687 lifter finds a new home, possibly $200 grade
 

I found serial number lifter 687 today at a gun show. Looking at the Parker story pages 229-232 I believe it to be a $200 grade from the 1869 catalogue, it looks identical to the gun on page 232 ser. #661 but I will leave that to the experts.
It is 30" 12 gauge on a 1 frame, barrel weight 2 lbs 14 oz, straight grip and the tubes are good, a few dents but it is looking like it will be a shooter. Engraving highlights consists a bird on top in front of the raised pin, there is a retriever head in front of trigger plate and a dog on the trigger guard, Parker Bro.s on the side plates and a lot of nice border and scroll. All the serial numbers match.

On page 232 in "The Parker Story" it makes mention of the marking on the top rib, this gun also has "PARKER BROS. MAKERS..."

What's wrong, no wood, no forearm iron, hammer spurs are broke. Action not bad, needs a little lug work to pull it down to face. If you have a set of hammers or a complete early fore arm with the slide pin and tip send me note. At the widest point the iron would be 1 5/8".

If you have reference to a hammer spur repairman please send it over as well. Also if anyone has more detailed pictures of a $200 grade under serial number 1000 I would love to have some more reference material.

Check it out.

A Very nice find.






.

Is it only the forend missing when you say wood? Since we see a butt stock

Very nice find. If the rest of the hammer is good - spurs can be grafted on, I have had it done

That is a very interesting early Parker

I turned it round so I could see the script.

Brian,
I also do not think that the buttstock is original to the gun. Several things about it that i see point to a restock.
I can certainly help you with all forend metal at least. Maybe used wood.

I think this gun may be a lower grade than $200, but i am no expert in early hammer gun grading.

I love the look of the ssbp on it with that hard edge on the top.

Hammers could be repaired, if i may be able to help with replacements.

A great piece to bring back! Some of the early guns did not have much engraving, The barrel weight of 2lbs 14oz is that what they weigh now? I have a 20 gauge w/ 28" barrels with full and full chokes it weighs 3lbs 14oz, that is a light weight for sure, Gary

Regarding the barrel weight - Parker guns of that era seemed to have much thinner wall thickness at the breech end of the barrels and this may account for the barrel weight being about a pound less than we would expect to see on a set of 12/30 barrels.
Re the stock being original or not - Parker shotguns of that era had coarser looking checkering even in the higher LPI checkering - more 'square' than the elongated 'diamond' shaped that we are used to seeing on the later guns, so at least the checkering is in keeping with what we would expect to see on a higher grade Parker of that three-digit era.

What stood out to you Brian that leads you to believe it may be a restock?






.

Brian/Dean regarding the stock, it is a decent fit on the head and the work under the hammers/firing pins looks well done but I question originality, there is no serial number on it, there is no oil in the head and the work beneath the locks is not of the caliber one would expect. The shape of the comb looks representative. I left it out of the pics since I did not assume it to be original. It just looks newer that the gun.

Yes Dean regarding barrel weight the breaches are much smaller and I assume the thickness in the barrels is less. The 1 frame receiver is light in the hand.

I took those photos quick at the show. I will more pictures of it in pieces tonight since these early guns do not come up often and it's nice to see them in detail.

Regarding grade if you have The Parker Story and you believe the info on guns pre 1,000 serial number to be true it is a variation of the highest grade. It seems as though the guns did not get elaborate until later price lists and later examples, But I would invite any experts with insight on early guns.

Thanks Edgar......damn pictures!

Regardless and to sound simple..........it's cool!

i guess my question would not be what doesnt look original, but instead what does look original? Not much, in my opinion.

The color of the wood and finish suggests it is newer. The fit around the locks and action look to be below normal quality and the little i see of the checkering looks totally incorrect by way of pattern. Far too closely cut to the cheek panels and upper tang. And also, looks more fresher cut to be original.