I have no experience whatsoever with Crescents of any type.

Would a .410 command much of a premium at all? The gun's not in great shape, but could make a nice little shooter. No finish left on any of the metal, but no rust. Wood looks to have been refinished sometime in the past. No major dings, dents, scratches, etc. However, it is fairly loose.

What should one expect to pay for something like this? Or is this thing even worth messing with?

The Enders tradenames were Crescents built for Shapliegh Hardware (I think) in St Louis. I've had an Enders Royal Special at one time...it doubled nearly every shot. I wouldn't pay much for it if I were you...Geo

Here in western Pennsyltucky, low condition hardware store, or cheaper American, or cheaper European .410's seem to not move very quickly if priced over $350.00. I see even some priced at that level making a return trip to the next gun show. I've never owned a Crescent or any of their many variants, but for a cheaper gun, they have better lines and more graceful appearance than many other low end guns. If you can buy it cheap and find that it doubles, you can probably fix the problem. At least, in .410, it won't beat you to death if it does double.

I checked Roy's auction lists. There is one that sold for $500.

Fit and finish on these can be very different from gun to gun. I have seen a couple which had good metal to metal fit and decent wood fit and finish. Others which were so bad that they gave klunker a bad name. Without the gun in hand you need to keep a low ball price in mind. The bad ones are not worth the cost of shipping them back and you would never shoot it among friends. Just too nasty to admit that you have one. A decent one might be fun to play with, but you still get what you pay for with Crescents. They are not a small priced version of a L.C. Smith.

As with most in life, you get what you pay for it.
Crescents are no different. BUT---there is one Crescent that is far superior, if in good condition. That is the Quail Hammerless. It is a 410 with 3 inch chambers that was made a bit nicer than the run of the mill others.
These little guns are great fun and as far as quality goes, even the Klunkermeister, in his vast wisdom, placed them just under the Elsie in build and design quality amongst American side locks.
This is not supposition on my part. I have a fine, high condition one, that was the favorite dove gun of a well known outdoors writer. It has been around a long time and a great many shells have passed through it. Well cared for, it has and will give happy service for many more years.
I agree that if it be in poor condition, pass on it unless it is very cheap.
Best,
John

I gotta disagree John. The "Quail Hammerless" was on the market many years before the 3-inch .410-bore shell was introduced. My family had one was made in the days of the 2 1/2 inch shell. The gun we had was just like the one shown in my 1925 H&D Folsom catalogue. My Great Uncle Art Gustavson, a gunsmith in north Seattle, bored it out for 3-inch shells after they came out. It had the bell-shaped breechends of the barrels to mate the 20-gauge frame they were built on. I now have a Crescent "New Empire" .410-bore and the breech ends of its barrels are very heavy and straight. It puts a lot more weight between your hands then the "Quail Hammerless" did. It is a Crescent of about 1930-vintage.

In early 1930 Davis-Warner was purchased by J. Stevens Arms Company (owned and operated by Savage Arms Corp.). A Stevens memo dated May 23, 1930, announced the acquisition and the intent to resume manufacture of the Davis doubles. Another Stevens memo dated December 15, 1930 announced the purchase from H&D Folsom Arms Company of the assets of Crescent Fire Arms Company of Norwich, Connecticut. The memo went on to say that the assets of Crescent would be merged with those of Davis-Warner Arms Corporation and that the newly formed firm would be known as The Crescent-Davis Arms Corporation, Norwich, Conn. Crescent-Davis would be operated as a competitor of J. Stevens. The new firm was no more successful then its predecessors. On November 4, 1935, an order of dissolution was filed with the New York Secretary of State. So, after that the remains must have been moved to Chicopee Falls and assembled and sold off under various names. The Crescent-Davis and Springfield guns shown in the 1938 to 1941 Stevens paper I have all appear to be variations on the 311. The Springfield 311 had a casehardened receiver while the Crescent-Davis 600 and 900 had blued receivers.

So, all the true Crescent Fire Arms Co. .410-bore doubles whether "Quail Hammerless" or "New Empire" were built before the 3-inch .410-bore shell was introduced.

My friend:
My little gun is coming home (been on loan) this weekend. I will take another look to make certain, but I remember that the chamber length was stamped on the barrels and the gun's stampings show no evidence of having been built by anyone other than Crescent Fire Arms Co.
More later.
Best,
John

I've seen some early Crescent guns that weren't bad at all. A friend has a little 28 gauge double hammer gun made by them and, though it's well worn, it was a very decent arm in it's day.

Destry