An Interesting GHE 20
 

xxxx

A very nice piece of wood for a GH grade gun regardless of guage. Production probably 1926-1927 I'm just guessing here.

How does something stay unused for over 80years, esp a gun???

Maybe very little use but certainly not "unused" as the breech face shows "substantial" use.

But not to be a nit-picker, that gun is in fantastic condition!

Bruce, what is the amount of ware inside the triggergaurd and on the tang where your hand holds the gun?
Thanks, Tim

--That is a fine look'en shooting iron

Very nice Parker but the borders on the butt stock don't look mullered in the pics.

Bruce: Always enjoy your pictures. Someday I would hope to see a gun in such condition. Two questions:
On the 20 gauge - have some screw heads been messed with? Registration a bit out on some. Could that have come out of the factory like that?

On the 12 gauge - Were recoil pads offered by the factory or is this always an after market addition??

Thanks,
Jack

Jack, recoil pads where a option on all guns except Trojan, I believe $ 2.00, which is hard to understand when comparing it to the work involved in a skeleton butt.

Not speaking for Bruce's gun but photos can make some of the screws look out, noticed it on some of the photos I've taken.

Tom, judging by the style of the engraving, the checkering, the lack of "Parker Bros." on the frame . . . oh, and now I've gone back to look some more at the pics and see serial no. 241XXX it is a late Remington gun and the lack of mullering to the borders of checkering was quite normal for the period.

Richard:

My great-uncle had a M97 Winchester. He was killed at Anzio in 1943, and it sat in his widow's closet until 1980. She gave it to my Dad, and he never used it. I inherited it in 1991, and haven't used Uncle Jack's gun. Just an example of how such a thing could happen.

Bruce,
I think " substantially unused after full restoration" would be more appropriate. You did not offer an opinion on this gun yet represented it as "fun to look at" and then included $$$$$$$$$$$$? Why? Are you trying to sell the gun? Create hype on the gun? Why not just put the pictures on the board and ask the question; Is it real?

I think the gun you posted was created by a talented person or group for the sole purpose of duping the "advanced collector" you so often refer to into the exchange of dollars for opinions of others.
I like the pictures of the gun and especially the engraving, but if you are going to post guns "AS ORIGINAL" either by your own admission or someone else then I think you should also either provide documentation of fact on condition or just post the pics and let people decide what is original or not. Opinions are free and my opinion is that you posted a gun that is a redone FAKE! Thank you

Patrick

Mr Lien, the gun is not mine nor was it ever, I have no stake in it, and do not know the identity of the present owner. I have no interest in creating a market or "hype" for the gun, and I have no idea why you would make such absurd accusations.

I didl not say anything about the originality of the gun and left that to others. I knew something about its history, so I stated that. I merely said the gun was interesting. I stated what I knew about the representations of the original owner without further comment.

In view of your reactions and statements, I have deleted the posts.

Bruce Day

I kind of liked that gun Bruce, fake or not, found it interesting how it appreciated over a short period of time.

Bruce,
My opinion is: I wish you wouldn't have deleted the note. I found it interesting.

Yeah Bruce put the pictures back up. Don't succumb to peer pressure:nono:

I always enjoy looking at nice guns:bigbye:

It was a very nice gun. The wood looked like a lot like claro walnut to me.Did they use claro in the late production guns? I realize that eastern black walnut also comes in the brighter colors and that photo lighting/wood finish affects the appearance in photos.

It looked like black walnut to me.

Well, the colors are so bright and the orange tones look a lot like the blanks I have of claro and also the claro lumber I just got from California. I also have a blank that was sold to me as black and it is very bright and looks a lot like some of the wood on the Parker reproductions.
I find it strange that most wood dealers insist that claro was not used as gunstocks much before the late 50's or early 60's even though there was a lot of it available in some really big trees long before that.

I have received a number of public and private requests to repost the G 20 photos and pay no regard to inappropriate and rude comments. I am inclined to do so with the provision that I am posting them with no comment from me. I am aware that the price escalated quickly. I do not know the gun's present status but it was on the sales circuit a year ago and I have waited a year to post photos.

Presented only as an interesting gun, so I'll try this one more time.

Does that not look like DelGrego's work?

If it is redone, I'm going with Turnbull.

Great gun. What's with those screws? I can't comment beyond that, because the original post is missing, and I don't have it memorized.

Its not missing, Bill. Scroll up.

Thank you Bruce for the reposting of these pics. I'd have to say that it doesn't look original to me. Way too much wear around the firing pin holes and the receiver is a bit too polished under that case color... could be I've just not seen and unused Parker receiver, but that looks too shiny to me. Is there a chance that the patent date stamp on the table was only half stamped like that originally? Never seen and end blank in the rib matting that wide either... anyone else?? Seems the back edge of the stock cheeks is a bit too sharp and prominent also. And as Bill notes, the screws don't look unmolested by any means. Regardless, it certainly is a stunning gorgeous gun. Maybe these are just Remington era features that I'm clueless about.

