doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Parkers are they truely...............?

Right on, Bill! Because I'm opinionated, I'd look with greater favour on the Parker owner in the case above for buying the gun and not the name, particularly if I encountered both of those guns afield or in a blind in North America.

Comparing a Parker, of any grade, to a Purdey is like comparing a Casio to a Rolex. If you don�t get it, you never will. Sure they both keep time, in fact, the Casio probably keeps better time than the Rolex and with much less maintenance but the Rolex�s quality, fit, finish, history, style, ergonomics, etc makes it what it is. Liken it to a new Toyota Carolla vs. a Aston Martin Db5. They both do virtually the same thing, the Toyota is probably hands down the cheaper, and much more sensible car...but the Aston, well, it�s an Aston.

If you haven�t ever seen a Purdey with its stock removed, just the inletting alone is light years ahead in overall quality over ANY Parker ever made. A lot of people don�t understand what internal finish means. It�s not just the polishing of parts. It includes shaping and fitting of the parts. Many times lock and action parts were shaped and styled in certain ways....just because it was a sign of quality and skill level. Gunmakers knew that hardly any customer would ever look inside the gun, and most customers would probably care less how the action bits were shaped up....but it mattered to the gunmaker. Tumblers are an example....most tumblers in English guns will be contoured and rounded off, shaped up and aesthetically pleasing to the eye...they certainly could�ve left them blocky with edges, wouldn�t have effected the function in the least....but they didn�t. You have to see and and understand what the gunmaker did just because they could and wanted to and because that�s how they insisted their guns be made. That�s the difference.
No, the bird getting killed and clay getting broken isn�t going to know the difference, and if that�s how you think about guns.....you�ve missed the entire point of this hobby �fine guns �. That�s the kind of argument someone who knows nothing about fine guns would use.

What that guy said.

Best,
Ted

I�m going to add that the American version of the English Purdey was, in fact, the English Purdey. They were available in the new world, assuming your pockets were deep enough.

As an aside, I have never seen a Purdey with a bolt through the head of the stock. I�ve lost count of how many times I�ve seen Parker�s repaired that way.

The mystique is a mystery.

Best,
Ted

Purdey has a firm grasp of the gold ring in the English market. Parker has the same reputation among American guns. Neither are always the actual best of the market...Geo

Purdey inletting courtesy of C.J. Opacak



Remington era 20g Parker with the "dumb bell" (for a reason) insert courtesy of Dean Romig

Might just be me Dr. Drew, but I don't view sidelocks as being superior to boxlock designs. Opposite in fact...Geo

Huh? Where�d he say or allude to that? Did I miss it? If the pic he posted shows anything....it absolutely proves my point of a gunmaker going way above and beyond what is required to make a gun just work. The Parker stock is inletted just enough to allow the gun to work...which is fine, nothing wrong with that...but the Purdey inletting...that�s art, and way above and beyond what is simply required to make the gun function.

Ted, sidelocks begin life with a bolt through the stock and the lockplates act as reinforcing to that part of the stock. That�s one of the main reasons you�ll seldom see a Lefever head split.

makes sense...but how to explain why so many lc smith brand side lock guns have cracked stocks at the head...