Mike, My first name is Phil. I guess my answer to you earlier question is "it depends". If we are talking about the same make and era 03s then yes I would generally prefer a non-rebuild to a rebuild. I don't know how much more the non-rebuild would be worth to me..I would have to see both rifles. Having said that, I would not consider rebuild any less GI or less historic than the non-rebuild...assuming that we are talking about a Gvt. arsenal product...in this case performed pre summer of 45...(I know hard to prove!). On the other hand I would prefer an original blued (never refinished)(say 80-90% ) WWI Sprigfield 03 even if a few parts were nor correct (say the bolt or the floorplate&follower) to a minty WWII factory condition Reminginton 03A3. That's just me and I really appreciate the true WWI rifles even if I had to hunt down a correct bolt some other part that would be fairly easy to find.

As I said before SS TK marked depot conversions of G-98s to K98s are also re-builds....I could live with knowing that. (big time!)

You example about the Garand sniper is well taken. My earlier point on all correct Garands, Carbines and 03s is that with diligent searching one can completly assemble an impossible to detect all factory correct weapon. This is something that most U.S. WWII collectors don't like to admit and I'm not saying it is that easy anymore as parts are expensive and getting harder to find.

I will not argue that all factory correct bring more money, but there is (or should be) more to military collecting than money. A legit military re-build (as opposed to a gunsmith restoration or a collector put together) is a valid military arm.