Parker-Hale .22 Conversion
- Thread starter mrcabinet2122
- Start date
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
I think the simplest explanation is the likeliest:
The "Belgian barrel" may have been misdirection. To my knowledge European proofhouses did and do not proof handgun components as such. The Belgian proofs were applied when the gun was whole, or when the barrel was attached to another gun, but that's unlikely.
Both the Birmingham proofs and the Belgian proofs are blued over; the gun was refinished at some point, so we have no way to establish where it was proofed first. This was more likely a Birmingham conversion by a gunmaker other than P-H that was later exported to Belgium than the reverse, which would be carrying coals to Newcastle.
And back in the 1950s or '60s, when this happened, Britain was not a C.I.P. member state, so there would have been no reciprocal recognition of proofs.
The "Belgian barrel" may have been misdirection. To my knowledge European proofhouses did and do not proof handgun components as such. The Belgian proofs were applied when the gun was whole, or when the barrel was attached to another gun, but that's unlikely.
Both the Birmingham proofs and the Belgian proofs are blued over; the gun was refinished at some point, so we have no way to establish where it was proofed first. This was more likely a Birmingham conversion by a gunmaker other than P-H that was later exported to Belgium than the reverse, which would be carrying coals to Newcastle.
And back in the 1950s or '60s, when this happened, Britain was not a C.I.P. member state, so there would have been no reciprocal recognition of proofs.
very interesting gun and work. the location of the front side is kind of odd. Could you show a picture of the recoil shield and the the hammer nose. I would love to see how they went from center fire to rim fire.
OP
mrcabinet2122
Member
Absalom, your idea is certainly plausible and could be exactly what happened. It sure would be nice if this thing could talk and give us its story, instead of the little snippets of information.
Here are photos of the bushing and hammer. Very creative work!
Here are photos of the bushing and hammer. Very creative work!
Attachments
OP
mrcabinet2122
Member
I took it to the range yesterday, primarily to function test and to see how my sight blade worked out. I will say that it functioned flawlessly! I need to do some adjustments to the rear sight blade before I post any target pictures though. My guesstimate was a bit off, lol.
Can you show us a picture of the sight blade out of the sight body?
OP
mrcabinet2122
Member
Good deal. That's the basic shape of a Ruger rear sight blade.
Thanks for the photos. Reworked hammer nose and a new bushing installed. Interesting work and gun.
A better use of a Victory than chopping the barrel off so there was no lug and reaming to 38 special. IMHO
A better use of a Victory than chopping the barrel off so there was no lug and reaming to 38 special. IMHO
OP
mrcabinet2122
Member
Yes it is, as well as a pre-war Smith and the old Micro sights. In fact, the sight base is reminiscent of the Micro as well.
OP
mrcabinet2122
Member
I was finally able to get the ol' girl out to the range today to at least get it sighted in with the new blade. Started out high left, but I eventually got it dialed in. This was at 45' with a wrist rest. Not K-22 accuracy, but I'm happy with it. Minute of squirrel for sure.
Attachments
charlie sherrill
Member
My brother and fellow Forum member Louisiana Joe has one that he bought for less than $200.00 many years ago. We didn't know what it was at the time. We just shot it and it did shoot very well and accurate. His was formerly a .38/200 converted to .22 cal. It has the barrel and cylinder inserts and the right side of the barrel is ground down and marked Parker Hale. It shoot as well or better than any other .22 revolvers I've ever shot. My brother has always been mean to me and won't sell it to me.
OP
mrcabinet2122
Member
Can't say I can blame him Charlie - I'm hanging on to this one too! I gave my son his grandfather's K-22 12 years ago for his 21st birthday and he won't let me have it back either.
Green Frog
Member
Every man ought to have at least one good 22 revolver to shoot, and if you're trying to talk father, son, brother, or complete stranger out of theirs... we'll all I can say is good luck. If I had an "extra" 22, I might let it go (and actually have in the past as I "traded up") but if it were the one I considered my own shooter, you'd better be ready for a struggle if you want to get it away from me!
"... from my cold, dead hands..."
Froggie
"... from my cold, dead hands..."
Froggie
Very nice work and I think you got a great deal on that one!
When I saw the front sight I thought it looked like the location the Belgians like to place theirs. I have seen Belgian copies of .44 S&W Americans with the front sight similarly located. I don't know why you would not place it at the muzzle but I guess they had their reasons!
It shoots well- that makes it all the better!
When I saw the front sight I thought it looked like the location the Belgians like to place theirs. I have seen Belgian copies of .44 S&W Americans with the front sight similarly located. I don't know why you would not place it at the muzzle but I guess they had their reasons!
It shoots well- that makes it all the better!
Similar threads
