As I am a young collector, compared to most of the experts in this forum. People will pay whatever the price if they want the gun bad enough, so called original, or restored. There are many qualified Parker gunsmiths in our member base. It's my opinion that none of them would perform work to intentionally devalue a prized Parker.

On a side note:
I have several Parkers that were sent back (PGCA letter noted), things changed, refinished, replaced ect. Why?? Obviously the original caretakers wanted the guns to fit their use and lifestyle. Does this mean we should not enjoy them? Clean 100 years of crud off the stocks to see the beautiful wood below? Refinish the Damascus to see the original pattern that once was..??

I think we would all love to have an un-touched, all original never fired Parker. The reality of this idea is only for a limited number of collectors. I shoot my Parkers all of the time, care for them and most of all admire them. A Trojan can make me smile as much as an A grade, it's all about what you love and appreciate.

I'll now step off my soapbox.....

[QUOTE=Paul Stafford]I think we would all love to have an un-touched, all original never fired Parker. QUOTE]

Paul I'll pass on one of those. I have had NIB Pre 64 Winchester M70's, a couple of Repo's and a Colt Diamondback 22 which I still have. The NIB doesn't interest me in the least as a big dollar is paid and it can't be used. The gun is destined to be a closet queen forever and I like to use my guns. I have a couple with lots of original case color and if I wear some off using the gun it will be the next caretaker's delima.

When viewing the hunting photos posted, I've noticed that many of the members here do their hunting with restored Parkers. That makes a lot of sense to me. Parkers in high original condition are finite, rare and expensive. Taking a gun into the wet brush for a full day of hard hunting will cost you some of that finish every time.

The options are to hunt with a grey gun with little to no original finish remaining, or to hunt with a restored gun. Personally, I like to do both depending on the mood I'm in and the hunting company I will be keeping that day. So at least for me, there is room in my safe for both original Parkers with little finish remaining, and restored Parkers that look almost new.

[QUOTE=Rich Anderson;115084]
What I meant is I would enjoy it, unfired or not. Leaving a gun in a closet for a hundred years, is not how the Parker family intended us to enjoy their fine craftsmenship. I know that this thinking is "against the grain". I hope to have 40+ more years of collecting but Life is short! Do you want to have memories of taking your prized Parker out and enjoying it, or just a memory of putting it in a closet or a safe....

I choose to use and enjoy them...

Just an opinion...

Kensal
To clarify my use of the word "preservation", wood and metal finishes are used to preserve structural integrity in their respective applications. With time and use these finishes degrade, exposing the wood and metal to accelerated degrading. Restoration halts the accelerated degrading process there by preserving the structural integrity of both the wood and metal.

Brad

Here is an issue I am now dealing with. Over the last 40 years I have collected Parkers, L C Smiths, Lefevers, Ithicas..... At this point in my life when I do get to go out to hunt and shoot I always end up taking the ole favorite. Some of those collected firearms are good examples of safe "queens". They have not seen the light of day in 30 years. Now my problem is compounded by what should ultimately happen to them. Wife and daughters have no interest or any idea what to do with them in my absence. Over the last 2 years I have sold many of them and now have had a change in mind set. Why do I keep them stored away in a dark gun safe. Let someone else enjoy them. Still too hard to part with some of them. Not because of any value, but because what they represent in our heritage and history.

Well said...

You know, Paul made a poimt I did not think of earlier. Many guns were sent back to Prker to effectively be "restored" completely or partially. No one in the collector community seems to have any problem with that. For example, early gunswere routinely returnedor the installation of ejectors. They required new stock, and heck, while they were there some were rebrowned. One caims that restoration devalued the gun, do they? Or am I missing something.

Question: If a parker was sent back to the factory to be restored and is now in 50% condition, is it worth less than a gun that was not sent back and is in 50% condition? If not, how could properly restroing it now have an adverse affect on its value?

If it is documented Parker or Remington work then it is considered 'original' and not done by some "unknown" whose methods and thoroughness cannot be supported. Untold numbers of Parkers have been very nicely cosmetically refinished but we so often see checkering patterns that are not true to original patterns, or LPI, or peaked diamonds as opposed to flat topped diamonds (according to the grade) as well as poorly done color case hardening and Damascus finish. We've also seen a good number of Parkers that, once again, have been cosmetically refinished nicely - even paying close attention to keeping as close to original regarding the features mentioned above.... but have paid no attention to mechanical issues. Certain guns come to mind and have issues with the following after being refinished.... loose at the hinge even to the point of being off face.... safety issues - doesn't always work (which to me means it has no safety).... trigger or sear problems - the gun doubles or has a "hair trigger".... cocking problems, opening or closing problems, ejector problems, etc., etc.

There are a few exceptionally skilled craftsmen out there who will restore your Parker in each and every respect to exactly how Parker would have done it and their prices reflect that attention to detail.... and there are other people who will refinish your Parker very handsomely.... and there are some in between.... 'nuff said.

Dean, If a gun built in 1890 was sent to Rem in 1940, then it would have not been restored to 1890 specs, right? Even so, it would still be considered "original"? I don't have much experience here but I remember passing in on 1890s AH that had been recolored and restocked by Rem, and I thought it looked nothing like the original so I passed. Did not have the same value to me. But I bet that had Brad restored it, it would have suited me just fine and been worth the price. It could be that guns restored today have as much or more value than guns restored by Rem, at least to me.

I think it is kinda interesting that the hobby has no problem with gun gun potentially restored somewhat improperly by Rem, but does have a problem, at least to some, if properly restored today. The market probably balances this all out when it comes to monetary value as opposed to personal thoughts about whether a gun should ever be restored.