Clean Old Rifles v. Dirty ones (Patina)

[msmith]

Seen a bunch of real nice antique rifles at the Winchester Show the last two days. I got to thinkin about a about bright rifles and patina covered ones. I know the trend is patina covered and not to clean it to much to @!*% the history of their ancient piece and I usually agree. I actually like and appreciate both. If you want to see a rifle how it was when it was used by a man everyday and probably was his only rifle &  his prize possesion, I think it would be clean & bright.Yes even if he hunted with it, he could easily cover up the shiny brass and silver for the hunt to prevent alarming wary game. I also bet that when something happened to it he fixed it ( Oh no you do not think he would to have committed the unpardonable sin and RESTORED it.)  . The black,rust & patina did not come from use, it came from neglect, it happened when these Longrifles was put aside in barns ,attics or hung over the fireplace to be used no more. While they probably was few owners back in time who used their rifle and only cleaned the bore and vent hole. I bet a lot more of them put their rifle on their lap every evening and wiped it down and  I bet a bunch of the guns  was as shiny as the Morning Sun when you are heading East on a clear morning. I like black guns and I like shiny ones. The ones in between are real nice also. To those who cleaned & shined (even restored) their antique rifles , I for one do not think you destroyed it, that is what the original owner did also.

[Shreckmeister]

I like them both ways also, but I leave them as I find them.  If I have to sell
one and I shined it up, the buyer might prefer patina.  On the other hand, if I leave it as found, they buyer can do what he wishes.  I was very surprised at
my first KRA meeting how many of the rifles were shined up.  My wife literally
begs me to shine them up.  She can't understand why anyone would leave the
tarnish on them.

[greybeard]

Nor would I park a T model ford in my driveway with a body on with rust holes and fenders barley hanging but thats just me. Be thankfull that I can"t afford a high end dirty rusty gun.
Cheers    Bob

[Feltwad]

It is a common fault to take restoration too far  a gun that is 150 years old should like 150 years old ,not something straight of the shelf .There is a golden rule if in doubt [LEAVE IT ALONE].
Feltwad

[Majorjoel]

I like em all as well ! What I have learned over the last few years is to accept a rifle for what it is. They all have so many stories to tell us! That ole crack in the wrist happened when the settler used up his one shot and swung the piece as a club to protect himself and his family. It just couldn't have been the UPS driver tossing the package hard to the ground...... . An appreciation of historical hard usage is to be expected with the majority of antique longrifles I run across. I certainly can't afford to buy them all, but I can still appreciate them all for what they are. Not to get too far off the subject of this post, Could you imagine what the photo's would look like in all of the longrifle books if all of the old rifles were in the black? There wouldn't be too many details showing for anyone to enjoy or learn from.

[msmith]

I like em all as well ! What I have learned over the last few years is to accept a rifle for what it is. They all have so many stories to tell us! That ole crack in the wrist happened when the settler used up his one shot and swung the piece as a club to protect himself and his family. It just couldn't have been the UPS driver tossing the package hard to the ground...... . An appreciation of historical hard usage is to be expected with the majority of antique longrifles I run across. I certainly can't afford to buy them all, but I can still appreciate them all for what they are. Not to get too far off the subject of this post, Could you imagine what the photo's would look like in all of the longrifle books if all of the old rifles were in the black? There wouldn't be too many details showing for anyone to enjoy or learn from.

Thats is a real good point about the photos in the Longrifle Books. Might not have been a lot of interest if all you would have seen is a silhoutte!

[longrifle]

When I get a old gun it doesn't make any difference if it is a rifle or a handgun. I gently and I do mean gently clean any green spots the brass might have on it and gently clean the metal of any red or orange active rust and maybe clean the bore If I feel it really needs it. That is just the way I do it to me there is a difference bettween active rust and dirt and real patina, I dont polish and shine it up to the point it look's like a bright new circus wagon. I have seen some guns that the owners didn't clean any active rust or dirt off and to me I don't see how you could expect to preserve something in that condition for another 100-200 yrs. without rusting away.

[BGC]

I hate to stick my foot in this hornet's nest, but figured why not.
I agree with msmit, the guns should look like the time they were being used, not after the time they were neglected. I appreciate the dirty ones in the black, but if it were mine I'd clean it up a bit. Doesn't have to be a mirror shine, just maybe enough to show the details of the gun. Why hang your proud possession on the wall if you can't even tell if it has a patch box or not. Clean that gunk off the metal and the wood and in a few months it will oxidize enough to show just a mellow patina. A lot of collectors and dealers will argue that it depreciates the value if the gun is cleaned.  I disagree.
In my experience of seeing and buying these old guns, I have never seen a gun sell cheaper because it has been cleaned. If you are strictly in it just to sale, then it wouldn't be worth your time to get it cleaned. I don't consider cleaning a gun as restoring. If there is a major fault with the gun such as a missing bunch of wood, or a heavy crack then it should be restored as long as the price of restoration added to the cost of the gun doesn't exceed it's value or if a person wants to keep the gun intact for sentimental reasons to preserve it for the next generations to come along. Just like an antique automobile or coin, the better condition it is in, the better it is appreciated and shown off.

