|
03-10-2012, 06:55 PM | #3 | ||||||
|
Such warnings are meant to cause new owners to err on the side of caution. Many owners of early Parker guns in good condition use them as they would use modern guns. However, after fifty years of shooting early Parker guns, I still prefer to err on the side of caution. Repairs are expensive and hard to access. I shoot light loads in all of my early Parkers.
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Bill Murphy For Your Post: |
03-10-2012, 07:55 PM | #4 | ||||||
|
i have shot sveral hundred loads in the parker 8 ga lifter i have...most all the loads on the medium to heavy side... smokless loads...the stock is oil soaked pretty good and i need to do something about that...but the old gun has never shone any sign of a crack in the stock or damage to the old stub twist steel barrels she wears...she fired a 2 1/2 ounce turkey load yesterday at a dummy turkey....im not bragging but these old guns are tougher than we think they are...most all of youwould not take a secound look at my old gun buti think as much of that old wore out 8 as i would of a a 1 parker if i had one...shes one tough old gal..... charlie
|
||||||
03-10-2012, 09:42 PM | #5 | ||||||
|
Charlie I have always shot 3-1/2" bismuth in my Parker PH with 32" steel barrels, course this is my duck gun, and geese!
|
||||||
03-11-2012, 05:24 AM | #6 | ||||||
|
Just my experience on oil soaked stocks. I found that removing oil by soaking in acetone did nothing, IMO, to strengthen the stocks. In fact, the oil and acetone removal of that oil, together robbed the wood of natural resins that bind the fibers of the wood together. I found that one stock was particularly affected by the oil and removal process. It had obvious signs that the fibers were not bonded as well. I addressed the situation on a couple of them by using a super thin cyanoacrylate glue to soak into the head of the stock and bind the fibers. To me, it seemed that the only area of the stock that had lost resins enough that it was a concern, was in the stock head where the oil had soaked it for decades. So, I attributed the damage mostly to the oil soaking and not the short use of harsh solvents to remove the oil. So, I have no illusions that removing oil restores strength. I think the damage is done to whatever level and only adding a binder like the cyanoacrylate glue after the oil removal will restore a portion of the original strength. Just my 2 cents.
Regards Chuck |
||||||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chuck Heald For Your Post: |
03-11-2012, 01:59 PM | #7 | ||||||
|
[QUOTE=Chuck Heald;64571]Just my experience on oil soaked stocks. I found that removing oil by soaking in acetone did nothing, IMO, to strengthen the stocks. In fact, the oil and acetone removal of that oil, together robbed the wood of natural resins that bind the fibers of the wood together. I found that one stock was particularly affected by the oil and removal process. It had obvious signs that the fibers were not bonded as well. I addressed the situation on a couple of them by using a super thin cyanoacrylate glue to soak into the head of the stock and bind the fibers. To me, it seemed that the only area of the stock that had lost resins enough that it was a concern, was in the stock head where the oil had soaked it for decades. So, I attributed the damage mostly to the oil soaking and not the short use of harsh solvents to remove the oil. So, I have no illusions that removing oil restores strength. I think the damage is done to whatever level and only adding a binder like the cyanoacrylate glue after the oil removal will restore a portion of the original strength. Just my 2 cents.
Regards Chuck Chuck, Not to dispute your opinion, but oil soaked wood is spongy and black/dark. If one sticks his fingernail into the head of a oil-soaked stock, you can feel this. If I'm going to go through the trouble of a refinish on a stock and forend, all oil possible will need to go. I use a heat gun which will draw an incredible amount of oil out of it by itself. Then comes a brushing and then a soaking in laquer thinner over night, not acetone. It takes a couple of days to fully dry once removed. If the laquer thinner is filthy, it may require soaking in new thinner. Then if I think any oil remains, to know I'm getting as much as possible it's Brownell's "Old Fashioned Whiting" (calcium carbonate). It "wicks the oil out of the pores and fibers of the wood." Keep in mind that no way does any of this penetrate all the way into/through the wood, and the many, many coats of finish restore the wood. A small amount of finish applied/brushed inside the head restores and protects from future oil contamination as well. Finish brushed onto the end of the buttstock and under the grip cap if it has one protects the wood from moisture damage. Just my opinion. |
||||||
03-13-2012, 11:04 AM | #8 | |||||||
|
[QUOTE=Jerry Harlow;64611]
Quote:
I think we're saying the same thing. Yes, I agree oil will make a stock weak and spongy. What I'm saying is that taking out the oil doesn't return the strength lost to the resins being desolved by the oil. Some type of binder is needed. I've found that the thin super glues penetrate very well and strenthen the wood again. On a couple particularly badly soaked stocks, I looked at the wood after removing the oil and you could literally see the fibers without binder around them on the surface. I've also used lacquer thinner and heat along with whiting as well. Lacquer thinner is a quite a bit more effective than acetone as it is a stronger solvent. If you get a stock that looks weak after oil removal, try the super glue (a good industrial brand.). Regards Chuck |
|||||||
03-11-2012, 07:03 AM | #9 | ||||||
|
There are guns and there are shoulders. I started shooting light loads a few years ago, 3/4 ounce 20ga, 3/4 - 1 ounce 12ga and 1 1/8 - 1 1/4 ounce 10ga. There is no doubt they are easier on guns but the really big plus is how easy they are on one's shoulder. I am so pleased with 7/8 ounce 12ga on trap singles I wonder now why I thought it necessary to shoot tens of thousands 1 1/8 ounce loads. A 1 ounce 12ga load will clobber any upland game bird with authority. The big 10 shooting 1 1/4 ounce is a magic wand all the way to 60 yards +. I think back in the 1920's when Super X shells came out ammunition and gun manufacturers started marketing more and bigger is better. The american shooting public bought it. Too many generations have past and the market of more is better continues, many of us have had to relearn the effectiveness and benefits of light loads. Light loads are a pleasant surprise for those who haven't tried them, and they are easier on the wallet too if you reload.
|
||||||
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Pete Lester For Your Post: |
03-11-2012, 07:53 AM | #10 | ||||||
|
Pete,
I could'nt agree more with your statement. I started shooting 7/8oz., 6200psi. loads 20+ yrs ago in my Parkers not because I was worried about the gun as much as I did not like getting pounded. My scores did not change but my ability to enjoy shooting 100+ rounds in a day went up dramatically. I've now went over to a 3/4oz. 20ga load and have found it to be just effective as the 7/8oz. Now that I'm getting older I worry about my guns that are twice my age and in much better shape. PS- I've always thought the major ammo companies are missing the Public Relations boat by not introducing these light loads to the general shooting public. You know, less lead in the environment, reduced costs, etc. The NSSA and the ATA along with the Sporting Clays governing body should mandate the use of these reduced loads in their events. I only see it as a win-win situation. Ok- I'm putting my soap box away and heading off to shoot some clays. (With light loads of course). |
||||||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Daryl Corona For Your Post: |
|
|