11-Gauge Parkers

[Richard B. Hoover]

It is great to get back into the World of Parkers and to renew old friendships. I am still trying to learn more about the early Parker Underlifter Hammer Guns, particularly the 11-Ga. Parkers. I am glad to see that the PGCA has grown so much in the past several years since I drifted away to Antarctica. (I fell under an ice sheet and had trouble getting back up.) I am hoping that now that many more underlifter Parkers have come to light maybe the members of PGCA can help in solving many of the 11-Ga. mysteries.

With the sole exception of the almost mythical 13-Ga., the 11-Ga is possibly the rarest and most mis-understood of all the Parker gauges. Only 114 of them are listed in the Parker Story and so designated in the serialization. However it is clear that many than this number were made. Several 11 Ga. Parkers that we have identified have very low (2 or 3-digit) Serial Numbers. These are of course not included in the records. Most of the 11 Ga. Parkers that are in the records that were made before 1874 were very low grade guns. Many were Back Action and had Decarbonized Steel or Plain Twist barrels. Most of these early 11-Ga Parkers were probably just discarded when it became difficult to get shells for them and have been lost forever. The late Bill Furnish and I found that several of his guns were 11-Ga. Parkers. Several had cylindrical 0.751” diameter bores (and some were full-length tapered bores like the Poker Parker #3561 and measured approx. 0.751” as measured 9 inches from the breech). Many of these guns were listed in Stock Books as either 12-Ga or 10-Ga guns---even though they had chambers that were 0.825” to 0.830” diameter and were clearly made to use with the 11 Ga. paper (11A Brass) shotshells. For some as yet undiscovered reason, many of these 11 Ga. guns were listed as either 10 or 12 Ga. guns in the stock records. Why was this done??

I would very much like to hear from any PGCA members who have (or think you may have) an 11-Ga. Parkers. Even if you do not have a bore gauge, you should check the chambers of your Underlifter Parkers. If a modern 12-Ga. shell just rattles around in the chamber the gun should be examined more carefully. It may be an 11-Ga., unless of course already you know it is 10-Ga. I only know of fewer than 20 of the 11-Ga. Parkers. Most are from the Furnish Collection and are now in the Cody Museum. I would love to hear about any other 11-Ga Parkers that have been discovered. Also any information about the early Parkers with full length tapered bores is of great interest. It would be very nice to get pattern information on these guns for comparison with other types of chokes.


Richard B. Hoover
256-337-4082 (Cell)

[Dave Suponski]

Richard, Glad to see you found your way back to the world of Parkers. We spoke several times years ago and I often wondered where you had ventured of to.

[Richard Flanders]

Glad to have you back Richard. Art Mortvedt and I were talking about you a couple of days ago.

[Ray Pond]

glad I'm not the only curious one on the 11 gauge. Was reading in my Cartridge collectors book and it mentions only 2 ,11 gauge shotguns to exist and that there was only about 240 rounds produced. So if there are that many documented shotguns then the writers are way off. Glad the frozen waters thru you back to the living. Ray

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

Richard, after our conversation this AM, could not help but check the Parker Story Vol 2, pg 1004 of the appendix, Show's 161 11ga guns and 131 14ga guns, again as you say on 11ga no numbers below 2000 and the same with the 14ga no numbers below 4702. Knowing that several of both gauges were made in the low ser# range, I feel that these numbers could be challenged. My 11ga is 3000 number range and my 14 is 1147 with dam brls.

[Dave Suponski]

I owned Rons lifter in the 3000 range and sold it to a gent in Atlanta years ago. I wonder if he still has it. This was the gun mentioned in Richards Parker Pages article on 11 gauge guns back in the early days of the PGCA.

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

Dave, if I remember correctly the elusive 13ga was in that ser # range too!

[Richard B. Hoover]

Richard,

Tell Art I am fine. I retired from NASA in January and now have more time for Parkers and Brittany pups.

Thanks for your post. I enjoyed seeing your beautiful Parkers while I was in Alaska a few years ago.

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Ray,

There were clearly at least 200 11-Ga. Parkers produced, but many of them were chambered for 12A or 10A shotshells. Some were chambered for 11A brass shells or 11 paper shells. I have seen one of the 11A brass shells but it had no headstamp. I have never seen an 11 paper shell and would love to know if you have ever seen one or knows anyone who has one? Since there are a number of guns chambered for them, they had to have existed, but the paper shells had little chance of surviving. I suspect the 12A paper shells from the early 1870's are also rare as hens teeth.

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Gary,

Thanks. I looked at the pics of your beautiful Grade 6 20 Ga. It is wonderful. I am still trying to learn how to use the system here and still do not know how to include photos. When I find out I will attach some images of the interesting for end of 3561 for you to see.

Richard

[Ray Pond]

11 gauge shell I havent seen. Talked with one of my collecting friends tonight and he hadnt or didnt remember an 11 gauge shell. Two more people to ask I did pick up a 4 gauge shell from one of the guys recently so he might possibly have an 11 gauge. My search continues.

[Destry L. Hoffard]

I seem to remember a Parker Pages article that pictured a headstamp on an 11 gauge shell. In all my travels I've never seen or heard of one, other than possibly that one.

Destry

[Austin W Hogan]

I think we pictured both a Parker 11 headstamp and a UMC 13 headstamp on brass cases in the "Odd Gauge" discussion in PP.

Best, Austin

[Tony Quinn]

Good to see you back, Richard. We last talked in Spring of 2009 after your DGJ article and the possibility of gun 26459 being 11ga.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

Thanks. It is great to hear from you. I have seen brass 11B shells with the Parker Headstamp. Was that an 11 or an 11B shell that was shown in the Parker Pages along with the UMC 13? If so, can you post the image? I have never seen an 11A brass or an 11-Ga paper shell with any markings, but have identified a few by their diameter. The Salmon colored Paper shell was shown in my DGJ article. I just read your article in Parker Pages with the images of several of your beautiful Parkers. It was very nice.

It is wonderful to be back among the Parker Collectors.


Yours,

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Tony,

I am glad to hear from you. What did we finally decide about 26469? Was it an 11-Ga?

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Richard Flanders,

I am glad to hear from you. I have tried to contact Art but to no avail. Do you know which continent he is on at the present?

tichard

[Tony Quinn]

With measurements I gave you, (bores .765, chokes .742 and chamber at mouth.824), I think you concluded it appeared to be one of six 11 ga. produced between 1877 and 1885. Mine was produced in 1882.

Tony

[Dave Suponski]

Richard, Check your private messages please.

[Todd Kaltenbach]

Richard,
I posted some pics of a Parker I suspect may be an 11 gauge today. It is in the 3200 serail number range and a 12 gauge shell is too small. I don't have any 10 gauge shells to try.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Todd,

I looked in albums but was not able to locate the pics of your possible 11-ga. Could you tell me where to find them. Also, is the gun listed as a 10, 11, or 12in the serialization and what is the grade? If it is listed as a 11 or 12, it is quite possibly an 11 and should be measured. If it is listed as a 10 it may just be a 10 bore rather than an 11.

Richard

[Jeff Kuss]

I think this is what you are looking for.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Jeff,

Nope, those are the wonderful brass 11B shells. They were made by UMC and stamped with a Parker Bros. headstamp. I have yet to find an 11-bore Parker chambered for these shells. I previously neasured a perfect 12-bore Parker that was chambered for 11-B shells (and in a case with them). These shells are not right for an 11-ga Parker -- they are much too small. The Parker 11-B shells are typically 2.39" long; have rim diameter of .845" and taper from .792" at head to .788" at mouth. They are even smaller than a Parker 12A brass or modern unfired 12-ga AA shell which taper from .808" head to .790" mouth.

