parker gun part swapping

[Jerry Andrews]

Yes, or government suppliments we seem to be so good at handing out in this country! Jerry

[Leighton Stallones]

A friend of mine here in Texas told me several years ago about his Parker
GH that he hunted Pheasants with in Kansas when he lived in Missouri.
However ,he said someone had put replacement stocks on it and they did not fit him well,but he was ok with them. A few months ago, I saw him at a shoot in New Braunfels and he told me an amazing story.
He was visiting relatives in Kansas City and his nephew drug him down to the Cabelas store. He noticed a big box of shotgun stocks and found a buttstock
and foreend that looked like they would fit his Parker and the serial numbers looked close. He said that he called his wife at home and asked her to look at the serial numbers on his Parker to see how close they were.
They were the same serial numbers as his gun and he bought them of course and left in a daze.
Evidently, Bishop, Fajen or another Missouri stocker had done the work on his gun and sold the excess old stocks to Cabelas.
True story.

[Vincent Pascucci]

The frame and barrels are SN 119568. The forend is 216041. So if anyone has forend 119568 or needs 216041 and is willing to trade a GH forend for it, so I'd at least have matching grades if not SN's, I'd be interested.

As for 119568, since this is the first time it's come to light in many decades, I'll share what little I know about it. It belonged to my father-in-law. It was sitting in a gun cabinet in his basement for the 25 years I knew him. I never took a look at it until after he died. That's when I realized it was a true damascus barrel and was clearly a cut above the twist steel barrel on an old double barrel my great grandfather used into the 1950's. It was an H&H, I think. I suspect the Parker hasn't actually been used in at least 60 years. My mother-in-law believes it actually came from her side of the family. I assume based on that that it was used around the coal country of Pottsville, PA going back into the 1940's and perhaps earlier, depending on where it was first sold.

As for condition, the only modification is the barrels were cut down a couple inches. The Turnbull folks noted this was pretty common. By the way, if you are ever in Bloomfield, NY, stop by Turnbull's. Not only did they give me a full run down on the gun, they provided a tour through the whole operation. My brother and I were there for about an hour and a half. The gun has a couple of dings in the barrel and needs all the metal refinished. But overall it is in nice shape. It's totally tight fitting. It does have ejectors and they function perfectly. What little rust there is on it is more of a browning in texture. All in all, a great freebie. My brother-in-law naturally had dibs on the gun, since it was his father's. But he didn't want it, preferring instead some nice rifles for deer hunting.

So, now all I have to do is take this "free" gun and start getting restoration work done. Turnbull quoted the barrel refinishing, which is my first desire, at $550 with another 50 to 100 for getting the dings out. Seeing the work on the guns in their shop, I'm sure it would come out fantastic.

[Jerry Andrews]

Thanks for those kind words Mervyn! Jerry

[Dean Romig]

I will add that the POI will be more affected as more length is cut off. For instance, if the barrels were originally 30" and only one or two inches are cut off the POI will be less affected but if four inches or more are cut off then the gun will most probably shoot high - again, determined by how much is cutt off.

[Vincent Pascucci]

All,

Thanks for the running commentary. On the issue of the barrels no longer being regulated due to shortening, I'm not certain what that means. I'll have to look it up. As noted though, they were cut down about 2 inches. The Turnbull guy I spoke with noted that they were 27 7/8th inches, which just shouldn't be - 30 or 28 I think is what he commented would be expected. Also, he felt there was a little too much separation between them at the muzzle. That said, he told me it was a common mod for trap shooting. In any event, it doesn't really matter as I didn't intend to shoot it. For years I've been told don't shoot damascus with modern loads, though as I said in an earlier post, my great-grandfather shot a hammered twist steel double well into the 1950's. Of course, he also used to cut the livers our of woodchucks right after shooting them and eat some. A tougher bunch back then I guess.

