Hi LSU-

Justin Hale and his Dad Andy (pre64win.com) are friends of mine, so my opinion is be colored by that fact. 

However, I’d suggest you give them a call and discuss your project goals.  Justin knows what is/is not a collectable gun, and can guide you on the most cost effective way of getting what you want without paying too much or trashing something that might have collector value.

Just my opinion… 

Lou

Caution! Dissertation ‘my take’ following!
pre64.com is a firm which sells complete pre 64 Model 70 rifles as well as components/parts. “Cannibalization”, by some folks. A perfectly legitimate firm providing valuable service in keeping other such rifles “on the road”, for owner/enthusiasts. I’ve not done business with them, but that my view as useful resource to collectors & shooters.
As far as desecrating a valuable collector item, I differ from some views. With over a half million such “pre” 70 rifles made, there are yet quite a lot of the ‘garden variety’, principally Standard Models in such as 30-06 chambering. Also a fair amount of those with their battle scars attesting to field deployment as designed & intended. Most yet good usable rifles due to such great design, materials and workmanship. The same thing which justifiably creates the ‘aura’. Yet made to be used and capable of considerable abuse.
I don’t personally consider it desecration to customize such ‘garden variety’ model, which I describe by common chambering, common model and condition relative to ‘deployment’ factor. I have one such almost surely customization accomplished in Germany, with such flavor, and interesting result (purchased inexpensively).
Others, simply by condition, a customization would seem a rescue service! Common rifles, stocks in poor condition, non-original recoil pads. Nothing ‘special’ about the gun other than stalwart veteran. Such rifles to me, great fabric for making handsome & useful. Moreover, whatever route pleased.
Much of what I’m saying, envisioning the postwar generation. As we move back in time, less ability to rotely brand one “customization material” without some wider consideration. First, to the early fifties, the (to me) great era of forged -integral barrel front sight ramps, a definite plus requiring only such as even .270 Win chambering to give me pause. Earlier, the transition models, and considerably less likely to propose conversion. Then the (to me hallowed) prewar models. Duly noting a misnomer, since that version extending to early postwar production.
Here, perhaps myself toward other extreme. While perhaps too typical ‘extra bridge top sight equipment holes’, where otherwise such as pristine ‘prewar’ model even with such as bridge-top holes, easily turning the other cheek. To happily accept… For a price. Still to value such specimen for all the virtues I appreciate in such prewar craftsmanship.
So, my rule… No fixed rule. To evaluate each rifle on it’s merits balancing originality-scarcity against modifications-commonness; condition a common denominator. The synthesis: There can certainly be some quite fine, beautiful, custom ‘pre 64’ based models.
Moving from generalizations-philosophy to your specific rifle. The 257 Roberts to me is one of those ‘swing chamberings’. Inherently valuable in original context and moving the ‘fickle finger’ a few clicks toward maintaining originality. Such noting the (perhaps irony) that even quality refinishing metal and wood, ostensibly restoring beauty; the rifle rendered inevitably & forever “non-original”. Such to the condemnation and disdain of many ardent collectors. Becoming simply “another pretty face”. Yet such views, leaving the non-beauties in something of no-mans-land. Cringing to view, yet with the point “still original”.
Conclusion. (Yes, there really IS one! Hooray! 🙂 ) I’m with several of these great rifles in 257 Roberts. A prewar 15K SN, transition 67K SN and third model 137K. Former two, both Supergrades, earliest with Stith mounted Weaver 3/4″ tube scope. Both SGs with red Winchester recoil pads. ‘Pre’ semi-supple and definitely replacement. ‘Trans’, hardened & flaking. ‘Third’, ‘organic’ original Standard rifle in all respects. But bluing & stock such only a mother could love! Restoration candidate only to increase value in my estimation. Simply not on this old man’s watch.
And so! As ever Louis, the necessary thanks for your invaluable contributions to this Forum and note of respect for your collector view Clarence! No hard single answers here, but a spectrum and many times ‘economics/market forces’ perhaps setting the most objective measure. Such absent the ‘purists’, which I can neither afford, nor wish to be.
Just another ‘dissertation’ take! 🙂
Best to all!
John

Well Lou…
First point, “hoot”, probably a misnomer (possibly even ‘fungible’ misnomer). “Coot” not just more descriptive, but factually accurate and in context of the ‘mature’ variety! 🙂
Second simply to say Plus 1 to your above post. I think we’re largely on the same page philosophically. Where we differ, is your far more extensive knowledge base concerning the pre ’64 Model 70 genre and potentially opinions which follow.
One opinion that I do hold, is that regarding a 70 in decent condition, “blueprinting” seeming to ‘gild the Lily’ unless perhaps starting just with action and ‘full monte’ of target quality barrel and well fitted stock. To my mind even in such context, the virtue of the 70 we so highly regard, is of quality, strength, reliability and decent accuracy. I do believe those virtues including such as the big claw extractor, reflect purposes ‘other than’ pure target arm. Even as most closely cast, in the very 70 target models, that virtue dated. Progress of time and design in turnbolt rifles, the push-feeds, seeming to me to take the absolute accuracy field. Coming down nowadays to just which virtues most important. Personally, for instance, still figuratively conjuring as ‘practice’, ‘Bulls & baseball bats…’ Most any 70 in decent condition more capable than this shooter and I’d opine such with many of us. US Army sniper Hathcock, likely exploiting the ‘tuned’ 70 to maximum. Nowadays, no benchrest shooter to my understanding using a CRF Model 70 action!
“Restoration”. Legitimate when “motive & intent” legitimate. Fact of some possible charlatan purveyor downstream, no ethical duty/responsibility arising for a present ‘innocent’ owner to deprive themselves of a nicely restored gun, or painting or widget, because of concern for submitting such to the vagaries of future possessors.
And that, a ‘terse’ comment! 🙂 🙂 🙂
Best
John