On the other hand, the Berdan primed UMC 11-Ga goes from .820" head to .814" mouth, which is suitable for the 0.825" diameter chambers of the 11-ga Parkers. Although the Bore Size is the crucial determining feature (0.751" 9 inch from the breech) the chambers too big for a modern 12-ga shell often give a good first clue to the 11-Ga.

I urge anyone with an early Parker lifter gun to slip a modern 12-ga shell into the chamber and see if it fits correctly or just rattles around.

If the chambers are too big, you may well have an 11-ga, even though the Parker record books may indicate it to be a 12- or a 10-bore gun. Years ago, Bill Furnish and I discovered that for some reason (as yet not understood) several Parker 11-bore guns were listed as either 10-ga or 12-ga guns in the Parker stock books and thus in the Parker Story and the Serialization as well. Very strange, indeed.

Any ideas or suggestions would be appeciated.

Richard

[Phillip Carr]

I have S/N 1500. a 10 gauge shell will not fit and the 12 gasuge is loose. What measurements do I need to take, to determine if it is an 11 gauge?

[Richard B. Hoover]

Phil,

Thanks for your post. I will try to help with your question.

As you know, the internal diameters of the bores are the ultimate determining factor. The bore diameter for a perfect 11-ga shotgun is 0.751". If the gun is a 12-ga, the bore is 0.729" and 0.775" for a 10 bore. A 12-bore gun with barrels that are very badly pitted or have been honed could look like an 11-bore, but pitting or honing would not alter the chambers unless they were intentionally altered to try to make a fake 11-ga gun. I have not heard of any instances of that being done. Your gun may be a 10-ga that was chambered for the 10-B brass shells, or it may be an 11-ga. The only way to answer this question is to use an internal micrometer to measure the dimensions of the bores and inspect them to make sure they have not been honed. If they are full length tapered bores, the diameter must be measured at 9" from the breech.

My measurements of the Prototype Parker S/N 06 at the Meriden Historical Society (with the help of Charlie Herzog) and several of the Bill Furnish early Parkers reveal that they were able to make their 12-ga bores precisely .729" and their 11-ga guns precisely .751" diameter from the very beginning. They were always perfectionists at Parker Bros.! I hope this helps.

Can you post some images of your Parker? Is it a Back Action Underlifter? And what are the barrels - laminated or Damascus?


Richard

[Phillip Carr]

Richard it is a Back Action with Decarbonized steel barrels. The barrels weigh 5lbs 2 oz and are 29" long. They appear to be uncut. I will try to get some pictures later. The bores measure .780 so they must have been honed. The rib is engraved Parker Bros Makers Meriden Conn Decabonized steel. The cambers measure abour .815

[Richard B. Hoover]

Phil,

They may not have been honed. How does the interior of the barrels look. If it has mirror bore, then I would say honing was likely, but I can not imagine why anyone would go to the trouble of honing the Decarbonized steel barrels. If the gun barrels have obvious pitting commensurate with an Early, Back Action Parker that had a fair bit of use on Ducks and Geese, then it is most probably in original state. The .780" bore diameter is a proper bore size for a 10-gauge Parker. I think the gun was most likely finished as a 10 gauge Parker and chambered for the Parker 10B brass shotshells. In the 1869 and 1872 catalogs, Parker advertises theur guns in 10- 11- and 12-Ga and they were generally sold with the Brass shells. By the way, have you checked the constrictions at the muzzle to see about the chokes?

Yours


Richard

[Jim DiSpagno]

There is a P grade lifter on Gunbroker and the frame and fore end are serial numbers 19296 Book says 10 ga. Barrels on said gun are serial numbered 10593 book says 12 ga. lifter. Called and asked exactly what ga. it was ans was told it must be a 10ga.as 12 ga. shell was too small and an old 10 would fit as a new one would not chamber. They had no way of measuring the bore and chamber. Could this be an 11??? Worth a look. I have no verted interest in this gun but thought it might have some bearing on this post. Thanks and have a great holiday. Jim

[Richard B. Hoover]

jim,

The barrels could be 11, but I suspect they are more likely 10-bore. Almost all known 11-ga Parkers have Serial numbers below 6000, but there are a few exceptions even higher than this. The only way to know for sure is to measure the bore diameters. The 10 B shells used in that time period were larger than a modern 12-ga and smaller than a modern 10-ga. Even though chambers can provide a clue in the hunt for the elusive 11-bore, the final answer can only be given by checking the bores.

Richard

[Phillip Carr]

Richard the bores are cylinder on both sides. No choke . That said the bores have a lot of roughness, not pitting so much inside. If they were honed they were done many years ago, I would guess. The barrels are plenty thick. A 10 gauge shell will not even start in, a 12 gauge shell will, but is loose. I should not admit it but I have shot 12 gauge shells in it just a few times to test fire. I just wrapped about 3 or 4 wraps around the base of smoe RST shell. What would be the chamber size of a 10B shell?

[Richard B. Hoover]

Phil,

I have measured the following shells:

UMC 10B Berdan Primed- Head 0..816"; Mouth 0.811" 2.98" long
UMC 11B Small Primer - Head 0.824"; 3.06" long

Although the head diameter of 0.824" is a god match for the chambers of my 11-ga#3561, they are both too long to fit in the 2.5" chambers.


I have never seen a 10B or a 10A brass or an 11Paper or 11Abrass shell with a Parker headstamp. Has anyone????

These beasts must be rarer than Unicorns. ---if they ever existed.

Yours,

Richard

[Robert Rambler]

10A Brass, measures 2 9/16 long

[Richard B. Hoover]

Robert,

Great. This discussion forum is wonderful!! Thanks for the rapid post and beautiful pic. Have you had the chance to measure the OD at the head and mouth of this shell? If so, please post the numbers---I am guessing that they are the same as the UMC Berdan primed 10A but would like to know for sure.

Richard
Now has anyone got a Parker or UMC 11A or an Eley #11 Paper shell? I have only seen one paper 11 and it was Salmon Color and with no head stamp.

[Robert Rambler]

Head measures .850, mouth .840
Several of the paper 10ga hulls I have measure .846-.850 at the head

[Dave Suponski]

Richard I have a UMC Bridgeport,CT marked 10A brass shell. It measures .855 large end and .843 open end.2.615 long.

As a comparison I have a Draper patent two piece 10 gauge brass shell that is unmarked. It measures .848 large end and .838 open end. 2.378 long

[Richard B. Hoover]

Dave,

The Draper patent two piece shell is short enough for these chambers, but the diameter is too large. Have you ever sen one with a head diameter arount ..820 to .825" that would fit these chambers. I am not familiar with the two piece Draper configuration. How did that shell work and can you post a photo of it? I am still hoping someone can find a shell stamped "11A" or "11".

[Dave Suponski]

Richard, Here are a few pictures of the Draper Patent 2 piece shell. I believe it was primed with a Berdan primer or a percussion cap. The headstamp reads Patent Nov.29th 1864 F D and Co.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Dave,

Thanks a bunch. That is one super neat shell. The nipple is similar to that of Parker #06 and is for a percussion cap. This is the W. H. Wills of Boston and it is patent No. 45,292 dated Nov, 29, 1864. Wills describes it as being useful because of the "objection to that class of firearms in which a metallic cartridge is employed arises from the difficulty in obtaining these cartridges in wild and unsettled portions of the country." He also remarks that these metallic cartridges are quite expensive and "on account oh their weight and bulk, are inconvenieNt to transport from place to place." The sportsman then needs only carry to cartridges and his supply of powder, shot and percussion caps.

If you wish, I can digitize the patent and send the two images to you. It is only one pg of drawings and 1 pg. of text. Perhaps you could then post it if you think there are others that might be interested. I do not yet know what I must do to upload pictures to this site.

