Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
It has been completely restored and restocked. The checkering pattern on the butt stock is not a Winchester pattern, and the beavertail (fat) forend stock is not correct on a 1918 production Model 1894.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
clarence said
Turnbull-quality restoration.
I disagree… Turnbull would have used the correct style forend stock, and the period correct checkering pattern.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Terrible metal prep and bluing job – I just don’t understand the purpose of doing this to an old 94. Many nice redone guns are original parts or at least correct parts and meant to deceive or to bring back a family heirloom to original condition. But, it is beyond me why anyone would do what was done to this old gun.
Bert H. said
clarence said
Turnbull-quality restoration.
I disagree… Turnbull would have used the correct style forend stock, and the period correct checkering pattern.
I meant it was up to his standards of workmanship, not that it was necessarily done in his shop. However, if a customer asked for that checkering pattern & forend, I have no doubt Turnbull would do the work, as that is his business, not making fakes that can pass for originals. The fat-cats who commission such rebuilds invariably want extra fancy wood that is itself a give-away that the work isn’t original, but they’re doing it to please themselves, not fool anyone.
Burt Humphrey said But, it is beyond me why anyone would do what was done to this old gun.
Why do folks customize old cars, often spending a fortune to destroy the car’s originality? If you ever watch Counting Cars on the History Channel, you’ll see things done to great classic cars that will make you cringe. There is a substantial number of collectors who like “old guns,” but want to see them “improved,” & don’t care how much it costs; they’re the folks who keep Turnbull & others doing the same kind of work in business.
1 Guest(s)
