An Interesting GHE 20

[Bruce Day]

xxxx

[Rich Anderson]

A very nice piece of wood for a GH grade gun regardless of guage. Production probably 1926-1927 I'm just guessing here.

How does something stay unused for over 80years, esp a gun???

[Dean Romig]

Maybe very little use but certainly not "unused" as the breech face shows "substantial" use.

But not to be a nit-picker, that gun is in fantastic condition!

[Tim Sheldon]

Bruce, what is the amount of ware inside the triggergaurd and on the tang where your hand holds the gun?
Thanks, Tim

--That is a fine look'en shooting iron

[tom leshinsky]

Very nice Parker but the borders on the butt stock don't look mullered in the pics.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Bruce: Always enjoy your pictures. Someday I would hope to see a gun in such condition. Two questions:
On the 20 gauge - have some screw heads been messed with? Registration a bit out on some. Could that have come out of the factory like that?

On the 12 gauge - Were recoil pads offered by the factory or is this always an after market addition??

Thanks,
Jack

[E Robert Fabian]

Jack, recoil pads where a option on all guns except Trojan, I believe $ 2.00, which is hard to understand when comparing it to the work involved in a skeleton butt.

Not speaking for Bruce's gun but photos can make some of the screws look out, noticed it on some of the photos I've taken.

[Dean Romig]

Very nice Parker but the borders on the butt stock don't look mullered in the pics.

Tom, judging by the style of the engraving, the checkering, the lack of "Parker Bros." on the frame . . . oh, and now I've gone back to look some more at the pics and see serial no. 241XXX it is a late Remington gun and the lack of mullering to the borders of checkering was quite normal for the period.

[Norm Growden]

How does something stay unused for over 80years, esp a gun???

Richard:

My great-uncle had a M97 Winchester. He was killed at Anzio in 1943, and it sat in his widow's closet until 1980. She gave it to my Dad, and he never used it. I inherited it in 1991, and haven't used Uncle Jack's gun. Just an example of how such a thing could happen.

[Patrick Lien]

Represented by first seller to be fully original and substantially unused.

Sold Sept 2008 for $17,000. Sold again in early 2009 for $22,000 to small dealer. When last seen at Spring Tulsa show, it was offered at $26,000.

Always interesting to look at some of these guns.

Bruce,
I think " substantially unused after full restoration" would be more appropriate. You did not offer an opinion on this gun yet represented it as "fun to look at" and then included $$$$$$$$$$$$? Why? Are you trying to sell the gun? Create hype on the gun? Why not just put the pictures on the board and ask the question; Is it real?

I think the gun you posted was created by a talented person or group for the sole purpose of duping the "advanced collector" you so often refer to into the exchange of dollars for opinions of others.
I like the pictures of the gun and especially the engraving, but if you are going to post guns "AS ORIGINAL" either by your own admission or someone else then I think you should also either provide documentation of fact on condition or just post the pics and let people decide what is original or not. Opinions are free and my opinion is that you posted a gun that is a redone FAKE! Thank you

Patrick

[Bruce Day]

Bruce,
I think " substantially unused after full restoration" would be more appropriate. You did not offer an opinion on this gun yet represented it as "fun to look at" and then included $$$$$$$$$$$$? Why? Are you trying to sell the gun? Create hype on the gun? Why not just put the pictures on the board and ask the question; Is it real?

I think the gun you posted was created by a talented person or group for the sole purpose of duping the "advanced collector" you so often refer to into the exchange of dollars for opinions of others.
I like the pictures of the gun and especially the engraving, but if you are going to post guns "AS ORIGINAL" either by your own admission or someone else then I think you should also either provide documentation of fact on condition or just post the pics and let people decide what is original or not. Opinions are free and my opinion is that you posted a gun that is a redone FAKE! Thank you

Patrick


Mr Lien, the gun is not mine nor was it ever, I have no stake in it, and do not know the identity of the present owner. I have no interest in creating a market or "hype" for the gun, and I have no idea why you would make such absurd accusations.

I didl not say anything about the originality of the gun and left that to others. I knew something about its history, so I stated that. I merely said the gun was interesting. I stated what I knew about the representations of the original owner without further comment.

In view of your reactions and statements, I have deleted the posts.

Bruce Day

[E Robert Fabian]

I kind of liked that gun Bruce, fake or not, found it interesting how it appreciated over a short period of time.

[Robin Lewis]

Bruce,
My opinion is: I wish you wouldn't have deleted the note. I found it interesting.

[Rich Anderson]

Yeah Bruce put the pictures back up. Don't succumb to peer pressure:nono:

I always enjoy looking at nice guns:bigbye:

[Robert Delk]

It was a very nice gun. The wood looked like a lot like claro walnut to me.Did they use claro in the late production guns? I realize that eastern black walnut also comes in the brighter colors and that photo lighting/wood finish affects the appearance in photos.

[Dean Romig]

It looked like black walnut to me.

[Robert Delk]

Well, the colors are so bright and the orange tones look a lot like the blanks I have of claro and also the claro lumber I just got from California. I also have a blank that was sold to me as black and it is very bright and looks a lot like some of the wood on the Parker reproductions.
I find it strange that most wood dealers insist that claro was not used as gunstocks much before the late 50's or early 60's even though there was a lot of it available in some really big trees long before that.

[Bruce Day]

I have received a number of public and private requests to repost the G 20 photos and pay no regard to inappropriate and rude comments. I am inclined to do so with the provision that I am posting them with no comment from me. I am aware that the price escalated quickly. I do not know the gun's present status but it was on the sales circuit a year ago and I have waited a year to post photos.

Presented only as an interesting gun, so I'll try this one more time.

[Tim Sheldon]

Does that not look like DelGrego's work?

[Dean Romig]

If it is redone, I'm going with Turnbull.

[Bill Murphy]

Great gun. What's with those screws? I can't comment beyond that, because the original post is missing, and I don't have it memorized.

[Bruce Day]

Its not missing, Bill. Scroll up.

[Richard Flanders]

Thank you Bruce for the reposting of these pics. I'd have to say that it doesn't look original to me. Way too much wear around the firing pin holes and the receiver is a bit too polished under that case color... could be I've just not seen and unused Parker receiver, but that looks too shiny to me. Is there a chance that the patent date stamp on the table was only half stamped like that originally? Never seen and end blank in the rib matting that wide either... anyone else?? Seems the back edge of the stock cheeks is a bit too sharp and prominent also. And as Bill notes, the screws don't look unmolested by any means. Regardless, it certainly is a stunning gorgeous gun. Maybe these are just Remington era features that I'm clueless about.

[Bruce Day]

Remington features in a 221 SN gun?

[Dean Romig]

I think Bruce had previously inadvertantly posted a picture of the barrel flats from another gun with the 241XXX serial number. That picture is not included in this batch and the serial number showing in this batch is that of a 1926 or '27 Meriden gun.

[Ed Blake]

Thank you Bruce. That is an interesting gun. Someone used their 401K funds to buy that one.

[Bruce Day]

One never knows.

Several years ago I got a call from a fellow who said that he had purchased a nice 20ga VHE and gave it to a local gunsmith who told him that he could turn it into a an A-1 Special with gold for a total cost of $10,000. The fellow said the work turned out crappy and crude and the gun was ruined. He said he had found another another gunsmith who could do a better job, so he was searching for another 20ga V to turn over to him. It would be another $10,000 or so but he was hopeful that this time it would turn out to look just like those A-1 Specials he had seen in books. I referred the fellow to the Tulsa show.

[Bruce Day]

I think Bruce had previously inadvertantly posted a picture of the barrel flats from another gun with the 241XXX serial number. That picture is not included in this batch and the serial number showing in this batch is that of a 1926 or '27 Meriden gun.



I originally posted two sets of photos. The first was the 221 GHE 20 which I re-posted. The second set was a 241 GHE 12 owned by a Nebraska friend. The G 12 is a high condition gun of which I know most of its history. I did not re-post photos of that gun.

[Dean Romig]

Thanks for the clarification Bruce.

Dean

[Richard Flanders]

Ooops. I guess the s/n is too early for even a transition gun. I don't have the s/n ranges in my head unfortunately. Thanks for the clarification Bruce.

[Chris Travinski]

Bruce,
He isn't going to use this GHE for the donor gun is he? Original or not, it's a nice piece.

[Bruce Day]

Bruce,
He isn't going to use this GHE for the donor gun is he? Original or not, it's a nice piece.


Chris, no connection. The fellow with extra engraving-itis ( I won't even call it an upgrade because that implies improvement) was after a cheap gun. In my book, nothing wrong and everything right with a nice, clean, well kept, honest V grade.

[Ray Masciarella]

Great gun one way or another. Too much is made of restoring guns anyway (in my view). Who cares if an old worn out gun is restored.
I express no opinion other then it sure looks nice.

Ray

[Bruce Day]

May I pose an interesting question?

Would, should or could Mr. Lien's unequivocal and forceful public statement of his opinon on this PGCA forum, whether correct, partially correct or not at all correct, have an effect on the value and saleability of that GHE 20 if the gun is on the market on this site, another website, gunshow, by a dealer or individual?

