Early and Rough, but still a Parker… - Page 2

Jay Oliver · 07-19-2021, 05:56 PM

I just re-read pages 88-89 of Volume I of The Parker Story, which provided a good overview of the "0" prefix. Seems the consensus is that these "0" prefixes are found on what could be considered lower grade guns. I would agree based on my small sample size of early Parkers.

This gun had to be first year of production in 1869. I am sure this Parker has seen quite a bit over the years. I look forward to getting it right again.

Austin J Hawthorne Jr. · 07-19-2021, 08:28 PM

Just curious...what does the rib inscription read?

Jay Oliver · 07-19-2021, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Just curious...what does the rib inscription read?

Here is a better picture, click on it to zoom in.

The rib reads: Parker Bros Makers Meriden Conn Decarbonized Steel

Dean Romig · 07-20-2021, 03:35 PM

Bill - I'll start a new thread in the Off Topic forum with pictures of some of my predecessors and a bit of history on them.

.

Jay Oliver · 07-20-2021, 04:46 PM

I kept wondering if I was missing something regarding the serial number on the barrels. I wanted(really needed) to know if they were original to the gun.

After a bit of light work with a frontier pad on the barrel lug I was able to find the faint/worn serial number and....it's a match!

edgarspencer · 07-20-2021, 05:50 PM

The gun was most probably cylinder bored on both sides, as it predates choke boring, so cut or not, it will likely shoot as it always did.

Jay Oliver · 07-20-2021, 10:38 PM

Edgar I look forward to finding out how it shoots and I'll bring it when we go shooting. I like the few guns I have that are choked cyl/cyl. This will be a nice one to get back in working order.

Dean Romig · 07-21-2021, 12:03 AM

I had a 16 ga. Lifter that had been cut back from 28” to 24” so it effectively had no choke.
But that little gun could really account for itself on 35, 40 and longer yardage clay targets. I was always anazed by how this gun would smash targets waay out there.

.

edgarspencer · 07-21-2021, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Romig

I had a 16 ga. Lifter that had been cut back from 28” to 24” so it effectively had no choke.
But that little gun could really account for itself on 35, 40 and longer yardage clay targets. I was always anazed by how this gun would smash targets waay out there.

Seems to me I recall that gun pretty well. Never should have..... oh hell.

"An object at rest remains at rest, and an object in motion remains in motion at constant speed and in a straight line unless acted on by an unbalanced force."

Newton's First Law says to me that a cylinder bore will alter the direction and spread less than a choked bore. I have patterned a couple guns that have had their barrels cut to an extent that NO choke exists. I was amazed to see that the pattern is very much tighter than a lightly choked bore, up to a point where air resistance also begins to affect it.

stumpstalker · 07-21-2021, 04:02 PM

Edgar:

I am trying to understand this effect.

QUOTE: ”…a cylinder bore will alter the direction and spread less than a choked bore…”

Can this mean that the “unbalanced force” that is absent with a cylinder bore gun as Dean’s be a tight choke constriction, that produces in comparison a diminishing-return, shot-confusing, "ricocheting”, dispersal of ejecta from the bore?

Russell