first ejectors

[Jim Bennett]

What is the first known date/serial number for ejectors?

[Brian Dudley]

1901 was the first year that ejectors were put into Parker guns.

[Jim Bennett]

Thanks Brian
This DHE 97000 Is close. Might have been done later upon returning to Parker.........close enough.

[Bill Murphy]

The PGCA letter will tell you. I did a research project on the first ejectors and I don't remember the serial numbers being that far back. I'll try to dig out my information. I started my research because I owned a CH in the 114,000 range that was among the first. The serialization book will tell you that 114,000 range are the first production ejector guns. According to the order book entries, not all of the early ejector guns were problem free and more than one customer requested that his gun be returned to extractors. Parker Brothers refused to do it.

[George M. Purtill]

Thanks Brian
This DHE 97000 Is close. Might have been done later upon returning to Parker.........close enough.

Are they Parker ejectors? I own 95428 with ejectors but they are not Parker.

[Dean Romig]

I own Parker no. 79355 that went back in 1913 to have ejectors retrofitted. It cost $25 to have it done.

[Jim Bennett]

I can't imagine the work it would be to retro fit for ejectors.
This gun has a plugged hole ( through the last zero of 97000) on the forend iron. Wouldn't think Parker would have done that.

[George M. Purtill]

Please post pictures.

[Jim Bennett]

Can't currently.All I have is my SMART phone. I can when I get to my digs later next week.
( actually I could if I had your or someone's email address). You could see and/ or post.

[Chris Travinski]

I'll post them for you. Ctravinski@yahoo.com

[Russ Jackson]

I own Parker no. 79355 that went back in 1913 to have ejectors retrofitted. It cost $25 to have it done.

:cool:

[Chris Travinski]

Jim's forend

[George M. Purtill]

This reminds me of my non-Parker ejectors.

[Dave Noreen]

Pictures Dr. Gaddy sent me of Moran & Wolfersperger ejectors --

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/Ansleyone/Parker/MWEjectorsonGHParker73542.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/Ansleyone/Parker/MoreMWEjectorsinGH73542.jpg

A Nov. 17, 1906, ad for M & W Ejectors --

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/Ansleyone/Parker/GusHabichFPStannardampMoranNov171906_zpsc3ae1622.j peg

by then being fitted by Gus Habich and Moran & Wolfersperger had parted ways and as can be seen in the other ad Mathew E. Moran was now working with F.B. Stannard.

[Bill Murphy]

OK, about those "first" ejector guns. I owned #114,370, a CHE that, according to the SB, is the thirteenth ejector gun in that serial number range including the two lower numbered guns to be mentioned. #109,826 and #108,043 are also in the same October 1902 era, but out of sequence of the first in sequence serial numbers which begin at #114,201 according to my order book research as well as the Serialization Book entries. Those two lower number guns were probably older guns that happened to be available for experimentation. There could be the odd ejector gun in order books previous to the ones I examined, but that is unlikely since the stock books for the period are available and are posted in the SB. For all practical purposes, #114,201 is the earliest production ejector gun. #108,041 and #109,827 are listed as ejector guns in the SB. It is odd that these two numbers are so close to the early ejector guns I mentioned earlier, so I suspect a posting error in the Serialization Book.

[Dean Romig]

Jim's forend


There is nothing in that picture that represents Parker Bros. ejectors.

[Dean Romig]

#109,826 and #108,043 are also in the same October 1902 era, but out of sequence of the first in sequence serial numbers which begin at #114,201 according to my order book research as well as the Serialization Book entries. Those two lower number guns were probably older guns that happened to be available for experimentation. There could be the odd ejector gun in order books previous to the ones I examined, but that is unlikely since the stock books for the period are available and are posted in the SB.

Interesting.... "My order book research" and "previous to the ones I examined" indicates you have examined several order book and possibly stock books too. Did one of our Research Chairmen allow you to examine those books?..... or was that from the time Remington Arms Co. granted permission to the PGCA to copy the books and you were part of that team? You've got a great memory for detail Bill... a phenomenal memory.

