Imagine I have two unfired rifles as alike as two different objects can be. I take one, mount a scope, work up a load, and determine that: 1) the rifle feeds and functions perfectly, and 2) it just so happens it is exceedingly accurate. With load development, etc., let us say it has been shot 70 shots. There is some bluing wear from running the action, but otherwise it is in "perfect" shape. The other rifle is unfired (other than proof shots at the factory) and unproven. I offer you your choice, sans scope. Which would you take? Some would take the unfired one and never fire it. Others would take the proven one, and possibly use it some more. I have no argument with either choice, but I would take the proven one.
I bought a 99% condition 1954 Standard .270 from Dave Riffle. I plan to shoot it, and hunt it on "easy hunts." Will I take some of the collector value off of it? I'm sure I will, just as I would take value off of almost any new item I put into use. To me, it is what I pay for the privilege. With a Standard .270, even a 99% one, using it does not cost thousands of dollars. I'm not sure I would be willing to pay for what it would cost me to shoot and hunt an unfired .300 Savage Super Grade. Another man might, and I wouldn't argue with him.
(OK, full disclosure, if we were talking .300 Savage Super Grades, in my hypothetical scenario above I might take the NIB one and never shoot it. But it would be a strictly money decision. I'd either hang onto it, or be trying to trade for things I would use.)
Have I hurt the collector value of my 1954 Standard rifle? Yes. Have I hurt the intrinsic value of the rifle? Actually, IMO, if it proves to be a good rifle, I have proven its worth, and thereby increased the intrinsic value. Have I somehow "ruined" the rifle by shooting it. IMO, not in the least.
Last edited by GunDoc7; 01/30/15.
