Parker vs L.C. Smith guns

[Lloyd McKissick]

Researcher, that "Rube-Goldbergian" design has lasted for a long time now (from 1886 to the present day) and it has killed a veritable mountain of game over those intervening years. Like it or don't like it, that's fine (& I know Dewey is sick of working on the many later versions). Crapping on it here is not making you any points.

[Lloyd McKissick]

A comparison between Smith and Parker hammers. The 1901 Smith is in better shape here (cleaner, w/more recent work having been done on it) but the 1887 Parker #1 frame gun is about a half-pound lighter (which makes a surprising difference) and the straight grip makes it feel like it's quicker to mount.

Is there a better way to get this nasty "brown mung" off of this old Parker?

[Double Lab]

With all due respect Mr. Mckissick, the OP asked for opinions on which gun was better. That's what he got from Mr. Noreen, who has forgotten more about guns than every member on this board ever knew. As does Dewey. I challenge anyone to find a more qualified gunsmith. It's the ole Ford vs. Chevy thing so let's keep it civil here.

[Mike of the Mountain]

I had a few Smiths over the years. Operative word is HAD. I have plenty of Parker and Lefever guns. Even a few Ithaca and Crescent to boot. My two cents, I'd take any Parker over a Smith any day.

[Lloyd McKissick]

Double Lab: Mr. Noreen is a spectacular resource, no doubt, but it was unnecessary for him to berate the maker any further and I calls 'em as I sees 'em. In my world that is not being uncivil.

Mr. Mountain: like Mr. Noreen, you are entitled to your opinion, but you are clearly ignorant of the better, earlier Smiths.

[Pa SxS]

Dumb topic. Calls for opinions. There are no answers to the question.

[Double Lab]

Originally Posted by Chuck Bishop

Dumb topic. Calls for opinions. There are no answers to the question.

My point exactly. Thank you your eminence. (As Toolman would say)

[Mike of the Mountain]

Originally Posted by Lloyd McKissick

Double Lab: Mr. Noreen is a spectacular resource, no doubt, but it was unnecessary for him to berate the maker any further and I calls 'em as I sees 'em. In my world that is not being uncivil.

Mr. Mountain: like Mr. Noreen, you are entitled to your opinion, but you are clearly ignorant of the better, earlier Smiths.

I’m very well aware of the earlier Smiths. It’s a personal choice and everyone has choices, and opinions. I personally do not like shooting LCS guns. I don’t like cats either. Just sayin’.

[BRDHNTR]

Cats purr too much

[Timothy Cicora]

Wow . I was one of the first responders to Stepmac.

I'm mainly a shooter and like all types of shotguns. I'm pretty new to this forum and don't post much. I am not new to firearms. I don't have a collection to try and legitimize or have anybody I need to back up on the forum . I respect people who have great knowledge but I never seen a need to kiss anyone's ring. I don't do guns as a business.

It was nice to see there is a segment on this forum that enjoys other types of shotguns as I do. It's a Parker forum so I was expecting it to lean heavy toward Parkers . From what I seen it wasn't a land slide. I think it would probably be the same on the LC site.

I was hoping to see some more people say why they think Parkers / LC's are better ?

Examples :

I have shot the best scores with a Parker . So, I have to say Parker. They fit me best.

I have a safe full of different shotguns but I always seem to pull out the LC's . So its LC's for me .

I'm in the business of buying and selling shotguns. Parkers seem to be the best for me because for me they hold value.

I had them both. For me I was always working on my LC's so I switched to Parkers. Been going good for me for years . So Parkers for me .

Have them both . My Parker let me down on some hunts but my LC never did . So for me it has to be an LC.

Nothing crazy . Just gun people sharing their experiences.


How about those examples . ?