[James Rogers]

To me the fad of encrusted guns is based on past history of many examples being had at by hacks and having been overdone so as to degrade the gun. One example of a nice old  piece being put to the buffing wheel comes to mind.

[Dphariss]

Some of the "Black" on original stocks is the ORIGINAL FINISH that is black as a result of the linseed oil in the finish reacting to the SULFUR in the air just about everywhere in the east due to the use of coal for heating and industry.
So removing the black  coating from the wood is removing the original finish in many cases.
This then removes clues as to how the firearm was originally finished. I equate this to taking a belt sander or Naval Jelly to corroded metal parts.
After the original remnants are removed what is it to be replaced with?
Fixing breaks and active corrosion is one thing and is often critical to preservation. I have no problem with adding finish to a "dry" stock that the original finish is gone from and the wood surface is shedding wood as a result, a form of surface dry rot that has to be stopped.
Cleaning an original gun just to make it look pretty is something else.
ALL such things have to be considered on a case by case basis depending on the condition of the individual firearm.
Far too many guns have been "improved" already to 1: Make them better fit a collectors expectations or guns already in his possession and/or 2: make them more valuable. 3: Ignorance.
 
Dan

[Buck]

Gentlemen,
I sympathize with all points, but whose to say who's right and who's wrong? I think its up to the person who possesses the piece, if a clean appearance is his fancy then its his prerogative. Myself I like to see the detail and character of the wood, not shiny but visible. The Iron I like to see brown, and  the brass to look like peanut butter, with a little black on the silver. In other words you might think my wife is fat and ugly but she could be the Goddess of beauty in my eyes!
Buck  

[smokinbuck]

I feel you have 3 situations; cleaning, restoring and destroying. If a rifle, or pistol, has been used hard and put away wet for a 150 years, it probably needs a little TLC. To remove finish and patina in an effort to restore the appearance is disruction. To clean the grime of years off WITHOUT REMOVING THE PATINA AND FINISH is cleaning. Restoration needs to be determined on an individual basis.  D&L handcleaner and Murphy's oil soap have served me well over many years, and many rifles, in cleaning the grime off and leaving what's left of the finish and patina. The D&L even puts some life back into a dried out stock.
Mark

[Dphariss]

Gentlemen,
I sympathize with all points, but whose to say who's right and who's wrong? I think its up to the person who possesses the piece, if a clean appearance is his fancy then its his prerogative. Myself I like to see the detail and character of the wood, not shiny but visible. The Iron I like to see brown, and  the brass to look like peanut butter, with a little black on the silver. In other words you might think my wife is fat and ugly but she could be the Goddess of beauty in my eyes!
Buck  

Historical pieces ultimately belong to all of us. The owner is just a custodian of a part of MY history.
The "its mine I can do as I want" while true is also arrogant and has resulted in rifles being forever damaged as historical references due to some collector making the gun to look as he wanted to match other guns he had or mistakenly thought it should look,  rather than how it should have been left.
Dan

[Dphariss]

I am sure the petroleum solvents in the hand cleaner are what makes the stock look better, at least for awhile.

Dan

[smokinbuck]

Dan,
I'm sure you are right about the petroeum solvents. There's also some lanolin in the cleaners and I have found that it does put some life back into the dried wood, not a lot, but it does help.
Mark

[Feltwad]

Even the very poor ones can be restored they are part of our gun heritage not to be scrapped just for certain parts.Enclosed are images of before and after
Feltwad





After

[Hurricane ( of Virginia)]

PATINA:
Patina ( /ˈpætɨnə/ or /pəˈtiːnə/) is a tarnish that forms on the surface of bronze and similar metals (produced by oxidation or other chemical processes); a sheen on wooden furniture produced by age, wear, and polishing; or any such acquired change of a surface through age and exposure. On metal, patina is a coating of various chemical compounds such as oxides or carbonates formed on the surface during exposure to the elements (weathering). Patina also refers to accumulated changes in surface texture and colour that result from normal use of an object such as a coin or a piece of furniture over time.[1]

For collectors of most antiquities, patina is a necessity.

