Where to draw the line?

[Tired Retired]

As mentioned in another topic, there is a line between a collectable/non-shooter and a shooter carbine. On one end, the mixmasters (and the rebuilts) make dependable, durable shooters for everything from plinking to varment hunting to home defense. At the other end of the spectrum are the truely historically correct and museum-rare carbines which are examples an America which we will never see again - these pieces we don't take chances with shooting.

CPM is giving us all great shooters ($600). The auctions are offering rarer (but shootable) examples of things we rarely see ($2,000~$3,000). The estate sales of old war veterans seem to be giving us the "bring-backs" of what really was (priceless).

But where do you draw the line? Shooter vs too-rare-to-shoot

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[shamrocks]

For me, it depends on the condition and if I feel it really is an original. If it is, I tend to put it away because of it's history and value. But, I have a couple that believe to be originals but were obviously fired sometime before I got them so I don't feel I necessarily need to put them away and not shoot them. However, I just bought a Underwood yesterday that gives every indication of being original with correct period parts AND the chamber, bore and everything is so spotless that I'm sure it has not been fired in a very, very, very long time. So...that one gets put up with a few others I have and I will not fire it.

[Jim Nasium]

My first carbine is a SG. It was the one that got me into this "mess". T'was a purchase from the widow of a good friend who passed. Was just trying to help, didn't really want the rifle. It's a DCM and I still have the papers. Mixmaster with M2 stock. I have fired it many times, and will not hesitate to do so again, if so inclined. Got a couple of more that are obviously run of the mill CMP's, and would shoot them as well.
But then, when the ante goes up, my reticence to shoot goes dramatically up as well... Some of the rifles are "as Manufactured", and in almost NIB condition.
Now when you get away from Carbines, Lugers, for example, I wouldn't dream of shooting any of them except one. Also my first one, it has a mismatched toggle. It also has the distinction of having two tours over V/N in the back seat of a Navy F4 Phantom. So, even tho I might shoot it, it would be the LAST one I ever got rid of. Long story for another thread.
P 38's, well, parts are not as crucial as Lugers, depending on date of mfgr. I've got a couple of Mauser "byf's" with French star proofs that I would and have shot.
I hear a lot of guys say that they won't have a gun they don't shoot. Well, that's fine. It's their gun. That's why they make Chevy's and Fords. Viva la difference!!! But I just get cold chills when I think of breaking the extractor on an IP.

My .02

jim

[Magyar]

For me, it depends on the condition and if I feel it really is an original.

Is there such a thing as "original" in the market place? I was castigated
for suggesting that collectors who search for "correct" parts to unmix their mixmaster was not much different than one who adds a cartouche to their stock for the finishing touch. I say it's fraudelent either way when they attempt to sell it as original. If it's in the confines of ones home, no problem, but out in the market place; please once again, explain the difference to me.

[Mizzouboy]

Is there such a thing as "original" in the market place? I was castigated
for suggesting that collectors who search for "correct" parts to unmix their mixmaster was not much different than one who adds a cartouche to their stock for the finishing touch. I say it's fraudelent either way when they attempt to sell it as original. If it's in the confines of ones home, no problem, but out in the market place; please once again, explain the difference to me.

I collect carbines; or as a friend put it (with a wink) I collect receivers. Mine are all mixmasters to varying degrees, and I have one of each receiver. I don't see any harm in parts swapping between them. They are mine and some day will be my son's. For example, my QHMC came with a Rockola Slide. You betcha, it went on the Rockola, and so forth. I would never consider representing any of them as "original". For one thing, I ain't trying to sell 'em. Finding the "right" parts to me is part of the challenge. One thing I won't try to swap is sights and bands. That really would be cheating if you removed T3 types and put on T1 or T2 bands or flip sights. Heaven forbid faking a stamp.

[LittleCrane]

The test I apply is, will shooting the carbine materially alter its condition and value? I don't have any carbines pristine enough that occasional shooting will affect their condition in any discernible way, and that includes both the rebuilds and the five that are in "as manufactured" condition but have seen some use.

That said, my favorite shooter is 5.7 million Winchester I got 36 years ago -- parts all original but someone reblued it, so it's obviously not original condition and who cares if it shows more wear.

That would be another good thread topic -- what makes a carbine your favorite shooter? For me it's the feel of the stock, the smoothness of the action, reliability, and of course a reasonable degree of accuracy.

[Maplebacon]

Is there such a thing as "original" in the market place? I was castigated
for suggesting that collectors who search for "correct" parts to unmix their mixmaster was not much different than one who adds a cartouche to their stock for the finishing touch. I say it's fraudelent either way when they attempt to sell it as original. If it's in the confines of ones home, no problem, but out in the market place; please once again, explain the difference to me.

Rifles were freely dismantled, then rebuilt as mixmasters. To undo the mixmaster nature is OK, as long as it's not said to be "original".

On the other hand, an inspector cartouche is another animal entirely. It was a mark put on by the government inspector. Restamping an inspector's stamp is akin to counterfeiting.

Apples and oranges, and pretty clear to me.

[Magyar]

On the other hand, an inspector cartouche is another animal entirely. It was a mark put on by the government inspector. Restamping an inspector's stamp is akin to counterfeiting.

Deep down, I know you are right. However, I sometimes feel there is a "rush to judgement" on what is fake. By viewing a photo and w/o personal examination we become instant experts. For example, on this forum there is always the guy who asks if this eBay item (cartouche) is fake. Invariably, if the cartouche appears to have a "hard-strike" or fresh; that's usually accompanies a damning indictment. Nothing else and the poor seller gets an F.
As if a faker-moron wouldn't think that "lighter" would be better if passing it off for original by careful blending. The bottom line is that there are many stamps/dies out there that are so good that only a true-expert and personal examination are necessary to determine a credible outcome.
Anyway, just IMHO.....

[Embalmer]

I had a early inland that came from an estate sale of a retired WWII colonel. Gun was aparently (according to his widow) his drivers, and was imacculate in original finish (cept for minor oprod track and bolt wear), all original parts, one dent and a little rubrash on edge of buttstock ect. was sitting on his wall so long barrel had dust bunnies in it, and everything was bone dry. put some oil in it, and put 15 rounds through it every year till I reluctantly sold it just to give it a little excesize.

[JimF4M1s (Deceased)]

They have all been fired at some time. Why not shoot with them? Just don't abuse them. But we all have the safe Queens.