I have to agree with Shreckmeister on this. To me, the rifle shows that it had lived a long and probably a hard life. Are there flaws? Yes. Could I live with them if I owned this rifle? Yes. If not, there are some out there that could correct the flaws to the point that myself, and probably most collectors would be satisfied. I have seen rifles that have had the locks replaced, the forearms replaced, inlays replaced, and the list could go on. And collectors look at them and say, "what a great rifle". I don't make any claims as to being anything more than an admirer of the Long rifle. I do have the privilege of being the caretaker of a few and when I'm gone, someone else can have the privilege. The rifles I have are not perfect, as this one is not perfect. But each one of them represent our past and deserve to be treated with care. Is this one worth the $15k they are asking, don't know. For me it's irrelevant because even if it is, I couldn't afford it. But to me, to say that looking at this rifle is like looking at a dead man shows a lack of appreciation for what this rifle was, is, and could still be. Maybe some of the comments here are one of the reasons that newcomers to collecting are hesitant to show what they have. As a collecting community, some seem to be quick to point out the flaws of someone else's rifles. So why would/should a new collector subject themselves to it. It's like blood in the water to sharks. The slightest hint and it's game on. Is it that hard to look past the years of use, neglect, and maybe even abuse to see a rifle for what it is?
