SxS opinions

[King Cobb]

I really enjoyed his posts on the springs. I respect his opinion/expertise. I do disagree with him stating there is nothing remarkable about Classic American Shotguns, but that is my opinion and I am not offended that his differs.

Just comparing most of those old guns to what you find in most modern gun stores today tells me that they are quite remarkable.

[Dean Romig]

Right Bill - but he is commenting from a mechanical & design viewpoint, and not so much the aesthetics of American made doubles.






.

[King Cobb]

Ok, I took it as a comment on the guns as a whole not just the mechanical design. I guess it was the use of the phrase, "nothing special".

[Fishtail]

I doubt anyone ever said American doubles were particularly notable from a mechanical point of view. But not too many of us buy guns based on their mechanical attributes...or at least that criteria is about #5 on the list of things we look for.

In any assessment, a Parker is a 'highly reliable' device when compared to all guns as a population. Their MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) must be a stellar figure. That's good enough for me.

I can think of no mechanical devices with moving parts that have ever been created that can't be criticized if you try hard enough. Dewey's comments are not without merit...but why he feels the need to voice them is beyond me. I'm privileged to have lived in a time when I can own and use a Parker....I don't complain.

[Mills]

Originally Posted by greg conomos

I doubt anyone ever said American doubles were particularly notable from a mechanical point of view. But not too many of us buy guns based on their mechanical attributes...or at least that criteria is about #5 on the list of things we look for.

In any assessment, a Parker is a 'highly reliable' device when compared to all guns as a population. Their MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) must be a stellar figure. That's good enough for me.

I can think of no mechanical devices with moving parts that have ever been created that can't be criticized if you try hard enough. Dewey's comments are not without merit...but why he feels the need to voice them is beyond me. I'm privileged to have lived in a time when I can own and use a Parker....I don't complain.

Well said. I will second you there.

[Paul Harm]

I like hammer guns, and my 100+ year old Parker hammer gun still works just fine, and it's been shot close to three times a week for the last ten years. I also shoot a number of Remingtons that haven't broke. What's nice about American SxS's is that if you need a part they don't have to be handmade. Our are guns aren't as light as a European made gun, but that's fine with me. For the most part, they were made for the farmer and working man and do just fine for what they were intended for. A friend and I were at the Southern about eight years ago and he bought a English gun, a Johnson. Had the trunk open and his gun and my Parker were leaning against the back of my car. Something happened causing both guns to slide over and hit the ground. His gun hit mine and lay on top of it. He just bought it ten minutes before, and now there was a dent on those beautiful Damascus barrels. Had to kind of rub it in saying how that nice, light, English double dented and my Parker didn't have a mark on it. To each their own.

[charlie cleveland]

only thing i see that the english guns have over american guns is that they built 4 bore breach loaders and we did not...charlie

[John Allen]

One thing many people forget is that the American manufacturers did not have the protection of a proof law.Europeans could build a gun to a specific load and if the gun failed when used with any other load they were not liable.American builders had to build their guns to handle the heaviest loads available to protect themselves from liability lawsuits. That is why American guns are overbuilt and generally heavier.Also,European guns were built for aristocrats,American guns were built for average working Americans.

[Dean Romig]

Mr Allen - I wish I could give you about a dozen 'thumbs up'!






.

[Nevada Fitch]

I am new to the board and just finally bought my first Parker. But I have shot other people's Parker shotguns. I always wanted a nice Parker but I always had problems finding one in good shape that I could afford. I love shooting Parker shotguns, but I have shot L.C. Smiths a great deal more, because I was able to find them in good shape at prices I could afford.

Based on my experience with quite a few side by sides, I find that I can't really fault Dewey's opinions. It's no secret that the old British Bests were more finely engineered and have better locks on them in general. But for all of his bad mouthing of the L.C. Smith, and I can't say that he is wrong in his opinion, I have found the old Elsey, to be very reliable in general and despite the weak stocks on some guns, I have seen them hold up very well to a lot of heavy hunting loads.

I guess being a gunsmith he has seen too many basket cases regarding Smiths, and I am sure there are a lot of them, but after scouring the gunshows for the last 30yrs or so, always on the lookout for a decent side by side, I could afford, I have found a lot more Elseys in good working condition then I have Foxes, or Parkers, or even British Bests. But them I guess the key phase is "ones I could afford"