Parker repros vs. Parker originals

[Richard Flanders]

I worry more about the wood than the bbls, especially, as Bruce says, on those pesky Reproductions. Trigg had a Repro20 that broke a stock. He sent it off and had a new stock made and on the first test shot it broke clean in half again. Some bad juju going on there somehow. I tailor my loads to the gun and shoot light loads in light guns with thinner stocks and bbls and heavier loads in heavier guns with stout wood and bbls. It's a matter of "it's supposed to be fun" and not an exercise in shoulder punishment. My stout 32" 1883 twist bbl 12ga hammer gun doesn't even burp when digesting old paper 1-1/2oz magnums and the recoil isn't bad at all. My wand-like 26" 6#10oz GHE 12 never gets anything heavier than a lightly loaded 1oz load and we're both much the happier for it and that puppy is deadly on woodcock and ruffies... and chukars...... and pheasants.... and sharptails.

[Duckman]

Here is a photo of Parker Reproduction and an original Parker VH in nice shape. They both make me happy.
Below them is a picture of me waiting for doves with an original Parker VHE. Below that is a picture of me with an old departed friend and a Parker Reproduction. I had fun both times and didn't think much about when either gun was made or by whom.
Finally, this is a picture of a cookstove in our kitchen that we use all the time during winter, which lasts 8 months here. My wife and I were once part of a Christmas home tour and a woman on the tour asked me if this stove was a "repo". I told her no it most certainly was not but was made in 1923 and was fully paid for.