Your not hurting my feelings. I could look and admire guns like this all day. I have never owned a Fox but after viewing these pictures-I may have to find a way to get one into my collection. Galazon and his team look to have put alot of effort into producing these guns.

John,
Here is a little Grade "Special" in 410:
Bob Jurewicz

Just curious why a Remington Parker is not a repro?

I have owned mine for 20 plus years. Purchased it new. I have hunted the gun extensively from Canada to Argentina. One ejector guide pin broke and the front trigger pull got light, both fixed within weeks and returned NC.

I would agree on ordering one if I was going to spend upwards of $30K. Get the gun specked exactly as you want it. Not sure of the wait time on a FE, but XE and DE grades are estimated at a 9 month delivery. Life time guarantee.
I have never owned a Philly or Savage Fox , but not sure as to why they would be superior other than nostalgia.

It is my understanding that Parker Reproductions were marketed as such. That is certainly one reason whey we still have this discussion. I often wonder how we would view and characterize those guns if they had not been marketed as "reproductions." The term original carries its own interpretations.

What we call Parker Reproductions are well made guns. Parkers made after the acquisition by Remington are well made guns. The A. H. Fox guns made in New Britain are well made guns.

The enlarged and italicized part of Harry's quote is the true key to the argument or any discussion suggesting Remington Parkers and Savage Foxes as being "reproductions."

And then we have the "Parker Reintroduction" by Remington in the 80's and then the Remington-authorized Parkers made by CSMC...
These seem to be a subjective matter of interpretation and I think it all boils down to semantics.


.

So post war Superposed are reproductions ?
I'm confused :confused: