| Author | Post |
|---|
Dave Miles
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | Michigan USA |
| Posts: | 1730 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14th, 2005 06:19 pm |
|
On my Parker Hammer gun, there is a #2 on the reciever, just above the S/N. See Picture. But on the barrel log there is a #1
On the barrel flat there is a 4 - barrel weight? the letter D and C
Is this a number 1 or 2 reciever
Attached Image (viewed 674 times):
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14th, 2005 06:38 pm |
|
| Number one frame grade two with Damascus barrels. Someone will tell you what the C means.
|
Dave Miles
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | Michigan USA |
| Posts: | 1730 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14th, 2005 06:40 pm |
|
| Was it common then for a 12 gauge to be on a #1 frame?
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 14th, 2005 06:42 pm |
|
| Yes, in the hammer and early hammerless guns, 12 gauge number one frame guns were very common. Some were even rather heavy.
|
Dave Miles
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | Michigan USA |
| Posts: | 1730 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 12:24 pm |
|
Ok then, why is there such a wide range of frame sizes between one style of gun? For example, I have a 12 gauge hammer gun on a #1 frame. I'm also seeing these same guns on a #2 and #3 frame. I mean is there a reason why one gun is built on smaller frame then the next. A #1 frame for upland hunting, and a #3 for ducks, with heavier loads?
Thanks, Dave
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 12:35 pm |
|
| That about covers it, but it has been discussed much more thoroughly in Parker Pages articles in the past. Can anyone pinpoint the issue where such an article appeared?
|
Kevin McCormack
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1025 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 01:48 pm |
|
| Most of the gauge-to-frame size variations center around desired weight of the gun for the majority of purposes it was to be used for - that is, a 12-gauge primarily destined for upland hunting many times was built on a #1 frame, whereas a 12-ga. used primarily on waterfowl would most likely have been built (either by customer order or "naturel selection") on a #2 or #3 frame. Barrel and chamber length influenced frame sizes accordingly as well - I have a 3-inch 20 ga. 32" live pigeon gun built on a #1 frame, and there are several examples of 20 ga. 3-inch 32" guns built on #2 frames as well. There is at least one example known of a 10 ga. 26" field gun built on a #2 frame. KBM
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 02:09 pm |
|
| Kevin is referring to a 10 gauge original factory Parker with even more unusual than a #2, a number one (#1) frame that was shown to us at the Vintagers shoot awhile back. It was documented in Parker Brothers records. I personally would rather be shooting Kevin's 20 gauge!
|
Austin Hogan
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 15th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1600 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 08:50 pm |
|
I wrote the article, but I do not have the text. I do have the original sketch, showing gun weight vs final finished frame width, and nominal size, that I used to prepare the article. I have added a couple of more guns , and post the sketch with this.
The sketch shows the all up gun weight in pounds, versus the width of the breech, in inches. The nominal frame widths 2 1/8 - 0; 2 1/4 - 1; 2 9/32 - 1 1/2; 2 3/8 - 2; and 2 1/2 - 3 are noted by vertical red lines at the corresponding width. This sketch shows 34 guns, with 0,1,1 1/2,2 and 3 frames, representing Parkers production from s/n 3083 to 232800. There are five guns with two barrel sets included; the two weights of these guns are connected by vertcal blue lines, and the grade is noted alongside the line.
There is indeed a general trend of gun weight increasing with frame size, but don't bet anyone that your 0 frame 16 is lighter than a one frame 16; or a one frame twelve. Note the three lightest guns; the 1 frame 16 ga is lightest by just an ounce, and the 1 frame 12 ga is only an ounce heavier than the 0 frame 16 ga. Also note that the five guns that approximate 7 pounds are found in three frame sizes.
I think the most interesting aspect of this data is the variation in weight of the two barrel set guns. The GH is a twelve ga upland/waterfowl set - seven pounds with its 28 inch barrels, and seven and three quarters plus with thirty inch barrels. The similar but older lifter G set has about the same weight difference between its 27 and 30 inch sets. The CH is a two gauge set; the bernard 12 is the 30 inch waterfowl barrel at 9 pounds plus, and a damascus 26 upland barrel brings it down to 7 3/4 pounds - as the customer ordered. The DH is also a two gauge set, and the two pairs of 30 inch barrels straddle 8 1/4 pounds. It appears that Parker could deliver a two frame gun weighing anywhere from 7 to 9 1/4 pounds, with the upland barrel a pound lighter, or the weights nearly matched, as the customer ordered.