Remington features in a 221 SN gun?

I think Bruce had previously inadvertantly posted a picture of the barrel flats from another gun with the 241XXX serial number. That picture is not included in this batch and the serial number showing in this batch is that of a 1926 or '27 Meriden gun.

Thank you Bruce. That is an interesting gun. Someone used their 401K funds to buy that one.

One never knows.

Several years ago I got a call from a fellow who said that he had purchased a nice 20ga VHE and gave it to a local gunsmith who told him that he could turn it into a an A-1 Special with gold for a total cost of $10,000. The fellow said the work turned out crappy and crude and the gun was ruined. He said he had found another another gunsmith who could do a better job, so he was searching for another 20ga V to turn over to him. It would be another $10,000 or so but he was hopeful that this time it would turn out to look just like those A-1 Specials he had seen in books. I referred the fellow to the Tulsa show.

I originally posted two sets of photos. The first was the 221 GHE 20 which I re-posted. The second set was a 241 GHE 12 owned by a Nebraska friend. The G 12 is a high condition gun of which I know most of its history. I did not re-post photos of that gun.

Thanks for the clarification Bruce.

Dean

Ooops. I guess the s/n is too early for even a transition gun. I don't have the s/n ranges in my head unfortunately. Thanks for the clarification Bruce.

Bruce,
He isn't going to use this GHE for the donor gun is he? Original or not, it's a nice piece.

Chris, no connection. The fellow with extra engraving-itis ( I won't even call it an upgrade because that implies improvement) was after a cheap gun. In my book, nothing wrong and everything right with a nice, clean, well kept, honest V grade.

Great gun one way or another. Too much is made of restoring guns anyway (in my view). Who cares if an old worn out gun is restored.
I express no opinion other then it sure looks nice.

Ray

May I pose an interesting question?

Would, should or could Mr. Lien's unequivocal and forceful public statement of his opinon on this PGCA forum, whether correct, partially correct or not at all correct, have an effect on the value and saleability of that GHE 20 if the gun is on the market on this site, another website, gunshow, by a dealer or individual?

If so, what? What part does perception play in valuation of these guns?

Again, not my gun, I'm not a dealer, just a small collector, rarely sell a gun and I'm likely done acquiring guns. Just raising the issue.

It probably has some effect. For too long there has been a stigma surrounding restoring a gun. The reality is that a restoration may increase the value but there are those who simply think it ruins a gun. I guess sometimes "perception trumps reality".

I at one time owned a Sharps Mod 1874 .40 2 5/8 that had a proven Bill Cody connection. It was actually used on the Czar's hunt. It was worn out after many years of use. Once I proved the connection I sold it for a lot of money (at least a lot back then). It was so worn out that I couldn't shoot it (too much head space) so I sold it. No way would I have restored it. But if it was some old Parker owned by John Doe-all worn out-no finish left-why not restore it? Why should it carry a stigma so long as it is done correctly?

Bruce, that is an interesting question and it reinforces the fact that if we ever have a "Parkers For Sale" page on our website it should be limited to the seller's post - in other words, he owns the thread and nobody else can make comments about the gun, either pro or con, thus, eliminating any opinion - expert or otherwise.

Mr. Lien's comments and expression of his opinion certainly serves to raise awareness that we must all be ever watchful of the possibility of upgrades, alterations, refinishes, reconditioned guns and that there are people out there who can sometimes deceive even the most serious collectors . . . so, let's be careful out there gentlemen.

Beyond this . . . :dh:

From my perspective, the gun sells itself to a willing buyer regardless of whatever lay opinions may swirl around it. If a buyer just wants a nice looking gun - this is a nice looking gun. If a buyer wants a quick turnaround investment - and doesn't want to get burned, then "gun in hand" expert opinions may be sought and relied upon over internet chatter based on looking at a few pictures. As always - caveat emptor.
Regards,
Jack

I'm not sure its a dead horse, Dean. I know there was a public announcement that the board of directors was going to be deliberating again the sale of guns through this website and the effect on Parker collecting. I don't have the answers, but I know this sequence plays into that.

Ray Masciarella: I believe I recall reading about the Cody/Czar Sharps quite a few years ago. It was in the same vein as the Custer Battlefield Springfield sold recently. You have the perspective of an experienced collector. May I urge you to join the PGCA, as your ID does not indicate that you are a member.

Is the Patent date poor stamping or has it been partially ground down or .....???

IMHO Mr. Leins comments regarding the "orignality" won't effect the value of this gun or any gun for that matter. It's just his opinion which he is entitled to. I would think that if someone was looking at spending that kind of money on a gun that in all likely hood won't see the field it would be the buyers primary focus to determine origanality.

The only two people who matter in a situation like this is the seller and the buyer. If both are happy then the opinions of the peanut gallery are moot.