SxS opinions

[William Davis]

Been following a very long thread on The Double Gun site, "Reinforcing Sterotypes etc" way down 6 or 7th page gunsmith gave his opinion on the design fit and finish of American Doubles including Parker's

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=424289&page=1

I don't know enough about it to say if he is right or wrong. Have a look pretty interesting.


William

[Daryl Corona]

3.
Interesting discussion. I think the thread you are referencing is on page 8 and by Dewey Vicknair. Dewey knows his stuff and does top notch work and pretty much nails it from the technical aspect of various designs. But we all know that there is much more to these guns than technical stuff- stuff you can't put you finger on. I have to agree with him as I highly respect his opinions.

[Bill Murphy]

Dewey is a good friend and I understand his opinions about American guns. However, I own a bunch of American guns and enjoy and respect them. End of story. Dewey's opinions about some American guns don't prevent him from working his art an many of them. Another "end of story".

[Brian Dudley]

Everything that Dewey says about the Parker design plus' and negs is 100% spot on.

Anyone who works on the guns regularly would tell you the same thing.


What surprises me is the people on that damned board that question his opinions that are built on experience

[Bill Holcombe]

His post on Parkers seems to concur with what I have read other smith's say, however this comment on page by him is a bit more surprising.

"I have many years working on shotguns from every industrialized nation on Earth and I can tell you that there is nothing impressive about any classic-era American shotguns. Once one has seen actual high quality, it becomes difficult to make excuses for guns like the Smith."

[Mike Franzen]

Appreciate things for what they are, not what they are compared to something else.

[Phil Yearout]

What surprises me is the people on that damned board that question his opinions that are built on experience

Doesn't that pretty much describe that board all the way "across the board"?

[Bill Holcombe]

Everything that Dewey says about the Parker design plus' and negs is 100% spot on.

Anyone who works on the guns regularly would tell you the same thing.


What surprises me is the people on that damned board that question his opinions that are built on experience

I am not at all surprised people question his experience.

Sadly we live in a society where difference of opinion means you are attacking me and invalidating what I value. Now one can be allowed to disagree with anyone anymore without it being an attack.


Jeez I sound a lot older than 35 saying that.....

[Mills Morrison]

That board is awful. I have thrown in a small donation every year in the interest of supporting double gun stuff, but will not do so anymore. You get one helpful post like the one referenced and then 10 posts by the troublemakers.

[Mills Morrison]

Dewey's comments about the American doubles are interesting. L. C. Smiths tend to have more problems than the others, in my experience. I just finished dumping two of them to trade up to a Fox.

[John Truitt]

sometimes the facts are hard to hear esp when you have an emotional attachment to something.

I do my best to avoid parkers with single triggers, vent ribs, and ejectors. Does not always work out that way but I do me best to avoid them, for the reasons Mr V explains.

No they aren't to the level of a Purdey/ etc. But I like them. I like my Parkers and that's it. Its not personal. I accept their flaws and embrace their attributes. :)

[Mills Morrison]

Well put John.

I even like the L C Smiths I still have

[greg conomos]

Any design can be faulted; but in the end it only needs to be so good. A Parker will last over 100 years with minimal care. That's good enough. I'd rather have a Parker with all of its positives last 100 years than a clunker that will last 1000 years.

Dewey's opinions are those of someone who has the benefit of being able to look back on a long history of gunmaking. That's a perspective not afforded a gunmaker who was actually living in the day. There are artists today who can do a better job than Monet or Van Gogh in every way, using better paints and canvases which will last much longer. There must be a reason people still pay millions for those old paintings....

[Bill Holcombe]

He isn't comparing to modern guns. He is comparing to contemporaries, basically saying there is nothing special about an American Classic shotgun.

[John Dallas]

Yet those fine British guns were sent back each season to be stripped, cleaned and gone thru. How many of us send back our competition guns annually, despite the fact that those guns digest way more shells than a British game gun?

[Bill Holcombe]

How many of us send back a gun ever??? Unless we find a project to work on.

[Mills Morrison]

I just will never forget when I got a "new" c. 1890 GH 12 gauge and my wife got a new Beretta auto. The Beretta didn't make it past the first station before malfunctioning. The GH works flawlessly to this day. It needs some new screws and is off face a little. 125 years old though

[Brian Dudley]

That board is awful. I have thrown in a small donation every year in the interest of supporting double gun stuff, but will not do so anymore. You get one helpful post like the one referenced and then 10 posts by the troublemakers.


I would never consider donating to that board with the way it is run. I dont sell on there anymore because i would not want my $10 donation to be misinterpreted as me supporting it in any way.
Besides, you cant sell anything on there anyway. All the buyers are no longer around and very little is being offered.

It gives a place for those thrown from this board to live and be with their like kind.

[Eric Estes]

Lol, Brian I still see you are on the fence with your opinion... :rotf:

The things some people say there, and with such absolute certainty, is astounding sometimes.

Dewey provided a lot of good information and I applaud him for doing so in such a den of vipers.

