Sold in 2010, so not a live sale. Would you buy this, or save the $$ and buy an original?

https://www.gunsamerica.com/950900427/Savage-1899-LEADER-GRADE-B-ENGRAVED-RAR.htm

No to both for me.

It's a beautiful rifle, but I have a philosophy that I'll never own another rifle I'd be afraid to drop out of a deer stand. Not that I toss them out onto rocks from 10 feet up, but accidents can, do, and have happened 🤷‍♂️

I used to have a couple collector pieces, but they weren't doing me, or anyone else any good hiding in the back of a safe. If I own it now, I use it.

Even the purists among us make exceptions.
I would have no problem with that rifle.
What did it sell for?

I'm with 'zcm82'---I'd rather buy a working gun and not one yer afraid to take hunting or whatever and 'ding' it somehow. Alot of the fancy wood/checkered, engraved firearms are nice to look at, but I'd rather buy maybe two or more of a model or use the cash for other things instead of investing in a show gun that is nothing but a wall hanger or safe queen. If I buy a gun I shoot it. Be like buying a guitar and never playing it. JMO and preference. I know and have heard of some guys who invest thousands into firearms and never fire em. Sorta like stamp collectors, they never use what they buy for mailing purposes. I'd save and buy an original.

When I first read the GunsAmerica info on the gun I thought it said the receiver was casehardened by Turnbull, then read just the lever. Before I bought my first 99, I was looking at a 99 on GunBroker out of Montana that had the receiver casehardened by Turnbull, really nice looking. I talked with the seller (a Grandson of the deceased original owner) and he advised his Grandfather took great care of his guns. Somewhere after I put one bid on it and was outbid and considering rebidding, I read where casehardened Savage 99 receiver's didn't take to the process and would crack at times. I called Turnbull and asked about 99's having receivers that didn't take to their CH process. They confirmed to me that they did casehardened 99's some at one time, but quit as the 99 receivers had problems. Didn't rebid on the 99. Wonder what that gun sold for back in 2010?

In 2010, the asking price was $7700.. don't know if he took a lower price or if it sold for full price.

Here's an original condition Leader Grade (supposedly, I don't see any obvious signs of refinish), and less than 500 serial numbers off of the above one. Again, it's been sold. No idea what price.

http://www.ironmenarms.com/listings.php?id=1273

It's a beautiful rifle. But I'd rather admire it than own it. But I wouldn't blame anybody for buying it.

I have guns I'll almost certainly never hunt with but theoretically I could hunt with them all. That is my barometer or condition for owning any rifle. It has to be "ready and able" to hunt. They are all range tested, sighted in and ready to go. I guess I am a collector of hunting rifles so that would disqualify the posted rifle from my ownership despite the fact that I admire it.

Don't get me wrong--I admire firearms that are nicely and thoughtfully engraved, top shelf bluing, beautiful wood and standout checkering, but not being on the United States list of those worth more than I could ever spend, I couldn't justify spending $5000-10,000 plus for firearm's that are for looking only and/or to have the notoriety of someone everyone talks about having such firearms. I do take care of what I do have and ever had. Have firearms I've had for 50 years, keep em clean, don't abuse, treat em kindly, but do shoot em, many can't believe of the age of some of my guns. Same way I do with my guitars, tools, and about all I have. Just the way it is. Sure is nice thought to look at eye candy firearm's, both pictures and in person. Nice ones ya posted Calhoun!!!!!

I would prefer the original one, given like condition, but I wouldn't own either one because such guns are the province of egoists or investors or maniacal collectors, none of which apply to me. It/they are indeed nice to look at and admire though.

Turnbull does consistently beautiful work. Because of that they are a class of collectibility all their own. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there are well heeled collectors out there who specialize in nothing but Turnbull restorations.

We humans are an odd lot.

I love seeing the eye candy on here, and don't begrudge anyone buying them, they're just not for me. To me, firearms of that class are basically works of art, and I just am more of the "rifles as tools or sporting items" sort of guy.



That is certainly true. 😂

I won't comment on this.

Life is too short to shoot with an ugly gun…f you can afford to buy it, shoot it! (I can’t afford it however, sigh).

The question is not would you shoot it but would you buy or commission a professionally restored rifle? Am I correct that Turnbull would have started with an original Leader grade rifle? I think that was the case so we don't know the original condition or amount of work done. I have not held a Turnbull restored 1899 that I remember but have handled several other makes and had no problem telling that they were redone.

