Saw some Parker Pipes today; I know it's related to Dunhill, but that doesn't necessarily mean quality. Thoughts, everyone?
Parker Pipe
- Thread starter sparrowhawk
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
I just sold a Parker of London Jockey Club pipe on ebay. When I smoked it, it was a very good pipe and a great smoking pipe. Definitely a quality pipe. Originally Parker was formed in 1922 by Alfred Dunhill for his Dunhill failings (seconds). In 1967 Parker was merged with Hardcastle and Parker became their own line of pipes. If the pipe is pre 1967 then its most likely a Dunhill second. After 1967 its a stand alone Parker. With the attention to detail that Dunhill had with his namesake line of pipes, I can't imagine his other line of pipes, Parker/Hardcastle, wouldn't be held to similar standards.
The whole Dunhill second fantasy has been worked to death. Parkers "by Dunhill," Hardcastles, and Britannia (sometimes associated with Dunhill in some vague way) are all good mid-grade factory pipes with much to recommend them, and Parker and Hardcastle are owned by the firm (so far as I know). But you can see by shape and finish, they are not Dunhill seconds. I have a Parker and a Britannia and both are fine smokers. I recommend them in their own right. If you want a Dunhill, buy one.
Hi all;
actually,
Mr. Mike Reschke is the Parker Man, Al. And Tony Soderman is Mr. Can, for his canadian collecting.
The Parker patent years are extraordinary pipes, btw.
actually,
Mr. Mike Reschke is the Parker Man, Al. And Tony Soderman is Mr. Can, for his canadian collecting.
The Parker patent years are extraordinary pipes, btw.
So I guess the guys at Pipedia are wrong about the history of Parker Pipes. Okay, I guess you can believe what you like, but I've never known Pipedia to be wrong, but I guess there's a first for everything. You may want to correct them if you're so certain about Parker's history since they seem to be leading people astray about those pipes and their origin.
I've bought loads of parkers over the years, not because there sold as dunhill seconds, because obviously their not, but because they are very good & cheap to buy.( here in England anyway). I've had a small Zulu on the go for years now, smokes as sweet & clean as when I first lit her up.
I understand that Pipedia is full of information provided by "volunteers," including individuals that may be "experts" on a subject. I'm also certain the website admins won't just let anyone post anything about a subject without some verification as to how the information was obtained. Even though its not a true encyclopedia of information with professional researchers, they also don't want to provide false information either if it can be prevented. If these individuals are suppose to be "experts" in the field of pipes then I tend to trust the information on the website until someone else can come along and dis-prove that information, and provide the correct information. Being that the information on the Parker page has been posted for a couple years, I know because I read it about 3 years ago when I obtained my Parker pipe, then why hasn't it been corrected if it is wrong? Pipedia has nothing to gain by claiming Parker Pipes are Dunhill seconds if in fact they're not. While not all pre 1967 Parkers were Dunhill seconds, there were many that were. The problem is that you'll never know if that pre 1967 Parker was a Dunhill second or a stand alone Parker as there was no indicator as to which it could be.
The following is part of the current pipedia entry, specifically dealing with the Parker as Dunhill seconds theory.
'It is evident through the Dunhill factory stamp logs that Parker and Dunhill were closely linked at the factory level through the 1950s, yet it was much more than a few minor flaws that distinguishing the two brands. Most Dunhill "failings" would have been graded out after the bowl turning process exposed unacceptable flaws. This was prior to stoving, curing, carving, bit work and finishing. In others words, very few Parkers would be subjected to the same rigorous processes and care as pipes destined to become Dunhills. Only those that somehow made it to the end finishing process before becoming "failings" enjoy significant Dunhill characteristics, and this likely represents very few Parker pipes.'
Doc
'It is evident through the Dunhill factory stamp logs that Parker and Dunhill were closely linked at the factory level through the 1950s, yet it was much more than a few minor flaws that distinguishing the two brands. Most Dunhill "failings" would have been graded out after the bowl turning process exposed unacceptable flaws. This was prior to stoving, curing, carving, bit work and finishing. In others words, very few Parkers would be subjected to the same rigorous processes and care as pipes destined to become Dunhills. Only those that somehow made it to the end finishing process before becoming "failings" enjoy significant Dunhill characteristics, and this likely represents very few Parker pipes.'
Doc
I have three Parker pipes in my "collection". Two are Parker Earls. I bought one new in 1989 or so and the other was an estate on eBay.
Both are fine smokers with pretty bad grain. The one I bought new developed sand pits like a teen before Prom. Nice stems. I had a Jockey Club
I bought new on eBay. Much cheaper feel, especially the stem.
