one of you that condemned him for doing it wrong, do not pay someone to do the very restoration work that you are saying he should have done. Most businesses are beholden to their customers, many are not able to do the work that they would *prefer* to do. I don't offer restoration work except under very certain circumstances because I found 99% of people simply won't pay for the labor required.

As a group of dedicated collectors you guys have reached a fairly tight consensus as to acceptable restoration processes. When I was studying museum curation in college (that's what I wanted to be when I grew up) it was amazing to me how LITTLE consensus there was. There were standards, and generally accepted processes, but by and large, it depended on the institution, funding, and technical direction. The same applies to collectors who in the end, span a giant chasm of funding and technical capability.

Finally, there are people out there that simply do not have our narrow minded approach to history. I had a gentleman approach me about building two custom rifles for his sons. He had two excellent matching numbers K98k's that his father had brought home from WWII that he wanted to use. I refused and told him that I would be happy to supply two excellent condition matching numbers actions. He offered a very good counter point that I had not considered before. The simple fact of the matter was that his boys had zero interest in the two rifles as K98k's. They would have interest in them if they could hunt with them. He would rather give them something they would be interested in, which they would keep, than something that they were not interested in and would get rid of. He took them to a different gun maker and had two very nice custom rifles built out of them.

I understand what you're getting at with the comparison to the arguments among the museum conservation community, but there are two key things to remember there:

1) conservationists will be the first to tear their hair out over some of the bad conservation methods used by their predecessors. In large part this has lead to:
2) the general thrust being to be as conservative as possible and not make changes that can't be reversed down the line.

There's a whole discussion to be had about where the line is, and frankly I'll argue that a lot of truly archival techniques aren't appropriate for even advanced collectors just because of the extremely different priorities between a museum and us. Heck, even among museums there's massive differences in how you treat objects that will be displayed vs. held in storage for decades. Still, I don't think it's too much to say that the over-all consensus is well on the side of "don't refinish the object." Which is what he does to that stock.

(edit: for the record I don't have major experience in physical object restoration, most of my exposure to this world has been through archives, on both sides of the desk. That said I did do a bit of very lightweight physical object curation and conservation for a small corporate archive once upon a time and had to dip my toes in.)

Now, when it comes to contract work and the line about how people can do whatever they want to their own property, that's absolutely true. If Chris woke up one morning and decided to pile all those great rifles he shows us into a heap on his yard, douse them in gas, and throw a match that would be his prerogative. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't criticize him for that, and this being done on commission doesn't mean I won't criticize Novak for what he did to this rifle. Or, to use your other example: Maybe dad wants to make Grandpa's rifles into custom hunting guns for his kids and that's his right, but as sentimental as it may be I'm still not going to approve of it just because the destruction of two rifles is wrapped up in a Hallmark moment.

Basically, just because people don't have our approach doesn't mean that their approach is correct.

edit: to be clear, I'm not saying he's a bad person or even a bad gunsmith. I have no personal dealings with him, and for all I know he's the best guy on the planet and an absolute whiz at the bench. If I seem annoyed it's because time and again I see him cited by younger, less experienced collectors as someone they're looking to when they decide how to take care of their own guns. He's got an audience, and that audience is out there following what they see as his advice and guidance on how to pretty up their collection. 30 years from now we're going to be talking about some of this stuff the way we talk about people bleaching K98k stocks in the 80s and 90s, and it's frustrating to watch it happen in real time.

 

[Warrior1354]

Yeah correct restorations on guns are lost when I start hearing a buffing wheel, grinder, and I reblued this. I mean that buttplate did not have to be done that way. Here are a couple pictures from the way back machine. This buttplate was on a Amberg 1916 I restored. Literally I took this part, and soaked it in kroil oil for a week. Using a rag, and some scrub brushes. Turned out nice in the end.

What really irritates me is to hear about rifles still being chopped up in 2024. To make a hunting rifle? How many sporterized rifles are already out there? How many modern hunting rifles can be reasonably had in today's market? Such as Remington 700, Henry lever action in 45-70, Savage Axis, Ruger scout rifle, etc. This isn't 1950-1960. There are not hordes of these rifles being stored at warehouses on docks somewhere. I mean, think about it? Most of the imported rifles coming in now are coming from Ethiopia.

I just hope those matching 98ks weren't a rare code that were butchered into a custom hunting rifle. I just don't get it. He could have sold those rifles for several thousand dollars to a collector that would appreciate them. Use the money to buy the most custom hunting rifle on the market. And have the most high end optic you could put on it. But, oh well. It's his rifle.

 

[Cyrano4747]

What really irritates me is to hear about rifles still being chopped up in 2024. To make a hunting rifle? How many sporterized rifles are already out there? How many modern hunting rifles can be reasonably had in today's market? Such as Remington 700, Henry lever action in 45-70, Savage Axis, Ruger scout rifle, etc. This isn't 1950-1960. There are not hordes of these rifles being stored at warehouses on docks somewhere. I mean, think about it? Most of the imported rifles coming in now are coming from Ethiopia.

I actually understand this one, just because it's sentimental and nice in a Hallmark/Norman Rockwell kind of way. Grandpa's old war rifles, made into something nice that the grandkids can use to hunt with and remember him by etc etc. Kind of the same thrust as people making remembrance quilts out of wedding dresses and the like.

Still, as I said above, just because I understand doesn't mean I approve or that I won't criticize the decision. I agree that the best path forward would have been to sell them and then buy some absolutely stellar custom guns made up off of modern commercial actions with the proceeds.

 

[OnlyMil]

Wow. After watching that, all I have to add are these:

 

[Warrior1354]

 

[R.W. Parker]

Here he shows the engraved screw heads, explains the importance of properly fitting screwdrivers, then proceeds to muscle the tang screw. Classic Novak!