|
03-24-2021, 10:37 PM | #3 | ||||||
|
I agree The Parker Story is the best book for collectors. The best read in my opinion is is Peter Johnson’s “Parker, America’s Finest Shotgun”
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Mike Franzen For Your Post: |
03-24-2021, 10:56 PM | #4 | ||||||
|
The best approach is to start with Johnson's book, then Baer, Muderlak, and finish with the Parker Story.
Trust me on this. |
||||||
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to todd allen For Your Post: |
03-25-2021, 05:27 AM | #5 | ||||||
|
I’ve always liked the Johnson book. I bought my first copy at ten years old when I knew nothing about the different Parker grades. It contains some good information but, unfortunately some errors. It is written more from the perspective of an enthusiast than the perspective of a historian. But it is an interesting read nevertheless and was instrumental in furthering my love of the Parker gun.
|
||||||
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Tom Flanigan For Your Post: |
03-25-2021, 08:36 AM | #6 | ||||||
|
Bob:
I believe that with THE PARKER STORY you will definitely get your money’s-worth, because you will continue referring to it. Not a serendipitous random-walk, the textual content of its two volumes is detailed and organized; and it is profusely illustrated by drawings, tables, and photos. But I agree that you should not skip over Peter Johnson’s PARKER, AMERICA’S FINEST SHOTGUN. Published in 1962, it is a time-capsule, and what lover of vintage guns can’t appreciate something like that? It is distinctive, as it presages the coming resurgence of interest in doubles -- guns that had become by mid-20th Century overshadowed, both on the range and in the field, by repeaters. On one level there may be no substitute for Johnson’s infectious passion for the Parker gun. You read that at age five he began collecting gun lists; and as a youth eyed the qualities of a Parker brought into his home by family friend, Dr. Bryant Cook. In spite of being a blatant booster of the Parker gun Johnson was not a Parker dogmatist. He cites the quality and dependability of other American doubles, specifically listing the Fox, Ithaca, L. C. Smith, Baker, and Lefever.
__________________
"First off I scoured the Internet and this seems to be the place to be!” — Chad Whittenburg, 5-12-19 |
||||||
03-25-2021, 09:20 AM | #7 | ||||||
|
I agree with Todd, You should start with Johnson, Larry Baer, both volumes, Muderlak, and then both volumes of the Parker Story, which I believe helped put the Parker Shotgun where it is today! Hats off to the authors! Gary
|
||||||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gary Carmichael Sr For Your Post: |
03-25-2021, 09:53 AM | #8 | ||||||
|
I agree The Parker Story is the definitive books to have as a Parker enthusiast.
The other book I feel is a must have is the Parker Gun Identification & Serialization book. The serialization book does have it's short comings due to the missing Parker factory records, but it is truly my first go to book when looking at a potential Parker purchase. It has saved me from a few potential mistakes over the years and it has also given me confidence on buying several guns as well. When you watch this forum long enough you'll see thread after thread asking "what does the book say" about serial number so & so, this is the book they are referring to. |
||||||
03-25-2021, 10:55 AM | #9 | ||||||
|
Let me give a bit of history and information on the Johnson book. Before Peter researched and wrote his book, there was absolutely no information on Parker guns or the company history, in print. Before 1961, collectors such as myself and many others still in the Parker collecting game had no reference material except "For Sale" ads in the Shotgun News and earlier on, the American Rifleman. Shotguns "For Sale" ads in the American Rifleman had pretty much ended by the early fifties. We bought Parkers by the seats of our pants, not having any information on the originality of Parkers we were buying except visual inspection. I was buying Parkers before I knew Peter Johnson personally, and before he wrote his book. Many other collectors were in the same boat. We knew original condition by experience with other guns and paid for guns that looked original to us. Hundreds of guns were faked up with bogus fluid steel markings on blued Damascus barrels. Most of the faked up guns were poorly done, but others were better. We had no information about barrel markings or lists of factory serial numbers to help us. We worked by experience and empirical information gleened by looking at a lot of guns. We had no idea of rarity of certain grades, gauges, and features except by, again, looking at a lot of guns. Things have changed in the sixty years since the Johnson book was published, especially after the Ilion trip by the PGCA research committee in 1998 and the Kevin McCormack and Commander Gunther trip in 1997.
|
||||||
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Bill Murphy For Your Post: |
03-25-2021, 10:59 AM | #10 | ||||||
|
I'm new to Parkers too, and from MY humble perspective, I found the Johnson book too wordy. I think an editor could have cut this book in half and retained any of the information you would need. It's a flowery wordy enthusiast rendition that is clearly biased, no matter how much you love these great guns, but that's just me. I appreciate it from the perspective that it was the first book on these guns (I believe). The serialization book is a must. The Muderlak book is waiting in the wings while I wade through the Parker Story. While I thought the Johnson book was too prose and glowing, the Parker Story reads like the history of the foundation of the Roman Empire. It is packed with detail that stands as a tremendous desk reference. I should have read the serialization intro first, then Muderlak, then the Parker Story. But you'll find that you'll learn a heck of a lot from people on this board. It's incredible to find out what you don't know. Yet.
__________________
Nothing ruins your Friday like finding out it's only Tuesday |
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Andrew Sacco For Your Post: |
|
|