Yours,

Richard

[Dave Suponski]

Richard you can send the patent to me at ctdoubles@aol and I will post it here.

[Dave Suponski]

Here ya go..

[Richard B. Hoover]

Dave,

I found the Video about how to attach a file, so I will try to send my first pictures to the forum as the Patent for your spectacular shell.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Dave,

I see you uploaded it as a .pdf, which seems to be easier to read than the two jpgs I sent.

That is a very interesting shell. It was from the very early days, when shells were still difficult to buy in many parts of the country.

Richard

[Robin Lewis]

Only five years later and we get the beginning of modern shot shell reloading, how fast it all changes.

[Paul Stafford]

I think this is what you are looking for.


Thanks for sharing! I have a pair of Parker 12Ga brass. Just love them!

[Robin Lewis]

Austin asked me to post these two documents to this thread. The first is a collection on documents discussing chamber size. The second is a list of Parker 11 ga. guns as you will find in the Parker Gun Identification & Serialization book.

[Austin W Hogan]

Thank you, Robin. Imagine! Polishing a 12 bore to .730 in to save it! That would be as bad as fixing a Rolls with a Bentley washer!

Best, Austin

[Richard B. Hoover]

Robin,

This 1882 article from Stonehenge in The Field should be viewed with caution. It appears to contains a number of errors. Proof testing of gun barrels in Europe began sometime in the fifteenth century and was well established in St. Etienne, France, Liege, Belgium and Ferlach, Austria. The second charter for London Gunmakers Company was granted in 1672 and gave powers for searching, proving and marking gun barrels. The Scale of Proof for Smooth Bore Breech Loading Arms (Fourth Class) that was in effect in England at the time the Field article appeared would have been the London Proof Bill of 1868. It provided the compulsory standards for the provisional and definitive proving of barrels ans established a penalty of 20 pounds sterling for selling a gun with unproven barrels and possible imprisonment for anyone found guilty of forging the proof marks on barrels.

According to this act, the proof testing was compulsory and must be carried out in accordance with the following bores dimensions with the specified powder and shot charges for the provisional and definitive proof as specified. These laws were never passed in the US, but there is evidence that Parker was well aware of them from the fact that they used the correct loads for proof testing barrels. Bill Furnish and I found several Parker's that had 11 gauge bores but were listed as either 12ga or 10 ga guns in the Serialization. This is still a puzzle. Several of the early lifter hammer guns have a number stamped on the barrels that does not match the bore size. Some of the 11 bores are stamped 12 and others are marked 11 or 10. I am coming to suspect that they may have been tamped in Liege, Belgium when they were first given a provisional proof test before they were shipped to Parker. I would like to hear from others as to whether or not this idea makes any sense.


The Bore diameters as set forth in the 1868 proof act are as follows:

Bore Number

13 - 0.703" to 0.709
13/1 - 0.710" to 0.719"

12 - 0.720" to 0.729"
12/1 - 0.730" to 0.740"

11 - 0.741" to 0.751"
11/1 - 0.752" to 0.763"

10 - 0.764" to 0.775"
10/1 - 0.776" to 0.784"
10/2 - 0.785" to 0.793"

If the barrel was tapered, the diameter was to be measured 9 inches in front of the breech.


Richard,

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

I would like to know your thoughts about the markings on the early Damascus barrels.
Several are marked C 12, C 10 or C 11, but the C looks a bit more like a left parenthesis ( than a C.

Any information about the meaning of these barrel marks would be greatly appreciated. I have given my idea above, but maybe someone has found some records or writings that give a clearer picture. Also, are these similar marks found on other very early guns by other makers?

Richard

[Austin W Hogan]

Richard; I have two $135 grades, a C10 and a C12. A good friend has a $250 grade C11. I think these barrels were purchased semi finished by Parker Bros before King joined as barrel contractor and superintendent. Note that many elevens appear in the 2000 serial , few in the threes, and fewer in the fours. This was probably due to King's beginning of successful barrel boring at Parker, but using up prior stock. Does anyone have an eleven with King's breech?
It should be noted that King's patent boring process tooling bored .750 bores in twelve ga from somewhere around s/n 5000 to 70000.

Best, Austin

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

Do you have the chamber and bore dimensions of these $135 and $250 Parker's and the s/n. Also have you encountered any of these early lifter guns with full length tapered bores? I think this was done in an effort to produce a tighter pattern, but it apparently was not a success as it appears to have been done only for a short period of time sround 1874 as far as I know now. More measurements on early hammer guns wold be most interesting.

Thanks,

Richard

[Austin W Hogan]

My 3215, a $250 grade, is also a C12. I measured all my chambers with a plug gauge, not a bore mic.
Jim Parker's Eleven Ga lettered with B12 chambers. All of the 11 ga guns were made prior to 1875, when Parker flyers offered only 10 and 12 ga guns. Other gauges were available with a surcharge: ie Gary's first 20 ga. Do you think the surcharge should letter on the elevens?

Best, Austin

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

I agree that almost all 11 gauge Parker's were made prior to S/N 6000, but there appear to be a few exceptions. The Parker Story lists 46740, which would have been made in 1885, as an 11 gauge with 30" barrels. I do not know if this gun still exists, but would love to get measurements from it if it does. Bill Furnish, Charlie Herzog and I have found evidence for four others with post 1875 serial numbers --- 1877 S/N 8900 (11 bore barrels chambered for 12A brass shells); 1878 - 12053 (chambered for paper 11 or brass 11A shells); 1879 - 14827 (chambered 10A); and 1882 - 25991 (chambered 11A).

I was also fascinated by what you said about Jim Parker's 11 gauge. Is it really chambered for a 12B shell? I have seen evidence for them chambered 11, 11A, 10B and 12A but never 11B or 12B.

I am intrugued about your comment regarding the surcharge. It would be interesting to see if there is an indication for a surcharge on any of these 5 post 1875 Parker 11 bores. Would you be able to check this out?

Richard

[Austin W Hogan]

The list of 11ga guns that I posted contains that top action gun. I think some one found it to be an entry error in our "Odd Gauges" discusion in Parker Pages.
I owned 8900 in the 1990's. It shows in the middle of a run of 12/30 inch guns in "Serialization. My notes show it to be .755/.755 cyl bores, with slightly short 12 ga chambers. Could that number be transposed?
7004 .756/.759
18122 .752/.751

The gauge surcharge was still present at 17448, as my lifter 20 carried it.

Best, Austin

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

That data matches the measurements BIll Furnish and I got for S /N 8900 in the mid 1990's. WE concluded it was an 11-gauge gun with 810" diameter chambers, perfect for Brass 12A shells. Do you know if 46740 still exists and if the bores and chambers have been measured. I did not see the article you mentioned.

Thanks,

Richard

[Austin W Hogan]

The Parker Story shows that there was an abrupt change in Parker barrels near s/n 70000. This figure was used in a Parker Pages article relative to this, and has been on the forum in the past. It is a frequency analysis of Parker 12 ga bore diamerters, showing the abrupt change with the post 70000 tooling.
The two large circles are from live bird guns; much similar to Super Foxes, but may have been post production re bores.
Best, Austin

[David Hamilton]

The full-length taper: I have a 10 ga 1883 Colt that he's a choked modified right barrel and a full length tapered left. I have often wondered about why one would go to the trouble of a full length tapered bore? David

[Richard B. Hoover]

David,

That is interesting. I suspect that those early full length tapered bores were made during experiments to obtain improvements in choke. In the late 1860's and 1870's Parker, Greener and other makers were just learning about choking methods, and some of the very early Parkers had relief muzzle boring, while others had constrictions of different extent, contour and degree.

Have you patterned your two barrels? Also did you do the measurements of the bores to determine the bore diameters were from chamber to muzzle. If so, I would be very much interested in learning the results.

