Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

[Rich Mason]

Gents,

Not sure if this is the correct forum to ask this, but I would like to ask for some advice from some of you "old-timers" on the best way to clean and restore a couple of original muskets.

I just got a couple in a trade deal from a friend. They are an 1844 dated "L. Pomeroy" precussion conversion. and an 1846 dated "Happers FerrY", model 1842.

Both are tired but have potential. They have a very heavy brown "Patina". I have thought about just leaving them "as is", but they look too much like "relics".

When I first started in the hobby as a teenager, I had a couple of "old-timers" in my unit that took several different muskets that looked as tired as these and got them looking almost brand new. They used steel wool and oil and lots of elbow grease.

At any rate, I am looking for some advice on the best method to remove the patina, while doing no harm to the piece and especially the markings.

I am not planning to use them for reenacting, but I would like to get them presentable enough to carry for living history and school displays.

Thanks in advance,

Rich Mason

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Re: Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

Rich

I have used lapping compound, and allot of elbow greese. There is no mechanical alternative to this that will not screw up markings etc.

[VMI88]

Re: Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

Rich,

It's hard to say for sure without seeing the muskets. However, unless these are "parts" guns you will most likely hurt their collector value by doing anything more than a light cleaning. Rub the stocks lightly with denatured alcohol to clean them, and then hand-rub in a little boiled linseed oil to restore their color. I wouldn't do anything more to the metal than clean it gently with 0000 steel wool and oil. Don't rush to do anything to them: you can always clean them later if you decide to, but you can never undo something once it's done. A lot of valuable relics have been destroyed by people trying to make them look pretty.

[MuleyGil]

Re: Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

Rich,

When you speak of patina, are you referring to a brownish color on the steel and iron sufaces or are you speaking of heavy, active rust? Patina should be left alone; active rust should be removed GENTLELY. If you desire arms that look "new", I would sell or trade for a good reproduction or an original in new condition (which takes lots of money).

My opinion.

Gil Tercenio

[Moonshine]

Re: Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

Ditto to all above! It would help to see and examine the piece.

In fact, the patina you speak of may be in fact be the "browning" on the parts from the arsenal! If that be the case... LEAVE IT BE! I heard once of a guy many years ago that found an original in much the same way and it too was marked Harpers Ferry. He proceeded to "take the patina off" with oven cleaner, steel wool and a wire wheel attached to his grinder. Well, when all was said and done, what he was removing was the arsenal browning (much like the blueing on Enfields) that added so much value to the piece.

Wood is a different story. It all would depend on the condition but by all means, don't start sanding with anything be it steel wool or sandpaper. At least not yet anyway.

Maybe Herr Schmidt can offer some words of expertise....

Jim Ross

[JimKindred]

Re: Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

If you aren't sure don't screw with it. There have been a lot of $1000 plus guns turned into $200 guns by people monkeying with them. Just this past weekend at the AGCA show in Birmingham I saw what would have been a $2500 Luger that had been converted into a $200 Luger because someone decided to make it "better".

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Need advice on "restoring" original muskets

Hallo Kamerad!

You are thinking of the M1822 (so-called M1816, Type II) produced between 1822 and 1831, which was, to use the period reports "National Armory Brown."

Basically, with the exception of locks, ramrod, band springs, triggers, screws, and 6 inches form the tip of teh bayonet- it was acid browned.

"Value" can mean different things to different lads, just as there are more forms of "currency" than just cash.
The most basic is "financial value." Removing patina WILL USUALLY ALWAYS decrease the resale price of an original (as will agressive or "over" cleaning efforts.")

However there are forms of "value," particularly to the owner of the piece and how he "values" the different forms of value.

For example, recently I worked with a friend in restoring an original NM1859 Sharps Rifle to its "as issued" 1862 apperance and function.
He had paid $3,000 for the very crisp, but "bright" NM1859. It was "like new," save for the lack of any "color" which had been purposely stripped off years ago.
This lad was a collector of original firearms, as well as a collector of custom-built guns including those of the Civil War.
He was also interested in having an impression that utilized a NM 1859 Sharps Rifle, and was not "happy" with the current (and ad infinitum) quality of the Italian Sharps.
So, the value to him, in restoring/recoloring this gun lies with its authenticity and its ability to support his persona, impression. and "believable image."
He took a $3,000 Sharps, added about $300 in period-color "coloring, and feels extremely happy with his Sharps.
For all the time he will use it, look at it, talk aobut it, do talks and presentations with it- he feels it is money well spent.

Someone with a "historical value base" may look at "restoring the color" and see it as devaluing the piece. (Others may view that having been stripped by a dealer or collector 25, 50, or 75 years ago as already done and "too late.")

Someone with a "gun show/gun collector value base" may see that reducing its resale value- as likely its next owner would have to be as "like-minded" as its curernt owner to want to by it. (Others may say the current owner just needs to professional remove the "color" to return the gun to the way it was when he bought- and let "inflation" furterh increase the $3,000 price more...)

Etc., etc.

IMHO, as a former CW custom gunmaker (who often used minty or prime original parts) and firearm collector (who collected ONLY mint, excellent, or very good), I have yet to see an original ANYTHING in the field that looked like it did when it was in use during the CW. That is NOTHING against lads who use originals, and NOTHING against lads who look at what they have and think that they do. Nor, it is a criticism of any lads whose original IS properly "period looking.'

To me, now, "originals" can never be owned. They are entrusted to our personal efforts at preservation for future generations, and then passed on t others to continue that effort. "Reenacting" only accelerates exposure to UV light, the elements, nicks and scratches, dings and dents, and accidental damage or destruction.

How do we "preserve" battlefields, uniforms, gear, images, and documents on the one hand - and then on the other, with a wink, put firearms and swords "at risk, at potential risk, or in harm's way ?" (Not making a case or argument, just framing the debate...)

Others' mileage may vary...

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt