Some things I like about Lefevers. First, let me say most of mine are the post-1898 models with large cocking hook. These do not include the "Unnecessary" compensating features of the earlier models.
1st, in spite of the bad mouthing of the ball hinge joint as being only a "Cheap" making expedient it is quite precisely fit. It uses a taper in the threads so the screw becomes tight when in the final position to prevent it vibrating loose & still allow enough adjustment to compensate for moderate wear.
2nd the mainsprings are checked just before striking the firing pins with the inertia of the hammer carrying on to fir the gun. Firing pins thus never stick, even on a well-used gun to hinder opening.
3rd the gun can be taken down with hammers at either full cock or fired position, it matters not a whit which.
4th disassembly & reassembly is about as you will find on any hammerless double, bar none. the hammers can be removed & replaced without even taking out the mainsprings. To do this of course the hammers will need to be down in the fired position. The mainsprings themselves can be easily set out or replaced with very little compression required.
What the Parker gains in the fit & finish, which as I stated earlier, in my opinion, was a necessity to make the Rube Goldberg design work, the Lefever more than makes up in design & pure workable simplicity.
The model 21 gained its reputation on two factors, first, it was made of modern steels which are stronger than used on most older doubles. 2nd was "Brand Name" value. Offhand I cannot think of a single design element which had not been previously used.