If so, what? What part does perception play in valuation of these guns?

Again, not my gun, I'm not a dealer, just a small collector, rarely sell a gun and I'm likely done acquiring guns. Just raising the issue.

[Ray Masciarella]

It probably has some effect. For too long there has been a stigma surrounding restoring a gun. The reality is that a restoration may increase the value but there are those who simply think it ruins a gun. I guess sometimes "perception trumps reality".

I at one time owned a Sharps Mod 1874 .40 2 5/8 that had a proven Bill Cody connection. It was actually used on the Czar's hunt. It was worn out after many years of use. Once I proved the connection I sold it for a lot of money (at least a lot back then). It was so worn out that I couldn't shoot it (too much head space) so I sold it. No way would I have restored it. But if it was some old Parker owned by John Doe-all worn out-no finish left-why not restore it? Why should it carry a stigma so long as it is done correctly?

[Dean Romig]

Bruce, that is an interesting question and it reinforces the fact that if we ever have a "Parkers For Sale" page on our website it should be limited to the seller's post - in other words, he owns the thread and nobody else can make comments about the gun, either pro or con, thus, eliminating any opinion - expert or otherwise.

Mr. Lien's comments and expression of his opinion certainly serves to raise awareness that we must all be ever watchful of the possibility of upgrades, alterations, refinishes, reconditioned guns and that there are people out there who can sometimes deceive even the most serious collectors . . . so, let's be careful out there gentlemen.

Beyond this . . . :dh:

[Jack Cronkhite]

From my perspective, the gun sells itself to a willing buyer regardless of whatever lay opinions may swirl around it. If a buyer just wants a nice looking gun - this is a nice looking gun. If a buyer wants a quick turnaround investment - and doesn't want to get burned, then "gun in hand" expert opinions may be sought and relied upon over internet chatter based on looking at a few pictures. As always - caveat emptor.
Regards,
Jack

[Bruce Day]

I'm not sure its a dead horse, Dean. I know there was a public announcement that the board of directors was going to be deliberating again the sale of guns through this website and the effect on Parker collecting. I don't have the answers, but I know this sequence plays into that.

Ray Masciarella: I believe I recall reading about the Cody/Czar Sharps quite a few years ago. It was in the same vein as the Custer Battlefield Springfield sold recently. You have the perspective of an experienced collector. May I urge you to join the PGCA, as your ID does not indicate that you are a member.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Is the Patent date poor stamping or has it been partially ground down or .....???

[Rich Anderson]

IMHO Mr. Leins comments regarding the "orignality" won't effect the value of this gun or any gun for that matter. It's just his opinion which he is entitled to. I would think that if someone was looking at spending that kind of money on a gun that in all likely hood won't see the field it would be the buyers primary focus to determine origanality.

The only two people who matter in a situation like this is the seller and the buyer. If both are happy then the opinions of the peanut gallery are moot.

[Ray Masciarella]

Bruce: I should be a member. Not sure why I'm not showing up. I paid my dues-I swear!!!!

The Sharps I owned was actually owned by Cody's neighbor. He had a ranch next to Cody's on the North Platte River. It was his gun, not Cody's. I bought it from his grandson many years ago now. This fella had such beatiful handwriting that Cody had him do all the invitations for Cody's daughters wedding. Interesting side bit. He went on the Czar's hunt with Cody. I guess they were hunting buddies so to speak.
That old gun must have killed a lot of buffalo cause, while it looked pretty good, it was sure worn out. It was that slight Cody connection that caused me not even to try to fix the problem with the headspace and, of course, it bought a perm. price just cause it had a real Cody story to go with it. It was a neat gun. Wish I hadn't sold it now but I don't like owning a gun I can't shoot!

[Pat Boccuzzi]

Bruce,

Who cares if the gun is redone...... it is a real gem......... 90 percent of the Parkers have had some work done to them. And when your talking small bore graded Parkers I'll take everyone i can get from no case color to delgrego redone. Delgrego It the next best thing as Parker of Galazan rebuilding a gun. The funny thing is a redone Muscle cars / exotic cars if redone correctly it does not hurt the value.

[Bill Murphy]

Jack, lightly struck patent lines on Parker water tables are not a sign of a refinish. Water tables rarely need more than a light touch in the refinishing process and faint patent lines are often seen.

[Patrick Lien]

May I pose an interesting question?

Would, should or could Mr. Lien's unequivocal and forceful public statement of his opinon on this PGCA forum, whether correct, partially correct or not at all correct, have an effect on the value and saleability of that GHE 20 if the gun is on the market on this site, another website, gunshow, by a dealer or individual?

