I think it might be useful at this stage to consider the following:

To claim that an object is “untouched” - whatever one takes that to mean - is an attempt at a negative proof. After all, the objects in question were all “touched” extensively - in manufacture and proofing. Apart from the extremely rare cases of rifles still sealed in a factory wrap, after distribution and unwrapping, rifles were handled, used, and maintained.

It may be possible to demonstrate that a rifle has been altered from its “out of the wrap” configuration - a positive proof.
But in the days of mass-produced components that do not require any individual fitting, it is hardly possible to prove that no components have ever been replaced - a negative proof.

Nevertheless, since so many collectors often place such an astonishingly high value on this presumed “untouchedness”, it is not surprising that sellers will do their best to suggest it - although they cannot prove it.

Recourse is thus taken to insinuation, conjecture, hypothesis - anything but a firm guarantee…

Because that is impossible.