[Bill Murphy]

Thanks for the "memory" compliment, but my early ejector research is all written down. I can quote it if I can find it.:) We were at Ilion for about five or six days for the PGCA Research Team and I sometimes would not go to lunch. I used the occasional lunch hour to pore over the books on days when they didn't lock us out of the Archives. During working hours, our noses were continually at the grindstone. Ask Allan about that. Another source of research material is my collection of "second copies" of pages I found interesting, like celebrity guns, the Show Gun lists, A-1 Specials, the Czar's gun, and any copies that were ruined and ended up in the trash. I think Jim Hall also raided the trash cans. Remember, there was no The Parker Story or Serialization Book and we were seeing these guns for the first time. I have only asked for special help from Research Chairmen when they expressed special interest in some special gun I was requesting a letter on, like the Gold Hearts Gun. Mark and I corresponed back and forth for days before we got that letter completed. For most of us, it was the highlight of our gun collecting careers.

[Rich Anderson]

I have serial number 70253 a 16ga 0 frame with ejectors. It's probably a retrofit as the gun is Damascus. I brought this to the Southern several years ago and Austin, Mark Conrad and several others looked it over and concluded all work was indeed Parker. It now not only has ejectors but a straight grip, SST,BTF with the correct lug and recoil rod and just for grins a SSB.

[George M. Purtill]

Rich -that is a very sweet combination. Is that a gun you have posted on the forum already?

[Rich Anderson]

George I don't think I have ever posted pics of it. I might bring it to the Southern this year, it's been years since I shot it.

[wally vernon]

Here is a pic of mine. It is obviously too early for ejectors. My opinion is that it went back to the factory sometime after 1901. When the ejectors were added they even stamped the forend iron with the patent date. It is a 10 gauge DHE
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g126/parkerdhe/parker%20dhe%2010%20009.jpg (http://s55.photobucket.com/user/parkerdhe/media/parker%20dhe%2010%20009.jpg.html)

[George M. Purtill]

Here is a pic of mine. It is obviously too early for ejectors. My opinion is that it went back to the factory sometime after 1901. When the ejectors were added they even stamped the forend iron with the patent date. It is a 10 gauge DHE
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g126/parkerdhe/parker%20dhe%2010%20009.jpg (http://s55.photobucket.com/user/parkerdhe/media/parker%20dhe%2010%20009.jpg.html)

Fabulous. I would say they didn't stamp the fore end iron with the date, they simply substituted a new ejector FE iron and stamped your SN on it. Very clean, neat and nice to have composite barrels with ejectors.

[wally vernon]

Yes, that is what I suspect also. it makes more sense. Also, If you look at the barrels, isn't it missing the screw that is supposed to hold the non ejector, extractors that would have been on the gun first? I know they could have welded in the hole, but why?

[George M. Purtill]

Wally- do you have a letter on this gun?

[wally vernon]

No, I plan to get one. The seller said he had one but cant put his hands on it. He said the letter did not mention ejectors. Everything else checks out. I know the letters don't always (or even often) mention coming back for repairs/ modifications.

[George M. Purtill]

Wally- let me give you the usual Dean Romig piece of advice. Join the PGCA. Get your letter at a huge discount and enjoy the benefits of membership.
Dean I am sure will fill in the rest of the blanks.

[Dean Romig]

Those 'after the fact' repair records may well be in the missing order books.

I wonder if Parker Bros would have replaced the entire lug on these guns that went back for ejectors? I know it seems to us like a lot of work but it may have been easier for those folks to do it that way... after all, they had to replace the rib extension - why not go all the way?

[Dean Romig]

Wally- let me give you the usual Dean Romig piece of advice. Join the PGCA. Get a letter and enjoy the many benefits of membership.

Dean I am sure will fill in the rest of the blanks.


George, I 'edited' your post a bit to reflect what I say these days. :bigbye:

[wally vernon]

I was a member very early on and for many years. I just kind of let it lapse. I will re-join as I have rekindled my interest in Parkers.

[Bill Murphy]

It is more likely that an ejector addition would include (under some circumstances), a net set of barrels as well as a forend because of the difficulty of installing the ejector stop on the extractor barrels. No one ever accused PB of being smart with a buck.

[Dean Romig]

That would surprise me Bill because a new set of barrels retailed for half the price of a gun and when my GH went back in 1913 the ejector retrofit was only $25. The rib extension (doll's head) could easily be removed and replaced with one made for ejectors.

The frame had to be mounted in a jig and drilled for the push-rods and the forend iron had to be replaced with the forend iron with the ejector mechanism. A new set of barrels to complete the procedure of making an ejector gun out of an extractor gun would have pushed the price up to that of a new gun in most cases.

Not saying it never happened but...

[Bill Murphy]

Good points, Dean.