If so, what? What part does perception play in valuation of these guns?

Again, not my gun, I'm not a dealer, just a small collector, rarely sell a gun and I'm likely done acquiring guns. Just raising the issue.


Bruce,
If you are going to continue to address my statements in an earlier post then I would ask that you please restore your original post to which I made the statements. Please don't alter it, just put it back. As I said earlier;

1. I like the pictures
2. I think it is restored gun
3. I think your original post was just a for sale ad minus the "buy it now botton".

It's just my opinion , but I left it there regardless of if people agreed with it. I did not delete anything and then re-post something different. So please put the original post back.

Patrick

[Bruce Day]

See your post #10 in which you quote the entirety of my text that preceeded photos I posted. I have no ability to restore deleted text with the forum program.

[Ray Masciarella]

Patrick: I'm a newbie interested in learning as much as I can (and I have a lot to learn). What do you see in the photos that leads you to the conclusion it is restored?

[Tim Sheldon]

I think that Mr Lein's post may well affect the price of the gun in a negative way, in the same but opposite way that it seemed that Mr Day's post may have affected the price of the gun.

Tim

[Ed Blake]

Tim - That depends on who is buying. A relative newbie with relatively thin wallet would say, "Nice gun, but it is very likely I can't afford it." And think nothing more of it. A relative newbie with fat wallet might jump on a gun like that without looking closely because he would not want it to get away from him. This is probably what has happened in this case. Bruce offered no endorsement of the gun, he simply presented it for our observation. I'd love to own a gun like that, regardless of whether it's been worked on or not. It's beautiful, but speculation drove its price way up. The first guy to flip that gun did OK. Now that the music has stopped, so to speak, the last buyer may have a hard time getting his return of capital, much less return on capital. Still a great gun.

[Bruce Day]

I'll buy you a beer at Dave Wunrow's trailer next time I see you, Ed.

[Ed Blake]

That's a deal Bruce. I love beer.

[Dave Fuller]

I like the gun, Ed's post and beer... where is Dave Wunrow's trailer? Thanks for showing us the gun Bruce.

[Bruce Day]

It's wherever Dave is.

First Photo: L-R at the Duluth Puglisi shoot:

Brad Heidel, PGCA member and Pheasants Forever executive.

Dave Wunrow in red hat.

Bill Bolyard behind Dave.

Charlie Herzog

Ed Morgan

Unidentified???

In beero, veritas.


Second Photo: L-R at da Yooper

Steve Cobb

Dave Wunrow. Barb Wunrow seated in background.

[Bill Murphy]

Ed, what Bruce didn't tell you is that no one has ever paid for a beer at Dave Wunrow's trailer, ever.

[Jack Cronkhite]

I'm a "thin wallet" guy who looks and drools. This one showed up today on GA
http://www.gunsamerica.com//975818114/Guns/Shotguns/Parker-Shotguns/Parker_PHE_12ga_PARKER_STEEL_BARRELS_1_OF_839_MADE .htm?wl=1#

Presented as a complete restoration with an "opinion" that restorations are becoming increasingly accepted by collectors. I'd like to be the guy who adds handling marks from field use and have a new gun for pics.
Cheers,
Jack

http://www.shotgunworld.com/bbs/cpg1410/albums/userpics/28884/normal_P1060891sgw.jpg

[E Robert Fabian]

If your going to drool, try checking out this AHE.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=151194920

[Dean Romig]

Yes, I've been watching that one daily. What an upland gun that would be . . . for a twelve-bore enthusiast. Very, very nice!

[Tim Sheldon]

Nice AH, too bad it has a pad, darn it. But it is a very nicely engraved gun. Where is the drool bucket?

Tim

[Richard Flanders]

I've been watching that A grade out of curiosity also. Looks like the bbls have been reblued and maybe the chokes opened, which seems odd considering how good the receiver looks. Nice colors and a beautiful job of engraving! I'd have it out in the grouse woods in a heartbeat...

[Dave Fuller]

Time to sell one of those gold prospects and get yourself a new Parker Rich!

[E Robert Fabian]

Could those barrels be cut? Did anyone get the sereal number?

[Dave Suponski]

Bob, Funny thing here the gun is in the "Serialization Book as a B grade with ejectors and 30 " barrels. The gun is being advertised as an A with 28" barrels.
Don,t know..But the book has been wrong before.

[Jack Cronkhite]

Could those barrels be cut? Did anyone get the sereal number?

I looked and drooled but had the very same question. From reading on these forums, as I understand it, the barrels should be touching or almost touching when viewed straight on. These are quite separated in that view. Again, nice to look at and thanks.

