Ilion Parkers
 

I’ve never owned an Ilion Parker or handled any that I’m aware of . Anyway is there a noticeable difference in quality , fit or finish ?

Probably the most noticeable difference is the thickness of the wrist. Not nearly as fine and ergonomically agreeable to the hand as the Meriden Parkers were made.

I like the Ilion Parkers very much but to me, they just seem to lack something intangible though the fit and finish is all there. It's like something, I don't know just what, but something, didn't make the trip from Meriden to Ilion......







.

A fellow I know is bringing a VH 16 in for my consideration . And the gun was made in Ilion so was just wondering .

I have a few Remington guns that I hunt with. They usually have better stock dimensions and nicer wood then the older guns. I seem to gravitate towards the Ilion guns.

True about the figure of the wood. It’s like Remington only used straight grain American walnut on the Trojan and the grades 0, 1, 2, 3 each got wood with figure that Meriden would have used for at least the next higher grade.






.

Here is 241,601 , the last C in the records. It’s an under 7 lb 12ga, thin wrist, delicate checkering , a fast upland gun at IC and Mod. I have been privileged to be its caretaker for many years.

Years ago I was offered GHE 241,602 , a 20ga. It was a stretch financially and I passed it by, to my regret now. It was a very nice gun.

If a Remington Parker comes your way, think seriously about it.

All things being equal I don't think there is any difference in value. My favorites are the Damascus barreled guns.

Are Parker Repro’s more like Meriden or Ilion Parkers in their craftsmanship and finer details?

I own one Illion Parker now and hope to add some more. There was a GH on a half frame a few months ago I really wanted

The quality seems pretty high to my eye.

The Parker Reproductions were exact copies of high condition Ilion Parkers that Mr. Skueuse sent to Japan to be duplicated.

So - they look like Remington Parkers in almost every way but the manufacturing procedure was nothing like the processes used by Remington.





.

I believe the Repro's were copied from the Ilion guns but in my mind at least you can't begin to compare a Repro to an Ilion gun ! Of course just my opinion and we all know about opinions !

IMHO neither. No disrespect intended .

I agree with Daryl ,No disrespect from me either ! The Ilion guns are usually beautiful guns the only thing I wish they would have done was continue the Legend on the Top Rib ! I know this is a different steel but that really is a nice touch on the Meriden guns !

The feeling is what I have often said of the Purdey vs Holland & Holland; It is a warmth of one, not felt in the other.

I do miss the "mullered" boarders that are absent on the Ilion checkering.

The reproductions have many adherents. They are nice guns. I owned one once but sold it because I thought it was on the heavy side for a 20 bore. The checkering on the DHE's was not up to Parker standards on most of them I have seen. It also has an incredibly hard finish on the stocks. I took the finish off and did the stocks with oil. I recut the checkering and cut mullered borders. The gun looked a lot better. I also redid the barrels even though the gun was new. I fully understand why people like them, but for me, I'll stick to the originals.

I agree with you Ralph. Those finely cut mullered borders were just one more sign of attention to detail and lent a level of true ‘class’ to the Parker Gun.





.

[QUOTE=Dean Romig;254004]I agree with you Ralph. Those finely cut mullered borders were just one more sign of attention to detail and lent a level of true ‘class’ to the Parker Gun.

Fortunately, mullered borders are easy to cut in for a person competent at checkering. However, I wouldn't cut them in on a gun that is factory original without them.

Tom, I’ve seen ‘mullered borders’ and then I’ve seen finely cut mullered borders and they apparantly are not easy to cut even for someone who is “competent” at checkering. There is or should I say, can be a big difference.





.

Dean, finely cut mullered borders are indeed easy to cut for a person competent at checkering. I use a 60 degree pointer to cut the guide line and then cut the fine mullered border with a small fine bent file. On larger mullered borders I might use a concave head or just use a bent file. I always finish up larger checkering borders cut with a concave head with the bent file. I've been doing mullered borders since I was 16 years old and for me they are indeed easy.

Just one more note.....I may have misunderstood your comment Dean. If by "finely" cut you mean mullered borders that are straight without running into the other border lines, these are still easy to do. When I speak of fine mullered borders I mean those cut very thin such as those on the early Parkers. Later Parkers often exhibit wider mullered borders.

If you are looking at mullered borders that creep into the two other border lines or are not straight and even, they were done by someone not competent or someone who is competent but didn't give a damn and cut them quickly. It is not hard to do them right if you know what you are doing.

That makes me wonder then why only a few checkerers cut finely mullered borders these days.

Case in point -

First 3 pictures are an original Parker Bros. stock with finely cut mullered borders.

Next 2 pictures shows recut mullered borders by a highly respected gunsmith/stockmaker.

.

I have no idea why only a few checkers cut mullered borders. I hate to see a restored Parker without them. To me it is a sign of laziness or incompetence. They are nothing more than a line cut with a file or concave cutter. In my opinion, they are no more difficult than any other part of the checkering process. But you do need to be careful to keep the muller perfectly straight and in the middle of the other two border cuts. A guide line and slow and careful cutting is all that is required, the same as any other cut you make when checkering.

Dean, the last two pictures contain errors probably resulting from being quickly cut and not sufficient attention to detail. The mullers are uneven, the mullers on the meeting lines are not finished so that they meet each other and the muller runs into the two surrounding border lines. Thats not the way I do it Dean. Attention to detail is critical to getting them right. These mullered borders look to me like the person checkering wanted to finish the job and didn't pay sufficient attention to detail in this last part of the process. Not good.

I know and it bothers me. It almost looks like he cut them with a pneumatic "wiz wheel".





.

OK, who wuzzee?

Whereas this is only my opinion, he shall remain anonymous.





.

This is a Repro I had the borders done on and I am very happy with them.
Bob Jurewicz