Post by: Stormrider51 on October 11, 2012, 02:07:14 AM
To me, rasp and file marks in a wooden stock are an indication of poor workmanship. At the very least, it tells me that the maker didn't bother to go to the step of sanding the stock to remove those marks left by coarser tools. Did this really happen in bygone times? Is there reliable historical documentation to back up such claims?
Now let's turn our attention to the metal parts of the gun. How would the external surfaces of the barrel, lock, and stock furniture have looked when the gun was handed to the new owner? Would they have been pitted? Would they have looked 100 years old when they were brand new? What was the standard?
Just food for thought.
Storm
Post by: Captchee on October 11, 2012, 07:05:06 AM
Yes its not uncommon to see file or scraper marks left in originals . In fact I have photos of pieces made by some very well know masters that have issue that simply would be frowned upon today .
IMO even when it comes to locks . The fit and finish we see today leans much more to the higher end type of work , then what was many time common on the general use firearms .
As to the subject of aging . Frankly I don’t do it . Simply put , im not spending the time I do on any given piece . Then turn around and beat it up . This aging thing has never really made much since to me .
Seriously . If a person is into the whole historical aspect .
Lets say they are depicting a frontiersman in 1780 . Then the chances are very good that their rifle would be only 10 -20 years old . So why try and make the gun look 200 years old .
With just a little actual use , a new piece will become worn and used looking
To be frank , again , I just don’t get it . I have family heirlooms that date back to the 1830’s -1880s that frankly are in far better condition then what the so called modern aging is depicting . Seriously these are guns that were on horses ever day or wrapped in blankets and dragged all around this country and parts of Canada.
What did these guns look like when new ??? Well IMO they looked new . But they didn’t look like that for long im sure . However I don’t believe they in short order looked like something from an archeological dig .
Post by: greyhunter on October 11, 2012, 08:25:32 AM
Post by: pathfinder on October 11, 2012, 09:26:46 AM
If done with A LOT of restraint, its very attractive,over done,ridiculous!
As far as worm holes faked,as restorer and reproducer of antique and classic furniture, it paid for my kids college!
Post by: prairie dog on October 11, 2012, 09:34:07 AM
1. Items that survived to become museum pieces were most likely not used everyday. Those "special occasion" and ceremonial items were typically more highly decorated and finely made than "everyday use" items.
2. 200 year old items are going to show the effects of age. Back in the day, no one would be using a 200 year old rifle or one that looks 200 years old.
Post by: Captchee on October 11, 2012, 10:46:30 AM
Quote from: "prairie dog"
I believe some folks do their research through museum displays and forget to apply two obvious facts:
1. Items that survived to become museum pieces were most likely not used everyday. Those "special occasion" and ceremonial items were typically more highly decorated and finely made than "everyday use" items.
2. 200 year old items are going to show the effects of age. Back in the day, no one would be using a 200 year old rifle or one that looks 200 years old.
i would add a third
#3) who is to say any such damage , patina or wear had not or did not happen in the 150 years since its last use ?
When it comes to worm holes , Knots and such , even mineral stains . Frankly unless the maker was doing a very high end piece , I don’t think they cared .
But then we also have to remember that the quality of available wood was also much higher then it is now
Glossy finishes ? IMO depending on the maker , but if we look at some of the pieces where types of lacquers were used . Then IMO the finish was probably shinny when new . But with use it quickly dulls .
Not to mention being subject to salt air or the packaging used to ship guns from Europe all would have played a part in changing the looks of the piece.
I also think that sometimes we forget that only in the last 40-50 years have we began to move to a more disposable society .. Simply put , we don’t on average take care of things the same way as past generations did . Those generations also not treating things as well as those before them
I also think that all to often people today have no realization of the value of a dollar .
Now that doesn’t mean being worth 60 cents ..
NO SIR!!!n it means what it takes to make that dollar and is the item your looking at wanting worth the same or greater to you then the effort expended to earn that dollar .
My father new the value of his dollars . And he taught me just as my grandfather taught him .
In fact I can remember my grandfather simply shaking his head at what my father would buy .
My father used to tell me that he could remember his grandfather doing the same thing .
So if human nature holds true , then could we not expect the average person looking to buy a working common gun in 1790 , to have been very aware of the value of the money in their pocket .
Myself , I think so . As such I believe that their items , while used and used hard , probably were still cared for very well.
Post by: Hanshi on October 11, 2012, 12:26:19 PM
Getting back to the point, I am almost obsessive about taking care of my guns. I have guns easily 30 & 40 years old that still look brand new - and they have been fired hundreds and thousands of times. I have a few honest nicks on my muzzleloaders and cringe at the thought of getting more. They are, in a sense, "pampered". But they get USED! I don't want mine to look old; no-sir-ree. :lol sign
Post by: Uncle Russ on October 11, 2012, 10:53:53 PM
The "beat & banged-up look" is not as prevalent today as it was back in the 60's and 70's, IMHO.
Real patina and worn edges are extremely hard to duplicate, and quite often many fakes can be spotted from twenty feet away.
I have come across several "honest fakes" in my lifetime of trading and swapping guns and this is the type I always disliked most.
What I call an "honest fake" is a gun that has many of the above issues you guys mentioned, but sold to a new buyer as original, with some wild story commonly connected, and the new buyer is gullible enough to buy the story, and the gun....hook, line, and sinker.
He now decides to trade or sell this particular gun, fully believing the story he was told about the gun's history, fully believing he has the "real thing", when in reality all he has is a piece of garbage.
Many times in the past I more than likely would not have had much of a comment, that is until the seller tried to 'hard sell'...then I would likely just walk of, although there has been a time or two where I had to say something because I felt it was really necessary.
Then somewhere around the 1990's I decided to speak up!
If the gun is a fake say it's a fake, if it makes the guy feel bad then that's just the way it is.
This kind of thing has to stop somewhere, and there is no better place than amongst friends.
Just don't expect that friendship to continue after you point it out.
My heart goes out to these guys, but it happens everyday.
Reasonably intelligent people falling for a "Cock & Bull" story that keeps changing with the last owner.
Reminds me of back home in El Paso Texas. Every Pawn shop in town had at least one gun that shot Billy the Kid. Either that, or they had this really special gun in the safe that had belonged to Pat Garret.
And, for $100 bucks more you could get documentation 'papers' that this gun was his hide-out gun.
However, I do think it's getting better.
Possibly because of my own lack of exposure, but maybe because it's now the "newer the better look".
Anyway, good subject guys!
I don't mean to get you off subject, just wanted to show you how many ways this fake stuff can be used.
Uncle Russ...
Post by: rickevans on October 12, 2012, 02:45:27 PM
Post by: Capt. Jas. on October 12, 2012, 09:31:24 PM
Post by: Loyalist Dave on October 17, 2012, 03:17:25 PM
But my horn that I wear for other times, the fancy screw tip, is white. LD