1993 NIB Sig P226-Collectable or Shooter?
- Thread starter BarkeyVA
- Start date
Actually, I felt pretty good about getting what I wanted for it. There must be at least 400 (22 pages) of the P226's posted on Gunbroker with the vast majority, including some like mine, not even getting a bid. I sold it to a guy in the area who likes older German-made Sigs perhaps as much as you do and who will enjoy shooting it.
LockedBreech
New member
Every gun I will ever own, regardless of how collectable it is, will be a shooter, in the sole exception that it is so old or fragile as to make firing it unsafe.
Life is short, chaotic, and random. There's not enough time to own nice things without enjoying them.
Life is short, chaotic, and random. There's not enough time to own nice things without enjoying them.
I had never owned a NIB handgun like the Sig and really didn't know what to do with it. If you re-read this stream and a similar one on The High Road web site, there were differences of opinion as to whether I should shoot it or keep it in the safe. Some told me I'd be lucky to get $550 or $600 for it (I paid $600). With so many for sale on gun auction sites that did not appear to be selling at the price I thought was fair, when I had the chance to sell it for $700, I jumped on it.
I am really more interested in long guns, specifically Marlin model 90 O/U shotguns. With the exception of the Sig I just sold, all of my guns, including shotguns, rifles and only two handguns, have been "shooters."
When I buy another pistol it too will be a used "shooter." It might even be another Sig, although my local gun dealer is a real fan of Glocks. He owns several, and his main carry gun is a Glock. He has commented more than once that if he had to rely on one handgun to save his life, it would be a Glock.
I am really more interested in long guns, specifically Marlin model 90 O/U shotguns. With the exception of the Sig I just sold, all of my guns, including shotguns, rifles and only two handguns, have been "shooters."
When I buy another pistol it too will be a used "shooter." It might even be another Sig, although my local gun dealer is a real fan of Glocks. He owns several, and his main carry gun is a Glock. He has commented more than once that if he had to rely on one handgun to save his life, it would be a Glock.
Walt Sherrill
New member
Part of this response repeats something I wrote earlier.
I'd say there are two kind of collectibles: 1) the kind that people who know something about the items in question buy as an investment, and 2) the kind people who love the item in question buy new (or nearly new) in hopes of it's value increasing over time. The variables are the same whether its a gun, a Tiffany Lamp, an old watch, fine china, or art. Most of the people in the second group aren't truly investors; they're just buying something they like or love.
I've known a number of gun collectors, over the year, and some of them have done well, but I don't think I've ever met one who bought a gun new (or near new) that was later sold for a significant increase in value. I'm sure it happens, but not often. If you figure in inflation and buying power, even some of the more valuable collectible guns aren't all that great an investment over the long term. Darned few of the folks who buy guns think about that when they sell it later.
Anyone who buys a new gun today in hopes of it becoming more valuable over time might as well buy a lottery ticket -- his or her chance of scoring is about the same, and the "collector" won't have to worry about gun insurance or storing the lottery tickets...
If you want to keep it nice because you'd love to have an old gun to pass on to a loved one, then do it -- but don't make a bet on values increasing significantly. As suggested in an earlier response, Mutual Funds are a far better investments.
Last edited:
Walt Sherrill
New member
Agreed, but you can't really shoot, hunt with, or defend yourself with an INVESTMENT gun, either. The minute you do, your investment -- if it ever really was one -- begins to decline.
You're preaching to the choir. If you have a nice shooter, you can do all of those things, and have some fun.
I don't have any collectibles, any more. Too much to know, too many shysters trying to selling you something that isn't what it's supposed to be, etc.,etc.. A nice shooter will bring a small premium over a less-nice one, and that's good enough for most of us.
Sure you can, and that's the whole point! Unlike coins, stamps or baseball cards; firearms and cars are the few potential "collectables" I'm aware of that allow you to still exploit their original purpose while hanging on to them for investment reasons. So, yeah, probably by shooting collectable guns (or by driving collectable automobiles) you in the process are incrementally degrading their value but, so long as due diligence is exercised in terms of care and general maintenance, devaluation should be minimal, especially when considering guns that have already been fired (or cars previously driven).
I'm not arguing that firearm collections are the most profitable investments to be made; far from it. But there are far more risky investment ventures out there than any gamble posed by collecting firearms. If a person uses some degree of intelligence and research when purchasing a firearm, he will seldom lose money-and sometimes he'll make money. And during the whole time a gun collector has a fine firearm in his possession he can, well, play with it.
