Making them look untouched

[Brian Dudley]

The owner of this DH wanted the checkering recut.

Pointing everything up to be like new would just not fit in with the surrounding finishes, which were original and showing signs of age and use.

A very careful job was done of cleaning and deepening each line so that the end result is one that does not suggest any work was done. It looks like it wore that way with use over the years. But it is much better than before.

The hinge pin screw was also very buggered up so it was replaced with a good used one. and properly timed.

My goal with work like this is for me to be able to casually see the gun years later and not recognize that I worked on it. It has happened a few times, and I love it when it does.

Before

63937

63938

63939

63940


After

63941

63942

63943

63944

[Daryl Corona]

Nice Brian, you did this for me a while back on a GHE which turned out just fine. I call it "refreshing" which still retains some of the patina left on the gun from scratches, bumps, etc. but does'nt look refinished.

[Dean Romig]

Nice work Brian. Your mullered borders are as good as any I have seen, and better than most.

It is nice to see a used gun that still has the 'worn flat' diamonds in parts of the grip area - the sharp pyramids are just so out of place on an otherwise used gun.... IMHO.





.

[Randy G Roberts]

Real sweet. That's a great idea and approach and you had a perfect candidate with that that DH. Nice work !!

[dan myshin]

Simply put, well done!

[Tom Flanigan]

The work that Brian did is an indicator of his skil and attention to detail. I hate to see recut checkering on an old gun that looks brand new and has all the diamonds pointed up, which is incorrect for a Parker. I do the checkering on old guns the way Brian does, but I do put a bit of "patina" color on using a tooth brush. It's good to kmow there artisans out there like Brian who do work that is historically correct and matches the overall condition of the gun.

[Tom Flanigan]

Actually, I don't know of any other artisans that have Brian's insight and skills. My hat is off to him. He is a breath of fresh air.

[Stephen Hodges]

A couple of years ago I sent Brian a Parker VH 16 Gauge on a 0 Frame with a stock that was a basket case. Cracked at the wrist with a very poorly fitted replacement over sized butt plate. The finish on the stock was all but gone. When he sent the gun back to me I could not believe my eyes. He had fixed the stock, re-fashioned the butt and installed a perfectly fitting butt-plate, gently re-cut the checkering and put a nice, what i call a "hunter finish" on the stock leaving some marks that were there. The gun looked "right" in every respect.

[Dean Romig]

Actually, I don't know of any other artisans that have Brian's insight and skills. My hat is off to him. He is a breath of fresh air.

Not to detract from the nice work Brian does but you really need to examine more guns worked on by the likes of Brian Board, David Trevallion, “The Stock Doctor”, and of course one of my most favorites, Chris Dawe.

These are just the ones off the top of my mind at the moment - there are others.




.

[Tom Flanigan]

Not to detract from the nice work Brian does but you really need to examine more guns worked on by the likes of Brian Board, David Trevallion, “The Stock Doctor”, and of course one of my most favorites, Chris Dawe.

These are just the ones off the top of my mind at the moment - there are others.




.

There are great one's out there of course other than Brain. Turnbull restores guns to new and probably the others too. Although, I'm sure that they will do "untouched" if you ask them. Brian seems to have an affinity for untouched, which is what I like and admire. Turnbull does great work, but a 100 year old gun restored to new doesn't look right to me. Its a bit out of place in my perspective which is why I would never buy a fully restored gun by anyone. To each his own, but I like guns to look like they were cared for but not brand spanking new.

[Dean Romig]

There are great one's out there of course other than Brain. Turnbull restores guns to new and probably the others too. Although, I'm sure that they will do "untouched" if you ask them. Brian seems to have an affinity for untouched, which is what I like and admire. Turnbull does great work, but a 100 year old gun restored to new doesn't look right to me. Its a bit out of place in my perspective which is why I would never buy a fully restored gun by anyone. To each his own, but I like guns to look like they were cared for but not brand spanking new.


Have you seen any of the ones Dewey has done? I was shown a GH with Damascus barrels and a fishtail lever on a 1 frame that I would swear to this day was a 'used' original that had simply been 'well cared for'..... If I didn't know better. Dewey had "created" this gun from three other GH beaters - barrels from one, buttstock and frame from another and forend and butt plate from a third and I simply could not tell it was a 'put together' gun.





.

[Tom Flanigan]

No, I haven't seen any of Dewey's work. I do all my own work including the frames so I'm not familiar with every competent restorer out there. I'm just finishing up a 10 bore hammer gun and putting "wear" on the frame and tip colors. This is the way I do all my personal guns. I like Brian's philosopy and skills. There are no doubt others out there that can do what he does but his philosophy matches mine although I am confident he can do "new" restorations also. The 10 bore will be finished when I get to the checkering. I do guns in batches of three. This is the last of the three. Checkering will start next week.

