A look at two wheellocks

[TobJohn]

I have the privilege to examine two almost identical wheellocks, thanks to @rickystl’s generous loan and a conveniently timed auction. I thought it would be interesting to compare and contrast them.

Mine, lock 1, is on the top, with rick’s, lock 2, on the bottom.

They are both most likely from southern Germany, or possibly northern Italy, from around 1580-1600.

Lock 1 is about 10% larger in most dimensions.

Lock 1 has a much simpler spring, attached towards the rear of the lock, holding the pan cover in position. Lock 2 has a more paddle shaped spring, attached towards the front of the lock.

 

[TobJohn]

The only flintlock I own is a wall gun lock, but it helped illustrate something that is hard to tell in photos of wheellocks…

That both of these wheellocks have very wide springs.

The frizzen and main spring on the wall gun lock are roughly the same width.

 

[Flint62Smoothie]

The only flintlock I own is a wall gun lock …

I see a problem right there … only one? I didn’t realize that was such a thing …

 

[TobJohn]

I see a problem right there … only one? I didn’t realize that was such a thing …

They are far too efficient and convenient to be interesting

 

[TobJohn]

These two locks have almost identical swirling decoration. What is even more interesting is that this seems to be a very widespread and consistent decoration for locks around 1600.

hjullås-luntlås

Most bizarre is that these guns all have different proof/maker marks, or at least different locations where they could have been, so it seems like these locks did not come from the same shop, yet they all are decorated the same.

 

[TobJohn]

Even their pan covers looks like they were made to the same design

 

[TobJohn]

I’ve made some observations that could be useful for someone trying to make their own wheellock. The first is that the claw of the spring and chain in this type of wheellock slot into the bridle:

(on the second lock, the mainspring is shifted about 1cm out of alignment)

 

[PhDBrewer]

Ya mean 1mm?
It appears that the spring is further away from the lock plate.

 

[TobJohn]

Ya mean 1mm?
It appears that the spring is further away from the lock plate.

Sorry, the image did not show what I meant.
This shows how the spring is shifted back:

It is pulling the chain back, so that it doesn’t fit in the slot in the bridle

 

[Flint62Smoothie]

With the Guild industry in place ... it is not possible that dogs et al were all made in one shop, as were other 'piece parts', that were then assembled by the (accomplished) wheellock maker who then applied their maker's mark to the lockplate?

This is essentially how the English Board of Ordinance worked in later years ...

 

[TobJohn]

With the Guild industry in place ... it is not possible that dogs et al were all made in one shop, as were other 'piece parts', that were then assembled by the (accomplished) wheellock maker who then applied their maker's mark to the lockplate?

This is essentially how the English Board of Ordinance worked in later years ...

That’s along the lines of what I was thinking. They could have one shop doing the rough forgings, one doing the filing, and then one doing the engraving. It could also explain why there are bigger structural differences between locks, while identical decoration. The two locks I am examining have different wheel retainers and a slightly different structure to how the dogs screw into the internal bits. Some client could have asked for something like “wheellocks with two dogs in the Italian style” and these were produced to match it, with different forging suppliers.

 

[Sam squanch]

If you were that talented to make a wheel lock, I’m sure a lot of rich guys were after you to re locate for them too. Maybe the same guys moved around a lot to get a better salary. The swirly marks maybe were a fad? I know- the apprentices were given swirly’s in the chamber pot as a rite of passage……

 

[rickystl]

The one feature that appears likely is that both locks were made during the same time frame. The internal working parts, and their assembly in both locks look close enough to each other to have been considered the current philosophy in building wheellock locks at that time. As well, the small swirl decoration may have simply been in vogue at the time. To me, both locks have more similarities than not.

Rick

 

[TobJohn]

The one feature that appears likely is that both locks were made during the same time frame. The internal working parts, and their assembly in both locks look close enough to each other to have been considered the current philosophy in building wheellock locks at that time. As well, the small swirl decoration may have simply been in vogue at the time. To me, both locks have more similarities than not.

Rick

Agreed. I wonder if there was some system of templates, or pattern models, that shops used at the time?

 

[rickystl]

Agreed. I wonder if there was some system of templates, or pattern models, that shops used at the time?

Hmmm. Good question. Interchangeability of parts had not evolved yet. And parts were forged rather than cast. Since all work was done by hand, making parts larger versus smaller would likely have been easier. This may also be the reason you see a wheellock pistol with a lock that looks larger than necessary. Forging, grinding, and filing small parts would have been time consuming. Still, you would think that with the complicated mechanism of the wheellock, lock makers would have kept at least some sort of patterns to use in building future locks.

Rick

 

[TobJohn]

The method of construction is a good segue for the next observation. Unlike later flintlocks, which used open die forging to make the upper edge of the lock plate, that juts out on the inside around the powder pan, both these wheellocks have their equivalent part of the lock made out of three separate sections:

(Rick’s lock/lock 2)
A: the guide for the pan cover and it’s arm
B: the pan
C: I’m not actually sure?

Part A is L shaped, attaching to the lock plate on one end with a screw and then providing a channel for the pan covers arm to travel. On both locks, it shares the same screw with the front dog:

(TobJohn’s lock/lock 1)

Part B is attached with 2 screws on the front. @Flint62Smoothie recently made a thread explaining the how and why for that design: Forming the powder pan on an original wheellock

Part C is a small piece that is dovetailed to the lock plate, which Rick’s Lock/Lock 2 conveniently has visible:

 

[Sam squanch]

Those old smiths may not have needed patterns. Probably they had done that work for so long it was second nature to them.

 

[PhDBrewer]

Part "C" might be a cover / filler because the barrel is up against that side and that pan is not very long. Maybe originally it was not there and loss of wood next to the tang made it necessary. It would most likely keep powder out or sparks, or both.
Just a WAG...
BillyB

 

[TobJohn]

Part "C" might be a cover / filler because the barrel is up against that side and that pan is not very long. Maybe originally it was not there and loss of wood next to the tang made it necessary. It would most likely keep powder out or sparks, or both.
Just a WAG...
BillyB

Some sort of filler makes sense. They both have it, so I assume it was originally part of the lock

 

[TobJohn]

Those old smiths may not have needed patterns. Probably they had done that work for so long it was second nature to them.

That’s a good point. I wonder what the lock to lock consistency from the same workshop was.