A-1 Special or BHE Steel Shot Specials?

[George M. Purtill Member #28]

Thanks Robin
Is this personal knowledge or is that written somewhere and if so by whom?

[Bindlestiff]

This is knowledge expressed on this forum which I saved in the grades page. I suppose you could do a search and see who posted it but as I remember it was from a person that was involved with the order of these guns.

[John Allen]

It was me.All of what he said is correct.I did the development work on the steel shot special when I worked for the Jaeger division of Dunns.We found that steel shot could pass throough up to .020" of constriction without stressing the barrels.Also the slightly longer leads to the chokes helped with large shot sizes.All of the other 12 gauge 28" barrels at the time were mod and full choked and the steel loads at the time would damage them.

[Bindlestiff]

Originally Posted by John Allen

It was me.All of what he said is correct.I did the development work on the steel shot special when I worked for the Jaeger division of Dunns.We found that steel shot could pass through up to .020" of constriction without stressing the barrels.Also the slightly longer leads to the chokes helped with large shot sizes.All of the other 12 gauge 28" barrels at the time were mod and full choked and the steel loads at the time would damage them.

Thanks! As I read threads over the years, when I see something that is of interest and comes from seemingly expert knowledge, I try to encapsulate it and preserve it in our web page for easy access to all. This is an example of that process but I couldn't begin to remember who provided the information.

I had a similar issue with the production numbers on Parker Reproduction guns. I was asked about numbers I put in the Grades web page but in that case I did know that I "collected" those numbers from several separate posts and various documents and I had no hope of explaining where they came from to support their validity. In the end, I removed them because I couldn't defend them.

My problem is I don't remember where I learned whatever it is I save to a web page in the past and when someone questions its value, I don't know how to respond. I this case, thank you for speaking up! It helps a lot!

[Wild Skies]

Originally Posted by Robin Lewis

~~snip~~ I had a similar issue with the production numbers on Parker Reproduction guns. I was asked about numbers I put in the Grades web page but in that case I did know that I "collected" those numbers from several separate posts and various documents and I had no hope of explaining where they came from to support their validity. In the end, I removed them because I couldn't defend them. ~~snip~~

It's unfortunate for those that do not own The Parker Story and with an interest in Parker Reproductions do not have the production numbers at their disposal anymore. I had found the production chart spawned interest and served as a conduit for expanding our knowledge of these wonderful guns, perhaps others have as well. Since we do not have factory records of Parker Reproductions available to us we learn through discussion and info gathered here and elsewhere. We learned a few things concerning the production figures of Parker Reproductions through discussion in the "Rare BHE .410 4/0-frame sighting" thread on this forum. For example, I had posted the following on pg. 10 of that thread:


"There are several things we have learned and found concerning Parker Reproductions in this thread:

1. We now know and have seen pics of at least two 0000-frame BHE .410s produced that have DHE-style engraving. I believe everyone would have to agree that this is rare, odd and unusual -- even in the world of Parkers.

2. The Parker Reproduction Production Chart on the Parker Grades page of this website states that there were 9 BHE .410s built. In this thread we have seen pics of B .410-0045 and B .410-0052 (both of these happen to be built on 4/0 frames). It appears from these serial numbers that there were at least 52 built -- and there's probably more out there. The Sisley article corroborates these findings.

3. There are no BHE .410/28 sets mentioned in the Production Chart. We now know there is one and only one BHE .410/28 set ever produced. This is documented by a copy of a type-written letter by J.T. Skeuse, the President of Parker Reproductions to Leslie Blumberg.

Given the above, I respectfully request that the Production Chart be revised and updated to show these Parker Repros found. And going forward, as additional information comes to light, further revisions be made at that time."

[TroutSetter]

I think Robin and Greg both make valid arguments. In most cases, garbage in = garbage out. Incorrect data tends to favor an output unlikely to be informative. However, the current accumulated knowledge is all that is available and by default becomes an informative starting point that potentially advances further discovery. Access to tbat knowledge shouldn't be restricted. I propose a compromise: post the production number estimates with a bold disclaimer that the data is subject to continuous revision as knowledge improves or otherwise validated by records (if ever). A mechanism for tracking the source of data revisions would help with credibility.

[Dean Romig]

To insert a caveat allowing for the possibility of such errata would seem to cover it.






.

[Bindlestiff]

The information found in the FAQ and in the Grades area are not just from one source. Most are a collection of data that is the result of back and forth discussions on some forum thread or another. That along with information from our collection of various Parker books; I for one am not about to try to index/reference/catalog all that in our web pages.

The Steel Shot information came from a good discussion in a single thread and I felt comfortable with it's accuracy and could point to one location for anyone questioning it; just search the forum.

The Parker Reproduction production numbers were another issue altogether. I did feel that the data was valid BUT it was collected from comments on this forum by our Mr. Skeuse and other reliable old-timers, along with old magazine interviews, original corporate advertising and the Parker Story; all of which I felt were reliable. The numbers became in question based on input that a serial number on a gun fell outside the data I collected, that made me believe my numbers could be in error. I tried to get verification via contact to the only real person that might know the facts but never had a response. Therefor, I felt that the numbers should be removed rather than allow these possible inaccurate information to become "the facts".

As long as I'm doing this, you can assume I will always strive for the most accurate information, presented in the clearest terms that I can possible give you. If I become convinced something is wrong, I'll fix it if I can or remove it to avoid confusion. But, if you expect me to index or footnote sources, just keep on expecting because it isn't going to happen.

[Bindlestiff]

BTW - The productions numbers were not lost when I deleted them, they can still be found in a forum thread but they are not on a web page that would make them seem more official than they should. So, if you want those numbers they are still available, just not from a single web page.

[Dean Romig]

Robin, Nobody suggested that you "index/reference/catalog" anything but only insert a single line caveat that "This is the most up-to-date information that we have at this time and it is subject to change from time to time as newer information comes to light." at the beginning of the Parker Reproductions section on the PGCA website.






.