I own Parkers, Smiths, Foxes, and Lefevers. While I own more Parkers, I like them all. Each maker/design has it's strengths and weaknesses in both physical and fuctional terms.
Parkers are a grand gun with good engraving from the E/G Grade 2 guns and up. The engraved birds are however not from this planet. Parkers have far too many internal parts. The stocks do split at the head but are easy to pin or run a bolt through.
Lower grade, especially post 1913 Smiths, those with named grades such as Field and Ideal, definately are prone to stock splitting at the rear apex of the lock plates. The higher grades had better craftsmanship on the inletting and tend to split less.
The Fox is a simple design. These guns have a well earned reputation. They are also easy to repair.
Lefevers, especially later ones, are perhaps the best designed American SxS. They have few internal parts to wear and/or break and the lock plates are easily removed for cleaning the action. Their stocks are equally as easy to remove. That is not true for Parkers and especially Smiths.
Lefevers have external adjusting screws for the sear engagement and to shut off the automatic safety. Perhaps the best feature is the Lefever "Fully Compensated Action". This is possible by a ball and socket in which the barrels and action are connected. The ball within the action is easily adjustable. Why, why, why didn't other makers employ this feature?
- Also, all (or at least most) makers paid royalities to Lefever to use their patents. That's why early Lefevers are marked "Lefever Arms Company Maker and Patentee".
Those of you who do not or have not ever owned and serviced the other maker's guns please do not cast uninformed stones!
|