Last edited:
Walt Sherrill
New member
You left out an important sentence, abov -- the part that addresses shooting a collectible/investment gun: The minute you do, your investment -- if it ever really was one -- begins to decline. "
Most guns aren't good potential investments. As you note, guns and cars are a little different, but not THAT different. They are both, generally, not investments, but expenses: items you use and wear down and sell for less. The few that are truly investments shouldn't be shot or driven -- as collectors typically want them in NEW Condition, un-shot (or very low mileage, with all-original parts).
There are exceptions, but they are truly EXCEPTIONS. A '57 Chevy 2-door V-8 Bel Air coupe with all original parts and low mileage will be worth MUCH more than a much-used but well-maintained '57 Chevy 2-door V-8 Bel Air coupe with non-original (but proper) engine, transmission, interior.
Don't agree? Pull out the newest Fjestad Blue Book you can find, and pick any gun. They'll show the original price and what it can be sold for, today, at 100%, 98%, 95%, etc. Darned few of them sell for MORE than the original price -- and inflation continues to degrade the value of the dollar with each passing year.
I have a Browning Hi-Power T-series. It no longer has the original barrel; new, in 1970, it sold for $1000... (A replacement factory barrel for the BHP is roughly $450... and even then the picky collector might not be interested.) The Blue Books says that my BHP in NIB (100%) condition might bring $825, today, but in 98% would bring $675; a gun in 98% is almost pristine, yet the value has dropped by almost 20%!! With proper barrel, mine might be worth $600, but not to a collector. (Mine also had the ring hammer, and external extractor, which added 20% to the figure cited above, and being a T-series added 15% more. But having a damaged barrel destroyed it as a collectible.
We agree about "shoot'em" but disagree about the costs when you do "shoot'em." If you have some personal experience (i.e., examples) in this matter that you can cite, please share it with us, and we'll all happily learn from your experience -- my experience says otherwise.
Most guns aren't good potential investments. As you note, guns and cars are a little different, but not THAT different. They are both, generally, not investments, but expenses: items you use and wear down and sell for less. The few that are truly investments shouldn't be shot or driven -- as collectors typically want them in NEW Condition, un-shot (or very low mileage, with all-original parts).
There are exceptions, but they are truly EXCEPTIONS. A '57 Chevy 2-door V-8 Bel Air coupe with all original parts and low mileage will be worth MUCH more than a much-used but well-maintained '57 Chevy 2-door V-8 Bel Air coupe with non-original (but proper) engine, transmission, interior.
Don't agree? Pull out the newest Fjestad Blue Book you can find, and pick any gun. They'll show the original price and what it can be sold for, today, at 100%, 98%, 95%, etc. Darned few of them sell for MORE than the original price -- and inflation continues to degrade the value of the dollar with each passing year.
I have a Browning Hi-Power T-series. It no longer has the original barrel; new, in 1970, it sold for $1000... (A replacement factory barrel for the BHP is roughly $450... and even then the picky collector might not be interested.) The Blue Books says that my BHP in NIB (100%) condition might bring $825, today, but in 98% would bring $675; a gun in 98% is almost pristine, yet the value has dropped by almost 20%!! With proper barrel, mine might be worth $600, but not to a collector. (Mine also had the ring hammer, and external extractor, which added 20% to the figure cited above, and being a T-series added 15% more. But having a damaged barrel destroyed it as a collectible.
We agree about "shoot'em" but disagree about the costs when you do "shoot'em." If you have some personal experience (i.e., examples) in this matter that you can cite, please share it with us, and we'll all happily learn from your experience -- my experience says otherwise.
Last edited:
Which holds true for just about any investment endeavor.
I think that you're taking this idea of making money on guns way more seriously than I ever intended. All I'm saying is that if you use your head when buying and with a bit of luck, you can make a little money with the purchase of some firearms and have a little fun with them along the way. Not something you can say about some other types of investments.
On 8-6-69, I paid $115.50 for a nib, Colt Government pistol. It was in very good condition when I sold it three years ago for $925.00.
I bought a nib Colt Series 70 Gold Cup for $205.07 on 12-27-74. I've shot it a lot but it's still in excellent condition. Most people would be glad to pay a grand for it now in its present condition.
