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.





.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

AMEN

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

JDG

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.




.

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.