Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Non-Parker Specific & General Discussions General Discussions about Other Fine Doubles

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 11-25-2017, 07:35 PM   #11
Member
Ed Blake
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,258
Thanks: 734
Thanked 822 Times in 333 Posts

Default

So Turnbull is now restoring the boxes as well? Genius.
Ed Blake is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 11:53 AM   #12
Member
GH-16
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,002
Thanks: 5,113
Thanked 1,304 Times in 445 Posts

Default

Fellows,
I never intended my comments to indicate I thought Turnbull restored this gun! I only mentioned his name because I felt the frame polish/finish is similar to what Turnbull's re-case hardening process looks like. I feel that this is probably a legit original gun.

There has been a lot of discussion here over the years about what original finishes should look like. My comments were meant to point out some of the features I am seeing in this gun. Not to suggest that it's a restored gun by anyone!!
Paul Ehlers is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 12:38 PM   #13
Member
Mike Poindexter
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 515
Thanks: 566
Thanked 613 Times in 244 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Noreen View Post
According to the dating feature on our home page, 193435 would be a 1921 vintage gun. I'm surprised that the label states it was targeted with a load of 1 ounce of shot and 2 1/2 drams of smokeless powder. Remington had just introduced a 2 1/2 dram smokeless powder, 1 ounce, load that year for its new Model 17 pump gun. But, the Model 17 was chambered for 2 3/4 inch shells and Remington's 1 ounce 20-gauge load came in a 2 3/4 inch shell. There is no mention on the label that this gun is chambered for a shell longer then the then "standard" 2 1/2 inch 20-gauge shell. The "normal" heaviest 20-gauge loads in 1921 vintage North American ammunition catalogs were 2 1/4 drams of smokeless powder pushing 7/8 ounce of shot in the "standard" 2 1/2 inch shell and 2 1/2 drams of smokeless powder pushing that same 7/8 ounce of shot from the longer 2 3/4, 2 7/8 and 3-inch shells. The Western Cartridge Co. high velocity, progressive powder, load (Super-X) of 1 ounce of shot from their 2 3/4 inch FIELD 20-gauge shell came out in 1922.


The shot size on the label appears obscured by a tear. I'm not sure what the shot tested would have been in 1921. According to a 1900 table of shot manufacturer's products, Tatham No. 7's go 291 to the ounce, while 8's go 399. According to current SAAMI specs, no. 7.5's go 350 while 8's go 410. Assuming Tatham 7's for the pattern test, 127/291=44% and 168/291=56%--a very useful IC and weak MOD. If 8's are assumed, we're looking at 32% and 42%--or CYL and IC. Still a useful pattern, albeit for close cover or pointing dogs. Wonder what the buyer had in mind? A letter would be interesting.
Mike Poindexter is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 01:20 PM   #14
Member
Ed Blake
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,258
Thanks: 734
Thanked 822 Times in 333 Posts

Default

Mike - my comment about the box was strictly a smartass remark and I do not doubt the authenticity of the gun, however, I have seen a number of Turnbull restorations that look awfully “original”. Caveat emptor as always.
Ed Blake is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 05:06 PM   #15
Member
David Noble
PGCA Member
 
David Noble's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 907
Thanks: 1,294
Thanked 1,076 Times in 382 Posts

Default

I noticed something that made me wonder about it's originality.
If you look at the closeup picture of the left side of the receiver and enlarge it a bit you can see that the zig zag engraving just below the lower edge has been reengraved over an earlier attempt. Now this is a lower grade gun and a lesser skilled engraver may have done this border engraving but I would think a better attempt of removing the errant engraving would have been attempted. Maybe it just slipped through inspection or the inspector just decided to let it slide since it is just a VH. What are your thoughts?
David Noble is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2017, 07:03 PM   #16
Member
B. Dudley
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Brian Dudley's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,550
Thanks: 476
Thanked 17,422 Times in 4,595 Posts

Default

At least one Parker exists that has a 5 legged dog.
__________________
B. Dudley
Brian Dudley is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Brian Dudley For Your Post:
Visit Brian Dudley's homepage!
Unread 11-29-2017, 06:15 PM   #17
Member
James L. Martin
PGCA Member
 
James L. Martin's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 709
Thanks: 848
Thanked 1,566 Times in 379 Posts

Default

Gun is sold, did someone here get it?
__________________
" May you build a ladder to the stars climb on every rung and may you stay forever young "
Bob Dylan
James L. Martin is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 12-01-2017, 02:21 PM   #18
Member
Alfred Houde
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 826
Thanks: 194
Thanked 672 Times in 248 Posts

Default

I guess what sticks out to me at a quick glance is how the tang screw appears worn yet the trigger guard and tang appear to be pristine. Images can be deceptive though. Glare, flash, etc.

Nice looking gun to a lucky owner, no doubt.
Alfred Houde is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12-01-2017, 03:41 PM   #19
Member
JLoew
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,440
Thanks: 5,978
Thanked 6,143 Times in 830 Posts

Default

Looked like a winner to me. Great gun IMHO.
Josh Loewensteiner is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12-01-2017, 04:50 PM   #20
Member
Opening Day
PGCA Lifetime
Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,862
Thanks: 11,113
Thanked 2,074 Times in 1,190 Posts

Default

I stayed out of this, but if was very similar to my new in box skeet gun that many of you had seen at the meeting and it looked like it was correct to me.
Eric Eis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1998 - 2023, Parkerguns.org
Copyright © 2004 Design par Megatekno
- 2008 style update 3.7 avec l'autorisation de son auteur par Stradfred.