Anyway, my real desire is to just get it looking good. I'd mostly want to just have the barrels redone to bring out the pattern I see on so many restored guns. And since I have no money into it, I figure I can splurge a little.

I think I will go ahead and become an official member. Lot's of good material bouncing around here. Well worth my investment so far - gun, $0; membership, $40; socializing, priceless.

[Autumn Daze]

Welcome Vincent...Glad to have you aboard..

[Old and Reliable]

Originally Posted by Dave Suponski

Welcome Vincent...Glad to have you aboard..

I'll second that--IMO the best $40 you'll ever spend on anything shotgun related-One great thing about new members in the PGCA- there is most always a new question or quest for info raised, and that's what has spurred the growth in membership in the PGCA--

[Double Trouble]

Regarding barrel regulation being affected by the shortening of the barrels: If that's true, then I guess we are assuming that each barrel is not reasonably straight, but instead, is (minutely) bent in all different directions (but looks straight at a casual glance) ?

Now, every manufactured product has a tolerance, and "straightness" of a barrel has an angular tolerance too. But....... If each tube is reasonably straight, it's centerline will theoretically define point of impact.

OK - now, if one regulates two such tubes together to form a side-by-side barrel assembly, they are "adjusting" the alignment of each tubes centerline to be reasonably coincident at a given distance (let's just say, 50 yards).

Now - these barrel centerlines - being "LINES" - are straight. That's a definition of a line. Additionally, these two centerlines do not change from their original orientation after one, two , or three inches of barrel assembly is cut off. (ie: the two barrels are soldered together for their entire length).

So, by shortening the tubes, we have not "moved" one barrel relative to the other, and we have not changed the same straight "centerlines" of each barrel. So, how then can the point of impact be so drastically changed ?

Additionally, we're talking about shotguns, not rifles. If one was talking about rifles - they are so exacting/accurate that a minute change in barrel "straightness" or barrel vibration/harmonics could affect the apparent point of impact (when the arm is capable of a 1/2" group at 100 yards). But when you're throwing a swarm of pellets in a pattern that can be reasonably measured in feet vs. minute of angle - how much differently can 2" shorter barrels possibly be aligned ?


[BTW: since the thinner walled muzzles of each barrels "touch" (at the muzzle end) - and the breech end of the barrels (which have much thicker walls) also touch, this means that the barrel centerlines are not parallel, and the paths of the shot charges must cross each other (when viewed from above the gun) not too far from the muzzle. Double rifles (when viewed from the muzzle) have the centerlines of each bore separated by a great distance in order to keep them reasonably parallel. Since shotgun bores do not appear to have the parallel centerline, that level of exactness must not be needed.]


I'm playing devil's advocate - I'm not saying that it's a simple task to regulate shotguns. In fact, I still have a beautiful 20 ga. Weatherby O/U that is such a POORLY REGULATED P.O.S. that it shoots like two completely different guns - mounted on one stock. The fine boys at Weatherby said it shot to their specs & did nothing to solve my problem. As a result, I can NEVER recommend that maker, and will never by one of their products again.

Of course, who needs to - with all those amazing old Parkers out there !!!!!


{Damn - my fingers are tired from all that typing !!!!}

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by John Mazza

[BTW: since the thinner walled muzzles of each barrels "touch" (at the muzzle end) - and the breech end of the barrels (which have much thicker walls) also touch, this means that the barrel centerlines are not parallel, and the paths of the shot charges must cross each other (when viewed from above the gun) not too far from the muzzle. Double rifles (when viewed from the muzzle) have the centerlines of each bore separated by a great distance in order to keep them reasonably parallel. Since shotgun bores do not appear to have the parallel centerline, that level of exactness must not be needed.]

True, to an extent... however, keep in mind that when the barrels are joined at the breech the sides of the breech end are filed flat and brazed together with a combined wall thichness equal only to the chamber wall thickness of a single barrel which helps greatly in aligning the two bore center lines and aids greatly in regulating the barrels.