One caveat I would put on your point of view (which I basically agree with) is the work involved in it , in today’s instant answer , immediate gratification , disposable society we live in how many would actually put the work in to achieve the ‘period correct’ look ? I’d say not many so even though it wouldn’t be THAT difficult to replicate one of your beautiful G3’s I’d still class it in the custom/bespoke category of builds simply for this very reason , today’s society on the whole is just too dam lazy to put in the effort needed to achieve it ?You speak of the G3 with full wood kit as been custom. I wouldn't call it custom at all, none of the parts that go into one are user specific. A better description is period specific.
Same thing with an M16, You can have the modern RIS look, but you might go for a solid stock, large front hand-guard, chrome bolt and make it 1960's period specific. It's still not a custom.
Now if I were to take the G3 to a wood worker, and have a full walnut stock in a different pattern, with brass additions and file work. That to me is custom. It's made just for me, no one else has one, and if they do it will be because they copied mine, the term bespoke could also apply.
Picking off the shelf parts will never equal a custom/bespoke gun. It'll end up as a modified, or upgraded.
Not custom.
Saying that is pretty much true. The wood alone ended up with 5 coats of oil, and it's probably ready for another already.
Internally, I agree- an upgrade is an upgrade and a sight, foregrip, changed stock etc. is NOT and upgrade.
Yes now for me this is bit of a gray area , a Gear-tech paint job Can make the most boring of guns look Truly epic , but its a custom paint job , it does NOT make it a custom gun but yes I do agree it could raise the value of a gun (but equally could de-value it as it gives kit a very personal look which may not be to everyone’s tastes?)
What the hell is that stock?Oh, Internets, how I love being in you:
Quite like, actually.
