Cheap import locks?

[Robert Egler]

Some things are such that a person can't tell a difference until someone points out what the difference is. That certainly was my experience with trigger pulls (in general, not just ML). Shot several guns over several years as a teen and just never really noticed a difference in the trigger pulls, smoothness, etc, until someone pointed it out. Then of course I always notice it.

 

[Captjoel]

There are gun builders and there are gun shooters. Until I got seriously bit by the building bug, I could not see any difference in most gun locks. If they made sparks or popped a cap, they were good to go. As a builder I have learned many things including some of the mysteries about steel. There ARE quality locks out there and there ARE still cheap low quality ones as well. Like everything else, it is a matter of education to learn to know the difference. When building a rifle I make sure to use only the best, highest quality parts that are available. Yes, they are expensive, but I'd be dogged danged if I put in all of the time and trouble around a CVA Lock or even a TC for that matter.

 

[ebiggs1]

I am not, nor do I want to be, a spokesperson or defender of Thompson Center but the facts are facts and the truth is the truth. Both seem to suffer here.
I think I am getting this into my somewhat challenged brain unencumbered by the thought process but for instance a digital Timex watch is more accurate and cheaper than a Rolex but since it isn't made by a Swiss watchmaker so it's cheap junk. I guess there is some logic there :hmm: ....................somewhere.

 

[ebiggs1]

Do you find it difficult or impossible that I may have a nice custom made flintlock with a Jim Chambers lock on it? :wink:

 

[Dphar]

TC is the sacred cow around this locale. To an extent it is like the brand loyalty to some auto makers. It is also, to an extent, like a guy who has only ever driven a Dodge K car getting into a Lincoln. Both will get you to the next county and beyond. But there just is no comparison.

Let a Tc fan shoot a good custom gun and most can tell the difference right off. Some honestly can't tell the difference. Some will lie cheat and steal to avoid noticing the difference.

Just human nature. Even among good locks there are noticeable differences. A lock tuned by a pro is so much better than most.

I paid $40 in 1978, for a brand new Markwell Arms 45 cal Hawken. The percussion lock interior crumbled after the 5th or 6th shot. Learned the hard way. Junk through and through.

When decent flintlocks were 40-55 bucks in 1973 there were ads for finished pistols for 19.95 in the same magazine.
This cheap stuff was REALLY scary. 30 odd years ago in examining one of the low end rifles a gunsmith here in town turned a "drum" (it was shaped like the "snail" of a patent breech but was a drum) 1/4 turn and it FELL OUT on the shop floor. 1/4 turn.... The owner had been shooting this thing and complained it misfired a lot.
:rotf: :shake: :shocked2:
The early TC Hawkens had problems with barrel failures that most people here have never heard of. But junk science and the "handloader defense" saved the company. In essence they had better lawyers.
I could detail a number of things that people here have likely never heard of or considered but its pointless.

The irony is that the magazine that had the guts to print the shortcomings and failures of the cheap MLs was run out of business for telling the truth. Was it dumb to tell the truth? Apparently from a business standpoint, yes.
But it sure was educational.

Dan

 

[Larry Pletcher]

I really didn't want to get involved in this but would like to say a word about the life of locks. One of the first flintlocks I owned was an inexpensive one. By the time I moved on to a better set up, I was on the third frizzen. I would have been on the fourth frizzen except that I had a friend half sole the frizzen with a piece of band saw blade. The sear, sear spring, and frizzen spring were all replaced. The main spring was so poorly fit that I removed it with my hands. At the end it would fall off the lock while the lock was on the gun. I could pull the lock, remove the main spring from the lock mortice, and reinstall it on the lock by hand. However, when the main spring stayed on and the frizzen wasn't worn through, I thought it shot pretty well. Was it a piece of junk? I won't say - you decide.

That was a long time ago. I've owned a number of locks since then; tested and timed many others. I have never run across a lock like that early one.

Now when I buy a production lock, I know exactly who I go to. I'm willing to pay more for better fitted parts, longer life, and sparks like mad.

The last lock I bought was a hand built one. It cost more than my first 2 production guns together. In my mind it was money well spent.

Many of you probably had much better experience with inexpensive locks than I did. Maybe mine was a lemon and the others were better - but I doubt it.

I have a friend that likes Duesenbergs while I like Model T's If I drove a Duesenberg I might hate driving my Model T. Maybe life's that way.