I paid $350.00 for a new Smith&Wesson Model 52-2 sometime in the early eighties. Its still in excellent condition and I would expect it to fetch around a grand today.
On 4-2-77, I paid $191.00 for a nib Savage Model 99, chambered in .358 Winchester. Although I've hunted with it many times, the rifle is in excellent condition and I would anticipate it bringing close to a thousand dollars in today's market should I ever decide to sell it.
I purchased a nib Steyr Mannlicher "Zephyer" .22 rifle on 7-12-74 for $275.00. After three decades of hunting squirrels with this little gem, I sold it in 2008 for a thousand dollars-and the buyer and I both know that he got a "steal" at that price. As an aside, at the time of purchase, I bought three spare magazines for this rifle at about four dollars each. I sold each of them in 2008 for over eighty dollars apiece via E-Bay.
My dad paid under twenty bucks for a brand new Winchester Model 67 .22rf, single-shot rifle, that he gave me for Christmas in 1957. It's still in excellent condition (I keep good care of my guns
) and I've seen them go for over two hundred dollars at various gun shows over the years.You asked for some examples and these are just a few. Did I buy these firearms because I thought I'd make money on them down the line? Emphatically, no. Most of the many firearms that I've bought over the years were guns I had every reason to believe I'd have with me at the time of my death. And I can assure you that I've never lost a nickel on a firearm purchase.
Could I have made more money if I'd invested in Mutual Funds, or the stock market or some other investment endeavor instead of buying guns? Most likely yes. Did inflation make my guns worth less today in terms of what a dollar is worth now as opposed to what it was when I bought them? Well, yes, but as I mentioned earlier, the same can be said for just about any other hard goods commodity you might invest in at any one point in time.
The only point I was trying to make is that firearms purchased wisely today will not only "hold" their value in the future but will afford you more pleasure through the years than most any other type of investment will offer. And I'm confident most true firearm aficionados will see the merits of this argument.
Last edited:
Walt Sherrill
New member
UYOT
OK. I'll accept your point. And I can't dispute that you've got some fine guns, and some of them can be kept and shot, and still sold for a profit.
I'll take the MAKING MONEY point a bit farther in the following comment than you would -- but accept your point, above. You can keep them and shoot them and MAYBE make a little. If you do, and you're a gun enthusiast, you've won. But I wouldn't call you an investor. (That's not really your claim -- I understand.)
The following is done to show the "investment" aspect of gun ownership, which so many talk about. Few have YOUR experience and success, however. In the following examples, I've used a historical database from the stock market to show annualized return (inflation adjusted) for the same amounts invested for the same periods. We're talking about INVESTMENTS, here, not the satisfaction you get from owning and shooting weapons of value...
You did alright on this one. To break even you would have needed to sell it for $719.00. You made roughly $200 extra in buying power. Your point that you had it's use for that period, however, is valid -- and important. The same investment in the stock market for that same period would have given you about $750 -- not really a big difference. I'd say you WON on this one, having that gun and using it cost you only $31.
You'd have to sell it for $954 to break even. The same money invested in the stock market would have yielded roughly $1800. You could have almost bought that a similar gold cup with your profits, and still have $900 to spare.
You'd have to sell that 52-2 for at least $850 to break even. $1000 gives you a $200 profit -- for a 30+ year investment. Again, the same money invested in the stock market for the same period would have likely given you a return of $3370. (I had a 52-2; had to sell it and a couple of collectibles to buy a car... I miss it. It might get a bit more than a $grand.)
That gun would break even at $725. A $1000 would give you a good profit, but the stock market would have paid $1665 (inflation adjusted) for the same period on the same $191. Had you invested that $725, you'd till have it, and $900+ to spare. You wouldn't have been shoot the $725, however.
It WAS a steal, as you needed to get $1280 to just break even (with inflation.) The same money invested in the stock market would likely have returned $1720... (This one wasn't all that great an investment, but you did have it to use in the meantime.)
That $20 gun would have to sell for $163 to just keep up with inflation. You would have made $37 dollar return on the original investment over a span of 55 years if sold for $200. The stock market return for that period would have been roughly $383 or almost double!
I would note, however, that I buy MOSTLY used guns, and generally only guns in top-notch shape. I don't think I have ever paid anything close to the original MSRP -- except for a relatively new SIG P-226 X Five (which I'm still not happy with), and often much less.
