So When is "Original" no longer Original?

[mobirdhunter]

Looking at another couple of threads has me thinking about our various opinions on originality. My question is about guns that left the factory one way, but were returned later for some changes. Example: I have a CH that was originally ordered without a safety, but returned a few years later (different owner apparently) to have the safety installed. Since I have documentation that this is all factory work, I consider this gun's condition original. Then there is the case when the records don't show what seems clearly factory work done after the original order was delivered.

Opinions?

[Mike Franzen]

I would consider any work documented as done by the factory to be original no matter at what point in the guns life it took place. Undocumented work is subject to opinion and a question mark will always remain. Collectors of “Original Condition” Guns are very wary of undocumented repairs, replacements or upgrades.

[Setter Man]

When I think of a gun being in original condition I think of a gun that has not been restored. Your gun was modified by Parker, not restored, so I think it’s original.

JDG

[6pt-Sika]

Originally Posted by Jay Gardner

When I think of a gun being in original condition I think of a gun that has not been restored. Your gun was modified by Parker, not restored, so I think it’s original.

JDG

Yes sir my sentiments almost to a “T” !!!! I DO NOT like words that begin with “re” like reblued refinished or RESTORED . To each his own and while I’ve had barrels redone it was pretty much last resort or a gun it wasn’t gonna affect the resale value in the least . And I under stand restoration is sometimes actually needed a gun needs to be damn near a basket case for ME to even consider the word restoration . When I was in my Virginia phase I was after muskets made at the Virginia Manufactory in the 1799-1820ish period . A good many of those guns were changed from flint to percussion by the Confederacy as well as other military flintlocks . Anyway I was looking for a few parts to reconvert a 1795 Springfield back to flintlock 20 or so years ago and asked a friend that was a BIG civil war collector for thoughts on where to get original parts . His reply to me was that I was destroying history . I’ve never forgotten that and to a degree I feel the same way about a total resto on any Parker that’s totally original but low in finish . I’ve said it before and will continue to say it , “I’d rather have an honest 30% gun that’s 100% functional and unabused over a total resto gun” . Again to each his own that’s just my opinion .

[Bill Murphy]

"Clearly done by Parker Brothers" determined by an experienced Parker researcher, is better than any lesser documentation by a selling dealer. There is a whole lot of work done by Parker Brothers and Remington that is absolutely original that is not documented by PGCA letters.

[mobirdhunter]

Originally Posted by Bill Murphy

"Clearly done by Parker Brothers" determined by an experienced Parker researcher, is better than any lesser documentation by a selling dealer. There is a whole lot of work done by Parker Brothers and Remington that is absolutely original that is not documented by PGCA letters.

Thanks, Bill. So who might be on this list of "experienced Parker researchers?"

Has the Association ever offered authentication services at any of its annual meetings or other affairs. Seems like a PGCA authentication would be a good way to add to the coffers AND help out some of those Parker owners that have guns for which records are not available.

[Bill Murphy]

It is in the eye of an experienced collector, as in "I know it when I see it". You will never see the PGCA offering any authentication by eye. However, many of our members have a good eye for originality or lack thereof.

[mobirdhunter]

I assume there are folks with expertise that for a fee would examine a gun closely (disassemble to check internal parts, for example) and issue a qualified outcome. Even our research letters have a caveat regarding the limitations of the records.

If there are people who would issue expert analysis of a gun, who are they? I certainly respect those with years of looking at and handling Parkers, but I assume there is more than just the eye test one could seek in those cases where records do not exist, yes?

[B. Dudley]

Originally Posted by Garry L Gordon

Thanks, Bill. So who might be on this list of "experienced Parker researchers?"

Has the Association ever offered authentication services at any of its annual meetings or other affairs. Seems like a PGCA authentication would be a good way to add to the coffers AND help out some of those Parker owners that have guns for which records are not available.

That is a very slippery slope that could come back to bite the organization which is why I would think it should not be done. IF it had ever been considered.
Especially if it was a fee based service.

At any event or gathering there are plenty of folks willing to lend their OPINIONS on guns and originality. In the end that is all it is.

[John Davis]

If you are trying to prove something that's not in the records, good luck with the "experts" opinion. At the end of the day it's just that, an opinion. I'm not a purest or an investor, so I try not to lose to much sleep over such things. I just buy guns I like or fit me, and then don't apologize for it.