|
12-23-2011, 10:08 AM | #3 | ||||||
|
No, it was a complete gun. The guy I got it from bought it on auction sight unseen. It was advertised as a completely restored gun. When he got it, it was anything but.
About the only thing that was done right was the case coloring. The engraving was not taken back up before polishing. It is all there, but just not as heavy as it should be. The Damascus barrels were blued, but other than that are in good condition. And the wood was sanded down far below metal and to where all checkering was eliminated and there was a very bad repair on the one side behind the receiver. I would have been pissed too if I bought it sight unseen, thinking it was "completely restored". What a shock.
__________________
B. Dudley |
||||||
12-23-2011, 10:50 AM | #4 | ||||||
|
Your seller had a lot more faith in humanity than I have to buy a gun sight unseen. Betcha he won't do that again.
|
||||||
12-23-2011, 12:34 PM | #5 | ||||||
|
Yeah, I am not sure how much he paid for it, but he was not hesitent to trade it for $500 worth of stock work.
__________________
B. Dudley |
||||||
12-24-2011, 07:58 AM | #6 | ||||||
|
The colors appear too bright, or vivid. There are many guys doing case hardening heat treatment, and while each have developed their own packing medium, whether it be bone, bone meal, leather or whatever, I think it's a safe guess that they are all using electric heat treat ovens, or possibly one of the good natural gas fired units.
I used to get an order from Colts, about every two years for a few dozen 'packing boxes' cast from a heat resistant alloy (CA6-NM) These boxes were 5x5x10", with cover plates that were wedge-clamped with a flat cover. I went to their heat treat dept several times and know they were using the same oil fired retorts (furnaces) that were pre 1900. |
||||||
12-25-2011, 01:55 AM | #7 | ||||||
|
Like most everyone else, I too use an electric oven. In my experience with case coloring, the vivid yellows and reds are usually the result of adding items like leather and antler charcoal to the matrix. When I use only a bone and wood charcoal mixture, my colors reliably turn out like those on this GHE 20. (the owner had restocked and blued it, so originality wasn't much of an issue) My colors don't likely pass for an accurate reproduction of the original pre-Remington Parker colors, but the owner was pleased with how the new colors looked along side the new wood and bluing.
|
||||||
12-25-2011, 09:21 AM | #8 | ||||||
|
I would own that gun.
|
||||||
12-25-2011, 09:28 AM | #9 | ||||||
|
I know that there are some out there that do not care for restoring colors. I have been told "why spend hundreds of dollars on something that is just gonna start wearing off in 4 years again".
Personally, I think that having it done is a fine line in judgement. Obviously it is a perfect complement to new wood work or new bluing, especially if both are done. But I think that if a receiver is evenly worn to a nice clean patina or silvered finish, just leave it. Unless the worn receiver looks ugly as due to rust or something, I think it would look just great as original.
__________________
B. Dudley |
||||||
12-25-2011, 11:11 AM | #10 | ||||||
|
Yup, a lot of controversy over that question. I've seen guys take some harsh criticism over the years for recoloring vintage guns, and especially Parkers. I have plenty of vintage guns with that nice even patina of age where the wood, barrels and frame are all in balance, with little to no case colors remaining. Would never think of recoloring one of those. But in cases where a gun has to be restocked or refinished and reblued, an old patina frame just doesn't match all those shiny new components to my eye. Of course, many like the polished silver look on a frame, especially where engraving is concerned. Personally, I don't. Those guns look "unfinished" to me, and certainly are the furthest thing imaginable from factory new in appearance. This is an example of when a resto is an easy decision. I bought this 1899 fluid steel LC Smith on GB for $399. The seller didn't realize it was a 2E, probably because the engraving was largely buried, but I was able to spot it and the split ejector face through all the rust and grime. It had a mild barrel bulge toward the muzzle of the left tube, the head of the stock was black with oil and dented, the barrels an ugly orange-brown from oxidation, and the butt pad poorly fitted and petrified. It was destined to meet the hack saw and be converted to someone's cowboy action shooter. I didn't need another 2E, but couldn't bear to see that happen. My only significant out of pocket was for the barrel repair and choke relief ($300), and the 2E is now resurrected and far nicer looking in person than the photos suggest. So I guess my point is that I agree with the main stream consensus that nice evenly aged vintage guns should not be restored. But when they have been allowed to deteriorate too far, or refitted with brand new shiny wood and bluing, new colors might not be such a terrible idea in those circumstances. Additionally, the financial reality for most of us is that we will never be able to afford or justify a truly high condition Parker with its original colors intact. Restoring colors becomes the only real option for us if we get the urge to shoot a Parker with colors. As for the colors wearing off in 4 years, I think that would take an awful lot of use. I apply a thin satin layer of Behlen's top coat lacquer as per the late Dr. Gaddy's instructions in DGJ. It will remain to be seen whether and to what extent that will protect and prolong the life of the colors. Of course, good old fashioned use also wears away new wood finishes, sharp checkering points, and bluing, and so long as it all ages evenly, a restored gun should maintain its pleasing appearance. Anyways, that's how I see it, for what little my opinion might be worth.
|
||||||
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Justin Julian For Your Post: |
|
|