Hello,  I'd like to weigh in on this as well.  I am not in agreement
with all of the folks who would prefer to make an estimate artificially
high for a customer to cover contingencies.  I would instead prefer
a situation where I have enough confidence and trust in my tech that
a "time and materials" represents the best value for everyone.  Then
I am only being billed for work actually done, and the tech gets fairly
compensated for work he has done -- "win/win" rather than "I win, you
lose."

As a mechanical music client, I understand the nature of the work and
am not looking to profit from a too-low estimate by the tech on the
front end (nor am I looking to be gouged for a too-high estimate to
cover stuff that _might_ happen).  The key is to have a level of trust
with your tech that you feel comfortable you are being charged fairly.
I have been fortunate to almost always have had people (mostly one guy
-- a shout out here to Kirk Russell, Wakefield, Rhode Island) doing my
restoration work, with whom I had this level of comfort.

All this being said, it may make sense for a tech to give a range
of possible costs at the start of a project.  And, believe it or not,
sometimes you still happen upon original work that doesn't actually
need replacing; this seems to happen sometimes with leather components
that were made with a higher-grade leather than is currently available.

Bob Taylor said this more eloquently in his 3/21 response to Ray Finch
[130321 MMDigest]:

"Many experienced rebuilders charge fairly for the hours needed to
complete the task at hand.  That removes guess work and establishes
a level of fairness to both the customer and the technician.  Advance
understanding of that is imperative to both."

My two cents.

Tim Baxter
Atlanta, Georgia