I did have fun one year at an OGCA show when one was up for sale for a paltry $100,000 or so!  Once I convinced the owner I was not a buyer, he relaxed and took it out of the wood and glass case and he and I had a great time just talking and examining it.  So I CAN say I've handled one in detail.  Tim

martin rabeno said
No. It’s not a hypothetical question but a very complex one as many of you have answered.  My feelings are, if you are upfront and have or can squire the skills needed to restore a piece of history, why not? Art restorers do it every day. But it must be done right with all respect due to the item in your care.  Not to make it look new but let it once again look like it would have been for its  its apparent age and condition. At a certain point it’s not about the money but for respect for the object. How you do it and the cost is up to the individual. Some interesting examples of frauds and restorations are pictured in Lewis’s book. Everyone can make up their own moral decisions.
  

Great point Martin! While opinions on restoration vary, I think we all agree at a minimum disclosure is required. What is the name of the Lewis’s book you referenced? I would like to get it if I can find a copy. Thanks, Buck

Chuck said
I recently bought an 1873 Ser #201866 in 22 short.  It needed the correct forend screws, an original rear sight and the inner magazine assembly repaired or replaced.
I fixed the forend screws with original screws.  I will buy a period correct rear sight.
The inner magazine will have to get a new assembly.  This is by far the most rare and hardest part to get.  Call it what you may but it will be a lot better than it was. 
  

Now that is a worthy restoration! 

I fixed the forend screws with original screws.  I will buy a period correct rear sight.

The inner magazine will have to get a new assembly.  This is by far the most rare and hardest part to get.  Call it what you may but it will be a lot better than it was. 

martin rabeno said
Interesting discussions to say the least and all god points made.
So, as I make it out. Repairs and restorations, not fakes, are acceptable as long as there is full disclose to prevent thievery down the road. As long as it is done skillfully and correctly. Right ? Of course a restored firearm is not everyone's cup of tea and naturally worth a fraction of an unrestored one
  

Martin-

I'm not sure you're asking this question of the right people. The purist collector will not be interested in the results of even the best quality restoration, if he can detect it. Many times he considers himself the temporary custodian of the guns he loves. The folks paying the big bucks for high condition firearms don't seem to be quite as picky, as long as it looks like it should. This category of collector may very well lurk here but probably doesn't post much if at all. He makes his preference known at the auctions. In my observation there are an abundance of less discriminating collectors, knowingly or unknowingly, at all price levels of collectible Winchesters. As there are fewer unmolested examples every day the future of this hobby will have to recognize the value of the non-original specimen. The high condition, original specimen will always be ultimate prize but many disappear into private collections for decades at a time. 

I think the answer to your question is the same as to the collector who has a nice specimen that needs a bit of oil on the stock, a few screw slots straightened up, a sight repaired or replaced with the correct model or an abused specimen needing a complete restoration with new wood, new barrel, new stampings and new finish; your gun, your money, your call. 

Quite frankly, if this isn't a hypothetical question I'm looking forward to seeing the before and after pics. I love a good project!

Mike

New copies of these screws are of course readily available. But I was hoping to find some vintage screws (early 1900s manufacture, certainly before the switchover to Model 94). I've found a few offered on eBay, but they're in awful condition, with badly mangled slots.

Would anyone have any suggestions as to where I might find vintage screws in reasonably good condition? Or should I just remove some of the bluing on the heads of the modern screws to match the current condition of the tang?

Personally, I’d rather see an abused wreck of a good Winchester restored rather than parted out and, in one small instance, have done just that.

Anthony said,

I really think that an abused 1 of 1000, receiver that is a rarity in itself, or an example that was worn past recognition, which in all reality is hard to imagine, should be restored properly, but not misrepresented! It can be done properly, without trying to make it into something it wasn't. Putting it back to it's originality, instead of leaving it by the wayside and not doing anything with it, would be disastrous. IMO! 

Especially if a talented person had the means, the talent, and the upstanding, wherewithal to do so! It wouldn't have to be admonished into something more than what it could be or should have been, but what it was, originally, and documented as refurbished, with as many original and existing parts that could be acquired, to do so! 

If I had the talent, and the means, and was able to acquire a receiver, from an original 1 of 1000 rifle, meaning that other original parts from a certain rifle weren't included with the receiver, I would absolutely try to put it back to it's originality, with as many original parts that I could acquire from the proper resources, and even if I had to talk to let's say a reputable company like Turnbull Restoration, I would do that, for the correct Deluxe, "XXX", wood! IMHO!

Tony

martin rabeno said
Interesting discussions to say the least and all god points made.
So, as I make it out. Repairs and restorations, not fakes, are acceptable as long as there is full disclose to prevent thievery down the road. As long as it is done skillfully and correctly. Right ? Of course a restored firearm is not everyone's cup of tea and naturally worth a fraction of an unrestored one
  

As long as there is provable full disclosure, I see nothing ethically wrong (or, for the artisans involved, hazardous) with a restoration and the market will decide what the piece is worth. 

Personally, I'd rather see an abused wreck of a good Winchester restored rather than parted out and, in one small instance, have done just that. 

I suppose there could be an issue in the case of a truly unique arm - say, the pistol used by Burr to kill Alexander Hamilton in their duel. If it existed in 30% condition and had absolute provenance, anything beyond wiping it down to preserve it from further deterioration would be wrong. 

What somebody wants to do with a rusted piece of steel that was once part of a valuable and rare, but not unique, gun does not bump my revulsion meter.

Building a gun around it and palming it off as real and original is a felony and should get the perp a good stretch of "porridge and mailbags", as the coppers at Scotland Yard liked to put it. 

Tim

So, as I make it out. Repairs and restorations, not fakes, are acceptable as long as there is full disclose to prevent thievery down the road. As long as it is done skillfully and correctly. Right ? Of course a restored firearm is not everyone's cup of tea and naturally worth a fraction of an unrestored one

Some owners don't deserve their rides.