Would I commission one...probably not. Would I own one...if the price was right and something I could justify owning, yes.

In 2010 I think you might have found a pretty nice Leader grade for $7000. I would rather have the original.

They’re nice, but not for me.

Ironmenarms handle some very special guns.

As for $$/Pleasure ratio guns seem to have great value/return. Think about what other silly things You've spent $10,000 on, and how much pleasure You've gotten from them.., then there's resale value to compare.

I'd be proud to own a Turnbull restoration rifle, they are beautiful workmanship!

...but I still don't have $10,000 to spend on any pure pleasure indulgances

I'm guessing you're not a collector. Thousands of new condition yet totally pedestrian working-man's model 99's are stashed away in collections that will never see the light of day on a hunt. Even though most hunts today aren't anyones' definition of "rugged." The majority of the guys around here for instance ride a larger vehicle to their prefered area then unload and ride another smaller vehicle to a blind or tree stand. They remain stationary from there - all day. Not so much a hunt as an ambush, a shoot, and not much risk at all to a rifle.

I say yay to this one. The majority of vintage 99's (and they're all vintage now, but say pre 1964 for the nice ones, pre 1960 depending on how you feel about early 60's guns) have rudimentary woodwork and finishes on them, and can only be improved to my tastes by skillfull reworking, and if done by a master can be made to increase in value many multiples of the majority of the baseline models no matter how new the condition of the original model. This one is the kind i would collect, if i were a collector, and if i had the disposable income to collect such works of art. I saw a really nice F in a pic the other day, restored by Turnbull. Exceptional wood that deserved the treatment: [img]https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...08-win-caliber.cfm?gun_id=101182742#lg-2[/img]

If I were going to spend $7700.00 on a gun, which I would and which I have and then some, it would be an original.

If I had more money than I knew what to do with, I'd buy Turnbull restored guns, and originals too. Having a pristine example of what one would have looked like would be great. However, I need to be choosey about what I buy so I don't end up living in a cardboard box with a ton of really awesome guns I really don't need. Hell I am fairly sure I make more money than a lot of people and I still can't understand how people will/can spend 8000$ on a rifle, unless they're born with money or are really lucky in life.

I know its hard for most of us to get our heads around this, but for some people spending $8K for a gun is about as hard a buying a pizza, maybe one with extra sausage LOL!!


I say if you have it to spend without taking food from the mouths of your family do whatever makes you happy.

I think the Turnbull is awesome, but would probably want original personally.

I think I would buy it. If, I could bring myself to spend that much on a single rifle. And I would use it, If I owned it. Maybe not on a hunt, through terrain, but I'd certainly shoot it. I not much of a 'sheeple' and like things not everyone has...that's part of the fun of owning something for me...people get to see something not commonly around when it gets brought out...sure is nice looking!

There seems to be a good solid market for engraved guns, these are not Turnbull restorations but there are collectors in the market for the engraved guns it appears. Looking at the listings these two went in the sold column today.


https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...rade-243-winchester.cfm?gun_id=101912574


https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...rade-284-winchester.cfm?gun_id=101912554

I would rather buy an original ,nothing against turnbull excellent work but i like the original period built guns. I would rather buy original winchesters,or marlins then restored ones. I still cannot bring myself to buy a new Henry rifle. This is a savage collectors forum, altho it seems to be leaning to mostly savage shooters forum.

Sometimes, Johnson, you DO amaze me.

ROMAC's quote pretty much sums it it IMO. I know of people and friends that will lay $60 grand for a new pickup while others are happy with a $6 grand used one. Old saying that he/she spends $100 for every $10 I spend, while the next person spends $1000 for every $100 I may spend. Priorities! A good lifelong friend of mine who buys/sells alot of firearms buys alot of stuff nobody else will touch, while I won't consider that stuff he buys, but will spend $1000+ for a gun, he thinks I'm nuts. Tells me I buy that expensive stuff, but $2 grand or a tad more is my limit. I've done so a few times, but those were exceptions. Ifin I'd worked a six-figure income all of my life, big investments and such, I'd probably be in the crowd of spending $5-10 grand for a rifle, but maybe not, I'm pretty simple, I think.

Any Turnbull restoration that I would buy would require the owner to be selling it at a loss. The cost of doing a Turnbull is just too high, an original high condition gun usually isn't far from the same price.

