Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums  

Go Back   Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums Announcement, Help & Introduction Forums New User Introductions

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
New to PGCA
Unread 04-22-2012, 04:19 PM   #1
Member
Terry P
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Default New to PGCA

I was just given a beautiful Parker 10 guage DHE by my dad. He inherited it many years ago. Thanks to your website, I learned that it was built in 1890 even though it looks brand new. It is a 3 frame with 30" Titanic barrels. The sides are engraved with a pointer dog and scrolls and the underside has what appears to be ducks. Along with the gun were several boxes of Remingtion 2 7/8 and 3 1/2 shells. Chambers seem to be long enough for the 3 1/2's. Can anybody tell me if they would be safe to fire? Thanks for the terrific web site.
Terry Phillips is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 05:25 PM   #2
Member
charlie cleveland
PGCA Member

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,986
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7,794 Times in 3,967 Posts

Default

welcome terry you have fond the greatest bunch of parker lovers youve ever seen....you have inherited a great gun for your first parker...terry it would be adviseable to have a gun smith that is familar with parker guns and have your gun ckecked outespically the barrels to see if it is safe to shoot.... the gun was not chambered for the 3 1/2 inch magnum shells....terry would be best to shoot low pressure 10 ga shells in your gun if it passes inspection...these can be bought from various places but i recommend the rst shells....or load your on low pressure shells....good luck there will be some more fellows to pitch in and give some expert advise...if you can we all would like to see some oictures of your gun.... charlie
charlie cleveland is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 06:05 PM   #3
Member
Terry P
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Default

Thanks Charlie, for the quick reply, Already had the gun checked out and it was given a clean bill of health. I just didn't know about using 3.5" shells. The forcing cone begins at 3.75" down the chamber. I think I'll stay with standard length shells. Here are some quick snapshots.. Thanks again for the advice.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 100_0832.jpg (525.7 KB, 3 views)
File Type: jpg 100_0833.jpg (564.8 KB, 1 views)
File Type: jpg 100_0834.jpg (510.5 KB, 3 views)
File Type: jpg 100_0835.jpg (545.6 KB, 5 views)
File Type: jpg 100_0836.jpg (497.8 KB, 4 views)
Terry Phillips is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 07:37 PM   #4
Member
Harry Collins
PGCA Member
 
Harry Collins's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,911
Thanks: 9,940
Thanked 1,757 Times in 732 Posts

Default

Terry,

I dont want to rain on the parade, but I noticed a few things that might be of concern. The barrel flats have a "D" just before the weight of the barrels (5 with a small 2 for five pounds 2 oz). "D" stands for Damascus barrels. I also see lines around the barrels as if they have been mono-blocked (original barrels cut off and new barrels inserted). There were no 3 1/2 inch shells in 1890. I have a 20 gauge Parker that started life as a 16 gauge with Twist Steel barrels that was mono-blocked and I shoot the snot out of it. Have fun.
Harry Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 07:44 PM   #5
Member
OH Osthaus
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Rick Losey's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,808
Thanks: 1,646
Thanked 8,157 Times in 3,260 Posts

Default

isn't "D" the grade

but i do see the line suggesting a sleeving
__________________
"If there is a heaven it must have thinning aspen gold, and flighting woodcock, and a bird dog" GBE
Rick Losey is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 08:07 PM   #6
Member
Terry P
Forum Associate

Member Info
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Default

Thanks for your acessment. You certainly aren't raining on any parades. I'm delighted with this gun even if it was rebarreled. Infact, I prefer not to have damascus barrels. Since the rib states "Titanic Steel" is it reasonable to think that Parker may have done the work?
Terry Phillips is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 09:48 PM   #7
Member
OH Osthaus
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Rick Losey's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7,808
Thanks: 1,646
Thanked 8,157 Times in 3,260 Posts

Default

Terry


might i suggest getting the research letter for the gun. That would tell you if it was originally damascus, and might reference if it was returned to Parker for work.
__________________
"If there is a heaven it must have thinning aspen gold, and flighting woodcock, and a bird dog" GBE
Rick Losey is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 09:54 PM   #8
Member
Harry Collins
PGCA Member
 
Harry Collins's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,911
Thanks: 9,940
Thanked 1,757 Times in 732 Posts

Default

I don't think Parker had Titanic barrels on DH's until about 1897. My 1894 hammered Parker was mono-blocked by LaFever and they changed "TWIST" to "STEEL". I don't think Parker did such things, but I've been wrong about many things Parker. The great thing about your Parker is that it came to you from family and that is more important to me about my family Parker's than all the warts they may have. You've a great old Parker you can try to wear out before you pass it along to the next generation. Good luck and great shooting.

Kindest, Harry
Harry Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 09:58 PM   #9
Member
Researcher
PGCA Lifetime
Member
 
Dave Noreen's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,609
Thanks: 1,632
Thanked 7,836 Times in 2,363 Posts

Default

Neither Parker Bros. nor Remington did that mono bloc sleeving work. Very likely the word Damascus was tig welded in and the rib remarked Titanic when the sleeving job was done.

The gun appears to have selective automatic ejectors that were not offered by Parker Bros. at the time that gun was originally made, so it very likely was back to Parker Bros. for those at some point in its life. Did it get the updated bolt and bolt plate at that time?

FWIW, it doesn't look new. When it was new the receiver, top-lever, forearm iron, and forearm latch lever were color case hardened, not buffed shiney like now.

Was/is that gun in Washington State? I saw one just like that at Chet Paulson's in Tacoma about 45 years ago.
Dave Noreen is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 10:37 PM   #10
Member
Dean Romig
PGCA Invincible
Life Member
 
Dean Romig's Avatar

Member Info
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 31,640
Thanks: 35,621
Thanked 33,235 Times in 12,376 Posts

Default

That "D" on the barrel flats represents Damascus.... which is what the breech section of the barrels is, behind the sleeve seam.
Dean Romig is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dean Romig For Your Post:
Reply


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 02:56 PM.

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