Buy the rifle not the story!!!!!

[Paul S.]

Well said Patrick.

[Robert303]

I too get rather angry with hoarders. If you have 5 or six different No 4Ts and can use them to illustrate the development of the rifle or any other differences that's fine but if they are otherwise basically the same then I agree it's just hoarding. Don't get me started on a certain gent who has too much money and just buys up Fosberrys so that he has the 'Largest Collection'. As to a 'Restored Standard' it's a lovely idea but will not happen when there is desire for something. The reason, because desire = money. Money = rogues. One just has to look at the Classic Car market over the last 40 or so years. Mark II Jaguars where the only Jag parts were the engine and VIN plates the rest being Daimler. A Multi million pound Bentley that became a multi million court case. Right through to fake cardboard boxes for dinky toys. This did lead to some of the auction houses and the FIA getting some protocols sorted out but that in itself pushed costs up. We could ask Capt Laidler and a few others to write the guidelines for restored / repaired rifles but unless you have someone who can verify or police the market you cannot enforce it. What you have to do is A) Not join in the Bright and Shiny Market B) Avoid the Bullshit Market C) Learn as much as possible from RELIABLE sources and most importantly d) Teach newcomers how to avoid A) and B) and who to trust when doing C).

[Homer]

Don't worry gents, when these so called hoarders die, there'll be plenty for everyone.

[Robert303]

Unfortunately the B-----d is a lot younger than me

[SpikeDD]

Collectors who, with misplaced pride, write "I have just acquired my 99th 4T (or whatever)" are not doing anything useful for the shooting community. They are, again IMHO, being dogs in the manger and preventing 98 other people from being able to shoot one of these rifles.

And then they have the temerity to complain that prices are rising - when they themselves are the price drivers!

Sorry collectors, I know this is unfair to some of you who are serious students of the material, and hereby apologize to those who feel unjustly criticized. But all too many appear to be hoarders. And this is merely the opinion of a serious shooter, so you can ignore it!

Patrick, everything above this bit is spot on and I agree. To the above part quoted, I do not take offense. I will say though, if I have to replace a part, or, during a sporter restoration I have the choice of parts sitting in front of me in a draw....I'm going with the correctly "marked" one. If I don't have the choice, then so be it, it gets what I have on hand. Apart from re-numbering serial numbered parts, to include the un-fitted forestock, who cares if someone changes out a rusty or pitted band, trigger guard, etc...? If you own a Savage rifle with a glossy black F48 marked middle band and you decide to change it out for a Savage marked one, you would be wrong? How do you know the shop owner didn't swipe the original band for himself ? Or, a friend? No one could know that.

I understand the implied impact that's trying to be expressed here and to a degree... I agree with it. I wouldn't know where to draw the lines or rules but I imagine that can be worked out. I understand you are a shooter and accept the fact that you don't understand the idea of collecting. I think the word "hoarding" gives that away Does it matter if someone is a serious student of the subject or merely enjoys the collecting aspect of a given interest in order to have a large collection ? I think not, collecting rifles is the same as any other thing you can possibly think of that can be collected. A degree of care and maintenance is required for all collectibles and I know the same degree of fake and forgery goes along with it all. I think the first thing that has to between collectors and shooters is a better mutual respect and understanding.

[enfield303t]

As someone with a few Lee Enfields I have no problem with enthusiasts having multiples of any gun including T's. I have worked hard to find some and worked hard to be able to buy what I have. I in no way consider myself to be a hoarder, have always LOVED Lee Enfields and will continue to buy them when one I want is available.

I understand the thought of someone having too many in some peoples minds however I have had a few friends with unbelievable collections of guns/militaria. Both were good people and never overpaid for items, they just worked diligently finding what they wanted.

I am old, my son who is probably a more dedicated gun nut than I am gets all of them. His decision on what to do with them will not be my concern...LOL

[Patrick Chadwick]

David, our positions are not as different as you might think. Of course, "if I have to replace a part, or, during a sporter restoration I have the choice of parts sitting in front of me in a draw....I'm going with the correctly "marked" one. If I don't have the choice, then so be it, it gets what I have on hand." BUT to renumber that part is to falsify it. And functionally unnecessary. Ergo faking.

"If you own a Savage rifle with a glossy black F48 marked middle band and you decide to change it out for a Savage marked one, you would be wrong? How do you know the shop owner didn't swipe the original band for himself ? Or, a friend? No one could know that."

