Parker 28 gauge photos - original (I believe)

[Wayne Dow]

I don't know, Big D. They've never been re-finished to my knowledge. 2-2, I suppose. Oh, sorry, I see in the technical section that barrels are always stamped in the factory before finishing. Shows you how much I know :-). I'll weigh them sometime soon and let you know.

My digital kitchen scale says 2 - 2 1/4. Somehow, finishing made them get heavier by a quarter ounce :-)

[Wayne Dow]

Thank you for your observations and recommendations, CL. I've always wondered why the checkering and color were different on the butt stock and forend. I've had the gun since 1966 and it's never been touched during my time except to repair slight cracks in the stock and endplate. After my great-grandfather died in 1947, the gun sat unused in an attic, so he must have had reason to re-finish it during his lifetime. Maybe the split in the stock had something to do with it. Anyhow, thanks for partially clearing up a mystery! I'm glad the forend finish is original as it shows me what the butt stock once looked like.

[Setter Man]

Wonder how many sweet little Parkers are tucked away in attics or closets waiting to be discovered?

[Fishtail]

My father has a JC Higgins bolt-action 12 ga tucked away in the closet waiting to be found. We don't like talking about it.

[B. Dudley]

Thank you for sharing with us photos of your 28g.
As Craig suggested, the buttstock has had finish added to it at one time. Checkering is filled in and it is very glossy for the condition of the whole gun. Other than that, the gun is pretty unmolested and it a good example of a gun that has seen much field service but not abused.

If you wish to continue hunting with it a lot and in any conditions, there is no worries about carrying on as you have been. However, as you may have guessed, 28g guns are rare, are desirable and are valuable. In nearly any condition. So, given that the gun really owes you nothing, any restoration work considered would no doubt increase the value of the gun from its current state as long as the work performed is quality.

[Bill Murphy]

I would guess the weight stamp is actually a poorly stamped 2-12.

[Wayne Dow]

Originally Posted by Bill Murphy

I would guess the weight stamp is actually a poorly stamped 2-12.

Thanks, Bill, an interesting thought. It's a surprise to me to learn that there could be such a range of barrel weights coming out of the factory. Would a customer have been able to order a lighter gun, or was it more random than that? What was the weight range on 28's? Maybe Charlie knows.

In this case, I weighed the bbls at 2-2 1/4 after Big D's question, and the attached close-up doesn't reveal a faulty strike, so I think 2-2 is the correct stamp.

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Bill Murphy

I would guess the weight stamp is actually a poorly stamped 2-12.

That was a thought I had too Bill - I just wasn't ready to say it... there is absolutely no evidence of a 1 stamp next to the 2 which would make it a 12.





.

[Bill Murphy]

Wayne, is your gun a 00 frame gun with dished out areas in the water table of the action? We have not seen a picture of that area and the frame size marking seems (to my old eyes) to be 00. Descriptions of orders in the Parker order books for 28 gauges usually say from nothing to "light as possible". Actual guns are usually six pounds or a very few ounces less. There doesn't seem to be a lot of difference in 0 frame and 00 frame in standard field guns. Read the article on early 28 gauges in the Parker Pages. I believe the author was Dave Suponski. Some of the research material for that article came from the Parker records, and some came from other sources.

[Wayne Dow]

Thank you, Bill. I'm getting a much-needed lesson from very generous and knowledgable members on this site, as I'd hoped. The attached photos show the 00 frame and the water table.

This gun weighs 2-2 + 2-14 + 6 = 5-6, assuming my kitchen scale is accurate, which I believe it is.

I'll read Dave Suponski's article. Thank you for the lead.