Would I commission a Turnbull? Only if it was to save a very rare gun. I'd almost surely be losing money on it, but if it kept something very rare around for another couple hundred years for others to look at - that'd be a good thing.

I always looked at gun restorations like Chris Craft restorations. None of those guys would tell you they made money off their restored boats. You do it because you want to do it and the money can be damned.

Agree with the above!

I admire both very much and glad some people can afford to buy them and save them. I can’t. I would prefer an original, but would never pay the going rate.

https://www.turnbullrestoration.com/re-visiting-how-its-made/

This link should take you to a short video inside Turnbull's restoration workshop. No doubt great work by talented employees but the debate on restored vs original will continue forever. However, I chuckle when advertises for a firearm proudly states "this rifle retains 100% of the original refinish". Personally, I prefer well used/never abused Savages to "refinished" as the character/history of the gun has been destroyed.

only original, restored guns are not like restored cars

The rich English have their fine guns sent back to H&H or Purdy each time new Duke succeeds the old.
No one wants a gun well used by the previous Duke. Resale improved.

I've had Doug do a couple that were well worn. Both were as good as new and a pleasure to use, handle and look at.

If you had a high grade 99 that was whupped, it would be worth it.

Some beautiful rifles here for sure that I'm happy to enjoy with bit of drool! yet I side with, I believe, the majority here. A lot of good points on both sides of such happy choice of original or super restoration. Adding one more point perhaps I missed or 'just me'. Holding an 'original; vintage rifle in my hands, I feel something of a connect with early prior owners. Guys who were feeding families or driving away predators of the henhouse: sportsman hunter or shooter! I like that feeling of 'connect'. Here and elsewhere, I've seen some beautiful restorations and could be 'seduced'... At a price! Just that I've never seen such in rifles at 'my price'. In handguns, only a couple. Both of them coming to me as 'a nice pair' At a deal not to be refused. Great price in context of decades ago pricing! Safe queens, both! Also have a '14 DWM Luger same exact config. Original and cherry!

Below, 1917 Erfurt Artillery Luger & 1896 Bolo Mauser. 9mm & 7.65 respectfully. Super well done, but I have them since they were together at super good prices. All matching SNs respectively. Last, re :engraved" which I'm not into, but if I were... A Colt .25 Auto c. 1924 which came to me from my Dad who wasn't a gun guy or collector of anything & amazed he ever bought it! Verified with Colt expert as not 'Factory' in even the style. But I do like it!

LAST PARAGRAPH HERE AMENDED - BITTEN BY THE MICRO kb PHOTO BUG AS FIRST several PIX - NO GO & GIVIG UP! When is 'The Fire' going to move into the 20th Century - much less the 21st! The MIA guns were handsome!

Best!
John

I'm from the Col Whelen school.

This one was not accurate so I sold it.



Typical of Doug's work (excuse the protective varnish)

I see two points here. One if I had the money to have a high end custom of Turnbull quality done on a common 1899, I don't think I'd do it, I don't like the engraving by most of the current engravers. It looks too deep, and too bold. I like the fine engraving by Tue.

Two, a restoration? I think it was Rory that stated above it would have to be to save a "Rare" specimen. I don't know if my 1902 Engraved, Checkered, Pistol Grip, Shot Gun Butt Plate, rates as a "Rare" specimen, but I don't think I would restore it. I like it the way it is. Same with my 1928K, I like it the way it is.

If I were going to drop 10K, I think I'd save up for an original, and keep my two stray hounds also. I'm not afraid of dropping one. I'd cry for a month if I did, but I'd get over it. I'm working on getting the 1902 Engraved rifle ready for a pig hun in 3 weeks.

As for original vs restored I would always have to give a nod to original. And thats because it represents exactly how the factory made the rifle and that is important information. Given that, I would never pay more money for a restoration than I would for a well preserved original. However, if the price was right I would not hesitate buying a well executed restration. I've been sucked into the world of single shots and restoring old rifles like Stevens, Ballards and 1885 Winchesters is a fairly common practice. As a matter of fact I'm in the middle of restoring a Stevens 044 1/2 right now and last year sent the receiver back to CPA rifles for color case hardening. Will I ever recoup the cost of new stocks, polishing and color case hardening, new barrel and scope mounts? Hell no! But I knew that going into the project. And this will likely be the first of several Stevens single shot projects. Oh well, what can I say. Its still cheaper than a crack habit!

Did you mean a Stevens CRACH SHOT habit!