I think your examples, cited above, while valid, are the exception not the rule. But I appreciate and understand your satisfaction with selling them for a reasonable profit in most of the cases, and having their use in the meantime. I'd argue that most shooters don't have that sort of luck/success/good experience, dollar wise.
I'd be interested to see if others can cite similar success stories. I still say that most guns aren't a good investment. And when you figure in inflation, most of the guns sold for a "profit" aren't really profitably sold.
OK. I'll accept your point. And I can't dispute that you've got some fine guns, and some of them can be kept and shot, and still sold for a profit.
What you can't address, is how much more those guns MIGHT have brought had they been left in unfired condition. For a true "collectible" firearm -- the subject of this discussion -- that's a point that can't be ignored. I don't think the 226 in question is a true collectible...
I'll take the MAKING MONEY point a bit farther in the following comment than you would -- but accept your point, above. You can keep them and shoot them and MAYBE make a little. If you do, and you're a gun enthusiast, you've won. But I wouldn't call you an investor. (That's not really your claim -- I understand.)
The following is done to show the "investment" aspect of gun ownership, which so many talk about. Few have YOUR experience and success, however. In the following examples, I've used a historical database from the stock market to show annualized return (inflation adjusted) for the same amounts invested for the same periods. We're talking about INVESTMENTS, here, not the satisfaction you get from owning and shooting weapons of value...
You did alright on this one. To break even you would have needed to sell it for $719.00. You made roughly $200 extra in buying power. Your point that you had it's use for that period, however, is valid -- and important. The same investment in the stock market for that same period would have given you about $750 -- not really a big difference. I'd say you WON on this one, having that gun and using it cost you only $31.
You'd have to sell it for $954 to break even. The same money invested in the stock market would have yielded roughly $1800. You could have almost bought that a similar gold cup with your profits, and still have $900 to spare.
You'd have to sell that 52-2 for at least $850 to break even. $1000 gives you a $200 profit -- for a 30+ year investment. Again, the same money invested in the stock market for the same period would have likely given you a return of $3370. (I had a 52-2; had to sell it and a couple of collectibles to buy a car... I miss it. It might get a bit more than a $grand.)
That gun would break even at $725. A $1000 would give you a good profit, but the stock market would have paid $1665 (inflation adjusted) for the same period on the same $191. Had you invested that $725, you'd till have it, and $900+ to spare. You wouldn't have been shoot the $725, however.
It WAS a steal, as you needed to get $1280 to just break even (with inflation.) The same money invested in the stock market would likely have returned $1720... (This one wasn't all that great an investment, but you did have it to use in the meantime.)
That $20 gun would have to sell for $163 to just keep up with inflation. You would have made $37 dollar return on the original investment over a span of 55 years if sold for $200. The stock market return for that period would have been roughly $383 or almost double!
I would note, however, that I buy MOSTLY used guns, and generally only guns in top-notch shape. I don't think I have ever paid anything close to the original MSRP -- except for a relatively new SIG P-226 X Five (which I'm still not happy with), and often much less.
I think your examples, cited above, while valid, are the exception not the rule. But I appreciate and understand your satisfaction with selling them for a reasonable profit in most of the cases, and having their use in the meantime. I'd argue that most shooters don't have that sort of luck/success/good experience, dollar wise.
I'd be interested to see if others can cite similar success stories. I still say that most guns aren't a good investment. And when you figure in inflation, most of the guns sold for a "profit" aren't really profitably sold.
Last edited:
Then again, I could have played it safe, played the stock market a bit so as to squeeze every bit of interest from every dollar invested and sunk everything I had into Enron...
I'd argue that I'm not anymore lucky or successful than most other shooters/hunters who have used good judgement while "accumulating" some guns over time. As I've already stated, though I've purchased more than a few guns over these many years, I have never bought a firearm with the intent of making money off of it later. I am decidedly not a "collector" in the purist sense of the word-though my long-suffering wife doesn't need to hear this... Some other gun purchases that I've been "lucky" with:
I paid $400.00 on 7-6-89 for a Model 41 S&W that the seller claimed had never been fired. Though it's been fired plenty since at Camp Perry and other Bullseye match venues, I still think this pistol might well fetch upwards of a grand today.
I paid $149.00 for the first gun I ever bought, a Browning "DoubleAuto" 12 gauge shotgun in 1961. I still have this gun and it's in remarkably good shape given the many setters it's pointed over and outlasted over the years (no matter what this gun's worth now, I'd gladly trade it for any one of those beautiful setters to have back again that I was privileged to have shared my life with...)