Of course no one can know. And undoing Bubba's work is perfectly legitimate. The Enfield No.8 that I recently used in a BR50 competition (beating about 100k-worth of modern high-tech in the process) was a sporterized example when I got it, already drilled and tapped for a scope. I fitted it out with original parts, and it is now a top-class rifle. But I am not pretending that it came thus from the factory.

My other No.8 (oops, what have I been writing about multiple copies!?!) is fitted with a No.4 butt-stock. It looks great, but I was worried that this was a bit of Bubba's work. Fortunately, Peter Laidler assured me that No.8s were indeed occasionally fitted out in this manner, so I have left it as it was when I got it, as there is no functional need to change it, and use it for shooting with the original sights. But it is a perfect example of the "arsenal? armorer? Bubba?" dilemma when confronted with obviously non ex-factory parts. Please note non ex-factory, not non-original. The butt is an original part, but did not leave the factory on that rifle.

So I think I do understand collecting. And the tendency to hoard. Serious collectors have made major contributions to our knowledge in the form of books and forum contributions. But I could show you a collection in a castle that contains multiple copies of the same types - and it is all suffering from rust, as the owner appears to be unable to care for it all. That really is disappointing. As to use of the word "hoarders", I stick by that. Acquiring multiple copies of the same type is hoarding, but the hoarders want to dignify their activity as collecting, and in this way are downgrading serious collecting.

So what is serious collecting? It would be interesting to hear a few viewpoints on that!

[5thBatt]

So I think I do understand collecting.
So what is serious collecting?

I would class myself as a "serious collector" but i cannot answer the question as i do not know the actual answer, i do know it's a forever evolving pursuit & it can be the smallest of details that will separate 2 of the "same type"

[Seaspriter]

Acquiring multiple copies of the same type is hoarding, but the hoarders want to dignify their activity as collecting, and in this way are downgrading serious collecting. So what is serious collecting?

Excellent question Patrick. Let me throw out some possible distinctions:

"Collecting is the acquisition, accurate/authentic/ethical refurbishment, historical research, and sharing of knowledge of a variety of one or more "species" (e.g. Enfields, Springfields, Colts, Mausers etc.) Because collectors are interested acquiring both guns and wisdom, they tend to be collaborative in nature (hence being drawn to a website like this).

"Hoarding is the obsessive-compulsive acquisition of any species for the insatiable purpose of owning more and more and more, without the intent of restoration or sharing the results of historical research or knowledge." Hoarders, being obsessive-compulsive, often are paranoid, thus tend to be isolationists and seldom share their knowledge or wisdom with others.

"Faking is the purposeful changing of a gun's configuration with the intent to deceive another future owner for the unethical production of profit or fame." Fakers, because they are unethical, work in dark corners or, if public, engage in a false façade. When they gather knowledge, it's for the purpose of being a better defrauder.

Let me also say that there is not necessarily/inherently any division or contrary purpose between "collectors" and "shooters." Many of us are both (e.g. Fredrick 303 on this thread is an ardent researcher/collector and target shooter), or primarily one and secondarily the other. Many shooters are great restorers of guns because they know shooting was the purpose of the gun in the first place. There is nothing inherently contrary or contradictory between these two distinctions. It is only when a "shooter" is also a "bubba" that a problem arises.

BTW, there is, in my mind, a distinction between a "bubba" and a "bignorant." A "bubba" is an ignorant, egotistical bozo who insists on doing the wrong thing and resists any knowledge or insight that is contrary to their erroneous view of the world. A "bubba" is akin to being "stupid," whilst a "bignorant" is an individual prone to making big mistakes because they are ignorant, but well meaning, usually repeating the mistakes of a bubba who erroneously insisted they were doing the right thing. Bignorants typically perpetuate myths, but, upon being exposed to enlightenment, will humbly acknowledge their mistakes and reform to the straight and narrow path provided by more knowledgeable mentors.

The idea of having "Standards" is to create a difference between paucity/mediocrity on the one hand and superiority on the other to foster "excellence." Standards do not necessarily have to be "laws" that need "enforcement." The standards that would fit best in our situation are more like "Principles" of refurbishment -- principles are not like laws (each of which stand alone and independent); principles are guidelines that must be taken holistically, applied judiciously, and balanced to fit the unique situations that emerge with every restoration. Principles are far more flexible and adaptable to circumstances than laws.

What is important about having standards is that standards actually generate trust, reliability, and integrity in circumstances where ambiguity, uncertainty, ignorance, confusion, and paradox prevail.

[RobD]

I wonder if I am a hoarder? In my defence, none of my Boer Mausers are identical - their serial numbers are different...