Parker Lifter

[Stan Hoover]

Hello,
I'm currently very interested in buying a Parker 10 Gauge Hammer Underlifter, the 2 guns that I'm trying to decide between are both 30" guns.

#1 is a Grade 1 I believe Stubb Twist barrels, engraving is sharp, engraving is minimal with traces of case color. The only concern with the wood is there is some splinters of wood missing behind the hammers. 7,000 Serial # Range

#2 is a Grade 2, Damascus barrels, wood is of course better as in more figure but checkering is very worn, more engraving but somewhat darkened and with almost no case coloring. This gun has seen much more use by all appearances. 24,000 Serial # Range

I noticed the firing pins on the earlier gun are retracted by a spring where as the later gun seems to be more of floating firing pin setup, any preferences or feelings on which is better?

I'm looking at the new gun to shoot, I like the later gun because of the better wood and more engraving but it has definitely been used quite a bit more. I would also most likely have the checkering redone, hopefully I don't offend any one by mentioning redoing what I believe is an original gun.

So help sway me one way or the other. buy the earlier Grade 1 gun with more condition or buy the later gun Grade 2 with less condition and possibly do some restoration?

Thanks,
Stan

[Dean Romig]

The more important questions are how are the bores?.... how is the wall thiskness of the barrels?... is 30" the original length?... what are the chokes in thousandths?.... what is the bore ID in thousandths?

If the gun is not a safe shooter and choked for what you intend to shoot with it, it is money down the drain.

If the barrels on both guns are deemed safe by a qualified gunsmith expert in the area of old classic doubles - I would choose the grade 2.





.

[Mike Franzen]

I agree with Dean’s assessment with one other consideration. Since it’s a shooter, I would buy the gun whose dimensions fit me best.

[Stan Hoover]

Thanks for the response Dean & Mike,

Dean,
The barrels length check as original on both at 30". Unfortunately I don't have a barrel wall measuring device, too the naked eye, the inside of the barrels look good, not that they shine like a mirror their complete length, but good.

I am not a dealer by any means, only a shooter/collector. I have seen Jon Hosford's barrel wall gauge and choke gauge in use and would love to own them but I just didn't think I could justify with not more than I would use them. I do own one of Jon Hosford's gun racks and I appreciate his great American craftsmanship.

Are there other measuring tools that are less expensive for a shooter who can't justify the price of Jon's nice tools? I even hate to ask that question since I hate cheap tools.

Mike, the dimensions on both guns are almost identical.

Thanks,
Stan

[Dean Romig]

Although Jon's tools in my opinion are the best you can buy at a somewhat reasonable price, I could never justify the expense either.

I have used his wall thickness gauge and found it very easy to use..... not so much for other manufacturer's gauges.

Try Galazan's for reasonably priced bore and choke mics and chamber gauges. A good bore mic will usually tell you if the bores have been altered, thus giving a good idea of wall-thickness safety.





.

[Garth Gustafson]

Stan,
Many on this site use the Manson wall thickness gauge with good results. At about $110 it works and is a more affordable option.

https://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-tools-supplies/measuring-tools/barrel-wall-thickness-gauges/wall-thickness-gauge-prod20463.aspx?avs%7cManufacturer_1=MANSON%2bPRECI SION

If you search “Manson” on the forum search bar you’ll pull-up plenty of discussion on this topic. Good luck with your purchase and keep us posted.

[Dean Romig]

I have a Manson gauge but I don’t use it anymore. I could never get consistently accurate readings from it. I think ‘flex’ may have been the problem.... or operator error. In any case, the Hosford gage was IMO superior.





.

[Stan Hoover]

Garth,
I was just looking at the Manson gauge and thought I would order one since I also need to order a 6.5 reamer, now I'm not so sure.

Dean,
thanks for your opinion on the Manson gauge, if you were to buy just one gauge from Hosford, would the barrel wall thickness gauge or the bore gauge tell you more about the overall barrels being original and or safe to shoot?

I'm guessing the bore gauge which you could then compare with OD measurements at different areas of the barrel?

Thanks,
Stan

[Dean Romig]

Garth,
I was just looking at the Manson gauge and thought I would order one since I also need to order a 6.5 reamer, now I'm not so sure.

Dean,
thanks for your opinion on the Manson gauge, if you were to buy just one gauge from Hosford, would the barrel wall thickness gauge or the bore gauge tell you more about the overall barrels being original and or safe to shoot?

I'm guessing the bore gauge which you could then compare with OD measurements at different areas of the barrel?

Thanks,
Stan

IMO a bore gauge reading when compared to OD readings will never, without hours of tedious and repetitive measurements, give you any inkling to incongruities in wall thickness.

I would always go to the wall thickness gauge and buy a cheaper bore and choke mic to go along with it.





.

[Brian Dudley]

When a manson gauge is used in a similar manner to a Hosford gauge, it does provide pretty accurate readings on general thickness. For the money, it works well.
It is limited on smaller gauges sizes that it can read and it cannot pick up pitting as well as Hosfords.


In regards to the original question...

Go after a sounder gun in the better condition. You cannot go wrong with that. If both of those topics are comparable, then go after the higher grade. Unless one speaks to you more than the other.

[Mike Koneski]

Nothing against John Hosford's wall thickness gauge but I too use a Manson gauge with very good results. I picked mine up at SHOT Show a few years ago for a show special under $100.

[Dean Romig]

I'm so embarrassed...:o... in my first post to this thread I typed "thiskness" erroneously but I missed it and our new editorial team bagged me in a PM.

I don't know if it was Mike or if it was Susan who found it....... will the REAL editor please stand up? :corn:





.

[Mike Koneski]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! No problem Dean. Your typing just developed a lisp. :rotf: Since Sam doesn't go on the forum, she would not be the one to throw the flag. :bigbye:

[wayne goerres]

Thank God for spell check.

[Mike Franzen]

Uh oh I think a bunch of us are in trouble!! :rotf: