Parker .410
 

There always seems to be much interest in Parker .410's so I thought I would post two that came up for sale today. I have no connection to the guns. I bring it up for discussion, but if against the rules please delete.

https://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...n_id=101939210

https://www.gunsinternational.com/gu...n_id=101939190

I like them both !

If I were in the the market for a wee little gun, I would go for the beaver tail forearm.

Both nice guns, though it seems V grade .410s haven't risen at the rate other grades/ gauges have. I will confess to having sold the two my dad had, in favor of 28s, and it seemed I never really found much use for them apart from the novelty. I sold them some 20 years ago and got nearly what these are being listed at. Maybe I was just lucky, but would have thought they would have kept pace with 28s. Trends and whims, I guess.

Thanks for posting these Steve. I have really been thinking about a Parker 410 for a while, it almost seems like now or never with the way prices are going. It would be a sell 5 or 6 guns for 1 proposition for me, but I might be okay with that. I should say I have a Citori 410 that has just been wonderful, and shoots better than it should for a 410. Having said that I really would like a Parker 410. And I would agree with Edgar that you can do so much more with a 28ga., but I am still mesmerized by the 410 for some reason...

On the two guns posted the first one has a recoil pad, which I am assuming was added to increase LOP, however I would think that would hurt desirability/value unless it was ordered that way. It just doesn’t look right on a 410.

The second gun seems to have the non-spurred flat buttplate, which I just found out was typical for these at the time. Also the second gun is listed with 3 inch chambers, but was made in 1928. From what I have read they should be 2 ½" as the 3” inch shell was introduced with the Winchester Model 42 in 1933. I read this in a post that Dean Romig started: https://parkerguns.org/forums/showth...&highlight=410

Is the desirability and/or value affected by lengthening the chambers in that gun?

While a 3 inch gun would have more versatility, I would think lengthening the chambers would affect value and possibly safety on the lighter 000 frame, but I don’t really know. I think you could play around with the loads and shot in a 2 ½’ gun to make it work in most situations you would use a 410.

Any thoughts on the above would be appreciated.

Thank you,
Jay

Jay I have no idea about Parker .410’s. I posted this because it seems to me they do generate much interest here. Good luck and I bet some experts will reply.

IMO both guns are overpriced based on the modifications. Again IMO the beavertail forend is a replacement and the buttstock on the second one is a replacement.





.

Whether your assesment is correct or not , I still like them . And based on the one that sold at Poulin's this past saturday for 34.5K after the premium was added I don't think the price that bad .

Now if we could all have what we wanted I'd like one with a straight grip , BT , SST , checkered butt , ejectors , 26" skeet in skeet out VHE to match the 12 and 16 I have in that configuration .

I’m a buy high, sell low kind of guy. (Not by choice.) I was tickled at the Southern when some dealer stopped me, asked to look at my .410 Parker, then proceed to offer about what I paid for the darn thing not too long ago. I said “no way,” as I was making my way to the sporting clays course.

Go on, getcha a .410 Parker!

-Victor

Perhaps it is just the camera angle, but to my eye neither stock looks to be a 1-1/2" DAC and 2" DAH.

I agree Edgar. Having grown up as a Stevens 410 as my only gun I have a love for them but but the 28 is infinitely more functional.

In support of my opinion expressed earlier - the following taken from the Serialization book.

235926 - V H 0 B 41 26 - 0 = no extras (originally made with a splinter forend)

226241 - V H 0 B 41 26 - B = Ball Grip - was not made with a capped pistol grip.





.

Dean, what your thoughts on the chambers? The first gun was made in 1931 and the Second was made in 1928. One would "assume" that the chambers would have been lengthened in both guns.

A look at the stock books may solve the chamber length mystery. Not always the case, but worth a look. Ithaca rechambered their double .410s in the early days without any mention of danger to the gun.

I think Mr. Murphy gave about the answer I would have given. I think there is plenty of metal in .410 chambers and barrels to lengthen 2.5" chambers to 3" but that's just my opinion.





.

I guess my question would then be is it better to have the improved functionality of 3" chambers or to have the originality of 2 1/2" chambers?

It might depend on the buyer I suppose. If one was to stumble across a 410 he liked with 2 1/2" chambers could they have the chambers lengthened, by a professional maybe someone like Mike Orlen. Then have a gun they could really use and not worry too much on the impact on value?

I would think for a shooter gun the 3" would be preferred for the availability of ammunition with a wider variety of loads.





.

In as much as Steve suggested comments 'on these two guns', potentially neither of which are in their 'As Shipped from Parker' configuration, it really comes down to desirable features, as they are now. Value is really not part of the equation, since there really isn't a table one could go to in order to determine an actual value.
Three inch chambers would seem to add functionality. Likewise, a Beavertail would be more desirable, on such an otherwise tiny grip. If there were two other VH .410s out there that you could put either of these against, it would come down to condition, and then determine if either of these guns are a comparatively good value. I guess if I was in the market for a Unicorn, I'd probably grab the first one I found.

So glad I'm not in the market for a unicorn... or a Parker .410 for that matter. :whistle:





.

It’s all kinda irrelevant for me ! Most of what I “want” I really can’t afford :rotf:

I was just curious and trying to continue/improve my Parker education. Everyone's take on these two 410s makes sense to me. You just don't see these that often and this thread started by Steve gave me an opportunity to ask some Parker 410 questions I had been thinking about.