It appears that Parker began with the 1 1/16 firing pin spacing one frame to accomodate twelves, and 1 1/8 firing pin spacing to accomodate tens. The three and larger frames appear for large tens and eights somewhere in the 10 -12000 serial range. The zero frame for sixteens appears 12-14000. [Note that 3215 is filed to the external dimensions of the later zero frame. ]
It is well documented that Parker had multi spindle drills that simultaneously drilled several holes in each frame. There was probably a multi spindle jig made up for each frame size , although the infrequent large (5+?) frames could have been laid out by the machinist. The ten and twelve were equally popular in lifter guns, and two sets of tooling were nearly equally used. As the twelve increased in popularity, the ten ga tooling was less in demand, and more twelves were made on two frames to meet orders without re tooling. (Note that popular 7 1/4 to 7 3/4 pound twelves are equally frequent on one and two frames).
As the hammerless era evolved, the ten became a special order item at extra charge, and the three frame NH became the popular ten. Smaller gauges became more popular and the sixteen consumed the output of one frame tooling.
I propose that, as the fluid steel era began and lighter guns became more popular, Parker devoted the zero tooling to 20's, the one tooling to 16's and re tooled the popular twelve line , calling it the one and one half frame. This roughly evened the tooling utilization, and retained the two plus frame tooling for custom orders. It is interesting to note that the 1 1/2 frame is just a 32nd larger than the one, probably to prevent accidentally putting them in the wrong boring jig.
We know there are one frame tens , two frame twenties, and the figure shows a seven pound twelve gauge can be made on any frame zero to two. It appears that availability of tooling was as great a factor as weight consideration in determining the frame size of an individual gun.
I know you will accuse me of heresy, but I was unable to put a yellow overprint on the text.
Best, Austin
Attached Image (viewed 365 times):
|
Bruce Day
PGCA Member
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 09:42 pm |
|
| Austin, what a wonderful and informative dissertation! I thought it curious that my 1886 sn 69,??? GH 12 ga 30" Damascus barrels , 1 frame weighs 8 lbs and my 1937 sn 241,601 CHE 12ga 28" barrels , 1 1/2 frame, weighs 7 lbs. Its true, the weight is mainly in the barrels, and frame size matched with the barrels is only part of the story.
____________________
Bruce Day
|
Bill Murphy
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 5872 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 19th, 2005 10:07 pm |
|
| Maybe the owners of some known guns will weigh them and post the weights. The guns I know about and assume we are curious about are a 1 frame 10, a 6 frame 10, a 6 frame 12, a OOO frame 28, a 00 frame .410, a 5 frame 8. My 7 frame 8 is the lightest 8 I have weighed or heard about at 11 pounds, 14 ounces. 4 frame 10's I have weighed are 10 1/2 pounds and 11 pounds even. A zero frame 16 hammer gun with cut out water table is very heavy at 7 1/2 pounds, but several on the same stock book page are identical weight and are assumed to also be zero frames. My old 2 frame VH 20 was 8 pounds even and was ordered that way. The 00 frame .410 was advertised at 8 1/2 pounds but I have no way of knowing whether that was accurate. When I had it in my hands years ago, it felt more like 7 1/2. A 2 frame 20 sold at Butterfield's I seem to remember having 5 1/2 pound barrels! The total weight was not mentioned but maybe the new owner will post.
|
Dave Noreen
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 463 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 20th, 2005 05:39 am |
|
| My very early 2-frame GH-Grade with the 32-inch Vulcan 20-gauge barrels in place weighs 8 pounds 4.5 ounces. With the 12-gauge now 30-inch (started life 32-inch) Damascus barrels it weighs 9 pounds 0.3 ounces. My Father's VH-Grade 2-frame 30-inch 12-gauge weighs 8 pounds 3.2 ounces. My Grandfather's very early PH-Grade 3-frame 30-inch 12-gauge weighed 8 pounds 8 ounces. So, Grandpa's 3-frame 30-inch 12 from 1890 weighs less then my 2-frame from 1889?!?
|
Fred Preston
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Red Haw, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 690 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 20th, 2005 10:40 am |
|
My 1876 lifter, Plain Twist 10 is on a #2 frame and weighs 8&1/4 lbs. It has 30" bbls. with 2&5/8" chambers to a step (no apparent forcing cone) for which I use RMC brass.
Another interesting gun is a 1920 20ga. VHE 0 frame 2 bbl. set (32" F&F and 28" M&F). With the 32" bbls., the gun weighs 6&1/16 lb; with the 28" bbls., 6&1/4 lb. Both sets balance at the hinge pin. I believe the 28" bbls. came later as they are stamped Parker overload proofed.
Fred
|
Eric Eis
PGCA Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 983 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 20th, 2005 02:29 pm |
|
| Bill, the 410 that I think you are refering to serial number 241082 is a OOO frame with a barrel weight of 4.9 and the seller says it is just around eight and half pounds. Eric Last edited on Thu Jan 20th, 2005 02:30 pm by Eric Eis
|
Current time is 07:10 pm | |
|
