.55"/.303", most definetly fakes!

[US-Subs]

Personally, I have no problem with replacing components - fins, fuzes, spoons, etc. with original items. But I've seen munitions with body filler, etc. to the point where you wonder how much original munition is still there. The same for the manufactured fins, etc. I've seen many similar pieces for sale as "mint", when they were trash under all of the "restoration". For myself, I clean and then oil to preserve. Maybe replace a missing/broken component if I have an original spare. That is enough and the piece is what it is.

No one said anything about consigning anything to the dump. I have a number of partial, rusted, or damaged pieces. Some are exceptionally rare. I keep them, preserve them, then if I find a better one down the road I upgrade and trade my old ones off. I do not try to take my beat up piece and "fix" it. If you decide to visit my collection (all are welcome) you know what you are seeing, and that it is an accurate, historic, and original piece, warts and all.

Not necessarily humble, but still just my opinion.

 

[Tony Williams]

I see nothing wrong with restoring or repairing ordnance items. Collectors rebuild and/or restore automobiles, airplanes, and buildings and most everyone sees nothing wrong about it. Why should an historic artifact be consigned to the dump just because it shows it's age and use?

I agree with you.

I think that there is often a difference in attitude between those who collect small arms ammunition and those interested in bigger stuff. For the former, authenticity has top priority - pulling a bullet, cleaning or inerting a round can be seen as ruining it. For the latter, it is uncommon in older examples to find ammo in anything like original condition. The cases have almost invariably been fired, projectiles commonly so. The cases are frequently polished to a nice shine. There is usually little or no original paint. If the projectile is loose, it probably was not the original one loaded into that case anyway: in fact, big-bore collectors often acquire the case first then go hunting for any appropriate projectile to stuff into it. In these circumstances, "authenticity" has a different meaning to that understood by SAA collectors.

Speaking for myself, I am interested not just in collecting but in photographing ammunition for my website and for articles and books which I publish. In a way, I regard them as "educational aids" for informing people who don't know much about the subject. It is therefore important to me to be able to have representative examples of all of the types I'm interested in, and I like them to look realistic including appropriate colour schemes. So I no have qualms about getting bare projectiles repainted, and cruddy items cleaned up, as well as replicas (which are obviously that on superficial examination) made of items which I have failed to see for sale - ever - in years of collecting.

To give an example: at the German ECRA meeting in May, I just failed to acquire a Dutch long-case 47mm Boehler round with a repainted projectile (Ben got there first!). But the seller had other examples which had evidently been stored for a long time in less than ideal conditions, since both case and projectile were covered in corrosion by-products. They looked horrible. But they were cheap and I didn't have one, so I bought one, and photographed Ben's example. Back in the UK my friend Mick Wilkinson (who makes my replicas) cleaned it up and painted it for me to match the pic I'd taken, and it now looks very presentable. I don't feel troubled by that, something which was basically scrap has become useful.

But one thing is for sure in this debate - there never will be agreement!

 

[TonyE]

A lot of what you say about the difference between SAA and big bore collectors is true, and most serious SAA collectors do not want restored or reproduction items in their collections. However it depends what you mean by "collector"; I collect but consider myself much more a researcher so pull a great number of my items to weigh the components. Peter Labbett, Freddy Mead, Herb Woodend and John Pople-Crump were all of a similar mind. Without pulling the round I would never have found the wire bound bullet on the KN .276 Enfield I showed recently. On the other hand I do not collect every date and minute bunter variation as some do. It is all down to personal taste.

Regards
TonyE

 

[SHAKY]

I have lots of rust and ugly in my collection. I figure I may become more serious as I age, and someday do some restoration. And of course, most cartridges I have acquired in separate components. A complete original cartridge of larger caliber is a much more preferred item.

 

[pointblank0]

Bockscar

You are a true craftsman.