|
11-02-2009, 08:25 AM | #13 | ||||||
|
Thank you Dean, George and Bruce. I don't want to act hastily and want as much advice as possible. All good advice so far.
George, I did indicate they had damascus barrels. How does that make a diiference to you? ie honing vs. polishing? I'm going to polish them first to see what I have. |
||||||
11-02-2009, 09:14 AM | #14 | ||||||
|
Ron
I collect high end sub gage Parkers and would advise leaving the guns alone. The number of collectors interested in restored guns is a LOT less than those of us looking for all original guns. If the gun is all original the next owner can restore it if so desired but once restored it can not be undone. David |
||||||
11-02-2009, 09:34 AM | #15 | ||||||
|
Ray,lots of times pits and uneven bores look worse than they are. Some people will take emory cloth, wrap it around a bore brush, apply lots of oil and scrub away. Others will take automotive paint rubbing compound and gob that on a bore brush. Just scrub away a lot and those bores may clean up, as pitted bores tend to collect dirt and look worse than they are.
Here's the issue. Lots of Parker barrels, fluid or damascus, were made around .032 to .038 wall thickness. Many people, such as me, feel that .025 is a comfortable minimum, although the Brits will go down to .020. Many older guns, such as yours, were sent back to the factory to have the bores "cleaned" in the days when people were still using black powder. Burnt black powder contains sulfur compounds, moisture collects, and sulfuric acid results. So bores were cleaned, wall thickness reduced, and so what because a person could always get new barrels from Parker and many did. So each rehoning costs .006, maybe more, in wall thickness and after two of those, you have very thin walls. Now I like damascus barrels and shoot modern smokeless loads in them up to Parker's design psi ( not proof psi) of about 11,300 for a 12ga, although much of the time I shoot loads that run between 7500 and 8500psi. I like wall thickness, and for some unfounded reason, particularly like wall thickness in damascus barrels. Honing reduces wall thickness and adds nothing functionally. Shiny bores are merely cosmetic. I'm talking about the normal ripples, rings, small pits, that you see in old bores, not deep cracks, holes, etc that show structural issues. Good luck with your A grades. Some of them, including those made around that time period, can be spectacular. "First, do no harm," And by the way, some of the same people that are telling you to exercise caution here are the same ones that are known to collect guns such as yours may be. Last edited by Bruce Day; 11-02-2009 at 09:53 AM.. |
||||||
11-02-2009, 11:40 AM | #16 | ||||||
|
Thanks Bruce. The pitted barrel has .042+ wall thinkness. I was thinking about using the Flex Hone sold by Brownells to clean them up cause I can controll everything well.
|
||||||
11-02-2009, 12:08 PM | #17 | ||||||
|
Ray, I am not a gunsmith and have no experience with the flex hone. I have seen a Parker barrel set where the barrels were honed and the chokes opened, and as a result the bores were not concentric and the patterns were off. Be careful.
|
||||||
11-02-2009, 12:20 PM | #18 | ||||||
|
Yes, that is a problem and one needs to stay away from the chokes when using the Flex Hones. Really no different then any other barrel.
|
||||||
11-02-2009, 04:12 PM | #19 | ||||||
|
Ray, There are Parker collectors who regularly restore their guns. This can add to the value of a gun. If one would restore a gun there are a couple of things to think about. Why would restoration be a benefit and who can do the job properly? Additionally, the restored gun should be able to pay you back if sold, not all guns can do this. But some people just want the gun brought back in appearance and aren't concerned with cost. It is expensive and it takes a good deal of time during which you will be without the gun. Should you decide to go forward you need to get the names of restorers as near to you as possible who can bring a Parker back in appearance and function.
|
||||||
|
|