[dannybb55]

It is a common fault to take restoration too far  a gun that is 150 years old should like 150 years old ,not something straight of the shelf .There is a golden rule if in doubt [LEAVE IT ALONE].
Feltwad

That's my excuse for never washing my Chevy C 10.
Would you never clean your M 1 or 1903 Springfield?
 I understand the museum approach. Leave the artifact in stable condition and any treatment has to be reversible, also NEVER touch the artifact with bare skin. The idea is that the object should be preserved forever. The building has to meet certain climate and lighting codes and the object should never go outside nor be on display all of the time. Do collectors follow these basic museum guidelines?

[Dphariss]

It is a common fault to take restoration too far  a gun that is 150 years old should like 150 years old ,not something straight of the shelf .There is a golden rule if in doubt [LEAVE IT ALONE].
Feltwad

That's my excuse for never washing my Chevy C 10.
Would you never clean your M 1 or 1903 Springfield?
 I understand the museum approach. Leave the artifact in stable condition and any treatment has to be reversible, also NEVER touch the artifact with bare skin. The idea is that the object should be preserved forever. The building has to meet certain climate and lighting codes and the object should never go outside nor be on display all of the time. Do collectors follow these basic museum guidelines?

Classic.

Dan

[Dphariss]

Dan,
I'm sure you are right about the petroeum solvents. There's also some lanolin in the cleaners and I have found that it does put some life back into the dried wood, not a lot, but it does help.
Mark

The problem with cleaners this extreme is they are likely to remove things that should not be removed.
Petroleum solvents won't hurt a barrel if just used to wash away crud putting them on a stock would be a long way from first choice.
If the stock is dry the solvents may well carry things into the stock that could have undesirable long term effects on the wood and the metal. Soaps for example are virtually always corrosive to metal.

People who use Murphys Oil Soap (for example) should look at the MSDS:

10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY
GENERAL:
INCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS:
HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION:
This product is stable. Hazardous polymerization will not occur.
Avoid contact with strong oxidizing and reducing agents, acids, alkalis, organic peroxides and easily ignitable materials. Avoid prolonged contact with reactive metals (e.g. aluminum, brass, bronze, etc.).
May produce irritating or poisonous gases upon thermal decomposition.

What the long term effect of Murphy's (Oil less SFAIK) Oil Soap is not known, at least not by me. I suppose some chemist might have an idea what Potassium Hydroxide might do long term. Could be harmless. ?
Dan

[Steve-In]

Feltwad it is hard to believe that is the same gun.  That is an awesome change.  Did you do the bores too?  I am sure if it could talk the first words would be THANK YOU!

[Shreckmeister]

Dan P,  Your thoughts on application of J & J paste wax or Renaissance wax to these wood stocks?

[Dphariss]

Dan P,  Your thoughts on application of J & J paste wax or Renaissance wax to these wood stocks?

I personally would not use wax. But others seem to like it.

Dan

[Fullstock longrifle]

How many of you have watched the Antiques Roadshow and seen one of the Keno brothers appraise an 18th century piece of furniture.  I can't say how many times I've seen them say that the piece is wonderful and by a rare maker, and if it hadn't been cleaned it would have been worth x number of dollars, BUT, because it had been skinned/polished/cleaned, it was only worth about half that amount.  I suppose if your dealing with a rifle of lower value, cleaning it isn't a big deal, but if your buying a higher dollar golden age rifle, and your paying premium money for it, why would you damage the value?  It's like taking $30,000.00 or so and then throwing $15,000.00 of in the trash, who would do that?  I suppose if you don't care about the value, then go for it, other wise, I would tread very lightly.

Frank

[490roundball]

Very nice Feltwad, but the British have always had a more practical approach,  each owner will make sure a gun fits while here it stays unshootable because its in original condition. (at least for classic shotguns)

the fact is,  baring more regulation -  its each their to own, hopefully as long as it does not damage the piece.  

I was at an antique show this weekend, one dealer had something for everyone  

at the bottom, literally,  late back action percussion swivel breach that was as found -  and it was found in a very wet basement,  a thick layer of orange rust and no finish on the wood.

Then,  a nice NY full stock percussion rifle,  with a provenance to a upstate NY historic house's owner.  in "attic condition" very nice patchbox with "patina",  a dark what looked to be original finish,  you could just tell there was some nice wood under there.  personally - I liked that one,  the house is now a museum and I have wondered about contacting the curator

And lastly, a PA percussion fowler,  spit and polish - wood refinished, not a nick or dent left in it, the brass shined up and the barrel cold blued and just starting to show the lightest handling marks.  If it looked any newer I would have expected to pull the barrel and find GETZ on the underside. (still might check, it was too good)  I thought about it as a shooter (still am) but any character was gone.  

which was right?  If I was going to get to make all the decisions,  the swivel deserves some restoration,  the full stock is great as is, and the fowler?  really over done.