raceratb wrote on Feb 21
st, 2016 at 7:17pm:
Would you consider replacing the cut forend fraud, refinishing? Metal refinishing? Replacing parts, a screw, a barrel? Any repair not done by the arsenal isn't original, I would like to have a nice shooter that looks like it should have. I bought a cut down, and it would like to put it back to what it looked like when it was first made. I'm going to refinish the wood, some of the metal and replace the cut down barrel. I know it's not original more would I try to pass it off as original. I wouldn't consider this fraud no more that restoring a car would be fraud, it's restored. If I kept it a carbine it would be a replica.
I asked myself all of these questions reading this thread as all of my Krags are "restored". They are all stretched back to their original military config but funny, I would not add a cartouche that is not already there. I'll have to puzzle that one out for myself just so that I understand my own thoughts on a rational level.
I can say, without any puzzlement, that for me adding or dressing up a cartouche just aint right. True, I put the forestock back on my rifles but adding the cartouche, well, the only word I can think of is counterfeit. It's adding something, taking something to a level that just isn't there. I have a model 1898 I restored that has a beautiful cartouche and circled P, they were there, I did not have to add them.
I guess, as I think about this, repair is one thing, embellishment is another. Adding or enhancing a cartouche is a step towards falsification in the view of most of us.
Come to think of it, I don't really "refinish" my rifles, ever. If they have dents and dings I'm ok with that. I do try to match the existing the finish that is on the rifle as best as I can.