Parker DH 'E'

[David Fishley]

At the recommendation of the guys on the Doubleshotgun forum I post this here.

I have now ventured into the relm of Parkers having picked my first one up in a DH 'E' at the Calgary gun show last week. It has 30 inch damascus barrels, splinter forearm, English straight grip stock, twin ivory beads, double triggers, crumbled period recoil pad, on a 2 frame and mfg in 1903.

I have few questions about the gun. First it appears it has 3rd party after market ejectors installed as noted on the forearm. Can I call it a DHE? And what if anything does that do to the collector value?

I'd like to know more about the numbers and letters on the barrel flats?

The right ejector is not working and the receiver/barrel fit is slightly loose, so now the question is who can fix it? Del Grego declined and I'm not entirely sure who the other Parker smiths are in the US. And I'd rather not venture into the last fiasco I had with a gunsmith.

Someone mentioned the gun came with a pistol grip. Whoever and however it was converted to a straight grip did a good job and the long tang looks very original to me, but that is an amateur's opinion.

Comments appreciated.

See images here: http://postimg.org/gallery/1rm10j69c/

[Brian Dudley]

Your gun looks like a straight grip conversion. The toe line is not as straight as it ideally should be for a factory SG gun. And the checkering is not correct either.

It does have aftermarket ejectors.

What exactly is happening with the right ejector?

Whatever issue it has, it likely might just be a damaged part or worn part. I do see in your photo that the right side trip rod end in the frame looks a little messed up as compared to the left. Maybe that is contributing to your problem.

[David Fishley]

The right ejector is not doing anything at all. While it acts as an extractor it does not set and spring open when the gun is opened.

Is the tang a Parker factory tang?

[Brian Dudley]

The trigger guard itself does look like a factory guard.

[Chuck Bishop]

Here is a link to the ejector patient.
http://www.google.com/patents/US636650

[Dave Noreen]

A collection of Parker Bros. guns with various after-market ejectors and/or single triggers would make an interesting display as well as an interesting article for Parker Pages.

[Dean Romig]

I couldn't agree more Dave.






.

[edgarspencer]

Here is a link to the ejector patient.
http://www.google.com/patents/US636650

It is apparent that Fisher's design, as shown in the patent drawings, was based on incorporation into a Parker hammerless shotgun, though he refers to it's potential suitability in 'breech loading' guns. It's difficult to see, but it looks like it may have been simpler than the design used by Parker Bros., and without the little "foot" that likes to break off.

[Mark Riessen]

A nice gun, interesting, a little restoration work and she could be a nice shooter. Not to be a wise guy but I believe the hinge pin is in backwards. Sorry. M

[Dean Romig]

Judging by the condition of the screw in the right barrel flat and the damage to the corresponding ejector trip rod in the front of the frame, that right ejector mechanism had been the source of much frustration over the life of the gun.






.

[Ron Leo]

"Del Grego declined and I'm not entirely sure who the other Parker smiths are in the US"

Suggest you communicate directly with Brian Dudley...he'll make it right, from my experience and is a trusted Parker smith. He replied on this thread, you can PM him or contact through his website here -> www.bmdgunstocks.com

Nice gun!

[Philip Peart]

I also own a BH "E" with Fischer's ejectors that does not function properly. It is a very interesting attempt though slightly over complicated IMO.

[Jim Pasman]

Welcome to the Parker realm, David! You've found a great gun and I've got a question for those more knowledgeable on the site. Looking at the picture of the muzzle, is it me or does the left muzzle look "shaved' about 1/16" to the outside? Could be the photo but doesn't look square? Shouldn't hurt your shooting, if it is. Looks like you've got a great find.

[Dean Romig]

It looks like both the left and right muzzles have been trimmed or filed, probably due to minor damage. It isn't a big deal as you say Jim, it won't affect the way it shoots.




.

[David Fishley]

Just had another look at the muzzles and both sides look shaved slightly however when I put a square up against them they do measure square on either side. If they are off it would be more like a 1/32.

Used a feeler gauge and the barrel receiver are off-face by .102mm or .004 inches.

[edgarspencer]

I would not be so quick to say the straight stock is not of Parker's making. While the Serialization book says it was a capped pistol grip, when it left the factory, we have seen numerous times where the 'book' was just plain wrong.
It seems very interesting that the trigger guard carries the same serial number as the one on the water table. This could simply be the hand of a talented engraver who removed one number, and replaced it with another, but looking at the font, and depth, I am inclined to believe that trigger guard was put on at the factory. It would be of interest to many of us if you could verify a serial number stamped into the stock, in the groove underneath the trigger guard. Hopefully, the Research Dept will find enough in the order book and stock book to better substantiate a pedigree. If the gun went back to the factory for a conversion to straight stock, alot of these questions will be solved. Simply saying so matter of factly the checkering is wrong is easier than suggesting the possibilities why this may be so. Perhaps it was a replacement of a Parker supplied stock which was broken (?)
I don't think there is any question that the ejector conversion was not by Parker, but there are some very talented Gunsmiths out there with more than ample experience in this kind of repair.
I think you have a very nice gun. It owes no one any apologies.

