I would like to ask the campfire's opinion on whether I should have a Winchester 1876 restored of leave as is. This rifle was handed down to me by my grandfather. It was given to him when he was quite young by an old man who used it to hunt buffaloe. It has been fired only once in the last 60-70 years and is in very good mechanical shape. You can see in the photos that it has virtually no original finish left, but it has no rust.

My questions to the campfire brain trust are:
1. Would it be more valuable as is with no original finish or professionally restored by a company like Turnbull?
2. If it is more valuable restored, would you go with a blue that is as close as possible to the original or case color hardening of the receiver, lever and small parts?

Thank you all in advance for your input. I want to be the best possible steward of this proud old rifle while it is in my hands.

Bill

If it 'twer mine, I'd leave it be and shoot the fire out of it.

Looks like it might be a nickel gun.
Would leave it as it is....

Leave it alone!!! would be nice to see a picture of the whole rifle. poor condition 3rd model '76' is still worth about $2k...Pocono might be right about the nickel finish. maybe spring for a Cody letter, might have something special.

Thanks, guys. I have lettered it, but the letter does not provide much info. Made in 1884, has an octagon barrel and a regular trigger.

I will get a few pics next I pull it out of the safe.

I had the same thoughts with an 1876 I picked up. Asking around, I decided it would be best leaving it alone rather than have it restored. The consensus was the restoration would limit the market if I were to resell and would not likely recoup my money.

As an aside, I suggest the use only black powder in your original 1876. The pressure duration of smokeless powders are longer than that of black powder which can increase the wear and tear on your rifle. I was lucky to find several boxes of Goex BP loads on clearance when I bought my rifle. I am on my last box and am undecided if I am going to reload BP or load smokeless to use in a Uberti reproduction I bought to compliment my original. They both shoot well and I like them for different reasons.

If I were to restore it, I personally would try for as original as possible.
As to restore or not, that is often a straight up $ decision based on recouping the cost or not.
But in your case, I suspect it is not a straight up $ decision. Why? Because my bet is you don't plan on letting it leave the family. And if it ever does, you will likely be long gone, so you wouldn't recoup any cost anyway.
Maybe the way to look at it is to try to determine the condition it was in when it was given to your grandfather.
Sometimes the answers are easier when we look at something a different way or consider the real question. But alas, sometimes not.
That was a bit cryptic, but I hope it helped.

Regards,
Gun Doc

I think I'd keep this one the way it is or do what is necessary to make it a safe, solid shooting piece without changing what is left of the original finish. If you want a better looking 1876, spend the money you would have on a restoration on another gun.

That gun does look like it has a plated receiver. If the letter has any returns to the factory, it might have been done then. But, if return, most likely not factory work.

I would leave it as is. It's a rifle passed down from your grampa who got it from a buffalo hunter. How cool is that? Restore it and you'll spend more than the rifle will be worth and remove the history in the process.

Nice old rifle. What's it chambered in?

Were it mine I would leave it as is.

On all of the "Pawn Stars" shows that I've seen, they talk about people who restore these old firearms. The restoration cripples the resale value. All of that old patina and such should be left as is. It makes it worth more money if you were to sell it.