Thanks for getting us the pictures, Larry.

It clearly has a WE3 (W = August E = 1936) Remington repair code to legitimize the SKEET IN/SKEET OUT markings.

Wonder what length skeet load it is chambered for --

Attachment 135195

Attachment 135196

Attachment 135197

Right Dave, it might but there are no records of what the service (3) might have been. It could have been to alter and mark the chokes…





.

And since we now can see both the single 0-frame stamp as well as the double 00-frame stamp we are lead to wonder what the firing pin spacing is…





.

Dean, where does the information about this gun being a 1920 0 frame 28 gauge come from? Our home page search shows no information. I've never seen an 0 frame 28 with lightening cuts in the frame. I'm sure it's a righteous 00 frame gun. Dave picked up the Remington repair codes that I couldn't see without a magnifier.

Whitworth Serail Numbers
 

Wouldn't genuine Whitworth tubes be individually serialized just forward of the barrel flats?

Bill, we know the serial number is a 1920 production number.
The two different frame sizes stamped in the barrel lug bring the question of which one is original.
The frame doesn’t give any information but the serial number.
To my mind the barrels are suspect, but not the frame with the lightening cuts found on 00-frame 28 gauge guns and .410’s.

The Remington codes don’t tell us anything about what service (3) was performed… It could have been choke work and Skeet stamps… or not.





.

Edgar, early on as in pre 1900 there was a time when PB did stamp the order number on barrels. This number was not the same as the serial number per TPS. I am not aware of individually serialized barrel serial numbers on Whitworth barrels, maybe someone has such a specimen. I have 3 sets of Whitworth, all are post 1900. Going from memory none have numbers stamped forward of the flats, 1 has what I presumed was an order number on each flat, 1 has an order number on 1 flat, and the last has no numbers at all. These presumably order numbers differ from the serial numbers.

Here you go Randy…

Perfect Dean, so some have the serial number and one would presume that the other non-matching number on some would be an order number. Thanks !!

Randy, There is a photograph of John Allen's AAH 28 ga, SN 178209, shown on page 332 in the Parker Story, and references Whitworth tube serial numbers 49131 and 49132, shown stamped on the barrel flats. The bottom of page 334, it states "Many Parker guns that we have seen with Whitworth steel barrels have the serial number of the Whitworth tube stamped on the flats of each tube." I guess the key word is 'Many', as opposed to all. I am familiar with one particular AAH 12 ga, where the Whitworth serial numbers (consecutive, not the same as an order number might be) stamped well forward of the barrel flats.
Interestingly, the Parker Story states that Whitworth Barrels were replaced by Peerless barrels prior to 1920.

Whitworth tube numbers and Parker order numbers are two entirely different things. This gun is way too late to have Parker order numbers. I assume that Whitworth tube numbers are often ground off when striking the barrels. I don't know about the pre 1920 date for Whitworth barrels on Parkers. Are the barrels on Leroy's gun really in doubt? I don't understand Edgar's statement about these numbers being consecutive, as order numbers might be. Order numbers are consecutive to what?

Bill, notice the comma, as I was attempting to say Whitworth SNs would be consecutive. I never said a gun this late would have an order number stamped.

Whitworth tube numbers are either there or not. The Whitworth wheat sheaves are either there or not. I have guns that fit any and all of these possibilities. Leroy's little Parker has none of the above, and apparently its originality as a Whitworth barrel gun is in dispute. Not by me.

My question Bill is, are the barrels shown with both the 0 and the 00 frame size stamps and the ill-fitting doll’s head original to the gun…





.

I don't think the doll's head is worse than some others I've seen. If we think the gun is a fake, built from parts, then someone come out and say it. Same comment goes for those who think it's a Runge-Del Grego gun. Come out and say it.

No one can make an 0 frame barrel set into a 00, so that supports no argument for or against originality. We have all seen plenty of examples of stamping that might not rate perfect. There's no one here who can say the barrels are or are not original to the gun. I agree with Bill that there are lots of original guns with a less than perfect rib extension fit. Digital pictures on the internet rarely compare to 'eyeballs on'.
I just don't get the point in slamming a gun. Rivet counters are everywhere when they aren't buying.

Jim, did the Congdons ever say how much lead they gave the intruder before they shot him? With skeet boring(s) it couldn't have been much!

I know I'd be proud to walk onto a skeet field with 191767 provenance or not.

It’s a lovely little gun. I wish I had the money (and negotiating skills). I’d make that short stock work.

A gun is too short only when your thumb hits your nose when fired. Go for it.

This one is a little out of my league, I’ll only add that when I talk myself into gun...meaning I don't like the chokes, it doesn't fit me, and I question a few things. I usually don't keep it long. I do like the engraving on the receiver...what's not to like...

That’s all I like about that gun Jay.





.

Fussy, fussy.

:rotf::biglaugh::rotf:





.