687 lifter finds a new home, possibly $200 grade

[Brian Hornacek]

I found serial number lifter 687 today at a gun show. Looking at the Parker story pages 229-232 I believe it to be a $200 grade from the 1869 catalogue, it looks identical to the gun on page 232 ser. #661 but I will leave that to the experts.
It is 30" 12 gauge on a 1 frame, barrel weight 2 lbs 14 oz, straight grip and the tubes are good, a few dents but it is looking like it will be a shooter. Engraving highlights consists a bird on top in front of the raised pin, there is a retriever head in front of trigger plate and a dog on the trigger guard, Parker Bro.s on the side plates and a lot of nice border and scroll. All the serial numbers match.

On page 232 in "The Parker Story" it makes mention of the marking on the top rib, this gun also has "PARKER BROS. MAKERS..."

What's wrong, no wood, no forearm iron, hammer spurs are broke. Action not bad, needs a little lug work to pull it down to face. If you have a set of hammers or a complete early fore arm with the slide pin and tip send me note. At the widest point the iron would be 1 5/8".

If you have reference to a hammer spur repairman please send it over as well. Also if anyone has more detailed pictures of a $200 grade under serial number 1000 I would love to have some more reference material.

Check it out.

[Dean Romig]

A Very nice find.






.

[Rick Losey]

Is it only the forend missing when you say wood? Since we see a butt stock

Very nice find. If the rest of the hammer is good - spurs can be grafted on, I have had it done

[Mills Morrison]

That is a very interesting early Parker

[edgarspencer]

I turned it round so I could see the script.

[Brian Dudley]

Brian,
I also do not think that the buttstock is original to the gun. Several things about it that i see point to a restock.
I can certainly help you with all forend metal at least. Maybe used wood.

I think this gun may be a lower grade than $200, but i am no expert in early hammer gun grading.

I love the look of the ssbp on it with that hard edge on the top.

Hammers could be repaired, if i may be able to help with replacements.

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

A great piece to bring back! Some of the early guns did not have much engraving, The barrel weight of 2lbs 14oz is that what they weigh now? I have a 20 gauge w/ 28" barrels with full and full chokes it weighs 3lbs 14oz, that is a light weight for sure, Gary

[Dean Romig]

Regarding the barrel weight - Parker guns of that era seemed to have much thinner wall thickness at the breech end of the barrels and this may account for the barrel weight being about a pound less than we would expect to see on a set of 12/30 barrels.
Re the stock being original or not - Parker shotguns of that era had coarser looking checkering even in the higher LPI checkering - more 'square' than the elongated 'diamond' shaped that we are used to seeing on the later guns, so at least the checkering is in keeping with what we would expect to see on a higher grade Parker of that three-digit era.

What stood out to you Brian that leads you to believe it may be a restock?






.

[Brian Hornacek]

Brian/Dean regarding the stock, it is a decent fit on the head and the work under the hammers/firing pins looks well done but I question originality, there is no serial number on it, there is no oil in the head and the work beneath the locks is not of the caliber one would expect. The shape of the comb looks representative. I left it out of the pics since I did not assume it to be original. It just looks newer that the gun.

Yes Dean regarding barrel weight the breaches are much smaller and I assume the thickness in the barrels is less. The 1 frame receiver is light in the hand.

I took those photos quick at the show. I will more pictures of it in pieces tonight since these early guns do not come up often and it's nice to see them in detail.

Regarding grade if you have The Parker Story and you believe the info on guns pre 1,000 serial number to be true it is a variation of the highest grade. It seems as though the guns did not get elaborate until later price lists and later examples, But I would invite any experts with insight on early guns.

Thanks Edgar......damn pictures!

Regardless and to sound simple..........it's cool!

[Brian Dudley]

i guess my question would not be what doesnt look original, but instead what does look original? Not much, in my opinion.

The color of the wood and finish suggests it is newer. The fit around the locks and action look to be below normal quality and the little i see of the checkering looks totally incorrect by way of pattern. Far too closely cut to the cheek panels and upper tang. And also, looks more fresher cut to be original.

[Mills Morrison]

I agree with Brian. It is still an interesting gun and would be fun to bring back, as Gary suggests

[Robin Lewis]

I have to wonder if looking at these very early guns, as compared to the higher numbered guns we normally see, is a fair comparison? It seems to me that the few guns I have seen in the 3 digit range have not been as well made as those of later years. The metal to metal fit and the wood to metal fit, to me, usually appears to not be as tight a fit as seen on higher numbered guns. I have to wonder if the quality standards that we expect from Parker Bros. today was just starting to be developed in those early years and this gun is not as reworked as some here believe.

I think those dollar grade guns are always tough to judge, even the grade itself is tough to call most of the time.:duck:

[Bruce Day]

Brian, pull the TG tang and see if the SN is stamped in the stock channel. I am not bothered by the wood gaps, those can be attributed to shrinkage. I know you said you did not see a SN, but one should be under the tang, even in early guns.

This may be a $200 grade, but I think more like the $150 grade, we'll see what Gary Carmichael or Robin says. The $200 grades I have seen were more ornate in wood and metal sculpting and engraving. That said, this is an interesting gun. My guess is that this gun is a dollar grade which became equivalent to a D when designs and designations stabilized.

The earliest catalog I have is the 1869 yellow cover Iron Founders and Machinists . The guns are poorly illustrated but the document identifies three grades of front action guns, $200 , $150 and $135. Below that are two grades of back action at $125 and $110 with laminated or Damascus and one back action with decarbonized at $75. I think yours is the $150 or $135 front action . That was costly in a time when skilled tradesman might make $40 a month and labor make $20.

As stated, those light barrels are going to be thin. You ought to get those measured and they may necessitate a very light low pressure load, which most Parkers do not.

An interesting find, Brian, which may lead you down the path of involved collecting.

[Brian Hornacek]

Bruce thanks for the note. What I got out of my reading was there were 2 grades for front action hammer guns, $135 which they have in the Story with a light border engraving, $150 was an up charge for a 10gauge I believe and the $200 gun.

Yes the barrels will need evaluated before being shot and will be shot only with the lightest loads.

I pulled the gun out of the stock and there are no markings on the wood and I will post more pictures later.

I am an involved collector which is limited by my pocket book. I will most likely never own a pristine example of a high grade gun but if I can buy a couple dozen guns that are higher grade and interesting I will satisfy my thirst. I have looked for Parkers tirelessly since that first purchase 4 years ago and a lot of digging has turned up quite a few guns I am happy with. Mostly guns that have not been in circulation for decades. Anyone can go to an auction and use there pocket book to buy a collectable item but I would rather find that next closet gun that has not seen the light of day in 30 + years. This gun is not as special as most graded hammer guns I have seen pictures of but I talked to the owner for 2 years before he finally brought it out for me to buy.

[Bruce Day]

I rechecked and you are correct. $150 was a 10ga upcharge. So I think this is the $135 grade.

This will be an interesting gun to bring back.

[Brian Hornacek]

It's possible that it's a $135 but if you look at the other early gun comparison in The Story it appears that this has quite a bit more to it. Could be that it was one with additional detail requested. If you get a chance take a look at the references I was referring too. I understand that detail in the early guns is speculation and guesswork but the fact that the breach balls are shaped vs the other example pictured makes me think that is the base grade $135 and this is something above that.

Thanks Bruce for your insite and view.

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

This gun has bolsters a lot like 258, If you look close you will see a little more engraving on they gun I believe it is a 200.00 grade, the bolsters and hammers are very much alike, this gun has full checkering on the for end, and skeleton buttplate, I like bruce think you have a 135.00 grade a few photos of this gun in original case, Gary

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

one more

[Chuck Bishop]

I can certify that Brian is not new to collecting Parker shotguns. I know his address by heart.

[Dean Romig]

Aha!! I know that gun Gary, now that you show the engraving on the left lock plate.




.

[Mills Morrison]

I am enjoying this thread.

[Dean Romig]

It seems apparent by looking at these pictures of Parker No.10165, the equivalent of a grade 0, that sculpted bolsters and skeleton steel butt plates weren't necessarily indicative of the dollar or number grade of the early shotguns. This would seem especially true of the three-digit serial numbered guns.



.

[Bill Murphy]

Brian, what is your firing pin separation?

[Dean Romig]

That's an excellent question Bill. That might explain a lot about the weight of the barrels.





.

[Rick Losey]

Brian

just to follow up on the hammer spurs

before
http://parkerguns.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=588&pictureid=7857


after
http://parkerguns.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=588&pictureid=7856

[Brian Hornacek]

I have really enjoyed this thread. Thanks everyone for adding your views, this is what helps the group become better informed collectors and Parker enthusiasts.

The firing pin measurement is 1 1/16" and the frame measures 1 5/8" across the hinge pin that is why I referred to the gun as a 1 frame.
The chambers measure 0.810/0.811, chamber wall thickness is 0.125, after the cone it has a nice taper out to about 15" where it measures 0.035. The left wall thickness is 0.035 to 0.028 and the right 0.035 to 0.025. Did I tell everyone the bores are basically rust free. There is no choke in the gun.

I will bow to those that think it is a $135 grade but if you read what is out there , knowing there were only 2 grades of guns at this time, $135 and $200 I believe this to be higher than $135 with the other gun pictured in the Parker story with no breach ball work and much less engraving.

When you blow up locks by clicking on them how many problems do you see? I see 2 problems on the right and 2 on the left. 3 brakes/cracks and a broken sear......well I suppose I would be a little cracked if I was about 146 years old! I like the thought of that.....~146 years old and I hope to shoot this again in the next 18 months.

Rick, who did the spur work? I am ready to go on that....

[Rick Losey]

Brian

the pictures just continue to impress us more

contact Larry at
http://dutchmanwoodworks.com/

he did the spurs on mine- you cannot find the weld line and that gun has been shot a lot since- no issues

[Jim DiSpagno]

That looks to be originalwood Brian

[Dave Suponski]

Ya Me too. I handled that gun at a gun show here in CT.

[Brian Hornacek]

Dave that would be good to link it all the way to CT, as far as I know it has been in Southern Alberta for quite a few years? Can you elaborate?

Original wood, with no serial number on the wood? I would be one happy fella if you really think it is?? It is in salvagable shape, a few cracks hear and there.

[Dave Suponski]

Sorry Brian, I wasn't clear in my response. I was speaking of the gun Gary posted pictures of and Dean said "he knew that gun". Sorry for the confusion.

[Brian Dudley]

Brian,
Thanks for posting pics of the stock.
I stand by my assesment of the stock not being original. Along with my previous observations, the quality of the inletting is far below meriden factory standards.

And... For all thise who think that a serial number under a guard is a gurantee of originality... It has NO serial number under the guard.

[John Cinkoske]

How can hammer spurs break like that? Bad spots in the forgings?

[Dean Romig]

I'd bet some dope whacked them from the rear with a hammer.






.

[Brian Dudley]

I'd bet some dope whacked them from the rear with a hammer
.


Thats one way to disable an unsafe wall hanger. At least the chambers arent welded up.

[Rick Losey]

with just the tops of the hammers missing- the gun is not inoperable, just hard to cock

the example I posted were broken just a little lower, but similar

since they were almost evenly broken and due to other signs- i have always assumed it was dropped or fell over on a hard surface and the spurs, since they protrude, took the force of the fall