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

That plot is very strange. I would like to read the article where it was published. By the very definition of shotgun gauge it truly makes no sense. Did it say where the bore diameter was measured? It was well known long before Parker started making shotguns that a gun with a bore diameter of 0.740" to .751" is a tight 11-bore and .751" and above is a wide 11-gauge and should be proof tested accordingly. It seems to me that such over boring of the barrels would result in loss of pressure, permit escape of gasses around the wad, and reduce the shooting quality of the gun. Parker always prided themselves on making a hard shooting gun. I had always thought they abandoned production of eleven gauge guns by the mid-1870's. Why would they make 11-bore barrels for "12-gauge" guns? That is really wierd. Please give me the info about the Parker Pages article---maybe it gives some clues.

Thanks,


Richard

[Chuck Bishop]

My grade 0 underlifter S/N 8036 has chambers (3") that measure .810 as best I can measure with small digital calipers. The bore diameters are .744 and .746. I'm sure the chambers, forcing cones, and chokes have been messed with. The bore diameters are consistant from about 6" from breach to the start of the choke.

What do I have?

Also, my 12ga TL S/N 27356 have chamber diameters of .810 and bores of .758. These are consistant with Austin's plot.

[Forrest Grilley]

Austin,

That plot is very strange. I would like to read the article where it was published. By the very definition of shotgun gauge it truly makes no sense. Did it say where the bore diameter was measured? It was well known long before Parker started making shotguns that a gun with a bore diameter of 0.740" to .751" is a tight 11-bore and .751" and above is a wide 11-gauge and should be proof tested accordingly. It seems to me that such over boring of the barrels would result in loss of pressure, permit escape of gasses around the wad, and reduce the shooting quality of the gun. Parker always prided themselves on making a hard shooting gun. I had always thought they abandoned production of eleven gauge guns by the mid-1870's. Why would they make 11-bore barrels for "12-gauge" guns? That is really wierd. Please give me the info about the Parker Pages article---maybe it gives some clues.

Thanks,


Richard

I am by no means an expert on this topic, all I can go on is guns that I have own/examined myself. My 12 bore G hammer has .751-.752 bores with .810 chambers (45,000 serial # range). Also, my 10 bore D hammer has .793 bores with standard chambers as well (50,000 range). I have recently examined another 0 grade 10 bore with this exact configuration (25,000 range).

I use thin walled brass in both my 12 and 10 bores, with 11 and 9 gauge wads respectably. From what I understand about this topic, these dimensions are common for Parker guns of this vintage. I don't know when "modern" dimensions became the standard, i.e .729, .775 etc. for Parker guns, although Austin's chart gives us a pretty good idea. There is nothing that confuses me more about Parker shotguns than the 11 gauge discussion. According to some people's definition I own one, as do many others. I think the larger bore diameters are just common for early guns.

Time to break open my copy of TPS to bone up on this topic.

[Austin W Hogan]

Thank you for your inputs. That graph appeared in Parker Pages a few years ago. It is based on measurements of bores of guns with .810 chambers, made with a Stan Baker Bore gauge. It represents mostly my own Parkers; I had many more measurements but did not "busy up" the plot. The measurements were made in a similar way as those of the Super Fox in the DGJ article.
I spent a pleasant day with TSP, reviewing King's work, and bore measurements. I can only conclude that King's tooling used from around s/n 7000 to 70000 bored .750+/- twelve gauge bores. Also, 11 gauge guns are no longer listed in catalogs and price lists after 1872.
I will write a summary of this for Parker Pages.

Best, Austin

[David Hamilton]

Richard, I will pattern the Colt barrels and do the measurements. I did find that the Colt chambers are not tapered and that a brass shell from my 10 ga Parker lifter would not go back all-the-way into the Parker chamber after being fired in the Colt. David

[Richard B. Hoover]

Forrest,

The "modern" definition of Shotgun gauge size in relation to bore diameter is determined by the laws of physics and mathematics and the English system of weights and measures. A sphere of lead that weighs 1/12 of a pound has a diameter of 0.729 inches. It takes eleven lead spheres of 0.751" diameter to weigh exactly one pound. It traces back to the middle ages when cannon bore dimensions were defined by the weight of a lead ball they fired. A full cannon was a 42 pounder and fired a 42 pound cannon ball. A 12 gauge gun that is severely pitted or has been honed could easily have the bore diameter of an 11 or even a 10 gauge size. We know from the records that in the early days (1872 to 1875) Parker made a number of 11-gauge guns and chambered them 11A (.825" head diameter) and others were made for 12A brass or 12 Paper shells (0.810") which is the proper chamber size for 12gauge guns made today, Some of the early 11-ga Parkers were chambered for 10A shells (0.849" head diameter) and have a record of one 11-gauge Parker that was chambered for the Parker 11B shell ( 0.792"). I have also measured a 12-gauge Parker that was chambered for the 11B shell

[Forrest Grilley]

Thank you for your reply Richard. I am very familiar with the origins of the gauge system for bore size. What I meant by "modern", is when did guns become standardized as to where a 12 gauge gun had a .729 diameter bore. This is a fairly modern occurrence, I would estimate this happened sometime in the mid 19th century. For example the British Board of Ordinance documents that a musket's "caliber" was not the bore size, but the size ball it shot. A Brown Bess musket had a actual bore size of around .760-.800 but fired a ball of around .690. It's caliber was referred to as being 13 balls to the pound, not 10 or 9. The same for the 42 pound cannon example you gave. For arguments sake say a 42 pound cannon ball measures 6". I will bet you a Coke that the actual bore diameter of the cannon is larger than 6", so why isn't it called a 41 1/2 pounder or a 41 pounder, by "modern" standards?

Today things are backwards from those early definitions. If you can find ball slugs for your 12 gauge, they will not measure .729, but somewhere around .690-.700. Why don't we call the gun a 13 gauge? It is because more recent standards have determined that a 12 gauge should have a bore size of .729 regardless of what size ball it shoots. I might argue that a Parker with a .750 bore is a more true 12 gauge because it can shoot a full sized .729 ball.

I think if there was a wide spread data collection of the bore sizes of the guns in the serial number range Austin gave (7,000-70,000) we would be shocked at the thousands of "11 gauge" guns that are floating around out there, if we went by bore size alone. Your reference to chamber dimensions may be the only way to accurately determine what the gun was originally classified as (if the Parker records for that specific gun are incomplete). Throw in the "A" and "B" chamberings and you get to a whole new level of headaches. I thank you for trying to add some clarity to this subject.

Do any of you know if there has been published data made available of full hull/chamber dimensions of the A and B versions of each gauge. This might go a long way as to clarifying this topic.

[Chuck Bishop]

I guess all these measurements are interesting if your a statistician and want to track the evolution that Parker made to their barrels over the years but how does it impact using modern 12ga ammo in these over sized bores?

Many years ago when Stan Baker was alive, he manufactured barrels that were bored out to .800 using standard 12ga chambers. If I remember correctly, pressures were only slightly reduced due to the larger bore diameter however most of the pressure is developed in the chamber or slightly forward of the chamber so pressure wasn't greatly affected. I also think velocity was slightly increased due to less barrel friction as the wad/shot moved up the barrel. Modern wads would properly seal against the barrel. Many modern guns are overbored from the factory and well known gunsmiths like Tom Wilkenson believe in improved patterns by overboring barrels but not as drastic as Baker.

To sum up what's been discussed (correct me if I'm wrong)

1. Parker made 11ga barrels with .825+ chambers and .851 bores mostly prior to 1874 in the 2000-6000 S/N range. Some of these guns may have been entered as 10ga or 12ga when they are really 11ga.

2. Many Parkers in the range of 7,000 to 70,000 have standard 12ga chambers with bores of .750 +/-. No problem at all shooting modern 12ga ammo in these guns.

