repros

[Daniel G Rainey]

Are the reproduction guns by Winchester preferred over the other reproductions ?

[Dean Romig]

If youre refering to such reproductions as Tony Galazan's Foxes and other reproductions, I would say no. Those guns are highly desirable but the beauty of the Parker Reproduction by Winchester is, not only the fact that it is nearly a flawless imitation of the original in terms of operation and aesthetics, but it is far underpriced for what it is in comparison to the guns I mentioned.





.

[Pay Dirt]

You wouldn't call the Utica Foxes reproductions.
Why do you call the New Britain Foxes reproductions?

[Dean Romig]

I guess because the New Britain Foxes are contemporary guns manufactured to original specs but using modern materials just like the Parker Reproductions by Winchester. If I may be so bold, I also consider the $50k New Britain AHE Parker to be a reproduction for those same reasons... but that's just me - YMMV.





.

[Pay Dirt]

I don't get it.
So materials are the criteria for reproduction status??

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Bobby Cash

I don't get it.
So materials are the criteria for reproduction status??

Bobby, I like your first reply better... the one you withdrew...

In any case, and without trying to be argumentative, to reproduce something (in this case) is to manufacture something that 'mimics' or 'copies' the original. The original may be considered a 'classic' (something that is honored as definitive in its field) and bears reproducing for this very reason. And the fact that these items are being reproduced in modern times it is just logical that modern (state of the art) materials be used in the manufacturing of the item.

Anyway, that's my opinion on the subject and as I stated before, YMMV.
And my mind can be changed by other opinions. I've never seen anything in print that defines what a 'reproduction' is in terms of shotguns so I guess everyone's opinion would have some validity on the matter.





.

[George M. Purtill Member #28]

Dean
You are not argumentative any more than I am. As I said it is a very interesting philosophical question.
I love my Skeuse Parkers. I think I will see if Tony Galazan will make me up some replacement case labels.
I know Gerry Addison and Kenny Graft will need a hundred each.

[Pay Dirt]

Originally Posted by Dean Romig

Bobby, I like your first reply better... the one you withdrew...
.

The new one is kinda like a “Reply Reproduction”.

I would suppose that the emotional and financial investment that some make in their
“Originals” seems to call out for some type of differentiation.

So what is it really?

I cant believe it’s the geographic parameters during production i.e.Philly vs. Utica Foxes.
I dont believe it’s continuity of production i.e. Superposed production during WWII.
Use and history? NIB/unfired 100 year old specimens begs that question.
Soul? Maybe those of you who shoot both can answer that.

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Bobby Cash

I would suppose that the emotional and financial investment that some make in their “Originals” seems to call out for some type of differentiation.

I completely agree with that statement.

So what is it really?

I cant believe it’s the geographic parameters during production i.e.Philly vs. Utica Foxes.
I dont believe it’s continuity of production i.e. Superposed production during WWII.
Use and history? NIB/unfiredd 100 year old specimens begs that question.
Soul? Maybe those of you who shoot both can answer that.

I can answer to the "soul" question having toted both originals in the uplands as well as my "Skeuese Parkers" - My original Parker Bros. guns have it - it's just there right between my hands - but my "Skeuese Parkers" don't....yet.






.

[WmRike]

If someone in Kansas other than GM was making what appeared to be Corvette three-window coupes, they would almost certainly be considered reproductions.