doublegunshop.com - home Forums Active Threads

Outstanding! Brought back to life!

Thanks Gil. This is such a no-brainer subject. Your post gives great clarity to doing what anyone with an ounce of double gun care should know from day one.
JR

Thanks for replying to my question Stan, most guys would of had a ''wise'' come back answer, You are a ''True Gentleman''.

Dirty Harry

Perry, don't try to jump ahead of me. "My check is in the mail."

The "better" wood sets will fit on the budget style guns OK- I set up an Essential 685 for my grown daughter to shoot at our cow pasture events. She shoots it real good often butt-kickin on the Annie Oakley line! I think I'm in that gun $750?

Although not in the same vein, but a neat Historical Meffert someone is getting for a deal:

https://www.gunsinternational.com/g...-underlever-shotgun.cfm?gun_id=103331373



Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Sure would like to see that pic, James. I'm a big fan of ebony forend inlays.

If I pick up the phone I’ve usually decided I want it, and the price is fair. I don’t buy much, I need to sell some things, but, I’m sure as hell not going to argue over 3-5%.

Best,
Ted

like tits on der bull...

Lloyd: bow, scrape, ginuflect...

you was blessed on dat day...

times five...

You sure do excellent work. I'll say that much. Good luck!!

This is an artist's print, produced by a photograph company, the print has a signature but it is also signed by hand in pencil.

greener, I PM you

I am fortunate to be the custodian of a „ATM“ French version:

https://doublegunshop.com/forums/ub...p;Board=1&main=40742&type=thread

And actually, it is contained in a Cabela's Travel Case that I reach for 1st when I plan to hunt..... I just wish I would take the time to have the sling swivel screw re-installed in the stock.



Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

Ted, I also have no dog in this fight. I have never owned a Parker repro, and probably never will... unless one pops up at a give-away price... never say never.

So the only photo we have to verify a Parker repro with a separated barrel lug was taken by you. That seems rather odd, if this is anything close to a common or widespread problem. Especially in a time where virtually every cell phone has a camera. If it was commonly happening, people like the Preacher would be collecting every photo they could find, and hysterically posting them on multiple firearms forums dozens of times. And for all of the panic over small bore Ithaca Flues frame cracking, we still don't see evidence of even a dozen different guns... out of nearly a quarter million made. And it appears the few that actually did crack at the breech/water table juncture... were severely abused.

That's why I refuse to rush to judgement about these Parkers. I went for years believing that small bore Flues frames were prone to cracking in normal use. That turned out to be bullshit, like many things posted on the internet.

There may be 18 other broken Parker repros out there... or there may be many more... with other potential failures on unfired guns. All anyone needs to change my mind is some verifiable proof.

I have already noted that the braze joint in your photo was indeed a bad one. I see roughly 50% wetting between the two mating surfaces. Some of the bare spots are on the barrels, and some are on the lug.

What we cannot know from a photo is the braze material that was used... the temperature of the parts during brazing... the flux used... the fit of the pieces being mated together... the clamping stability and pressure... contamination of the surfaces... the skill of the person who did it... etc. Analysis by a good metallurgist could tell us a lot. We also don't know what happened at the point of failure. For all we know, the barrels got launched from the gun after being fired with nuclear reloads assembled by the Nutty Professor.

The difference between repairing a braze joint vs. a solder joint lies mainly in the materials used... and an increase in temperature for brazing. Brazing happens at greater than 850° F. and solder less than 840°F. Shotgun barrel rib soldering is normally done with alloys that melt around 400-450° F. Brazing is normally stronger than soldering. But both must be done right.

Very sorry to hear that. I used to visit the NRA Museum in Fairfax, VA, when I lived there. It is very impressive. Serving as the director there would be no small task. May Phil rest in peace.

Any fotos?

Also, I guess it would cost about $800 to export & import into the U.S. of A.?