3. After 70,000 bore diameters were mostly in the .730 to .734 range.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Forrest,

I regret my wording may have been awkward and I assure you I did not mean to insult in any way. I am very well aware that Parker enthusiasts are extremely knowledgeable about shotguns. However, I have been wading in this 11-gauge thicket for over two decades now and things just seem to get curiouser and curiouser. There is no doubt that Parker made 11-gauge shotguns in the 1866 to 1875 period. They designated many of them as 11's in both the Order and Stock books. This was done even in cases when the guns were chambered for 12-gauge shells.

To support this notion, I attach a copy of Pgs. 48 and 49 from the Parker Order Book of 1872. As you can see, Order 2075 of July 1st 1872 was for a $150 10 Ga Parker with 30" barrels, chambered for 10A brass shells and shipped with 50 10 A shells. Order 2076 was for a 1-11-32 $135 Damascus barrel gun and 50 12A shells. Similarly 2078 was an Order for a 135$ 11-ga Parker and it was sold with 100 12A shells. Order 2071 was for a $75 12-ga. gun and it was shipped with 3 doz shells at $6 and 50 paper shells (price not shown). Order 2293 of Feb. 1873 from W. L. Harrod of Norwalk, Ohio was for a $100 Iron Barrel 11-ga Parker with "Stock Tough and Curly" and "No Checking" was chambered for brass 11B shells. I have an 11-gauge Parker that was chambered for 11A Brass or 11 Paper shells. I also have one chambered for 10A brass shells and have seen data for another one.

I have measured the bores and chambers of many Parkers, but they were almost all early lifter guns. Many of them are precisely 12-gauge (.729" bores chambered 12Barrels (such as the Meriden Prototype #06 that was initially thought to be S/N 90 and a 14-ga gun because of the 12B chambers).

The Proof Testing of barrels was well established in Europe before Charles parker started making shotguns, and there is evidence he was well aware of those standards. The History of Shotgun Proving is beautifully described in the small book by Purdey and the 1868 Provisional and Definitive Proof loads are given in the Table by Greener (Attached). Parker was not required to use these standards, but there is evidence in TPS that Proker Proved all of his barrels and the standard Provisional and Definitive Proof loads shown in the Greener Table appear to have been used at the Parker Factory.

Now the mysteries :banghead: are:

Why would Parker have made 11-bore dimension barrels and called the guns 12-gauge during this serial number range? This would have resulted in lower pressures, and possibly improved patterns by reducing deformation of the shot.

Did they Proof test these barrels with the loads and charge for 11-bore barrels? And are there any records about precisely how Parker Proof Tested their Barrels at different times? Maybe they changed back to the correct bore dimensions when chilled shot was introduced? Does anyone know if the date of the introduction of lead show with antimony added to increase the hardness is at about the same time as the S/N 70,000 Parkers??

I am delighted more people are becoming interested in measuring their barrels. I have a nice set of Bore and Chamber gauges. Unfortunately I can not go to the SXS, but would be delighted if someone would be willing to measure the bores of some of the wonderful guns that will be there.

Yours,

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

I attach the rest of the files. I could have included all of these pages as a single .pdf file, but did not discover until I had created them that the site allows .odf files up to 17 meg in size. I was trying to keep everything less than 1 meg. The last page (Pg. 141) in The Shotgun Book by Purdey and Purdey is the most important as it sets forth the broad requirements for Proof testing in accordance with bore size.

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Forrest,

I have published the measurements of the dimensions of a number of the early Brass and Paper shells in my DGJ articles on 11-gauge Parkers (Winter, 2008 and Spring, 2009). I will be happy to make them into .pdf files and upload them if you would like.

Richard

[Chuck Bishop]

Richard,

I'll be more than happy to measure bores at the Southern. We can compile a list and forward to you. Unfortunately, my Stan Baker micrometers don't measure 12ga chambers but my digital calipers may be good enough. I'll have them at the Parker Tent for everyone to use.

Chuck Bishop

[Richard B. Hoover]

Chuck,

That is great. How deep can you get into the bores? I am still hoping to learn more about full length tapered bores, so if they can reach 15" you could measure the full length of most barrels.

By the way, I forgot to post a couple of other things that had led me to my conclusions about early Parker 11-gauge guns. It had been suggested that Charles Parker just may not have cared much about precise bore dimensions. Then in June 1996, I had the wonderful opportunity to measure the bores and chambers of the Prototype Parker S/N 06 at the Meriden Historical Society. It was originally thought to be S/N 90 and in 14-gauge. Charlie Hezog and the late "Big Iron" Ed Kapelski helped me to measure the gun and fing that it was chambered for short (2") Maynard shells and with rlief chokes in the last 4" at the muzzle. My measurements revealed that both bores were perfect 12-bore dimensions (0.729") over almost the entire length of both barrels (Attached). This precision 1866 barrel boring amazed my friends in the NASA/MSFC machine shop. The Prototype was chambered for Maynard shells and it had an abrupt lip at the end of the chambers so that once it had been fired and the hulls were still in place it could be used as a muzzle loader. This was fine, since the caps were not in the shells, but fitted on percussion nipples on the top of the receiver. An 1866 or 1867 Ad in the Webb N. E Railway and Manufacturer's Statistical Gazeteer described this type of gun. The Meriden T-Latch Parker with Percussion Nipples may be the only one of its kind still in existence, and I doubt that they made very many to start with. I attach the Webb Ad as there may be new members of the PGCA that have never seen it, but I think it was probably published in TPS.

Richard

[Forrest Grilley]

Forrest,

I have published the measurements of the dimensions of a number of the early Brass and Paper shells in my DGJ articles on 11-gauge Parkers (Winter, 2008 and Spring, 2009). I will be happy to make them into .pdf files and upload them if you would like.

Richard

Outstanding! I think I have those issues, I will be sure to check at first opportunity tonight. If not, I would definitely love to see your articles.

[Chuck Bishop]

Richard,

The mic will reach 18 1/2".

[Richard B. Hoover]

Chuck,

That is fantastic. Does it have sufficient range to do chambers and forcing cones as well?

I am very much interested in finding out the serial number range of the full length tapered bores as well. Do you have the DGJ issues. If not I will post them as they describe the saga I have been through since my Grandfather won an old Parker in a Poker game in 1921. the mysteries of this old wall hanger continue to help us learn more about the Parker secrets.

Richard

[Chuck Bishop]

No, it's a Stan Baker set so there are 3 separate shafts that will read 12,16,20,28,and .410. I don't know why 10ga wasn't included.

The largest head will only read to .770 so checking the chamber and getting an accurate read on forcing cones isn't possible. I use my digital micrometer for chamber dia. which seems to work well right at the mouth of the chamber.

Please post the DGJ article.

[Austin W Hogan]

Chuck, Forrest, and all:

My 10 ga measurements are as yours, but are on the edge of resolution on my Stan Baker gauge so I did not use them in the article. After a little my searching through TPS, I conclude that the combination of .810 chamber and .750 bore would accomodate either paper or brass shells, making it possible to distribute and stock Parker guns in American commerce.

Parker order book entries begin with steel type gauge length - ie Dam 12/30. It would be very difficult to miss an 11, if it existed in the serialization data.

Best, Austin

[Richard B. Hoover]

Austin,

That is just the problem. Bill Furnish, George Flaim, Charlie Herzog and I have all found true 11-gauge Parkers that were entered in the Stock books as 12- or 10-gauge guns. And these are early (pre-1875) guns chambered 0.825" to 0.830" which is not suitable for either 12A brass or 12paper or 10A brass or 10 paper shells. We have also found perfect 12-bore Parker (0.729") barrels chambered for 11B brass shells. More measurements are needed. I have suggested to Charlie, that I could send my Bore and Chamber gauges to him, but it may be getting too late for him to get them to the SXS.