(The finest lock I've ever held was a Joseph Manton that I timed for Lynton McKenzie. I agree with Dan about the late English flintlocks.)

Should have stopped earlier - all this is one guy's opinion. Shoot what you like. I have no problem with that.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I had a subscription to that magazine when it stopped printing. I was mightily peeved about the fact that it was run out of business too. a year or two ago, I saw that a complete reprint of the magazines was for sale.

I have no problem with Tc percussion locks. The flinters just aren't right. Geometry could be better, they could spend 20 cents more and actually use good steel. Their warranty cuts two ways. Is it nice to have a company that stands by it's product for the most part? Sure. But wouldn't it be even better to have a product that doesn't need warranty service? After all, if it wasn't for the warranty, TC would be known as lemons.

 

[Dphar]

I had a subscription to that magazine when it stopped printing. I was mightily peeved about the fact that it was run out of business too. a year or two ago, I saw that a complete reprint of the magazines was for sale.

I have no problem with Tc percussion locks. The flinters just aren't right. Geometry could be better, they could spend 20 cents more and actually use good steel. Their warranty cuts two ways. Is it nice to have a company that stands by it's product for the most part? Sure. But wouldn't it be even better to have a product that doesn't need warranty service? After all, if it wasn't for the warranty, TC would be known as lemons.

John published a couple of volumes with some of the issues in them but many of these were lost in a fire.
They would have been in the black in 2 more issues when the bank pulled the plug.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

As I believe I indicated a lot of things were fixed over time and it was not just the Italian guns that improved. The blowups, or at least the reports, of American made MLs shutoff like flipping a switch it seemed.
We figured it was a change in barrel steel and that all the bad ones, perhaps from one exceptionally bad lot of cheap steel, had blown. When I hear of people collecting early versions of this thing I cringe yet.
I was building guns by the time the flood of mass produced guns arrived. The only store bought I ever owned was a Belgian made "Dixie Gun Works Squirrel Rifle" it was OK but spit a nipple out one day because the nipple seat was tapped too big. I was too inexperienced to know any better.
It was very accurate after it had been shot enough to remove the wire edges from the rifling and I made some great shots with it hunting squirrels, but it was not a high quality gun but it worked OK for a 17 year old. I would like to have one today just for old times sake. I could ignore the poor shaping of the stock and could fix the metal parts if I wanted to shoot it...

I don't make comments about cheap guns just "because". There is experience behind what I post.
We are dealing with firearms, malfunctions can and do kill people. They need to be held to a higher standard than a tooth brush or a table knife. Unfortunately in some cases they are not. Yet attempts to simply inform the shooting public about such things invariably result in a percentage obstinately refusing to listen and/or attacking the messenger for relating honest experiences from decades of shooting, making and gunsmithing 18th and 19th century firearms.

Its very difficult to tell people that "BP duplication" loads of IMR 3031, for example, is extremely dangerous in large capacity cartridges like 45 or 50 3 1/4". Until they blow a modern made rifle into pieces. The "phenomenon" has been known since the late 1930s by both Dupont and Phil Sharpe. But people still insist on trying it even when specifically told by the manufacturer NOT TO DO IT.
"BOOM!"
In a way its gratifying to have the guy call up and admit he did what I told him not to and the result was just what I said it would be. I found it out without blowing a gun. Then some years later was reading Phil Sharpe and found that it was well known by the time the IMR powders were marketed in the 1930s.
With BP we have a wider leeway due to the fact that BP cannot detonate as smokeless apparently can. Nor is it as prone to pressure waves as some light charge weight powders like Unique is even in "short" cases like 45-70. This rings chambers in a manner some here would not believe. But Ruger had the same problem with the loads we did so it was not just us. Over 100 separate rings in the chamber.
BP is a relatively benign propellant but can still blow off a hand or a head if something fails.
A lead ball at BP velocities is just as deadly as a 7mm mag if the lock malfunctions at just the perfect instant.
Yet people will insist that the cheapest firearms they can find are perfectly OK.
Its like having a choice between a safety feature equipped car that has been crash tested and given an excellent rating and one that is 1963 technology that is almost suicide in even a moderate crash and choosing the old technology because it works good and the buyer has never had an accident and does not need all that safety stuff. Besides the payments are 100 bucks a month less.

Dan

 

[Rifleman1776]

The early TC Hawkens had problems with barrel failures that most people here have never heard of. But junk science and the "handloader defense" saved the company. In essence they had better lawyers.
I could detail a number of things that people here have likely never heard of or considered but its pointless.

The irony is that the magazine that had the guts to print the shortcomings and failures of the cheap MLs was run out of business for telling the truth. Was it dumb to tell the truth? Apparently from a business standpoint, yes.

Yes, the early TCs did have barrel/breech problems that, at times, were quite serious. I may have been a part of the effort to awaken TC to changing their QC and customer service policies. About 1970/71 I purchased a TC 'hawken'. It had a serious gap in the barrel/breech. TC would not respond to my inquiries for help. At the time I lived near Friendship, Indiana, the home of the NMLRA. My friend Don Davis enlisted the help of Maxine Moss and several NMLRA officers and others to bombard TC with letters and phone calls of complaint. Eventually TC did respond and sent me a new barrel and letter of apology. Shortly afterwards they announced a new customer satisfaction policy and changed their manufacturing and QC procedures.
As for the magazine mentioned, it was Buckskin Report, owned and edited by John Baird. I wrote for John and had many articles in BR over the years. His business failure was only partly due to telling the truth. He suffered great expenses in a lawsuit. Right or wrong, the expenses were a big blow to him. And, because of his policies, he could not get a lot of the big name advertising. It wasn't so much attacks on him as it was lack of support. I liked John and the magazine but, truth is, he wasn't suited for that kind of enterprise. His son took over for a while but that sad effort isn't even worth a footnote.
BTW: I don't recall any real complaints with quality or performance of the TC locks. He/we, a lot of folks, were simply prejudiced against them because they used coil springs. Not 'traditional'.
BTW #2: I still have that original 'hawken' rifle. It is the basis of my 'half-breed' target rifle I posted about a couple months ago. And, using a Douglas barrel, I smoked the guys at a big shoot in the 100 yard benchrest matches with it. That's using the original lock with -horrors - a coil spring. :shocked2:

 

[ebiggs1]

BTW: I don't recall any real complaints with quality or performance of the TC locks. He/we, a lot of folks, were simply prejudiced against them because they used coil springs. Not 'traditional'.

Actually this statement is the main reason I get my back up when some of you start the rant against Thompson Center. But let me say first and foremost I do appreciate all the information you guys provide, so here is a big “Thank You” for that. However, that out of the way, a person has to make their own judgment about any lifestyle story. Whether it be politics, religion, the stock market and, yes, flintlocks. When you observe one thing and some else tells you differently, there is a problem! Let me use the Timex watch for example, as I did earlier. I have been using a Timex watch for years and now along comes my fried and tells me, you can't get accurate time with that watch, you need a Rolex to do that. But the Timex has been very accurate for years and years. His remarks are contrary to what I have seen.
This statement, ”¦ simply prejudiced against them because they used coil springs. Not 'traditional'. Seems to me to be the over riding reason some of you can't give objective assessments of TC firearms.
That one thing won't let you. They just can't be good, they just can't.
I see on thing and you are telling me another that just doesn't jive. Do you believe that advances your side of the story? Does it endure you as a good reporter?
You know even Jim Chambers locks have to go back once in a while. Doesn't make them poor, does it?

Thank you Rifleman1776, you are a stand up guy! :thumbsup:

 

[Rifleman1776]

Thanks for your comment.
We all have our level of comfort with regards to the 'authentic' bit.
I have never come close to being as 'authentic' as some of the serious trekkers. My hat is off to them.
But, I do reenact as best I can within safe limits. And, the ml game is about preserving certain traditions. That is why a group of guys in Ohio got together in 1933 to start what is now the NMLRA.

 

[Dphar]

BTW: I don't recall any real complaints with quality or performance of the TC locks. He/we, a lot of folks, were simply prejudiced against them because they used coil springs. Not 'traditional'.

Actually this statement is the main reason I get my back up when some of you start the rant against Thompson Center. But let me say first and foremost I do appreciate all the information you guys provide, so here is a big “Thank You” for that. However, that out of the way, a person has to make their own judgment about any lifestyle story. Whether it be politics, religion, the stock market and, yes, flintlocks. When you observe one thing and some else tells you differently, there is a problem! Let me use the Timex watch for example, as I did earlier. I have been using a Timex watch for years and now along comes my fried and tells me, you can't get accurate time with that watch, you need a Rolex to do that. But the Timex has been very accurate for years and years. His remarks are contrary to what I have seen.
This statement, ”¦ simply prejudiced against them because they used coil springs. Not 'traditional'. Seems to me to be the over riding reason some of you can't give objective assessments of TC firearms.
That one thing won't let you. They just can't be good, they just can't.
I see on thing and you are telling me another that just doesn't jive. Do you believe that advances your side of the story? Does it endure you as a good reporter?
You know even Jim Chambers locks have to go back once in a while. Doesn't make them poor, does it?

Thank you Rifleman1776, you are a stand up guy! :thumbsup:

Have you ever read the comments on locks in "The Sporting Rifle and Its Projectiles" by Forsythe?
Have you ever handled a properly set up lock such as a Manton or a good copy of one?
Do you understand "heavy first lifting"?
Do you understand the internals of lock being broken because the hammer was blown back because the lock was not set up right and the hammer blew back past 1/2 cock and broke some internals?
Do you understand the benefits of the "heavy first lifting"? For flintlocks AND percussion?
Do you under stand how its done?

BTW you are unlikely to find this feature very apparent on most of the locks for sale by anyone today.

Do you understand that the vented nipple many speak so highly of is the direct result of locks and breeches that are not properly designed? So they need this crutch to prevent blowing the hammer back?

There is more to a good lock than "I shot it for 1000 shots and its still OK". Most people would not know if it was OK other than it works.

Coil spring locks are made for the reason I described earlier, easy and cheap. From the marketing standpoint this is a good idea. Order a coil spring of a certain length with a certain wire size for a given spring rate and modern machines can crank out a springs by the millions that will be almost identical to each other.
But its very difficult to make a lock that functions like a good lock from the past SHOULD with coil springs and designers who only understand that the hammer has to smash a cap.
Do you know why MLs don't have rebounding hammers?

Just curious.

Dan

 

[ebiggs1]

Mr. Phariss,
The short and quick answer to most (all) of your queries is “no”. So I will skip to the one that makes all the sense to 90% of all shooters. The others are mostly for gunsmiths and gun builders.
But this is the bottom line for most of us.

"There is more to a good lock than I shot it for 1000 shots and its still OK".

Yes, maybe there is, maybe not.
But, I think you have proven my point, however, your view of TC and/or other “cheap” locks comes from your love of the past. You see TC as not traditional and no matter how well if functioned, it would be a “cheap” lock. I think we can let the other forum readers decide for themselves which is better, more appropriate, for their use. I wanted someone to name brands and you have accomplished that. It makes it more clear when posters mention “cheap” locks to know exactly which they are referring to. At least to your credit, you are one of few, if any, that did.

Might I remind you this was about flintlocks not cap locks.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Do you understand that the vented nipple many speak so highly of is the direct result of locks and breeches that are not properly designed? So they need this crutch to prevent blowing the hammer back?

Do you have a link to prove that?

It varies from what the designer/inventor told me.

 

[BEP]

Never mind. Won't get drawn in. :hmm:

 

[ebiggs1]

I have show this thread to several, non-flintlock, people and got a similar response, did you read this statement aloud before you posted it?

There is more to a good lock than "I shot it for 1000 shots and its still OK".

Just curious ............. :hmm:

 

[zimmerstutzen]

My cva perc lock has a few thound shots fired which frankly don't mean poop.
Tc locks had lousy mild steel frizzens and poor lock geometry which is why tc changed them.

Acknowledgement that the product was substandard by the maker

 

[ebiggs1]

"... has a few thound shots fired which frankly don't mean poop."

Maybe not to you and Mr. Phariss, but to the average moderately reasonable person, I suggest it does indicate a pretty good lock. We can only wish all mechanical items in our lives would preform as well.
Anything, everything made by the hand of man can and will fail at some point but is it a definition of “cheap”? In my opinion, in a word,.................no!

 

[Rod Lassey]

If I had a lockless percussion rifle, I'd bet I could get 100% ignition by holding the rifle with one hand and smacking the cap on the nipple with a good sized rock in the other. Just because I'd get 100% ignition doesn't mean that's a good lock system. But, it would be cheap! :wink:

Rod