Please help identify this for us

[RickR]

My first post just a few weeks ago, was basically the same Q as this poster including the same model with an 1886 SN although I had some basic knowledge having a hobby business helping old doubles recuperate 4 decades ago before moving on. I was depressed that I could no longer just know the SN of any better quality gun, regardless of it's brand, like I once could and so know when it was built, but also surprised over how much MORE has been documented in the last 40-50 years. One surprise to learn was that Parker kept building damascus, err composite barreled guns for decades after nitro powder came to be and black loaded ammo was the economy load while the good stuff was nitro. The point being that never shoot damascus regardless of condition does not apply to Parkers...that anyone able to afford $55 for a shotgun when one that would go bang for a few lifetimes of typical use could be had for $10 in the Sears catalog, would also be buying the best shells. Ergo, there are damascus Parkers that never fired anything other than smokeless loads including the heaviest of them. And that most of the current shooters of composite barreled Parkers STILL shoot store-bought light target modern ammo. That raised my confidence enough that the black substitute loads I'll continue to use will be with no worries.

PS. mine has chambers smooth out to about 2 7/8" and such a short and barely visible forcing cone to a standard oversize bore (evidently most older Parker bores were larger than other 12 bores) that a 3" shell would fire and open up just fine. In fact I kept getting 3" with my depth gauge because the step up from chamber to bore was too minimal for the gauge to stop at the forcing cone.) I mention this because I don't recall the suggestions given mentioning the need to check chamber length, likely because they already know they came with longer chambers already, but best to double check before using a 2 3/4 shell.