So When is "Original" no longer Original?
 

Looking at another couple of threads has me thinking about our various opinions on originality. My question is about guns that left the factory one way, but were returned later for some changes. Example: I have a CH that was originally ordered without a safety, but returned a few years later (different owner apparently) to have the safety installed. Since I have documentation that this is all factory work, I consider this gun's condition original. Then there is the case when the records don't show what seems clearly factory work done after the original order was delivered.

Opinions?

I would consider any work documented as done by the factory to be original no matter at what point in the guns life it took place. Undocumented work is subject to opinion and a question mark will always remain. Collectors of “Original Condition” Guns are very wary of undocumented repairs, replacements or upgrades.

When I think of a gun being in original condition I think of a gun that has not been restored. Your gun was modified by Parker, not restored, so I think it’s original.

JDG

Yes sir my sentiments almost to a “T” !!!! I DO NOT like words that begin with “re” like reblued refinished or RESTORED . To each his own and while I’ve had barrels redone it was pretty much last resort or a gun it wasn’t gonna affect the resale value in the least . And I under stand restoration is sometimes actually needed a gun needs to be damn near a basket case for ME to even consider the word restoration . When I was in my Virginia phase I was after muskets made at the Virginia Manufactory in the 1799-1820ish period . A good many of those guns were changed from flint to percussion by the Confederacy as well as other military flintlocks . Anyway I was looking for a few parts to reconvert a 1795 Springfield back to flintlock 20 or so years ago and asked a friend that was a BIG civil war collector for thoughts on where to get original parts . His reply to me was that I was destroying history . I’ve never forgotten that and to a degree I feel the same way about a total resto on any Parker that’s totally original but low in finish . I’ve said it before and will continue to say it , “I’d rather have an honest 30% gun that’s 100% functional and unabused over a total resto gun” . Again to each his own that’s just my opinion .

"Clearly done by Parker Brothers" determined by an experienced Parker researcher, is better than any lesser documentation by a selling dealer. There is a whole lot of work done by Parker Brothers and Remington that is absolutely original that is not documented by PGCA letters.

Untouched original is the gun that has never been back to the factory. A gun can only be original once regardless of the wear. Factory refreshed is a gun that was returned to Parker for either mechanical or finish refresh and is documented. A restored gun is a gun either mechanically repaired or refinish by other than the factory (or not factory documented) using the correct methods. A refinished gun is a gun done without regard to correct methods.
I prefer original guns but I have many guns with some undocumented restoration. As an example I picked up a very nice original DH 20ga all original except it had a large ugly scrape 1 inch by 3/4 inch long like it was dropped on a cement walkway. If I was alive during the Parker factory era I would have sent it back to be re-blacked. I had the barrels re-blackened using the proper methods. The gun is no longer original but restored but much more appealing in my opinion. After a few years of wear it will be impossible to tell. Hence I believe many of the guns we shoot today and consider original there is a high likelihood they are not.

My definition of original means the gun retains the exact same finishes as it left the factory originally. If a Parker is changed in any way (i.e. refreshed, refinished, restored, etc.) regardless of who did the work - whether it be the factory or whomever, the gun is no longer original.

Thanks, Bill. So who might be on this list of "experienced Parker researchers?"

Has the Association ever offered authentication services at any of its annual meetings or other affairs. Seems like a PGCA authentication would be a good way to add to the coffers AND help out some of those Parker owners that have guns for which records are not available.

It is in the eye of an experienced collector, as in "I know it when I see it". You will never see the PGCA offering any authentication by eye. However, many of our members have a good eye for originality or lack thereof.

I assume there are folks with expertise that for a fee would examine a gun closely (disassemble to check internal parts, for example) and issue a qualified outcome. Even our research letters have a caveat regarding the limitations of the records.

If there are people who would issue expert analysis of a gun, who are they? I certainly respect those with years of looking at and handling Parkers, but I assume there is more than just the eye test one could seek in those cases where records do not exist, yes?