Hochachtungsvoll,

Raimey
rse

I used to talk to Tony years ago when he came to the National Gun Day Gun Show in Louisville, Kentucky. But I guess he doesn't come anymore. That was when he was first starting the Winchester project. I was buying 21s like crazy back then. Hopefully I will get up there again sometime. The place sounds fascinating. I loved that area of the country when I went up there. Good luck.

This gun is in very good mechanical condition and locks up very tight. That is good. I have done a lot of stock work, so the wood doesn't really scare me. It's certainly shootable as is but at least needs some wood clean up to at least be respectable. I'm not disappointed with it. I knew what I was getting.
Bruce

Have you checked out Tristar, GI has listings for both O/U and SxS guns in 28ga. within your budget?

For all interested, a new screw is on its way back. I will post a picture (with Larry's help) when I have it.

I found an engraver. I mentioned that a while ago.
Ill post photos once its all done.

This gun is in Holt's spring 2026 sale; attractive gun for an attractive price. It is posted for two reasons which confirm some previous conclusions:

1). SN 22127 can be firmly dated to mid 1879. However it has a Purdey patent 1104 top lever PUN 6777. The Purdey patent expired in May 1877. One plausible reason to have a Purdey PUN on this late serial numbered gun were if the action were paid for before 1877 and then just sat on the shelf awaiting a buyer. There are multiple other TL Reilly's from the time period using the Purdey patent without a PUN. (The Scott Spindle patent was still active until October 1879 - But it would have been stamped "Scott spindle WMS pat 2752" with a different PUN as is the case on Reilly SN 21839 and 21337).

2) It is cylinder bore in both barrels. Holt's has not confirmed this but presumably there is no "NOT FOR BALL" stamped on the barrel flats because of this.

https://www.holtsauctioneers.com/as...++1801+&refno=++242788&saletype=
E.M. REILLY & CO. 
A 12-BORE TOPLEVER HAMMERGUN, serial no. 22127, 
for 1879, 30in. black powder only bold damascus barrels, the rib engraved 'E.M. REILLY & CO. NEW OXFORD STREET. LONDON & RUE SCRIBE. PARIS', 2 1/2in. chambers, bored approx. true cyl. in both, some pitting, elongated treble-grip rounded bar action, carved percussion fences, rebounding sidelocks with dolphin hammers, J. Purdey patent locking bolt, patent no. 1104 of 2nd May 1863, use number 6777, fine acanthus scroll engraving with varied ornate bordering, brushed and blued finish overall, triggerplate with pin, 14 1/2in. stock with ink enhanced figuring, chequered horn buttplate, fore-end with Scott 1873 patent 'key' fastener, weight 6lb. 14oz. 


Carcano,
I do not have the RWS "Schoenzeitladung" either but do have some ca.1940 DWM versions of similar loads (not the cartridges, but the data). All the 6.5mm cartridges are loaded the same. The 6.5x52R is not listed but the ballistically similar 6.5x58R is. The 6.5x58R is shown as being loaded with 3.3-gram bullet with 0.85 grams of Tr.target P. 1912 powder for a V25 of 648 m/s and E25 of 70kgm, from a 60cm barrel. It is interesting to note that the other 6.5mm cartridges used 1,00 to 1,05 grams of the same powder to produce the same velocity with the same bullet. DWM also had "Schoenzeitladung" for 7mm and 8mm cartridges, which they called "Cartridges for use during the closed season".
Until the 1939 proof law, the bore (not groove or bullet) diameter (pre-1912) or bore diameter and case length (post 1912) did not represent the nominal cartridge but represented actual dimensions (within tolerances) of bore diameter and case length only. Case diameter, shape, or presence of a rim are not represented. Consequently, any set of proof marks may be found on rifles chambered for different nominal calibers. one example of this would be 7,8/57 which could be found on rifles chambered for 8x57I, 8x57IR, 8x57R/360, or 8.25x57R Hagen nominal cartridges. After implementation of the 1939 proof law, it was required that the name the cartridge was normally called by was marked in a visible place on the rifle. This helped clear up the prior confusion.
Mike

so,in conclusion?