Worn Hinge Pin?

[Double Play]

Originally Posted by Dean Romig

Tightening up a Parker by the forend method involves adding material to the rear of the forend lug on the barrels and filing for a fine tight fit. This process effectively pulls the hook tighter against the hinge pin but also pulls the barrels away from the breech face and as the gun wears more at the hinge the barrels become more and more "off the face".
I would recommend sending the gun to a shop that will properly add material to the hook and finely fit the barrels as they were originally done in Meriden.... then the forend will have to be re-fit.

Dean,
I couldn't agree more with the above statements. I've watched a well known Parker smith remove the forend metal and peen the backside to move enough metal into the slot to tighten the gun when open. This 10 minute fix makes the gun tight when open but dose nothing to correct the off-face condition which will only get worse with continued shooting.

[chris dawe]

I remember reading last year I believe, that some one stateside was gearing up to manufacture and sell new roll joints for Parker's ...I think it was Steve Bertram ?

That would be a fantastic way to go and something I'm trying to get my machinist friends to look at for me (when their time allows ).

Other than that...what Dean said .

[Bill Murphy]

If I had a bucket full of new roll pins or rolls, I still would have to find a gunsmith to do a good job of installing them. I would rather work with the hook, which anyone handy with a soldering iron can address with shims and files. Don't get the idea that I do this on a regular basis. I have guns that I have owned for forty years or more that are a bit loose on the hinge when open. I don't worry about them. They are just fine to shoot, because they are tight when closed.

[Double Play]

Originally Posted by chris dawe

I remember reading last year I believe, that some one stateside was gearing up to manufacture and sell new roll joints for Parker's ...I think it was Steve Bertram ?

That would be a fantastic way to go and something I'm trying to get my machinist friends to look at for me (when their time allows ).

Other than that...what Dean said .

Chris,
I made a roll joint for one of our members a few years ago just for the learning experience. I would have to say that it would not likely be a "cost effective" way to correct an off-face condition. I've had guns put back on face by adding material to the hook and redressing for a lot less than the cost of a new roll joint.

[chris dawe]

Originally Posted by Larry Frey

Chris,
I made a roll joint for one of our members a few years ago just for the learning experience. I would have to say that it would not likely be a "cost effective" way to correct an off-face condition. I've had guns put back on face by adding material to the hook and redressing for a lot less than the cost of a new roll joint.

True,but if you could set up to run out a couple dozen or more at a time it would offset the cost ,I'm sure there's a market ...all it would take would be the right guy with the right equipment ,Parker did it once and the reproduction crowd did it years later,and Galazan must be doing it now ...Just a thought I've always had .

Like others and you have said ,Tig and refit is the most economical ,I've done it many times ....I can't help but wonder though every time one comes across the bench .....Why could no body else ever realize that Dan Lefever's ball and socket was the cure to the problem ? simply ,bloody genius !