[wayne goerres]

That is an allfull tempting little G grade. I like it.

[edgarspencer]

That is an allfull tempting little G grade. I like it.

Are we looking at the same gun Wayne? The one shown on his album page is a DH, converted to a DHE. (is it correct to call it a DHE if it doesn't have Parker ejectors?)

[Dean Romig]

Edgar, I have a little 0-frame 16 Damascus Grade 2 made in 1893 that went back to Meriden in 1913 to retro-fit ejectors for $25. I have always referred to it as my GHe.






.

[Chuck Bishop]

Take a piece of printer paper and cut it to fit over the roll joint. Use grease to keep it in place. See if the gun is now on face. Normal printer paper is about .003.

[edgarspencer]

Edgar, I have a little 0-frame 16 Damascus Grade 2 made in 1893 that went back to Meriden in 1913 to retro-fit ejectors for $25. I have always referred to it as my GHe.






.That makes sense but would you call it a GHE if it had aftermarket ejectors?

Take a piece of printer paper and cut it to fit over the roll joint. Use grease to keep it in place. See if the gun is now on face. Normal printer paper is about .003.I need to add Chuck to my Gunsmith list.

[Dean Romig]

Lower case "e" edgar.



Aftermarket - why not? It is an ejector gun, right?





.

[David Fishley]

This is a great forum. I didn't expect such interest in my gun and thank you all for your experienced comments.

I took the trigger guard off and no serial number on the wood but a stamped serial number on the underside of the trigger guard.

I took pics of the escutcheon and spurred butt pad. Two questions: Can it be determined if the escutcheon is original? and Can a spurred butt pad be replaced with a new one?

I am impressed by whoever fitted the butt stock and forearm as the fit is exceptionally well done. Much better than some of my fine English doubles. I would also like to point out the wood of the butt stock and forearm match in character and figure. Now if the butt stock checkering is incorrect is the forearm checkering correct and if so more the puzzle?

http://s19.postimg.org/6xanqr3z7/Underside_of_Trigger_Guard.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
screen capture tool (http://postimage.org/app.php)
http://s19.postimg.org/40nmqgy5f/Spurred_Butt_Pad.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
screenshot windows 7 (http://postimage.org/app.php)
http://s19.postimg.org/4rgcw90ir/Stock_cut_for_Trigger_Guard.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
capture screen (http://postimage.org/app.php)
http://s19.postimg.org/8y17bl04j/Escutcheon.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
adult photo sharing (http://postimage.org/)

[Brian Dudley]

The stock oval is original.
The spurred pad can be replaced with a new one.
The forend checkering is correct.

Who knows what is going on with your buttstock. The guard looks correct for a factory guard. And the stamping on the underside is correct. The wood should also have the serial number and the grade number stamped in it.

The pad could even possibly be original to the gun.

[Jim DiSpagno]

Here's an aftermarket ejector system on a PH 2 frame twist barreled gun. It needs help but ejectors are very strong. Receiver pics later

[Jim DiSpagno]

Any idea who did this work???

[George M. Purtill]

I am late to this thread but just read it from start to present.
First, I love the patina on this gun. It is that classic D grade wood that has been carried and loved for a century. Nice gun.
Second, an aftermarket ejector article would be a great idea and would require very good pictures to show the subtle differences. Good idea Chuck.
Third, I own a VH "E" 28 gauge 95428 that ejects shells perfectly all the time. I don't know what to call it. I like the VHe. The Shippee 28 gauge is a DHE* since it went back to the factory to have ejectors added before it was sold at retail by A&F.
Fourth, David- you need to join the PGCA. You will be even more hooked than you are now. Thanks for sharing.

[David Fishley]

I let this drop and shouldn't have since there are few more interesting questions to quandar. If the gun came out of the factory with a pistol grip it would have a short trigger tang. The long tang on the straight grip appears to be an original. Would that have been mfg if the gun was sent back to repair at the factory and the pistol grip removed to a straight stock? As I mentioned previously the butt stock wood matches the forearm so I don't think it is a replacement or was replaced with a very close grade to the fore arm. And if factory 'repaired' then why isn't the butt stock checkering correct? Two main points factory original long trigger tang but incorrect checkering on the butt stock and no serial number on the wood. Slightly off topic but you should see my Manufrance Ideal. The left side of the gun seems to have been made at a different time than the right side as the serial numbers match on right side but not on left and vice versa. That includes barrels, strikers, ejectors and so on.

[Brian Dudley]

Good questions.
The guard is completely correct. And i woild expect that the factory woild have converted stocks to straight grip if need be. But i would think that they would pit the numbers in the wood after doing the work. Some things just cannot be explained completely.

As for the checkering, i think that the butt was just worn or refinished at one time and simply incorrectly checkered by someone at that time or sometime later.

[Dean Romig]

Do the stock cheeks have the typical D Grade drop points? Could it have been ordered with G Grade features with D Grade wood?
Have you ordered a research letter for that gun?






.

[Brian Dudley]

The photos show it as having worn drop points.

[Dean Romig]

Hmmm... That blows my theory...






.