Remington Parker GHE

[Bruce Day]

And certainly no one would want a low grade Remington Parker, like this little GHE 20ga, SN 241, 600.

[Kenny Graft]

I like the ringnecks better than them other birds on the belly plate...the quail are questionable? They don't look as real or lifelike. Why did remington change the bird patern anyway?

[Dean Romig]

Ken, the engraving on the GHE Bruce has displayed was done by Robert Runge, one of the most accomplished engravers of Parker guns. G or Grade-2 Parkers almost always had two birds engraved on both sides as well as on the floor plate. Each successive Chief Engraver had his own theme of what kind of birds he depicted. Runge obviously chose quail.

Nice gun Bruce.

Incidentally, the machine duplicated engraving on the DHE Repros is an exact copy of Runge engraving.

[Steve Huffman]

Ill take it !!!!

[Pete Lester]

When did Runge start working for Parker?

[Dean Romig]

Don't know the date but he started with Parker Bros at a relatively early age and 'apprenticed' under his father if I'm not mistaken. He became head of the engraving department or Chief Engraver replacing Anschutz in the early thirties. It's all in The Parker Story but I don't have mine close at hand at the moment.

[Kevin McCormack]

Lots of misinformation in this thread - for a definitive biography of Bob Runge, see my article in the Double Gun Journal, Vol. 11 Issue 3 (Autumn 2000), entitled "When I Paint My Masterpiece."

[Bill Murphy]

Yup, please read Kevin's article. Most information about Runge is from those who never met him. He and his family did have quite a long history at Parker Brothers, as well as Remington.

[Bill Zachow]

One point of possible interest--the frame on that G was a fairly early Meriden produced frame. I would guess early 1900s-pre 1910. You can tell by the "shoe filing".

[Bill Murphy]

Serial #241,600 1910?

[Russ Jackson]

Here is a picture of a 16 Ga. GHE ,real close to the serial # Bruce posted ,Serial # 241685 ! Does the " Shoe Filing " look the same ??? I don' see any difference myself .:corn:

[Dean Romig]

May we presume the one pictured in the book is a .410?

On what page of TPS can we find that picture?

[Russ Jackson]

28 Gauge Dean ,TPS Page 722 !

[Bill Zachow]

Bill, you must be aware that Remington purchased Parker's parts inventory along with the gun business. In that inventory was an untold number of unnumbered frames. In manufacturing those frames, Parker (not Remington) gradually changed the amount of filing (shoe filing) that they did on the bottom of the frame. The earliest hammerless frames have the "bullet nosed" filing almost touching the trigger plate. As the years went by,less and less metal was removed, to the point where the end of the "bullet nose" was around 3/8" from the trigger plate. The latter was in the latest Parker produced frames in the early 30s. The "parker Story" by Price et al, has a good, detailed section on this. My collection of "Gs" bears this out and allows me to date the subject frame to around 1910.

[Russ Jackson]

Bill ,This is interesting to me , are you able to tell by the picture I posted of my GHE Serial #241685 if it is an early Frame or a late frame ,I really haven't seen enough of the Remington Era guns to tell the difference ! If you need different pictures ,I would be happy to post or take others if need be ! Russ

[Chuck Bishop]

Bill, I agree with you. The pictures by Bruce show the early style shoe filing. I don't know exactly how to describe it but if you look at the bottom of the receiver, on the old style cuts/channel/gouge, what ever you call it, extends almost to the top right and left edge of the floor plate. On the newer frames, the cut is just about to the bottom of the 2 top floor plate screws. It does slight alter the side shape of the receiver but is not as noticeable as the underside of the receiver. According to TPS, this change was a cost saving measure.

If I'm wrong about this, I'm sure you guys will correct me.

Russ, show pictures of the bottom of your receiver.

[Chuck Bishop]

Sorry Bill, I missed your last post. Looks like we're on the same page with this subject!

[Russ Jackson]

Chuck ,here is a of piccture of the bottom of the receiver ! Russ

[Chuck Bishop]

Russ,

The contours are very close to my 1904 GH but not exactly. My channel continues to slopes till it ends, where yours is parallel for a short distance till it ends.

I wonder if all the Rem Parkers were filed this way?

[Chuck Bishop]

Now that I've reviewed the picture Bruce posted, his does have the continued slope to the floor plate edge. Maybe the differences have to do with smaller gauges but there is no doubt that channel runs longer and is more like early Parker frames versus the later Parker built frames.

[Dave Suponski]

I am sure some of these changes were done as a cost savings but I'm beginning to believe many of these suble differences we see in frame sculpting early or late guns along with barrel swamping and even differences in trap forends all lead up to getting a gun to a specified weight or to get the balance point were it needed to be.

[E Robert Fabian]

This is a 1 1/2 frame 215929 1926

[Sarah Runge]

@Kevin McCormick. When you wrote the piece on RPR did you get to meet him?

[George M. Purtill]

@Kevin McCormick. When you wrote the piece on RPR did you get to meet him?

I thought that's what the article said. I just read it the other night for the first time coincidentally.
Mr. Runge was unflattering about the conditions at PB in Meriden as i recall. They were very cheap in their dire financial condition. People tripped on badly patched floors, etc.

[Bill Murphy]

Ms. Runge, Mr. McCormack is a close friend. He, in fact, met Robert Runge on many visits to the DelGrego shop. I never met Mr. Runge, but I have been friends with the DelGregos since 1972. If you would like to contact Mr. McCormack, email me at wilmrph@verizon.net and I will put you in touch.

[davidweirjr]

Happy. 4th members from David weir Jr new member

[Bruce Day]

OK folks, here is a repeat of SN 241,600, the 20ga G ( third photo), and another of my SN 241, 601, the last C in the Serialization Book and a gun sold in 1939( first photo). See what you think about the frame sculpting.

For Sarah Runge, the engraving on the C floor plate, though unsigned, has been attributed without hesitation to your grandfather by several people that I regard as knowledgeable. Runge dogs were distinctive. The G looks to me like it could be Runge engraving but I am not prepared to say that it is, as these lower grade guns like G's were often done by engraving staff rather than the master engraver.

The second photo is of a 1910 C 16ga, and you can see the frame sculpting does not extend as far to the trigger plate as it does in the 1939 gun.

Back from Boy Scout camp after a session watching over several archery departments serving about 1000 boys. What fun even though it was over 100 degrees every day.

[Dean Romig]

Bruce, the engraving style on the floor plate of the G you show appears to have been done by the same hand that engraved VH to GH Runge/DelGrego upgrades I have seen.

I almost bought a 20 gauge Runge/DelGrego upgrade "skeet gun" a few years ago for $2400... I should have done it. It eventually sold for over $7k less than a year after I had the chance to buy it.

[dwight pugh]

how do you know who the engraver was ?

this is my 0 frame20 # 217442

ddp

pic didn't attach...will add later, when i figure it out.........


& there it is now........

[Dean Romig]

There were a few Parker engravers who's work is usually identifiable but most are not so easy to identify. Parker engravers were not allowed to sign their and it is extremely rare to find a gun with initials or a name engraved in an obscure spot.

[dwight pugh]

There were a few Parker engravers who's work is usually identifiable but most are not so easy to identify. Parker engravers were not allowed to sign their and it is extremely rare to find a gun with initials or a name engraved in an obscure spot.
thanks so much for the info & your time.

ddp

" learn something new every day & someday you "MIGHT" be wise "