|
04-22-2012, 06:05 PM | #3 | ||||||
|
Thanks Charlie, for the quick reply, Already had the gun checked out and it was given a clean bill of health. I just didn't know about using 3.5" shells. The forcing cone begins at 3.75" down the chamber. I think I'll stay with standard length shells. Here are some quick snapshots.. Thanks again for the advice.
|
||||||
04-22-2012, 07:37 PM | #4 | ||||||
|
Terry,
I dont want to rain on the parade, but I noticed a few things that might be of concern. The barrel flats have a "D" just before the weight of the barrels (5 with a small 2 for five pounds 2 oz). "D" stands for Damascus barrels. I also see lines around the barrels as if they have been mono-blocked (original barrels cut off and new barrels inserted). There were no 3 1/2 inch shells in 1890. I have a 20 gauge Parker that started life as a 16 gauge with Twist Steel barrels that was mono-blocked and I shoot the snot out of it. Have fun. |
||||||
04-22-2012, 07:44 PM | #5 | ||||||
|
isn't "D" the grade
but i do see the line suggesting a sleeving
__________________
"If there is a heaven it must have thinning aspen gold, and flighting woodcock, and a bird dog" GBE |
||||||
04-22-2012, 08:07 PM | #6 | ||||||
|
Thanks for your acessment. You certainly aren't raining on any parades. I'm delighted with this gun even if it was rebarreled. Infact, I prefer not to have damascus barrels. Since the rib states "Titanic Steel" is it reasonable to think that Parker may have done the work?
|
||||||
04-22-2012, 09:48 PM | #7 | ||||||
|
Terry
might i suggest getting the research letter for the gun. That would tell you if it was originally damascus, and might reference if it was returned to Parker for work.
__________________
"If there is a heaven it must have thinning aspen gold, and flighting woodcock, and a bird dog" GBE |
||||||
04-22-2012, 09:54 PM | #8 | ||||||
|
I don't think Parker had Titanic barrels on DH's until about 1897. My 1894 hammered Parker was mono-blocked by LaFever and they changed "TWIST" to "STEEL". I don't think Parker did such things, but I've been wrong about many things Parker. The great thing about your Parker is that it came to you from family and that is more important to me about my family Parker's than all the warts they may have. You've a great old Parker you can try to wear out before you pass it along to the next generation. Good luck and great shooting.
Kindest, Harry |
||||||
04-22-2012, 09:58 PM | #9 | ||||||
|
Neither Parker Bros. nor Remington did that mono bloc sleeving work. Very likely the word Damascus was tig welded in and the rib remarked Titanic when the sleeving job was done.
The gun appears to have selective automatic ejectors that were not offered by Parker Bros. at the time that gun was originally made, so it very likely was back to Parker Bros. for those at some point in its life. Did it get the updated bolt and bolt plate at that time? FWIW, it doesn't look new. When it was new the receiver, top-lever, forearm iron, and forearm latch lever were color case hardened, not buffed shiney like now. Was/is that gun in Washington State? I saw one just like that at Chet Paulson's in Tacoma about 45 years ago. |
||||||
04-22-2012, 10:37 PM | #10 | ||||||
|
That "D" on the barrel flats represents Damascus.... which is what the breech section of the barrels is, behind the sleeve seam.
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Dean Romig For Your Post: |
|
|