SatThuVoBui
Well-known member
I think valuing a restamped and refurbished fake at less than $200 is quite a bit harsh considering that's way less than even total parts guns or RCs go for in today's market (and I fully realize that comment was made 4 years ago). I also find it quite perplexing that to collectors, sanding a stock or reblueing metal is the end of the world and constitutes a complete "erasure" of history as though that makes the gun the same thing a novel reproduction that was just made 5 minutes ago, when coming from medieval or ancient stuff, people are lucky just to find completely unusable and rusted junk (and yes I know this is apples to oranges, but there is something to be said about the ridiculousness of the logic of "purity.") Also RCs are refinished and reblued too, and so I don't think whether they were messed with here in the states or by Ivan 50 years ago changes anything. If this were the case...I guess my restored M40 stahlhelm is a complete fake and worth about as much as a $80 chinese replica, even though objectively, it IS a made-in-the-reich shell, came out of a German factory in 1940-1942, and was (most likely) worn by a soldier into combat. To me, that's absolutely ridiculous.
I completely agree with the sentiment that when you alter or change a historical antique to change its appearance or state from how it historically appeared, it loses value (hence why in my Stahlhelm example, it's a $350 helmet and not a $2000 helmet), but I completely disagree with the sentiment that this completely changes the object's identity and disassociates it from its history entirely. At the end of the day, that piece of metal was still made in a German factory, and was used by a German soldier in what is now the world's most deadly conflict to have ever been fought, and to me, that has value, but of course not as much value as an all-parts-matching original that is unmessed with.
I mean...I think finding an AIRSOFT replica k98 (that isn't just made of plastic or pot metal) for less than $200 is quite a tall order, let alone a functional firearm. Also, guns aren't made equal, and so the comparison to a Ruger 10/22 is quite unfair - they're different guns for different purposes, and I would say a K98 commands a premium over a 10/22 simply for being a K98, and I subjectively couldn't care less for 10/22s.
I completely agree with the sentiment that when you alter or change a historical antique to change its appearance or state from how it historically appeared, it loses value (hence why in my Stahlhelm example, it's a $350 helmet and not a $2000 helmet), but I completely disagree with the sentiment that this completely changes the object's identity and disassociates it from its history entirely. At the end of the day, that piece of metal was still made in a German factory, and was used by a German soldier in what is now the world's most deadly conflict to have ever been fought, and to me, that has value, but of course not as much value as an all-parts-matching original that is unmessed with.
I mean...I think finding an AIRSOFT replica k98 (that isn't just made of plastic or pot metal) for less than $200 is quite a tall order, let alone a functional firearm. Also, guns aren't made equal, and so the comparison to a Ruger 10/22 is quite unfair - they're different guns for different purposes, and I would say a K98 commands a premium over a 10/22 simply for being a K98, and I subjectively couldn't care less for 10/22s.
Last edited: