Chambers or L&R

[LFord]

I am having a English style fowler built and the maker is now offering the option of using Chambers locks instead of the standard L & R locks. The ones that I am looking at are the L & R Queen Anne and the Chambers Colonial Virginia and Round Faced English. I think that any of the three would be suitable for a 1760's style fowler but if any one can give me some input on that I would appreciate it. My other question concerns the quality between the two makers, is it worth the money to drop a few extra bucks on the Chambers?

 

[rich pierce]

Chambers has more glam appeal and if it works for the style of gun you want and can afford it, resale could be easier because of the perception that Chambers locks are better. There may be very little practical difference in the quality and performance of some Chambers and L&R models of similar styling. Right now there are very few poor locks out there compared to what was available in the 70's. The Siler got such good reputation in part because others were often not up to snuff.

I'd also consider the Davis English lock which has nice styling if you are interested in an early English styled lock with no pan bridle.

If there's no way you'll ever sell or trade this gun, the choice will come down to personal preference. There's no "consumer reports reliability data" on any of these parts- it goes by reputation.

 

[B.Habermehl]

I have had verry good results with my Chambers English and Virginia locks. I have not used the L&R round face as yet. The new Davis lock is from the one example I have a keeper too. My choice if I were building the gun for myself wound be either the Chambers Or the Davis depending on the size of the breech of the barrel I was using. The Davis is a bit smaller than the Chambers locks and uses the same size flint as a large siler lock. Both of the Chambers locks use 7/8 flints. All three locks have worked excellently for me.
BJH

 

I have a fowler mounted with the L&R Queen Anne lock and a rifle with the Chambers Early Virginia round faced lock. Both of these locks work fine. Many people will tell you that Chambers locks are better, and maybe they are over the long run--I don't know--but I have no complaints about either lock. Both companies are reputable and stand by their products.

 

IMO both locks will work. However, a Ford Escort and a Mercedes will both get you to the store and back also. In my experience, the workmanship, fit and finish are considerably better on a chambers than an L&R. Don't get me wrong, the L&R is a fine lock and will work well, the chambers is just a better lock. I have no problem useing an L&R. I've used several (not the one your refering to) and I've been able to get all of them to work well although some have required some serious tuning. Given a choice, I will ALWAYS take the chambers over an L&R. It's not hype, chambers locks are just put together better.

Cody

 

[Birddog6]

The Chambers is the best lock in my book & the best warranty...... Chambers Locks from the Chambers shop have a Lifetime Warranty on all parts.....

Here is a good example on their business techniques:

I bought a Chambers Lock from a guy that was selling all of his rifle parts. (didn't buy it from Chambers myself, the guy selling the parts did) It was a Chambers Golden Age lock & when I got it, I was a lil concerned with how the mainspring sat on the shoe of the tumbler.
So I took it to me to Friendship and showed it to Jim Chambers & Jim looked at it & said "Yes, it is a lil close, but it will not come off." Then he just smiled & opened a drawer & picked up 3 locks & said "Keith, pick out lock you like & insure it is to your liking & we will call it even." OK ? I said Sure & that is how it went.....

Now.... how could a guy be any easier or better to deal with ?

Several years ago I was taking a lock apart & got in a hurry & broke a piece out of the tumbler shaft where the cock screw goes into the tumbler. I called Jim & told him what happened & I told him it was not a part failure, but my fault & I want to buy a new tumbler.. He said I will mail you a new tumbler in the morning, no charge. My locks have a Lifetime Warranty on them. 3 days later I got the tumbler & was in business that afternoon.

Needless to say, I use a Chambers lock whenever I possibly can........

:thumbsup:

 

[CrackStock]

I really like my L&R Queen Anne lock. I do not have a Chambers .

CS

 

[Tom Curran]

I like the fit and polish work inside the Chambers better. I have used both L&R and Davis locks, but I have to say,in my experience, the Chambers come out on top. The screw holes are tapped true, bearing holes for the tumbler line up in the bridle properly, and the fit of the tumbler in the lockplate is excellent. The screws themselves are beautifully turned and robust, with good fits in their holes.

Almost all the locks available today are good, but you'll be tinkering and tuning less with a Chambers. It's all about attention to details.

 

[LRB]

NO contest. Chambers! Finished better, sparks better, designed better. Much less work to tune one if desired. I have used both in the round face. Chambers English is one of the best sparkers I have ever seen.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I've got a few Jim Chambers locks and I swear by them. Hundreds if not thousnds of shots with no problems. I do have an L&R lock and it's pretty good, but not even close to my Chambers locks. The Chambers locks are faster, and they don't eat flints. They're good folks to deal with, too. All in all, a class act.

 

[fho]

I think that the L&R Locks are a little better because they have a stirrup on the tumbler ,less friction. L&R also redesign there locks for faster lock time. :imo:
Olie

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Stirrups aren't historically correct for a lot of early locks. And the early style L&R locks do not use a stirrup because it would be historically inappropriate. Truthfully, I tend to think they are an unnecessary complication and a weak link in the lock work. I have an early Ron Long percussion lock and a fine Schillinger lock, both percussion and both with stirrups. They seem to be fine, but I do worry about those little links. I never worry about my Chambers locks because they are so well made and reliable. And, in the end, I think that's much more important than an alleged improvement--at least for me. And if a stirrup lock is faster, I can't tell the difference. A properly polished and maintained standard lock is plenty fast enough. Still, to each his own.

 

Agreed!

I have built several Siler/Chambers locks from kits, and even in my ineptness produced locks that were superior to the L&R and Davis products I have used that were factory tuned!

:front:

 

[LFord]

I would like to thank everyone for the info and decided to go with the Chambers English. I like the lines of the lock better and it seems to be well thought of. I called the builder and since he hadn't started working on it yet the change was no problem. The price difference was $35 which isn't much when compared to the price of the gun overall. You should hear back from me in about 5 months when I start working on the stock finish. I haven't done much work with walnut and I have never finished a gun stock so I will have a few questions at that point. :thanks:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I have a Chambers round-faced English on a favorite rifle, and it has served me well. Thousands of rounds and it is still like new. I think you made a great choice.

 

[Treerat]

I can't say how an L&R would hold up as I have never used one But the ones that I have looked at feel a lot rougher(gritty) than Chambers locks. I just picked up a Colonial Virginia at the spring shoot. I think you made a good choice.