Reconditioning: Impact on Custom value ?

So what is devalued in one instance may not be quite so much in another.

To the original question, I agree with all the others: First refurbish done by the maker, more value than untouched. Done by another: Less valuable.

But, there may be exceptions.....

I had to get a knife rehandled. A couple of years back I was offered this ivory Hill Pearce bowie by dealer Dan Piergallini who purchased it from a nutty collector:

orig.jpg


I say nutty, because when it was first offered the guard had a string of low-quality diamonds encircling it, in the groove. Also it had that preposterous citrine embedded into the handle.

I called Hill and discussed the knife, and he was well-aware of it. Apparently he sold it to a Doctor who decided he would dress it up. So he garnished it with gems by another jeweler. Hill though it atrocious, but, hey, it was HIS knife.

Years later, Dan purchases it and tries for a year to sell it at the increased value that the diamonds have given it. No buyers.

In disgust, he removes the diamonds and sells them to a pawn shop. Now he has a more-marketable piece still with a lovely citrine stuck in the handle. :jerkit:

At this point the price has come within MY reach and I spring for it with a trade or two.

Let me see if I can get this citrine off... Is it just glued on top? I take a hot piece of stock and heat it up and hold it onto the stone to soften the glue. Yes, it softened it, and it also cooked it underneath. Not such a big disappointment, as the inlay had been carved about 1/18" deep into the handle anyway. Now I have an oval crater colored brown. Nice. :(

My first call was back to Hill Pearce: Can you rehandle this knife?

"No, I'm sorry, Coop. I don't have any more tools and can't do a thing for you. Why don't you call your buddy and mine, Jim Small, and see what he can do?"

And so I do. Jim gets the knife, and despite me suggesting an oval escutcheon, he feels the original beauty of this piece was in the plain original elephant ivory. And Jim has just such a piece that has been aging for many years in his old stock. "Let's get it back to how Hill built it."

It took time, but Jim sent me an in-progress photo of his work:

orig.jpg


Jim cut the scales and smartly said "I want to wait for the newly cut scales to settle." It takes two months or so sitting on his bench, and yes, they've twisted and shrunk a bit--but now they are stable. At this point he attaches them. (Smart maker, eh?) Finally this knife arrived back in better-than-received shape, as Jim also re-etched the blade and guard, as it had also been polished to lose the patterns.

NOW here is the final knife as I own it:

(Click to enlarge)


So, this knife has a crazy history, and a series of bungles, not the least of which I exacerbated. But, in the end, I am left with a knife that, to me, is notably more valuable than had it been left with that un-original jewel stuck in the side.

Funny, I thought I had gone through this history before here, but my search revealed nada. So now you know. This thread gave me the opportunity. Hope it's relevant.

Sorry for taking up a lot of space. Well, not really.... ;)

Coop
 
I just sent a knife back to John Fitch for a few changes, and a bit of reconditioning, and feel that when it comes back it will be more valueable than when it left. There was a problem with corrosion on the blued guard that is being fixed or replaced with stainless at the same time. There are times when reconditioning is definitely the best way to go.
 
SharpByCoop said:
So what is devalued in one instance may not be quite so much in another.

To the original question, I agree with all the others: First refurbish done by the maker, more value than untouched. Done by another: Less valuable.

But, there may be exceptions.....

So, this knife has a crazy history, and a series of bungles, not the least of which I exacerbated. But, in the end, I am left with a knife that, to me, is notably more valuable than had it been left with that un-original jewel stuck in the side.

Funny, I thought I had gone through this history before here, but my search revealed nada. So now you know. This thread gave me the opportunity. Hope it's relevant.

Sorry for taking up a lot of space. Well, not really.... ;)

Coop
Click to expand...

Great story Coop, with a happy ending.
And I stand corrected, as this is certainly an example of a case where someone other than the original maker increased the value of a knife.
 
Sounds like the Moran need a bit of a cleaning, and sharpening, rather than re-finishing. No maker of using knives ever intended for them to never be sharpened. Sure a never sharpened knife from a famous maker will bring more money. But a nicely sharpened blade is better than one with chips. Much less a chipped tip. In the case you show here, I would definitely have it touched up. Mike
 
An interesting question... I buy Loveless knives and have recently noted a number of his knives in the hands of purveyors that had been re-conditioned at the Loveless shop. The difference I noted was in the finish of the blades -they had a more polished (brighter?) finish than the originals. I personally didn't like it because they just didn't have the same look, but the next buyer may not care. The same thing happened to an older Randall that was given to me by an uncle. I sent it back to Randall and thought it would come back looking somewhat "new", but I could have achieved the same finish myself. Maybe there's something that happens to steel after it ages (?) that the same builder can't achieve the same finish anymore. I guess it will come down to the eye of the buyer, but for me I'd rather have an original finish with a few light scratches.
 
If I needed to refurb one of my Custom knives, I would send it back to the maker. I don't think that would adversely affect the impact on the knife.
 
Sorry but I don't see much in mint condition knifes. I like to see the history of a knife recorded in the marks it bears. Much more knowledge can be gained about the maker and past owners when you can see it. Keep it mint condition and when it leaves your hands it is like you never existed.
 
Ed Fowler said:
Sorry but I don't see much in mint condition knifes. I like to see the history of a knife recorded in the marks it bears. Much more knowledge can be gained about the maker and past owners when you can see it. .
Click to expand...

A refurbished knife is not "mint". "Mint" is the knife that it left the maker the first time. A refurbish is just that. Let us say for example, that the owner of the knife got a little carried away sharpening, and scratched up the surface. That doesn't tell you anything about the knife except that the sharpener maybe could have used some sharpening lessons.

A cleanly refurbished knife is a continual testament to the ongoing skills of the maker.

Ed Fowler said:
Keep it mint condition and when it leaves your hands it is like you never existed.
Click to expand...

I really disagree with this statement, Ed. That may be how you feel, and you are ALWAYS entitled to your opinion, but there are makers who's work is hard enough to find, let alone in good condition, the finding of one of their knives is like a small blessing-Bill Bagwell, Robert Hayes, "genuine" W.W. Cronk....the list is endless. Oh, heck yeah, they existed.

Remember, you don't make "art" knives.;)

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top