It is likely that any Parker .410 made before 1933, with 3" chambers, was probably drilled out to 3" at Parker Brothers. I say this because anyone would want the "new" 3" shell to play with and the makers would be the only source of a 3" .410 reamer at that time. I would not hesitate to regard an early Parker with 3" chambers as original or factory modified. An early 2 1/2" chamber Parker .410 is probably a rare bird.

Bill I hadn't thought of it like that. It makes sense that Parker would lengthen the chambers for customers' gun. There might not have been any other way to do it at the time. Very good point.

If one found a 2 1/2" gun would you keep that way?

IF I ever got a Parker 410 I wouldn't ream it out . But I've got an IJ 410 Hercules with 3" chambers . Really anything I'd use a 410 for 2 1/2" has always been adequate for me be it dove , quail , skeet and what little bit of sporting I shoot with 410 .

I wouldn't trust any of these barrel butchers to work on any Parker. Choke and chamber butchers who specialize in this work are well documented as people we shouldn't trust with our guns. They are not full service gunsmiths.

I've had Mike Orlen in Amherst, MA do choke work for me and they were done perfectly.





.

When both of those guns were made, the 2 1/2-inch .410-bore shells carried a load of 3/8-ounce of shot.

Attachment 106686

A few years after the 3-inch .410-bore shell was introduced our North American ammunition manufacturers upped the 2 1/2-inch .410-bore shell to the 1/2-ounce load we all know.

I probably should come clean...I found out about a 410 for sale privately a week or so ago. I saw it today and I could not pass it up. Not in the book, but made in 1927 still has 2 1/2" chambers(actually more like 2 7/16" as Edgar mentioned). 26" barrels M/F on a 000 frame 5 1/2 lbs. 14 1/4 LOP ball grip with splinter forend. Looks like it was tastefully refinished several years ago. I don't know what else to say other than I saw it and I just fell in love...

Dave I have seen on 410 Parker hang tags that they were tested/patterned with 3/8oz. of shot. Does it say on those boxes the powder charge in drams or the velocity?

There is a company called Sterling that makes 3/8oz 2 1/2" 410s @ 1329fps. That seemed a little fast to me

Congratulations, Jay.

My bet would be that the Sterling load would not be regulated out of any vintage .410 double. I have had considerable experience with .410 doubles, in the field and on clays courses, vintage and contemporary, and have found several to be very finicky about what they want to be fed.

Loads on the light end, and at high velocities, often crossfire in lightweight doubleguns such as .410s.

Also, addressing an earlier question you had about loads, I have had great success with WW 3/4 oz. loads on doves and quail, and have "designed", and use, a 3/4 oz. nickel plated load of 8 1/2s to great success on doves. Patterns beautifully and definitely puts doves on the ground "deader" than any .410 load I've ever used on them. It's a little sledgehammer.

Yup, Stan, same load I shoot in 20 and 12.

Jay, congratulations on your new gun. I’ve been buttering up my wife in hopes of getting the go ahead for one. I’d like one just like yours. Post some photos when you can.

I will start a new thread on this, though this thread helped me make the decision on this 410. I will get some pictures up and should be able to try the gun out tomorrow. Gary I did have to charm my wife as fast as I could as time was of the essence on this deal. Luckily she understands by now :)

I have ordered some nickle plated shot in addition to some other components that are on the way, which I believe patterns better especially in a 410. Since I am limited to 2 1/2 inch shells I might see if I can work up some 5/8oz loads. Or use my 5/8oz bar which probably throws 9/16oz. I would like to get this out in the field. Maybe get my first grouse or woodcock with it...

Thanks everyone I will follow up with some pictures soon

The early .410-bore ammunition company catalog listings are pretty vague. This from Rem-UMC 1915-16 --

Attachment 106695

Attachment 106696

This in the 1916 Winchester catalog --

Attachment 106697

A bit more info given here in the 1922 Western Cartridge Co. catalog, highlighted in yellow --

Attachment 106698

No powder or weight of shot load on the box labels though --

Attachment 106699

24 & 35 dollars for how many? That is some money in 1916. I also rather enjoy where it says suitable for developed neighborhoods. :rotf:

The Rem-UMC and the Western catalogs list the prices as per 1000, so I would guess the Winchester price is also per 1000.

That "developed neighborhoods" gives me pause. My aunt & uncle were in domestic service for a wealthy Chicago lawyer. After WW-II he was ready to retire and looked around the country for where he believed his money would make him live the longest. He settled on the Stanford University medical center and bought a seven acre "estate" nearby at 284 Valparaiso. When I would visit them as a teenager, I shot several quail in the orchard with my aunt's Winchester Model 37 .410-bore. A few years ago when I was in California I drove through Valparaiso and where the "estate" was it is now wall to wall Mac Mansions.

I’d not seen or heard of 410 2” until recently . I acquired a Belgium double hammer 410 that has 2” chambers as we speak but will soon get run out to 2 1/2” .

Rst has 2" 410 shells. They are sweet shooting shells.

Just to continue to muddy the .410-bore waters, the early Western Cartridge Co. FIELD .410-bore shells were loaded in a 2 1/8-inch case to give the loaded shells a 2-inch length --

Attachment 106713

Attachment 106714