I also have a pat# Apple sandblast. I would not be at all surprised if the Earl and the sandblast came
out of the Dunhill factory but it wouldn't surprise me
If they didn't either. They all get regular use except the Jockey Club, which is long gone.
Mike S.
Both are fine smokers with pretty bad grain. The one I bought new developed sand pits like a teen before Prom. Nice stems. I had a Jockey Club
I bought new on eBay. Much cheaper feel, especially the stem.
I also have a pat# Apple sandblast. I would not be at all surprised if the Earl and the sandblast came
out of the Dunhill factory but it wouldn't surprise me
If they didn't either. They all get regular use except the Jockey Club, which is long gone.
Mike S.
So you're saying that the respected Alfred Dunhill wasn't respected by the piping public of his time, and no one believed his claim and his intentions behind the opening of the Parker line of pipes. Makes sense I guess, because I've never believed the claims that a Dunhill "Factory Pipe" could be worth $500 to $900. To me that's the biggest myth in the history of pipe smoking... a $900 Dunhill is better than a $150 to $300 factory pipe of another brand. Now that's a myth.
Unfortunately, perhaps, it's not a myth that a Dunhill can be worth $900, because the market says so. And at times multiples of that. The myth, as you point out, is that it's unlikely to be a better smoker than a much cheaper pipe.
Coincidentally, I recently bought two new Parkers out of baskets, one in London, the other in Edinburgh. Both fine smokers, and above average in looks.
Coincidentally, I recently bought two new Parkers out of baskets, one in London, the other in Edinburgh. Both fine smokers, and above average in looks.
I have a nice bent Parker and it smokes really well I don't notice any outstanding quality just a nice pipe.
I've always had a soft spot for Parker's.
Big love.
The "everyman" aspect of the marque, combined with the classic understated elegance of Dunhill, just oozes appeal.
As said above,
they were always side by side...
...and Parker was very much a standalone brand,
filling the gap as it were, and expanding Dunhill's patron base --- a function the Parker marque fulfilled with utmost aplomb.
Especially the names,
Super Briar Bark is my favorite of course, but they sold pouches like Slimrip, Wyderip, or Rolltite - ashtrays under the name of Nockout, Snuffout, and Diffusalyte - and of course the infamous Baccyflap along with the Wunup ciggy case and the Magic Casket ciggy desktop box.
Those names are so infused with total Britishness,
I love 'em!!!
Getting back to the Parker/Dunhill relationship, mysteries remain as to the early formation of Parker, and questions of which factory the pipes/sundries were actually made.
The earliest addy I've seen for Parker is 20 St. Pancras Road,
circa 1924.
For 1926 I've seen 17 Hanover Square, Oxford Circus.
Then I've seen a 1932 date for 141 High Street, Notting Hill Gate which is of course part of the Dunhill-proper premises...
...but in 1955 they moved to Holland Park Avenue,
as seen on the inner flap of the PipePages catalog:
http://pipepages.com/55parkerinside.html
Of all those addresses, I'm unsure if they're related to actual manufacturing, or simply retail locations --- which begs the question, did Parker have shops all their own like the Beacon House seen in the '55 catalog?
I've never seen a pic of one, nor heard of anyone discussing such.
Dunhill "magnums" are highly valued by serious collectors, often seen as "grail pipes", and Parker had their very own version of such a grail specimen called a Giant Bark.
Richard Esserman detailed an interesting example in an old issue of The Pipe Smoker's Ephemeris, telling of an eBay auction where a 9" long with 3" tall bowl Parker Giant Bark billiard from 1926 sold for $1,500 - the year was 2004.
He also included an image from the 1926 Parker export catalog featuring a huge blasted bowl above which says;
Giant Barks.
A unique showpiece and a ready seller.
Here I will quote Esserman:
the Giant Barks are exceedingly scarce and rarely seen.
Parker even had their own distinct lines of 2nds, seen (and marketed by them) since almost the beginning, with quite a few different brands on the totem pole of price.
Here's a 1950's era example of one of them, a Drum Major, which sold last month on eBay, complete with box, for a bargain at $8.75!
So, even when it can accurately be said that Dunhill was "downstreaming" to Parker,
Parker was yet further downstreaming beyond their own brand!
But for the most part, Parker can be readily identified by very closely resembling Dunhill --- like this cigar holder, which clearly screams Dunhill...
...and this tamper too,
very very Dunhill.
and,
one cannot forget the lighters!
My personal favorite Parker lighter is this T.Q. model.
(Tall Oblique)
I'd love to have one, but an example like the specimen below usually go for a good bit.
Parker had elaborate cased pipe sets available too...
One of the most unusual Parker pipes I've seen is this one:
http://pipesmagazine.com/forums/topic/a-highly-unusual-old-froth-blowing-parker
War era pipes are very scarce and highly sought after by collectors,
here's a specimen from 1942:
http://www.thepiperack.com/blue-chip-estate-pipe-parker-super-bruyere-patent-rarest-1942-19-date-code/
Here's an old auction for a wartime pipe inwhich included a printed note in the box explaining to the buyer that due to WW2 restrictions they reget not being able to supply the standard silk pipe sock...
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-1940s-parker-super-bruyere-246251904
Parker also had quite a few different patents of their very own,
here's but one example:
https://www.google.com/patents/US2314982?dq=%22parker+pipe+company%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiGob-NqtDLAhUI7CYKHYFZDicQ6AEIHDAA
...and again, the Baccyflap is one of the alltime classics!
The earlier versions of the Baccyflap were of course marked Wunup and made of very nice mottled bakelite, but I think it's a mistake to presume that Wunup was a company unto itself, I propose that it was one of Parker's clever brand names (unless of course there is evidence of an actual company named Wunup of whom Parker bought out very early on, but I haven't seen any proff of that)...
...the Wunup ciggy case had been marketed under the Parker name from at least the early 30's.
The playful name is charming,
and also accurate, for with the case, the smoker always easily got "one up'...
After the war the Baccyflap bore the Diamond P logo and the construction material was changed to a less visually stunning plastic, but they were still quite beautiful, very neat, and highly useful!
On the same concept as the Wunup ciggy case was the Magic Casket,
as seen here:
https://www.etsy.com/listing/270778903/art-deco-the-magic-casket-bakelite?ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=magic%20casket&ref=sr_gallery_1
Parker is one of the classic great brands!
:
:
Big love.
The "everyman" aspect of the marque, combined with the classic understated elegance of Dunhill, just oozes appeal.
As said above,
they were always side by side...
filling the gap as it were, and expanding Dunhill's patron base --- a function the Parker marque fulfilled with utmost aplomb.
Especially the names,
Super Briar Bark is my favorite of course, but they sold pouches like Slimrip, Wyderip, or Rolltite - ashtrays under the name of Nockout, Snuffout, and Diffusalyte - and of course the infamous Baccyflap along with the Wunup ciggy case and the Magic Casket ciggy desktop box.
Those names are so infused with total Britishness,
I love 'em!!!
Getting back to the Parker/Dunhill relationship, mysteries remain as to the early formation of Parker, and questions of which factory the pipes/sundries were actually made.
The earliest addy I've seen for Parker is 20 St. Pancras Road,
circa 1924.
For 1926 I've seen 17 Hanover Square, Oxford Circus.
Then I've seen a 1932 date for 141 High Street, Notting Hill Gate which is of course part of the Dunhill-proper premises...
as seen on the inner flap of the PipePages catalog:
http://pipepages.com/55parkerinside.html
Of all those addresses, I'm unsure if they're related to actual manufacturing, or simply retail locations --- which begs the question, did Parker have shops all their own like the Beacon House seen in the '55 catalog?
I've never seen a pic of one, nor heard of anyone discussing such.
Dunhill "magnums" are highly valued by serious collectors, often seen as "grail pipes", and Parker had their very own version of such a grail specimen called a Giant Bark.
Richard Esserman detailed an interesting example in an old issue of The Pipe Smoker's Ephemeris, telling of an eBay auction where a 9" long with 3" tall bowl Parker Giant Bark billiard from 1926 sold for $1,500 - the year was 2004.
He also included an image from the 1926 Parker export catalog featuring a huge blasted bowl above which says;
Giant Barks.
A unique showpiece and a ready seller.
Here I will quote Esserman:
Very interesting stuff,
the Giant Barks are exceedingly scarce and rarely seen.
Parker even had their own distinct lines of 2nds, seen (and marketed by them) since almost the beginning, with quite a few different brands on the totem pole of price.
Here's a 1950's era example of one of them, a Drum Major, which sold last month on eBay, complete with box, for a bargain at $8.75!
Parker was yet further downstreaming beyond their own brand!
But for the most part, Parker can be readily identified by very closely resembling Dunhill --- like this cigar holder, which clearly screams Dunhill...
very very Dunhill.
one cannot forget the lighters!
(Tall Oblique)
I'd love to have one, but an example like the specimen below usually go for a good bit.
http://pipesmagazine.com/forums/topic/a-highly-unusual-old-froth-blowing-parker
War era pipes are very scarce and highly sought after by collectors,
here's a specimen from 1942:
http://www.thepiperack.com/blue-chip-estate-pipe-parker-super-bruyere-patent-rarest-1942-19-date-code/
Here's an old auction for a wartime pipe inwhich included a printed note in the box explaining to the buyer that due to WW2 restrictions they reget not being able to supply the standard silk pipe sock...
http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vintage-1940s-parker-super-bruyere-246251904
Parker also had quite a few different patents of their very own,
here's but one example:
https://www.google.com/patents/US2314982?dq=%22parker+pipe+company%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiGob-NqtDLAhUI7CYKHYFZDicQ6AEIHDAA
...and again, the Baccyflap is one of the alltime classics!
