|
04-16-2012, 09:22 PM | #13 | ||||||
|
That would be great!
|
||||||
04-16-2012, 09:24 PM | #14 | ||||||
|
If you want to resize the picture check this out...... Shows how to get a picture that is to large to upload resized so you can load.
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Robin Lewis For Your Post: |
04-17-2012, 05:46 AM | #15 | ||||||
|
Dimensions are an important criteria especially in a shooter grade (vs. collectable). Often we see guns for sale and the ad states "good" or "modern" dimensions, which is considered a plus. Seems shooters may have had a different style 100 years ago and many guns reflect that. The guns you mentioned have more drop than I like and when I see a gun with lots of drop it's factor in my decision. Sometimes it's too discouraging like the H&R 10ga grade 3, 2" by 3 1/4", I posted about the other day here, other times I factor in the $130-$150 more it will cost for a gunsmith to bend the stock (if it will move enough). Too much drop cause me to "float" my head on the stock to see the proper bead/rib picture, and that is not good and leads to more misses. Sometimes shooters compensate by attaching a neoprene or leather comb riser on the stock. in rare occasions the original stock is set aside and new one is custom built to the new owners specs (very pricey). Lots of drop affects value in the sense fewer people will be interested, it is a legitimate concern. The question is how much in terms of price.
|
||||||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pete Lester For Your Post: |
04-17-2012, 08:06 AM | #16 | |||||||
|
Quote:
The e-mail link looks like this: http://s269.photobucket.com/albums/j...raightgrip.jpg |
|||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Pete Lester For Your Post: |
04-17-2012, 08:11 AM | #17 | ||||||
|
Sam I have older guns that letter with 4 to 4-1/2 in of drop, back then it was what the buyer wanted to a certain extent, Parker would not do some things if there was danger involved to persons or the integrity of the gun!
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to Gary Carmichael Sr For Your Post: |
04-17-2012, 11:13 AM | #18 | ||||||
|
I posted these on the AHFCA web site sometime back, so had them available in photobucket --
I have a theory, that a lot of the guns that were built with what we consider "good dimensions" today, have been shot a lot, while these old guns with excessive drop kicked the original owners in the cheek so bad that they were shot very little, and remain for us today. |
||||||
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Dave Noreen For Your Post: |
04-17-2012, 10:56 PM | #19 | ||||||
|
1.5" and 2.5" fits be perfect as well. I think that is a fairly common dimension for a lot of people now a days. It seems like 3" drops were pretty common in Parker's day, especially early on.
Actually, the comb dimension is in some ways more important. Since you place your cheek closer to the comb. I have had shotguns with 1.5" and 3" drops feel pretty nice.
__________________
B. Dudley |
||||||
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Brian Dudley For Your Post: |
04-17-2012, 11:07 PM | #20 | ||||||
|
I have a 4 frame that had 4 inches of drop. My head floated all over that stock and I shot the worst ever. You can have all of them 4 inchers you want. Not me.
|
||||||
The Following User Says Thank You to David Holes For Your Post: |
Tags |
comb, drop, heel, stock |
|
|