Bruce,
I'm not sure how much if any lateral stability is gained from the use of the newer bolt vs. the full surface version. I would think the fit of the barrel lug to the slot in the frame as well as the dolls head would generate the most lateral stability.

The other consideration when converting older guns to the 1910 style bolt plate is that Parker changed the top lever linkage at some point. I’ve made several hybrid bolts for my gunsmith which allowed the use of the 1910 bolt plate on guns with the older style linkage.

Guys,

Thank you for your explanations. I can see, now, that as a repair it is out of my league and one that I'll let an expert handle. However it is still a very neat remedy for a loose action.



Jack Kuzepski,

Jack, Thank you for posting your question. I provoked a great discussion.

Who does it right? What does it cost? Thanks, George

If you mean by "right" replacing the bolt to match the 1910 channeled bolt plate , Del Grego. They have the original parts. Call and ask.

It seems to me in my non expert view far away out here that Parker developed the 1910 bolt/bolt plate configuration over the 1905 version for a reason and that reason is negated unless the matching bolt is used. I know some feel that it doesn't matter, like some also feel the dolls head rib extension doesn't matter, but it obviously mattered to Parker. Me not being an expert, I don't know enough to dispute Parker.

I don't think that Parker Brothers thought that the doll's head mattered in a durability or mechanical way. They made thousands of guns without the doll's head without apology.

This is why I love this place. Great discussion!!

Bill, look at the guns they made without a doll's head rib extension. First you have the lifter actioned guns, which preceeded the rib extension development. Next you have the later Trojans, which were a low price point gun made inexpensively by Parker standards. Next are the single barrel guns, which had no torque caused by off center line fired side by side barrels. Then were those few graded doubles special ordered without rib extension. The latter are the only Parkers that I believe a person can justifiably point to in argument that the rib extension was not necessary. I believe that those do not number in the thousands by any means. I believe that absence of a rib extension in those guns was not Parker driven, but customer driven.

So would you argue that the rib extension was just unnecessary fluff.....something like a marketing ploy? Its too costly a feature to justify that.....you know how hard it is to get the fit right when replacing barrels.

Obviously, Mr King is not among us to defend his design but for me, its one of those Parker design features that I want.

Bruce Day, Parker non expert apprentice fourth class

Yup, Bruce, they made thousands of perfectly acceptable guns without a doll's head, regardless of your statement to the contrary.