Maybe you could give me a call at 256-337-4082 as I would like to discuss this in more detail. I talk faster than I type (still only use one finger).

Chuck, I wil post my DGJ articles that contain the information on the early shotshell dimensions and my wanderings in the Parker 11-gauge briar patch as soon as I get them converted to .pdf files (hopefully later today.)

Thanks,

Richard

Richard

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

Richard if you are ever up my way, "30mi south of Roanoke VA." at milepost 163 Blue Ridge Parkway, You could check some of my early guns I have no gauges to check with! Some of interest. Ser # 97-12B?, Ser# 258-12ga? Ser# 1147 14ga, Ser# 1590-12ga? Ser# 2349-12ga? Ser# 3307-12ga? Ser# 3416 2brl set 12ga? Ser#3834 11ga, with letter, Ser# 4412-12ga? As stated some have letters but not many, I am giving these serial numbers from memory but believe them correct without checking. Best Gary

[Richard B. Hoover]

Gary,

I was delighted to hear about your Early Parker. I may have data on some of those guns if they belonged to Bill furnish in the early to mid 1990's. Some of those T-Latch numbers sound vaguely familiar.

I would like to talk with you. I will try to give you a call later this evening

[Richard B. Hoover]

Chuck,

I am posting Part I of the DGJ Article. The Table with data on the Dimensions of Early Shells is on Pg. 72. I also post images of these early 11-gauge shells. As you can see, the head diameters (0.825") are much to large for a fireformed 12A or 12 Paper shell (0.810") but appropriate for a true 11-ga chamber. These shells are extremely rare, and to my knowledge no one has any shells with dimensions like these with a Parker Headstamp or designated "11A". If anyone does, it would be wonderful to hear from them.


Yours,

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Forrest,

I attach a picture of one of the Game Scene Ovals of #3561 with a Pointer and Setter on point and back as a Timber Doodle flushes from the rich Marsh Land of Southern Louisiana, where Aristide Monnot had his vast Sugar Plantations and Refineries. I also attach a photo of me with my GrandDads old Parker and Bonnie my faithful hunting dog. The ducks were brought down with 12-gauge shells in the sleeved chambers of the 11-bore Parker (unfortunately not a double) and retrieved by Bonnie. She died at the age of 15 shortly after this picture was taken. Bonnie was fast as the wind and had many NSTRA and NAVHDA awards. She retrieved many a dove, quail, grouse, woodcock, geese, duck and shoes (she kept bringing them from my closet until she was given a reward). That girl had a sense of humor like no dog I have ever known. There will never be another one like her and she will always be missed. But you have to move on and Miriam and I will pick up my new (49 day old) Brittany Pup tommorrow. I am taking an 11-gauge Parker along to make sure the pup I choose will have no fear of the sound of thunder and love the smell of gunpowder.


Yours,

Richard

[Austin W Hogan]

Richard ; Please contact me at

austin.w.hogan@valley.net

Brst, Austin

[Richard B. Hoover]

Chuck,

How did it go at the Southern. Did you get more neasurements whle you were there. I am extremely interested in hearing what you found. I very much wish I could have been there, but my wife did not feel well enough to make he trip and I could not leave her here alone. I have been very tied up during the last week with Miriam and he new Brittany pup that we just picked up on Thursday.

[Chuck Bishop]

Sorry to disappoint you Richard but nobody came forward at the Southern to have their barrels checked. I wasn't in the tent constantly but I left my barrel mic there for anyone to use.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Richard if you are ever up my way, "30mi south of Roanoke VA." at milepost 163 Blue Ridge Parkway, You could check some of my early guns I have no gauges to check with! Some of interest. Ser # 97-12B?, Ser# 258-12ga? Ser# 1147 14ga, Ser# 1590-12ga? Ser# 2349-12ga? Ser# 3307-12ga? Ser# 3416 2brl set 12ga? Ser#3834 11ga, with letter, Ser# 4412-12ga? As stated some have letters but not many, I am giving these serial numbers from memory but believe them correct without checking. Best Gary


Gary,

I am sorry I have not gotten back to you sooner, but my wife has not been well and I have not been on the Forum for the past few weeks. I see you have a number of very interesting early Parkers. Could you please post the letter for Serial No. 3834?. Also have you checked the diameter of the chambers for this gun?

Thanks,

Richard

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

Richard I am currently in Tenn, will be here till Tuesday once back home I will be able to get that info for you. Gary

[Richard B. Hoover]

Gary,

Will your travels take you anywhere near Huntsville? If you could drop by I would love to meet you and talk about hammer Parkers and show you some interesting documents. If you have a spare moment, please give me a call (256-337-4082).

Richard

Richard

[Gary Carmichael Sr]

Richard I am hosting a prevost rally here in Tenn, 50 people and the only time I get is right about bed time to answer e=mails, will call when I get back to V.A. Thanks Gary

[Carl Baird]

Hi,
I have an 11 ga. that I am cleaning up a bit. I have had the bores cleaned to a mirror finish. The gun is a strange animal. Great shape, but came to me with a Tiger Maple stock and an unadorned walnut forend. It was made in 1884 and has the more conventional top lever. I have not done anything to the gun, other than cleaning out the barrels. As you mentioned, it will work as a 12 ga.
I'm trying to determine what was original, the Tiger Maple stock or the forend. No checkering on the forend (may have worn off), and looks like 18LPI checkering on the stock. If the stock is not original, it was very well done. Either case it is old. Very substantial gun. Came with stub twist barrels. All serial numbers match. Grade is "T".
Any body know if Parker ever made Maple stocks?
I'm about to send in a letter on it.
Thanks,
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

A letter would be useful, but I am wondering why you think it is an 11-gauge. If the barrels have bores that have been honed their dimensions can not be used to establish that the gun is an 11-gauge. Also it is clear that all Parker 11-gauge guns seem to have been made before Serial Number 6000. It would be helpful if you could post photos of the stock, forend and barrels. Also, do the serial numbers match?

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Hi Richard, I don't know about the serialization issue. I sent the barrels to a highly respected guy in Oklahoma that specializes in barrels. I told him I bought as an 11 ga. and he verified that it was indeed an 11 ga..I can call him and ask what the original diameter and wall thickness was. He did the barrels in March. At the time he shipped them back to me, he made the comment it would make a great black powder gun with brass shells from RST. I have not pursued that. All the serial numbers match. I'm confused by the stock/forend wood difference. The barrels are 32" and ended up at full and improved.They have a very nice patina with a vivid twist pattern. I'm comparing the size of the bores on the Parker with my very original FoxAE 12 ga, and the parker bore is bigger and has more metal to it. This is NOT a 12 ga.
Richard, I'm not interested in selling it, but I am interested in getting the stock forend issue resolved. I want to match them, but I don't know if it's to Maple or walnut.Again, the maple stock is so well fitted and so old, it makes me believe it might have been made that way. It's a whole lot easier to replace a forend than it is a stock.
I was told that Parker NEVER made a double that wasn't checkered...do you know if that's true?
Thanks for your interest.
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

Regarding the last point --- it is definitely not true. Parker made what the customer wanted. I have seen order book entries where a $250 Parker "A" grade was ordered to have no engraving whatsoever. If someone wanted a Parker with no checking, that is what he would have received. I would be very interested in learning what the bore diameters were before and after the barrel work was done, and at what posits the measurements were made. Of course, if the bores needed honing they were probably badly pitted,, so unless measurements were made at several positions, the values obtained might not reflect the initial dimensions when the barrels were finished at the factory.

Also, I typed without thinking when I said there were no 11-gauge Parkers with Serial Numbers above 6000. Bill Furnish reported that he had four 11-gauge Parkers with higher numbers--S/N 8900, 12053, 14827 & 25991. Parker 8900 was chambered 0.810" for 12A brass or 12-gauge paper shells. Parker #14827 was chambered for 10 gauge shells (0.851') but the S/N 12053 and 25991 guns were both chambered for 11A brass or 11 paper shells (0.825" to 0.830").

Could you please let me know what is the Serial Number of the gun and do he numbers all match? Can you also send photos of the stock and forend?

Yours,

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Richard,
ALL the numbers match. The serial number is 40419. I do have a Choke gauge, I recently bought from Connecticut Shotgun. The gauge goes as high as 12ga. One of the barrels stops the gauge at the very last stop...Cylinder, the other barrel is too big for the gauge and it slides completely in... easily. I will supply you with specifics on the barrel measurements tomorrow when I call the barrel guy.
I will send you pics of the stock and forend, but I have the stock removed from the receiver..is that ok? Do you have an email address you are willing to give me, so I can email the pics?
Carl

[Carl Baird]

Richard,
I have sent in the money for the Parker letter. I called the gunsmith who did the barrels and he said the original bore was .752/753 and he opened it up to .765. The thinnest spot after the job was complete was.33. He does not remember what the chamber size was. I asked him again about the gauge and he said it's tough to say because a lot of the old Parkers were just plain big.
I have not heard from you about an email to send you pictures. Is it because you were under the impression that the gun was for sale? If so, I am sorry I mislead you. I will continue to share with you what I find out.
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

I understand the gun is not for sale. I was asking for images to try to help answer your questions. The chamber size you can easily answer yourself without any tools. Slip in a modern 12 gauge shell. If it fits just like in any modern 12gauge gun the chambers are 12 gauge. If the shell is very loose try a 10 gauge shell. If it can not be slid in then it is probably chambered 0.825 for an 11A shell. Have you looked up he Serial number in the Parker Serialization book?

Also are you sure the stock is maple? If so, the gun was probable restocked, as I have never heard of Parkernusing maple for a stock. There are other experts here who would know far more about this question than I do, and maybe they will comment on that point.

I hope this is helpful.

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

Sorry, I forgot to list my e-mail.

Entogonia@AOL.COM

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Hi Richard,
It seems to take a 12 ga. shell just perfectly, maybe a little play, but not so you'd notice. I am a wood person and it's tiger maple. I've taken the pics to show you. They will be downloaded later today. I have looked up the number in the Parker double book set. It was made in 1884. I don't know of another book? I did dial in the serial number before sending the letter and there is information available on it.
I believe you are right. I was hoping that it had been stocked in Maple, because the cost to replace the stock is a lot more than the forend. However, setting up the forend for the pics, there is no doubt it's original. The stock is the issue.
Thanks,
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

The Serialization lists Parker Number 40419 as a 12 gauge with 32" barrels in Stub Twist made in 1884.

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

The other book is

Parker Gun: Identification and Serialization. 2002.

You can get it at Amazon.com for $37 and it is a must for every Parker enthusiast.

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Hi Richard,
Just sent several pictures to your email address.
Carl

[Carl Baird]

I will order the book right away. Well that answers my question. Thanks a bunch.
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

Thanks for the photos. The forfend looks original, and
the stock looks like a later addition. the bore dimensions are 11-gauge, but it is possible that the barrels were honed at an earlier date to remove pitting. The chambers are clearly 12-gauge and your letter will probably list the gun as 12-gauge with 32".stub twist barrels.

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Richard, thanks for your comments. I'm still hoping for the letter to say it was an 11 ga. In either case, I start the refit this weekend with a nice piece of walnut I ordered. Today is my birthday and I'm getting the book.
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

I would very much like to talk to the man who did work on your barrels. He might know if here was evidence that they had been previously honed before he received them. Also did they measure 0.751" or so at several places along the bores, or only where the pitting was worst. If so the pitting could have made 12-bore barrels into the 11-bore range.

However, if they were originally bored to the .751" dimension, then the gun was made an 11, even if Parker may have chambered it for 12gauge shell and called it a "12". It is well known throughout the world that it is the bore dimension and not the clambering of the gun that determines the gauge size. If you call a lemon a pineapple, it will still not be large and sweet.:rotf::)

But it is clear that the Stock books contain many discrepancies in this area. I have an early lifter D-grade 11- bore Parker ~0.755" with 30" barrels that was chambered for 10 gauge shells and is listed in the Parker Serialization as a 12 gauge with 30" barrels. If the stock book listing were based on the chambers, then this gun should have been listed as a 10 gauge. However there is clear evidence as Austin Hogan has pointed out that Parker over bored many guns in the 7000 to 70,000 range. The question that needs to be answered is --- Why? They clearly knew how to make perfect 12-bore barrels as we heve found in many early guns with .729" bores. Could it be that they did this to reduce the pressure that may have helped reduce failure in lower grade barrels? To answer this, we need to find out if there are any written factory memos, letters or records that may solve the Problem. Austin mentioned a King patent for tooling that caused the barrels to be overbored, but I have not been able to find it. The only one I remember having in my collection of Parker Patents related to a method of encasing the barrels in Plaster of Paris to keep them from vibrating or twisting during the boring proces, but that would not alter the bore diameter. If anyone could upload the King tooling patent, I would very much appreciate it, as I am still trying to understand how to unravel this mystery. Also, it would be interesting to know if thare are many 12-gauge barrels in this serial range that are bored .729", and if so are they also on the lower grade guns.

Please put me in contact with your barrel man, as he might have some answers to these questions.

Yours,

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

I forgot to say Happy Birthday. The Serialization Book is a perfectly suitable birthday present for you to get for yourself. It is wonderful. I use mine all the time.

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Hi Richard,
Dean Harris...Skeets Gun Shop.
918-456-4749. Located in Oklahoma. Nice guy and very knowledgable about old barrels. I personally don't think it had ever been bored before. Let me know what you find out?
Thanks very much.
Carl

[Howard Levita]

My first time here...SUCCESS...thank you Autumn daze.
You have filled in all the missing info. about my Draper cartridge and how it was reloaded.
Also, I've had this one in my collection for years and only now have been able to document it and the original Wills patent, as well. I could never even find it via Google!
This Forum is obviously a valuable resource...

[Mills Morrison]

Well, I bought what appears to be an 11 gauge at the Southern Side by Side this past weekend. The serial number is 14923. A 10 gauge shell does not fit and a 12 gauge shell is very loose. A research letter is going out today, so we will see what it turns up. The gun appears in original condition, except for a replacement hammer. Barrels are 32 inches, bores cleaned up easily, wood in decent but oily condition.

[Mike Franzen]

I remember seeing an 11 ga for sale at the Southern. Kevin McCormick might have had it.