...the Wunup ciggy case had been marketed under the Parker name from at least the early 30's.
The playful name is charming,
and also accurate, for with the case, the smoker always easily got "one up'...
On the same concept as the Wunup ciggy case was the Magic Casket,
as seen here:
https://www.etsy.com/listing/270778903/art-deco-the-magic-casket-bakelite?ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=magic%20casket&ref=sr_gallery_1
Parker is one of the classic great brands!
:
:Nice to see you & your pictorial & informative posts againMLC. I've always passed up the times I could of bought a baccyflap. Far to easy to forget there in ones pocket, sit down & crack! Goodnight Vienna. Very pretty & practical, but too brittle to last anytime with me. I remember my old dad telling me he had one made of brass rings & soft kid leather. Now that would last, I'm forever looking for one of those on the off chance.
. This Flap is made of Aluminum, a bit pricy 85$, but wanted one for Overalls when I top pasture.
Thanks for the kind words SimonG --- I do hope that maybe one day you'll find that leather version like yer old dad had, hopefully the fates may bring one yer way!
Bradley - those Morgan baccyflaps look bulletproof fersure, I don't think there's any way it could be broke, got one on my wishlist, so glad he was able to make 'em and good to see them be well received because they are no doubt very cool!
Al - yup, too dear for me I'm afraid, although I won't lose much sleep because it'd be more of a luxury item than a practical one, but man is that slinky shape breathtaking!
Something I forgot to mention earlier,
regarding the Wunup pipe, possibly some further evidence that Wunup was a brand name and not a company unto itself,
WDC here in America marketed their own version:
http://www.smokingmetal.co.uk/pipe.php?page=472
Here's the original version:
http://www.smokingmetal.co.uk/pipe.php?page=432
Here's what the "filter pillows" looked like for those pipes;
Indeed, those "argillaceous" filter things greatly resemble the later Dunhill Dri-Way "kaolin" filter thingies...
One of my fave finds was this old '39 SuperBriarBark:
http://pipesmagazine.com/forums/topic/amazing-pad-1939-parker-briar-back-unsmoked-new-in-box
I took complete photos of the 'lil booklet and Steve Laug posted them on his blog:
http://rebornpipes.com/tag/care-of-a-parker-pipe-booklet/
...notice on page 3 the footnote makes the Wunup seem like a new thing, perhaps indicating it's arrival on the scene to the late 1930's?
I have another version of that booklet in a different colorway with the lighter/sundries supplement omitted.
I wish I could find more printed Parker ephemera, but it's hensteeth,
similar to how difficult it is to find well-preserved examples of the pre-war patent Parkers,
most you come across have been so well loved by their previous owners that they've been heavily smoked and often with the blast rubbed down quite considerably --- only further proof of what fine smokers they were!
::
Bradley - those Morgan baccyflaps look bulletproof fersure, I don't think there's any way it could be broke, got one on my wishlist, so glad he was able to make 'em and good to see them be well received because they are no doubt very cool!
Al - yup, too dear for me I'm afraid, although I won't lose much sleep because it'd be more of a luxury item than a practical one, but man is that slinky shape breathtaking!
Something I forgot to mention earlier,
regarding the Wunup pipe, possibly some further evidence that Wunup was a brand name and not a company unto itself,
WDC here in America marketed their own version:
http://www.smokingmetal.co.uk/pipe.php?page=472
Here's the original version:
http://www.smokingmetal.co.uk/pipe.php?page=432
Here's what the "filter pillows" looked like for those pipes;
http://pipesmagazine.com/forums/topic/amazing-pad-1939-parker-briar-back-unsmoked-new-in-box
I took complete photos of the 'lil booklet and Steve Laug posted them on his blog:
http://rebornpipes.com/tag/care-of-a-parker-pipe-booklet/
...notice on page 3 the footnote makes the Wunup seem like a new thing, perhaps indicating it's arrival on the scene to the late 1930's?
I have another version of that booklet in a different colorway with the lighter/sundries supplement omitted.
I wish I could find more printed Parker ephemera, but it's hensteeth,
similar to how difficult it is to find well-preserved examples of the pre-war patent Parkers,
most you come across have been so well loved by their previous owners that they've been heavily smoked and often with the blast rubbed down quite considerably --- only further proof of what fine smokers they were!
:
:- Status