New Hammer Gun!
 

Greetings and Salutations! I just acquired a nice 10 gauge, 'I' Grade, top lever Parker. It has 30" Laminated Steel barrels with an unstruck weight of 5 pounds. It has a number 3 frame, pistol grip and a 'Dog's Head' buttplate. The vintage is 1886.

Nice Mark. My damascus grade 2 10ga is an 1886 also.

Nice Mark! Pretty case color.

That's a really nice one! I don't think you could ever go wrong with a gun purchased from Puglisi's.

Very very nice. Congratulations.

NICE, i just bought one there too, being shipped today, can wait to get it :corn:

Very nice! In seemingly great condition.

Congratulations to you too Scott. Look forward to seeing it.

Mark and Scott, Congrats to the both of you. They need to be warmed up ASAP!

I bet that old girl will be getting a workout on that mississippi flyway geese pretty shortly. I grew up in that country and had some great times shooting ducks and geese.I would put that in my gunrack no problem. Thomas

Scott, did you buy the 1874-75 Lifter with Damascus barrels and tons of remaining finish? That was the other gun I wanted to look at! It is a jewel! I will post more photos after I clean her up. Cheers, and thanks for the nice comments.

might be , a 2 frame str. grip weight 10 lbs 5 ozs , can't wait to shoot it. look out crows and duck oh and geese :shock:

It is really a nice looking 'Lifter', Scott. Keep us posted. I am curious whether it was chambered for the '10A' or '10B'. That was the time frame when Parker was doing that.

Were the "10A" and "10B" actually chambered differently? I thought the shell letters referred to thin and thick walled brass hulls, with the outside of the hull having the same dimensions. The thin walled hull had a larger inside diameter to accommodate 9 gauge card wads (.815) that would be fired in a 10 gauge with larger than .775 bore. My D hammer has .793 bores that I load thin walled brass with 9 gauge wads, it patterns remarkably well with this combination.

I could very well be mistaken about the difference between the "A" and "B" designations, if I am please correct me, this is a topic that I don't remember being discussed very often. I will have to go back and look this up in The Parker Story to refresh my memory.

Back to the main topic, you got yourself a beauty Scott, congratulations. I hope it brings you many years of good shooting.

The '10A' brass shell has the same outside diameter as the modern paper hull. My 1879 Lifter has very little difference between the chamber diameter and bore diameter, due to the thin 'A' brass shell. The '10B' brass shell is smaller in outside diameter than the 'A' brass and paper hulls. I have dozens of brass shells in my collection. I will put together some photos to show the differences. Basically, the 'A' chamber will take W.R.A. Co. 10 gauge brass, E. Remington 10 gauge brass, UMC 10A brass, REM-UMC 10 brass and paper hulls (old and new). The 'B' chamber will only handle the '10B' brass shell. You are correct in regards to the wad sizes, Forrest. Manufacturers of reloading components carried wads in numerous sizes to accomodate different bores. My 1879 Lifter has '10A' chambers with bores of .808". A thin walled brass shell with 9 gauge wads would be perfect in my gun.

Thank you for posting this information, this certainly clears things up. I would love to know what the dimensions are of a "B" hull, both inside and out. I've lathe turned a bunch of the "A" configured hulls for use in my gun, but have never examined a "B" hull to record the dimensions.

in other words a 10b chambered gun will not chamber a paper or plastic hull is this correct....what was the purpose of the 10 b chambered guns.... charlie

Charlie, I really don't know what the real story is on the 'A' and 'B' shells. I went through my brass shells and found a 12B, but no 10B. I can still take photos to show the differences with the 12s. I recall reading a passage somewhere that stated that the inside diameter of the paper hull is the same as the inside diameter of the 'B' brass. So, maybe the bore of a 'B' gun is more along the lines of our modern, standardized bore, and the 'A' bore is/can be much larger.

I made some rudimentary measurements of the bores on my hammer gun and came up with .808" for the bores just ahead of the chambers, and .759" for both chokes. She's choked pretty tight! These are very svelte barrels, given the unstruck weight of only 5 pounds and 30" length. They taper down quickly, just beyond the chambers. I wonder if a letter would say if someone ordered the gun to be light?

does any one know what the size of chamber dia from A shell and B shell is? and can the smaller chamber be reamed to fit the larger shells?(todays shells) thanks scott

These are chamber dimensions from the 1870s era Parkers:

10A - .845" to .860" diameter

10B - .815" to .825" diameter

Scott, I imagine that value on an excellent condition 1870s Parker would be diminished. RMC can make lathe turned brass shells for you, but I don't think they do well with anything but black powder. That is the impression I got from various threads concerning the subject here.

well the gun came in and it does take the "modern" 2 7/8 ths 10 ga shell:) but found a crack just behind the lock plates on both sides:crying: running for front to back about 1 3/4 in long, love the gun but not shur what to do. working on a dicount to help off set the cost of repair.(great people to work with). i will keep you posted. up date; worked out a deal ! now to get it fixed, thanks dave, scott

Scott, aside from the cracks, is the gun as nice as the pictures show? That was my 2nd choice to look at when I visited Puglisi's, but when Jason said it was spoken for, I did not bother.

hi Mark, yes!! nice , unturned screws lots of barrel finish ,30 to 40% case, points wright for me .just like a new pup you don't want to put it down:rotf: thanks scott

Mark did you look at the 3 frame 10? its bottom of salelist. best ch

Calvin, I did not look at any more guns. I had a budget, and did not want to tempt fate by looking at other 10s!

The locks have been cleaned and reassembled. It pays to invest in a mainspring vise, repro or original! The scratches on the exterior of the lockplates were there when the plates were colored. I had to use my high powered magnifying glass to see them properly. Sorry about my macro photography. One of these days I'll get it! I sure wish other forums could upload photos as easily as this one.

Mark, Those cleaned up nice.Great colors!

The hammer faces are barely dimpled from use. There is just a little mark in the colors. The stock has a couple of teeny weeny cracks that I will be able to stabilize quite easily. Overall, the gun appears to have been used very little. The bores have some pitting though. As nice as this gun is, I would be willing to place a decent wager on the fact that 90% of the signs of neglect happened after the original purchaser passed away. Maybe not, but I like to think so. As always, Cheers!

Scott, John Puglisi noted that the chambers of your new gun were 3". Are they, indeed, 3 inches? They may very well be a special order item. The big ammunition manufacturers provided hulls in various lengths. Not so much to pack a heavier payload, but to add wads.

Curious to what the advantage of adding extra wads were back in the day?

I dunno. It must have something to do with cushioning the shot(?). The 1914 Winchester catalog shows the NPE 10 gauge Leader hull in 6 lengths, from 2-5/8" to 3-1/4". The same catalog has the loaded Leader 20 gauge with 2-1/2 drams of Bulk Smokeless and 7/8 ounce of shot in a 2-3/4" or 3" shell. The 28 gauge 'Repeater' has 2 drams of bulk and 5/8 ounce of shot in a 2-7/8" shell. These are certainly not heavy loads and could have been loaded in 2-1/2" hulls.

mark, when i checked it they were 2 7/8ths, the gun is heavy for a 2 frame 10lbs 4 oz on my baby scale, between firing pins is 1 .125. scott

I finished cleaning the 'old girl' up and tried a few of my 1 ounce handloads. Yep, she's a 'keeper' alright! It balances right at the hinge and does not seem muzzle heavy like my other tens. A check will be in the mail for a letter tomorrow! Cheers, everyone.

I won't comment on the great #3 frame gun that came out of Puglisi's. However, I will give you the wall thickness figures on the #3 frame hammer ten I just got in the mail from an internet purchase. There were some few places that showed measurements of .050, but they were way up front. The bores in the first half did not show any place under .060. Now I know why many Damascus barrel British ten bores pass nitro proof with 3 1/2" shells.

My PGCA letter states that my gun was ordered by Powell and Clement, of Cincinnati, on 5 FEB 1886 and shipped on 15 JUN 1886. The 30 inch Laminated Steel Barrels were choked F and F. The gun weighed 9 pounds 3 ounces. Price was $70.00. All specs still match, for which I am pleased! It is nice to have a gun that isn't all goobered up. Cheers!