To Blue or Not to Blue

[neoisprettycool]

Hello gentleman,


I recently acquired an all matching WWI Lee Enfield No. I Mk. III. The issue is that almost ALL of the bluing is gone on it. Presumably, someone stripped it for whatever reason, but I digress. I would like to have a non-permanent solution in which I can blue it, but the bluing could easily be taken off for it to retain its original collectible value and not harm the historical authenticity. I want to blue it because I want to protect the bare steel from rust. The first thing that comes to mind is a cold bluing. Do any of you have any idea of what process I should use, or perhaps if I should even do this at all, at the risk of damaging the value? If I can find a non-permanent solution, then the value shouldn't be affected whatsoever, as I could just remove whatever bluing I decide to use. Also, as a side question: Does anyone have any resources that I could use to decipher British markings?

Here are some pics:

http://prntscr.com/j3xawb
http://prntscr.com/j3xb4d
http://prntscr.com/j3xbf1
http://prntscr.com/j3xblj


Thanks!

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.

[Patrick Chadwick]

I can't quite follow your argumentation re. "original collectible value".
You write that the finish appears to have been deliberately stripped.
That alone is a deliberate alteration which reduces the value - goodbye "historical authenticity" - and leaves the raw surface open to rust.
I would act to preserve the metal by cold-blueing with one of the readily available products from Brownells etc.
I don't see that this is going to make matters worse with respect to value.
The rifle will look better, be less prone to rust.
And cold-bluing is fairly easy to remove.

[neoisprettycool]

Thank you for the advice, I figured a cold bluing would in fact be the best option. As a collector, I don't think the lack of bluing entirely ruins the collectible value. Moreover, in my eyes it doesn't affect the historical significance much at all. I'm aware it affects the price, as it isn't in original condition, and luckily I was able to get it for a pretty decent price. Maybe I am a bit simple in my tastes, but I would rather have a matching rifle such as this one, with no bluing, rather than a non matching rifle in absolute perfect condition. That being said, one thing I really don't like is rust. I don't care how a rifle looks so much as I care about it being historically significant. In the end, I want to do my best to protect it so I can preserve history. As a side note, one good thing about this Enfield is that the stock is in superb condition and isn't cracked at the wrist like most Enfields are. (From people trying to remove the butt-stock before the fore-stock...)

---------- Post added at 04:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:19 PM ----------

I can't quite follow your argumentation re. "original collectible value".

- Also, at least with the dozens of fellow collectors I've collaborated with, there is a consensus among us that most collectors would prefer a rifle with no bluing over one that has been re-blued by anyone besides an arsenal. Perhaps others here might disagree, but that is where my argument stems.

[Patrick Chadwick]

OK, I'm not a collector!

[neoisprettycool]

I guess that would explain why you don't understand my argument concerning collectability then. I guess I was wrong to assume that people responding to a thread concerning collectibles would in fact be collectors. Thanks for your input regarding bluing.

[browningautorifle]

you don't understand my argument concerning collectability then

He understands well...Patrick does...

Your rifle is not original if it's been altered and I doubt it was as issued before that was done. It's likely been through a rebuild or upgrade so no longer as issued. Cold blue doesn't do much except change the outside color, hot blue protects and so does parkerizing. Cold blue can be rubbed off with fingers most of the time. Not durable. Oil protects too, applied to whatever finish you have or don't. Collectors prefer different things, even here. They still have various methods and trains of thought, and some of these guys have extensive collections... It's not collector's rifle from your description anyway, so do what makes you happy...you can never return it to original patina or factory original.

[rcathey]

To add to what Jim said,
You’re not gonna do much to *increase* the value no matter what finish you apply.
You might look around your area for someone that does parkerizing or maybe even duracoat (or similar paints).
You’d have a solid corrosion barrier either way and wouldn’t be out a huge amount of money. $100 to $150 or so.

[neoisprettycool]

Right, I don't intend to make this rifle increase in value. I actually bought it for the purpose of using the stock for my Irish Civil War Enfield. I just want to protect it, but like he had said, oil will always protect metal if nothing else. You'd be surprised as to who considers rifles like this collectible. It might be that there are a lack of purists in my area, but around here an Enfield, even of this condition, goes for ~$500. Thank you all for the input, I'll honestly probably do nothing with it then and just oil it I guess. I either cold blue it and it basically be pointless, or hot blue it and considerably affect the value. (Whether you agree with that statement concerning hot bluing/value or not, it is true for the many collectors I know in my area.)

[Daan Kemp]

Interesting: "cracked at the wrist like most Enfields are." I have never seen or heard of any No 1 or No 4 cracked at the wrist. Could you provide some facts about this please?

[bigduke6]

As others have said, its not a collectable rifle as is and the value has long gone, I would bead blast and rust blue it, which was the original finish.