[Carl Baird]

just a general note on my 12 ga. Parker. Richard and I had a discussion about it last year and whether it was an 11 or 12 ga. It measures out as an 11, but the 12 ga. shell snugs in real nice. no sloppiness at all. The gun is just about finished, with a nice new utility grade walnut stock fitted to it. Have a few more coats of linspeed and it's done. Still a question in my mind...and probably Richards, as to why the darn gun has a .751 bore and be lettered as a 12 ga. Dean at skeets, who cleaned my barrels out, thinks it might be because Parker wanted to keep the pressures reasonable and the gun more reliable. My original barrels are stub twist...low man on the totum pole. I think they are beautiful, and I would go after geese with those 32" barrels. I have absolutely no doubt the gun will shoot for years to come. The only problem is the weight of the gun. A tad bit heavy by todays standards. The serial number is in the 44000's and it's a straight hammer gun not a lifter.
Carl

[David Hamilton]

One must be aware that the Parker chambers are tapered. Some shells will not go into the chambers all the way. I have a 10 g Colt with straight chambers and a shell fired in it will not go all the way into my old Parker hammer 10 gauge. I use brass shells for the Parker and fired some in the Colt. They are now dedicatd Colt shells. David

[Carl Baird]

Hi David,
Not clear on what you are saying. Are you saying my gun may still be an 11ga.
Also, Dean at skeets mentioned brass shells and said my gun would be a great candidate to use them. Since I've never used them, I don't know what's different about them. The full story shortened, is that Dean said my gun was perfect to use as a brass shell black powder gun. He said just wash out the barrels with hot soapy water and that's all you have to do. I never went any further with it, because I don't want to get into black powder ammo.
Carl

[David Hamilton]

In my case, The guns I refer to are both 10 gauge but one has tapered chambers and the other does not. Brass shells fired in the straight chambers will not then fit in the tapered chambers. I had Rocky Mountain Brass make shells for me. They can make shells any size so you can get 11 gauge from them. You can load the shells with low pressure nitro loads if you don't want the mess of black powder. Black powder can be cleaned up with a water and Balistol solution that protects from rust. You needto have your chambers measured properly before having brass shells made. David

[Carl Baird]

Thanks david, Appreciate the clarification. Other than fitting the ga. properly, is there any other advantage to brass shells?
Carl

[David Hamilton]

Brass shells can be reused many many times. If you have an 11 gauge they be the only shells you can get. David

[Mills Morrison]

I was thinking of getting some gauge mates for mine so it can hold 12 gauge RST shells. Surprisingly for an old, odd gauged Parker, mine has modern dimensions and handles very well when I swing it.

[Carl Baird]

Mine swings well too, it's stopping the swing that's troublesome. The darn thing is very heavy but well balanced and with those 32 inch barrels, it can reach out there very well. I exercise with an old cape gun I have, made by Remington. Ten ga. one barrel and 40-50 sharps in the other barrel. It weighs in at 11 pounds. After half an hour with the Remington, the Parker feels like a modern 20 ga.

[Mills Morrison]

It sounds like ours are very similar. Mine has 32" barrels too. Mine is on a No. 2 frame.

[Carl Baird]

Yup, mine too. Mine is a field grade "Stub Twist" and in very good shape. No checkering on either the forend or stock, but I think I will have it checkered. I think it will make the gun look much nicer. Supposedly the Stub Twist was the lowest grade, but to me it has so much character, I don't mind in the least.

[Mills Morrison]

Mine are plain twist. Twist barrels are underrated, in my opinion. The wood on mine is uncheckered as well and I will probably leave it that way, but I am tempted to have someone leach out the oil and cigar smoke smell in the wood.

[Chuck Bishop]

I believe I read somewhere, probably TPS, that Stub Twist was considered a higher grade of barrels, ranking between Plain Twist and Damascus.

[Mills Morrison]

I seem to remember a similar statement on this forum that stub twist were some of the strongest of the composite barrels.

[Carl Baird]

Hi Pa SxS,
I assume your a grampa? My grands all call me Paw Paw emphasizing the Paaaaaw.
I would love to know more about the rankings of the various twist steels. Someone told me that "Stub" was another way of describing the iron nails that were used in the processing of "Stub Twist" barrels. Regardless, they seem to be somewhat rare. Could be because they were meant to put dinner on the table and got a lot of rough use. Mine was made in 1884 and that's almost 130 years ago. That's a lot of hunting.
Took it all apart to give it a thorough cleaning and its very well made. Springs are strong and no noticeable wear. The only thing wrong with it when I bought it was the stock. The original must have been damaged at one time and was replaced with a tiger maple stock. Not a good look with the original walnut forend. All has been rectified though and looks good now. You probably know this already, but if you take the stock and forend off, soak them in acetone for a few days, most of the oil will be cleaned out. Also, the old finish will have been removed in the process or comes off very easy with bronze wool. Then let it air dry for a day, then boil both pcs which will draw out any dents, or at least minimize them. Then sand to 800 and finish with whatever finish you like. I like Linspeed.
Carl

[Mills Morrison]

Letter came back today. The letter describes the gun perfectly, except it has it as a 12 gauge and not an 11 gauge. I wonder if the chambers were just oversized or if the old brass shells took up more space than modern plastic shells? Still happy with the purchase regardless.

[Mills Morrison]

The letter confirmed that the wood was originally uncheckered, which was what I suspected.

[charlie cleveland]

any body out there got a 11 ga shell in there collection...since they made some guns in that ga they must have made the shell..i sure aint got a 11 ga in my collection but i would like to have one... charlie

[Carl Baird]

I'm repeating myself, but mine measured like is should be an 11 ga. but the letter came back describing my gun to a tee and said it was a 12 ga. It would be interesting to get hold of an 11 ga. shell and see how it fits. Don't know where to get a sample.

[Todd Kaltenbach]

The last 11 gauge shell I saw was at the Louisville show and was priced at $150!!! Needless to say I didn't buy it.

[Richard B. Hoover]

Richard if you are ever up my way, "30mi south of Roanoke VA." at milepost 163 Blue Ridge Parkway, You could check some of my early guns I have no gauges to check with! Some of interest. Ser # 97-12B?, Ser# 258-12ga? Ser# 1147 14ga, Ser# 1590-12ga? Ser# 2349-12ga? Ser# 3307-12ga? Ser# 3416 2brl set 12ga? Ser#3834 11ga, with letter, Ser# 4412-12ga? As stated some have letters but not many, I am giving these serial numbers from memory but believe them correct without checking. Best Gary

Gary,

I just found this in an old thread. Can you bring these guns to the Southern for me to measure them?

Thanks,

Richard

[Richard B. Hoover]

The last 11 gauge shell I saw was at the Louisville show and was priced at $150!!! Needless to say I didn't buy it.

Todd,

Was the shell you saw at Louisville I stamped "11" or "11B". I have a Parker 11B shell and will be bringing it to the Southern. Do you have any Parker 12A brass shells?

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Would parafin casting help? I'm thinking of casting mine at the breech. You could take it to a show and compare it to any 11 ga. shell you run across?

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

It is much easier to just use a micrometer to measure the dimensions of the bores. Remember, it is the barrel bore diameter (not the chambers) that determine the gauge of a shotgun. Shotshell diameters were very well established by the time the Parker Bros. shotguns (both back action and front action) were first being made. And the diameters have not changed since that time---except the 10B, 11B, and 12B have gone extinct.

You can use modern shells to perform a simple test of the chambers of an early under lifter Parker Hammer Gun:

1. A modern 14-ga shell fits perfectly in the chambers--gun was chambered for either a 14-ga. Paper or 12B brass shells. Gun could be a 14-ga but probably a 12-bore.

2. Modern 12-ga Shell fits--gun was chambered for 12-A brass or No. 12 paper shells. Gun probably a 12-ga but it could be an 11-ga Parker.

3. Modern 12-ga shell is loose and modern 10-ga shell will not go in chamber --- gun is most probably an 11-ga Parker.

4. Modern 10 ga shell fits---gun is probably a 10-gauge.

Richard

[Carl Baird]

Richard,
My gun is not a under lifter, it's an old hammer gun. It was made in 1884, and as you recall, the bore measured .754. The letter from Parker says it's 12 ga. and a modern paper 12 ga. fits fine. Are you saying that a brass 11 ga. might fit it?
Is this 11 ga. issue more related to the old Parker under lifters?
Carl

[Richard B. Hoover]

Carl,

Absolutely. Almost all of the 11-ga Parker's we're made before 1876. Some were chambered for the 11 paper or 11-A brass shell, but many were chambered for 12 paper or 12-a brass shells. A heavily pitted or honed 12-gauge barrel can measure as an 11---but it is still a 12

[Carl Baird]

Richard,
Thanks very much.
Carl