[Tom Flanigan]

By the way Dean, I don't touch guns with original finish. I might refresh a stock if it has bare spots or thinning finish or do a light touch on the checkering. I enjoy working on Parkers so what I do is look for guns that were cared for but have no remaining original finish with checkering sometimes worn off. I don't mind less than perfect screws because they are relatively easy to replace and time. My philosophy is different than many who want their guns to look like new, but we all have our preferences

[Tom Flanigan]

Dean, I went to bed last night thinking about this thread. So I want to make sure that my perspective is fully understood. I agree with you that there are artisans out there, other than Brian, that do fantastic work. Turnbull is probably a genius technician as well as a very competent business man. He caters to folks that want their Parkers to look new and has built a very successful business around that niche market. But where Brian stands out, in my opinion, can be found in the title of his post, “Making them look untouched”. I admire and respect that perspective. Brian further states, “My goal with work like this is for me to be able to casually see the gun years later and not recognize that I worked on it. It has happened a few times, and I love it when it does.” That is a perspective that, I truly believe, is not held by a lot of restorers. Totally refinishing a gun is more lucrative for folks like Turnbull. Nothing wrong with that. But I suspect that Turnbull and others take all comers and will take a gun with a decent amount of original finish and make it look like new. It’s his livelihood and I understand and appreciate that. But Brian’s light touch work is more closely aligned with my theory of Parker life. In addition to being extremely competent, he is a virtual textbook of Parker knowledge. I am thankful that he is a frequent poster. I learn from him.

[Brian Dudley]

Thank you for the accolades Tom. I am not sure if they are all that derserved. I do the best that I can. Historical correctness is really important to me, and if you dont have that with these old guns that are so collectible and valued, then the trade is sold short. Of course I do full restorations as well when called for and desired. But even with that, it is just as important to do things to as close as the factory did. It is just plain for the better.

[keavin nelson]

As with many things, sometimes doing less is the harder path. Well done Brian.

[Bill Graham]

a 100 year old gun restored to new doesn't look right to me. Its a bit out of place in my perspective which is why I would never buy a fully restored gun by anyone. To each his own, but I like guns to look like they were cared for but not brand spanking new.
AMEN

[Jay Gardner]

AMEN

Agreed. To me, the magic in these old guns is in the patina of being used and well cared for, for decades.

JDG

[Dean Romig]

Dean, I went to bed last night thinking about this thread. So I want to make sure that my perspective is fully understood. I agree with you that there are artisans out there, other than Brian, that do fantastic work. Turnbull is probably a genius technician as well as a very competent business man. He caters to folks that want their Parkers to look new and has built a very successful business around that niche market. But where Brian stands out, in my opinion, can be found in the title of his post, “Making them look untouched”. I admire and respect that perspective. Brian further states, “My goal with work like this is for me to be able to casually see the gun years later and not recognize that I worked on it. It has happened a few times, and I love it when it does.” That is a perspective that, I truly believe, is not held by a lot of restorers. Totally refinishing a gun is more lucrative for folks like Turnbull. Nothing wrong with that. But I suspect that Turnbull and others take all comers and will take a gun with a decent amount of original finish and make it look like new. It’s his livelihood and I understand and appreciate that. But Brian’s light touch work is more closely aligned with my theory of Parker life. In addition to being extremely competent, he is a virtual textbook of Parker knowledge. I am thankful that he is a frequent poster. I learn from him.

Tom, in this thread where you address me, you have talked at least a couple of times about Turnbull's work and business model. I never once mentioned Turnbull in any of my posts here. Just so nobody gets the idea I brought his name up... I didn't.
I agree with you that DTR does to Parkers what he needs to do for his business... he refinishes them to look very pretty and he probably restores them mechanically.




.

[Tom Flanigan]

Dean, I brought Turnbull up as an example of the few who can very competently restore Parkers to new condition. We all have our different perspectives and mine is to restore, when necessary, using a light touch so that the gun doesn't look new but instead reflects the age of the piece. Others like their guns to look like new and invest many dollars with restorers to get them to look that way. Either perspective is valid, it depends on what an individual wants.


However, I don't like to see guns with much original finish gratuitously restored. But that's just my opinion.

[Daryl Corona]

Brian Dudley took a GHE that had rough wood finish, heavily stained barrels but otherwise mechanically sound and as per my discussions with him made it look like a well cared for 1913 gun. He left the "patina" on the wood, properly blued the barrels and trigger guard with the receiver left in that silver condition that I find attractive. I personally do not believe in re case coloring/hardening. Great job Brian.

[Brian Dudley]

Thanks Daryl, You are right about case coloring. There is really no functional need to have to re-case a frame. The hardness of the surface does not go away, though the colors may fade. Unless it HAD to be annealed for some sort of major repair work or something. But basically Re-casing a frame is simply a cosmetic function of restoring the colors that are a byproduct of the hardening process.
Unless you WANT your gun to look like new, then there is no reason to do it. And Case coloring is the LAST thing that should be considered when it comes to restoration work. Only after wood and barrels. Barrel blue and stock finish comes a simple point of maintenance if they are allowed to get bad enough.

[allen newell]

Brian, your work products are excellent and sharing your approach and philosophy to restoration work is much appreciated.

[Dean Freeman]

...Not to mention his technical expertise.