Yes, but the reproduction of an antique set of armour needs more than just the functional capacity to make it, and a lot of artisan handwork is unavoidably involved in its production. A lot of the 19th -early 20th c. production of antique armour is made using essentially the same tools that were used in the 14-16th c. It's just the lack of familiarity with the details of the product what shows painfully to the trained eye, and still, some of the reproductions were nearly impossible to distinguish from originals. On this regard, the products of the Munich dealer Ernst Schmidt, an antique dealer and provider of reproduction antique weaponry is often quoted. The pieces coming off his workshop were very well able to stand by themselves for what they were, but with the more elaborated work, specially regarding armour, when compared with the originals the difference was pretty obvious.
On the other hand, some work was extremely close to the originals. Just take a look a the pair of gauntlets below (author unknown). The picture doesn't make them justice, they are exquisite. They were auctioned recently and I was able to examine them up close. Wouldn't they had been a copy of the pair of gauntlets belonging to the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I, held in the Royal Armoury in Madrid, I don't think anyone but the best of experts would had be able to tell them for reproductions based only in the quality of the workmanship.
In short, lousy armour was done everywhere, and kept being done until today, but excellent, quality work was also done in many places, although a lot less in numbers... also as today.