On 1-23-74, I purchased a new Mauser Model 620 trap gun for $369.95. I sold it on 1-8-05 for $950.00 after firing thousands of rounds through it. I loved this beautiful, Italian-made ou (I think it might have been made by Gamba for Mauser) but parted with it after I left the trap league. I did give thought to using it for waterfowl blind hunts but worried about shooting steel with it.
I think the last three examples cited above are especially apropos to the discussion at hand. I shot these guns hard for decades, using them for what they were intended for and still came away with some jingle in my jeans. And, as you have acknowledged understanding my narrow perspective more than once and have even agreed with it to a point, that is the core of my argument:
By the way, I have very much enjoyed reading your "counter-points" and appreciate the time and thought you've put into them and have always respected your many insights on other topics over the years. And lest you think I only "invest" in new guns, here are three examples of used firearms I have bought in the past that I've enjoyed using and don't plan to lose any money on in the future:
$150.00 on 2-7-87 for a post-64, Angle-Eject, Winchester Model 94 carbine, chambered in 30-30, in excellent condition.
$325.00 on 11-23-02 for an early fifties era, Colt Officers Special, chambered in .38 Special, in excellent condition (a splendid revolver for the Harry Reeves revolver only matches at Camp Perry).
$450.00 on 2-12-05 for a Smith & Wesson Model 25-2, made in 1972 and chambered in .45 ACP, in excellent condition (another gun perfectly suited for revolver only matches at Camp Perry).
Or ever will be-we agree on this
I'd argue that I'm not anymore lucky or successful than most other shooters/hunters who have used good judgement while "accumulating" some guns over time. As I've already stated, though I've purchased more than a few guns over these many years, I have never bought a firearm with the intent of making money off of it later. I am decidedly not a "collector" in the purist sense of the word-though my long-suffering wife doesn't need to hear this...
Some other gun purchases that I've been "lucky" with:I paid $400.00 on 7-6-89 for a Model 41 S&W that the seller claimed had never been fired. Though it's been fired plenty since at Camp Perry and other Bullseye match venues, I still think this pistol might well fetch upwards of a grand today.
I paid $149.00 for the first gun I ever bought, a Browning "DoubleAuto" 12 gauge shotgun in 1961. I still have this gun and it's in remarkably good shape given the many setters it's pointed over and outlasted over the years (no matter what this gun's worth now, I'd gladly trade it for any one of those beautiful setters to have back again that I was privileged to have shared my life with...)
On 1-23-74, I purchased a new Mauser Model 620 trap gun for $369.95. I sold it on 1-8-05 for $950.00 after firing thousands of rounds through it. I loved this beautiful, Italian-made ou (I think it might have been made by Gamba for Mauser) but parted with it after I left the trap league. I did give thought to using it for waterfowl blind hunts but worried about shooting steel with it.
I think the last three examples cited above are especially apropos to the discussion at hand. I shot these guns hard for decades, using them for what they were intended for and still came away with some jingle in my jeans. And, as you have acknowledged understanding my narrow perspective more than once and have even agreed with it to a point, that is the core of my argument:
By the way, I have very much enjoyed reading your "counter-points" and appreciate the time and thought you've put into them and have always respected your many insights on other topics over the years. And lest you think I only "invest" in new guns, here are three examples of used firearms I have bought in the past that I've enjoyed using and don't plan to lose any money on in the future:
$150.00 on 2-7-87 for a post-64, Angle-Eject, Winchester Model 94 carbine, chambered in 30-30, in excellent condition.
$325.00 on 11-23-02 for an early fifties era, Colt Officers Special, chambered in .38 Special, in excellent condition (a splendid revolver for the Harry Reeves revolver only matches at Camp Perry).
$450.00 on 2-12-05 for a Smith & Wesson Model 25-2, made in 1972 and chambered in .45 ACP, in excellent condition (another gun perfectly suited for revolver only matches at Camp Perry).
Or ever will be-we agree on this
Last edited:
Walt Sherrill
New member
Putting all your eggs in one basket, like that, almost never works. (Some of the very best-performing investment managers do it, but they REALLY watch that one basket closely.)
For the stock market to pay off, you have to think and invest for the long-term, and "long term" doesn't seem to be a part of the American vocabulary any more.
Good discussion.