Jack
http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/151194000/151194920/pix1209344218.jpg

[Bill Murphy]

The letter may give us a hint. Obviously the stock books show 30" barrels, but the order book may give a clearer picture. Where is the T on the barrel flat?

[Richard Flanders]

Bill: What would the T designate? There's a "+" mark on each barrel flat; shouldn't they designate tight chokes? If so, the current chokes as stated would support honing and/or cutting of the barrels. The picture of the muzzle is too fuzzy to see if they touch; if they don't, it isn't by much. I sent that nice 26" Lindgren Daly I got back because the bbls had been cut, which they hadn't noticed and I wasn't told of.

[E Robert Fabian]

Dave, I don't know the serial number so I didn't come to any conclusions, I like others saw the choke configuration as being a little sceptical.

What I see in the barrel end pic. is lack of keels.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be a proud owner, I could find a use for that open choked gun.

[Dean Romig]

The book says 30" and the book also says TI5, not TI6 as the seller originally claimed but now says he's been told it may be a B or grade-5. I think I remember that gun from a while back. One becomes educated quickly in this game . . . or rather, some do.

See for yourselves, 130593

[Jack Cronkhite]

Jack, lightly struck patent lines on Parker water tables are not a sign of a refinish. Water tables rarely need more than a light touch in the refinishing process and faint patent lines are often seen.

Not sure if we are considering the same thing. Curious about the patent date stamp. Could it have come from the factory like this??

Thanks,
Jack

[Bruce Day]

[QUOTE=
Presented as a complete restoration with an "opinion" that restorations are becoming increasingly accepted by collectors.
Cheers,
Jack



An interesting sidebar, if I may use the term "interesting" anymore, is that during the last major firearms sale at James Julia auctions, there were several high grade Parkers that were originally identified by Wes Dillon and J R LaRue, two real experts who know their Parkers, as original guns. Prior to sale I understand Doug Turnbull identified several of those as guns that he had redone. They still sold, in an audience of advanced and knowlegeable Parker collectors, for what Julia had estimated they would sell for before the restoration became known. To me this was a demonstration that high quality restorations that are indiscernable from originals are bringing, at least for that auction and those guns, high end prices.

And an observation; most restorations are lacking in that they don't look like Parker originals. Those that do, I think are outstanding, my opinon only.

[Dean Romig]

[To me this was a demonstration that high quality restorations that are indiscernable from originals are bringing, at least for that auction and those guns, high end prices.

And an observation; most restorations are lacking in that they don't look like Parker originals. Those that do, I think are outstanding, my opinon only.


But the problem in this, in my opinion, is that when it is discovered that a Parker, previously thought to be original and purchased as such, is actually a redone (refinished - refurbished - rebuilt - remanufactured - whatever term suits the gun) the value often drops considerably and what was formerly a good investment . . . is no longer.

[Dave Suponski]

Jack,I have seen patent date stamps like that many times.

[Fred Preston]

The rib on 130593 is stamped "Titanic". Could the gun have had Damascus barrels originally and been refitted with Titanics by Parker? Most 5s and 6s wear Acme barrels.

[Bruce Day]

Fred, Titanics are correct for the 130's. Look at TPS. The Acme's were not until a couple years later.

[Tim Sheldon]

Not sure if we are considering the same thing. Curious about the patent date stamp. Could it have come from the factory like this??

Thanks,
Jack


Jack, I'm with you, this one does not look "right" to me. Though I do agree with Bill that lightly struck or off struck is somewhat common.

Tim

[Jack Cronkhite]

Jack,I have seen patent date stamps like that many times.

Thanks Dave.

[Kurt Densmore]

Thank you Bruce for the reposting of these pics. I'd have to say that it doesn't look original to me. Way too much wear around the firing pin holes and the receiver is a bit too polished under that case color... could be I've just not seen and unused Parker receiver, but that looks too shiny to me. Is there a chance that the patent date stamp on the table was only half stamped like that originally? Never seen and end blank in the rib matting that wide either... anyone else?? Seems the back edge of the stock cheeks is a bit too sharp and prominent also. And as Bill notes, the screws don't look unmolested by any means. Regardless, it certainly is a stunning gorgeous gun. Maybe these are just Remington era features that I'm clueless about.

Regarding the rib matting.........this GH20 Serial number range 200XXX is very similar. This gun letters to the current 26" bbls. Although the ivory bead has probably been added at a later date. It has the widest gap I have seen to date.

[Richard Flanders]

Thanks Kurt. My 1918 GHE12 has an ivory front bead and letters with 26" bbls... which have been cut. That's a large bead. Looks in size like one of Galazans.