T/C Kit Guns?

[mike3132]

Why is it T/C kit guns seem lower in value than a factory built gun? When I see T/C kit guns advertised for sale they are always less money than the same model factory built. If the kit gun has been properly finished and assembled shouldn't it be worth as much. Thoughts?

 

[necchi]

Well when TC was honoring their Lifetime Warranty the "Kit rifle" was not covered.
I guess it doesn't matter much any more.
Your right, If a kit is done properly there is little to no difference.
But there are a lot of'm that get kind of messed up when assembled, people like to sand the wood and slap on the finish, very little time is spent trying to get the brass parts to fit let alone finished.

 

[FishDFly]

Why is it T/C kit guns seem lower in value than a factory built gun? When I see T/C kit guns advertised for sale they are always less money than the same model factory built. If the kit gun has been properly finished and assembled shouldn't it be worth as much. Thoughts?

Factory guns were assembled to factory standards, they all looked alike and were assembled alike.

Kit guns were finished to the level and desire of the person putting the kit together. They might be better than factory finished or far less than acceptable.

 

[galamb]

My take would be, there is more potential for something to be messed up.

Probably just as many of the kits were bought by guys trying to save a few extra bucks as opposed to those actually interested in "building a gun".

So a number may have been slapped together somewhat haphazardly.

Anytime you have to roll the dice you tend to do so at a discount.

If it's "fine" it's surely worth the price of a factory assembled.

If it isn't and requires "replacement parts" to get it 100% then what's it worth? half the price of a used factory gun - less? more?

You are going to place this thing a couple inches from your eyes - resting against your cheek and basically touch off a pipe bomb.

What premium are you willing to pay for one assembled in a factory compared to "Bubba on the kitchen table" who didn't use the directions because those are for "ijits" :rotf:

 

[mooman76]

I don't really consider whether the gun is a kit gun or not. I consider the condition of the over all gun. A kit gun I would think would be of more value if they took their time and did a good job. More than likely they would take better care of it too if it was the original owner. Just my way of thinkin.

 

[FishDFly]

We all get to chose how we spend our dollars.

Would you feel the same sending a Postal Money Order for a rifle you have not seen that it a kit?

I have seen my brother's workmanship, no thanks.

 

[mooman76]

I wouldn't buy one sight unseen from a private party, kit or factory.

 

[Col. Batguano]

There is the other element of so called "collectability". A lot of people that buy ML'ers buy otherwise collectible guns too, and apply those same buying standards. If a gun is at 70% finish, if it's a factory finish that's different than cousin Herb's original finish, even though both might be identical in present state. The function and utility value of each will be the same, but the secondary or tertiary markets for re-sale or re-re-sale are thinner for a kit gun than they are for a factory gun, which is to and of known quality standards, however low or high they may be for that particular factory.

However, if this home built gun went on to become the prototype for a model that then became a historically significant piece, such as John C. Garand's prototype for the M1 Garand rifle, even his pre-production run of hand-built guns from the Model Shop are of VERY significant value (in the 100's of thousands of dollars) because of their place in shaping world history.

If the individual gun performed some significant world event, like the gun that shot someone of significance, then that too would affect the value.

I haven't a clue what his actual M1 Garand prototype hand built by him would go for, but I'm sure it would be more than $1,000,000.

 

[Uncle Levi]

My .54TC Hawkin was assembled from a kit and it took me about 35 hours to get it so I thought it was good enough. I'd like to think I did a good enough job so it looks as good as factory finished. I really don't care about comparative value. I'm going to keep it forever.

 

[ohio ramrod]

Kit guns got a bad reputation simply because so many were simply slapped together. T.C.'s warranty on the kit guns excluded the stocks, the metal parts were still covered the same as the factory builds. I used to assemble a lot of their kits ( And early CVA's as well) for the Amish boys for deer hunting back in the seventies and early eighties. How the gun was treated after build is more important than weather it was a kit, or factory build. :idunno:

 

[don hepler]

Of all the Kit guns, that I have seen, only a very small percentage looked as good or better than a factory gun. There have been a few members on here, that have refinished, and reshaped TC's into works of art.

 

[house]

I have one kit and two factory T/C Hawken rifles and I like my kit gun the best. The finish on the stock is what makes it.

 

[cynthialee]

It all depends on who finishes the kit.
I have seen kit guns I wouldn't be seen in the dark with. And I have seen kit guns that look as good as full custom pieces of art. And all types in between.

 

[Captjoel]

I have bought "not so nicely done" kit T\C's with good bores on the cheap and refinished them to look better (to me) than factory model's. It has added a lot to the fun factor in muzzleloading.

 

[mike3132]

This is a .54 T/C Hawken kit gun I bought a few weeks ago, completely redone the gun from stock to bluing and mechanics. Shot it Saturday at 65yards with PRB and 70 3f bp. Shot a 2" 3 shot group, then 5 clicks left and hit dead center. Called it good.

 

[Dandyfunk]

I think the cost of the kit guns are cheaper because there is less manufacturing involved in their production. That, IMHO is the reason the kit guns were developed, I.E a less expensive way to get into the hobby. Just my 2 cents tho. Df