[William Davis]

Latest post on that thread from Dewey goes into coil vs leaf springs. Very interesting.

William

[Bill Holcombe]

I really enjoyed his posts on the springs. I respect his opinion/expertise. I do disagree with him stating there is nothing remarkable about Classic American Shotguns, but that is my opinion and I am not offended that his differs.

Just comparing most of those old guns to what you find in most modern gun stores today tells me that they are quite remarkable.

[Dean Romig]

Right Bill - but he is commenting from a mechanical & design viewpoint, and not so much the aesthetics of American made doubles.






.

[Bill Holcombe]

Ok, I took it as a comment on the guns as a whole not just the mechanical design. I guess it was the use of the phrase, "nothing special".

[greg conomos]

I doubt anyone ever said American doubles were particularly notable from a mechanical point of view. But not too many of us buy guns based on their mechanical attributes...or at least that criteria is about #5 on the list of things we look for.

In any assessment, a Parker is a 'highly reliable' device when compared to all guns as a population. Their MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) must be a stellar figure. That's good enough for me.

I can think of no mechanical devices with moving parts that have ever been created that can't be criticized if you try hard enough. Dewey's comments are not without merit...but why he feels the need to voice them is beyond me. I'm privileged to have lived in a time when I can own and use a Parker....I don't complain.

[Mills Morrison]

I doubt anyone ever said American doubles were particularly notable from a mechanical point of view. But not too many of us buy guns based on their mechanical attributes...or at least that criteria is about #5 on the list of things we look for.

In any assessment, a Parker is a 'highly reliable' device when compared to all guns as a population. Their MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) must be a stellar figure. That's good enough for me.

I can think of no mechanical devices with moving parts that have ever been created that can't be criticized if you try hard enough. Dewey's comments are not without merit...but why he feels the need to voice them is beyond me. I'm privileged to have lived in a time when I can own and use a Parker....I don't complain.

Well said. I will second you there.

[Paul Harm]

I like hammer guns, and my 100+ year old Parker hammer gun still works just fine, and it's been shot close to three times a week for the last ten years. I also shoot a number of Remingtons that haven't broke. What's nice about American SxS's is that if you need a part they don't have to be handmade. Our are guns aren't as light as a European made gun, but that's fine with me. For the most part, they were made for the farmer and working man and do just fine for what they were intended for. A friend and I were at the Southern about eight years ago and he bought a English gun, a Johnson. Had the trunk open and his gun and my Parker were leaning against the back of my car. Something happened causing both guns to slide over and hit the ground. His gun hit mine and lay on top of it. He just bought it ten minutes before, and now there was a dent on those beautiful Damascus barrels. Had to kind of rub it in saying how that nice, light, English double dented and my Parker didn't have a mark on it. To each their own.

[charlie cleveland]

only thing i see that the english guns have over american guns is that they built 4 bore breach loaders and we did not...charlie

[John Allen]

One thing many people forget is that the American manufacturers did not have the protection of a proof law.Europeans could build a gun to a specific load and if the gun failed when used with any other load they were not liable.American builders had to build their guns to handle the heaviest loads available to protect themselves from liability lawsuits. That is why American guns are overbuilt and generally heavier.Also,European guns were built for aristocrats,American guns were built for average working Americans.

[Dean Romig]

Mr Allen - I wish I could give you about a dozen 'thumbs up'!






.

[Nevada Fitch]

I am new to the board and just finally bought my first Parker. But I have shot other people's Parker shotguns. I always wanted a nice Parker but I always had problems finding one in good shape that I could afford. I love shooting Parker shotguns, but I have shot L.C. Smiths a great deal more, because I was able to find them in good shape at prices I could afford.

Based on my experience with quite a few side by sides, I find that I can't really fault Dewey's opinions. It's no secret that the old British Bests were more finely engineered and have better locks on them in general. But for all of his bad mouthing of the L.C. Smith, and I can't say that he is wrong in his opinion, I have found the old Elsey, to be very reliable in general and despite the weak stocks on some guns, I have seen them hold up very well to a lot of heavy hunting loads.

I guess being a gunsmith he has seen too many basket cases regarding Smiths, and I am sure there are a lot of them, but after scouring the gunshows for the last 30yrs or so, always on the lookout for a decent side by side, I could afford, I have found a lot more Elseys in good working condition then I have Foxes, or Parkers, or even British Bests. But them I guess the key phase is "ones I could afford"

[John Campbell]

That board is awful.


A nugget of wisdom...

[todd allen]

Not looking to be too controversial, but my H&H Royal rests in the safe with a broken hammer spring, while
my VHE 12 is out killing quail.

[Michael Moffa]

I have a turn of the century DH Titanic tube. It is a live Pigeon gun, no safety. The metal around the firing pin holes are according to Larry Del Grego caved in from super hot loads. Still goes bang every time I pull the trigger, regularly shoot 23/25 at skeet. Choked IM/IM. I'd like to see a Purdey take that pounding and still be in one piece 110 years later.

Spin