Der Fett' Deutscher's lockwork

[Story]

Just some shameless bragging about one of resident Jaeger expert's work outside his normal projects - two of three 1740 Potsdam locks built up by him from TRS kits. Very nice work!

A more detailed review will follow, in due course.

Mind you, 1740 locks have been 'recycled' into late 18th century Continental Jaeger rifles.

 

[Mike Brooks]

Ain't he sumthin'? :bow:

 

[Story]

I heard his secret is in the 'special' sauerkraut. :thumbsup:

 

[Stophel]

Thank you, thank you....please, no applause...


Just don't anyone ask me to do another!!! They were a pain in every way. Definitely not like a Siler lock set, or even the typical Rifle Shoppe kit, which are usually very nicely done castings. Not these. Perhaps you can tell by the roughness on the inside of the lockplate how rough (and mismatched) these castings were...multiply that by ten, and then you'll be close!!! :shocked2:

By the way, I guess you can tell, I used the Davis spring in the last two locks. The TRS mainsprings were giving me problems in hardening, and one of them cracked (I don't like Rifle shoppe springs...I have found them to be very inconsistent in how they harden...if they harden at all..). I happened to have one of these Davis springs, and looked at it and thought "I can make that work", so I put it on, it worked beautifully, with no modification whatsoever, except for drilling the hole out for the slightly larger screw I was using. I went ahead and got a second spring and used it on the last lock. The original springs were heavy. I mean HEAVY. I can't possibly convey to you in words just how incredibly heavy all the springs were. These springs are still heavy, but much more "normal".

These locks are not exactly "fine tuned watches", but I got them to work pretty well, considering their size. :winking:

 

[Roy]

:applause: :applause: :applause:


oop's

:thumbsup:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

And look at all of those blind screw holes! Incredible! :hatsoff:

 

[Zonie]

"...Perhaps you can tell by the roughness on the inside of the lockplate how rough (and mismatched) these castings were..."
---------------------------

So THAT explains why the inside doesn't look like this.

I knew there had to be a reason. :rotf:
zonie

 

[Stophel]

The blind holes were the EASIEST part of these locks to do!!!! :winking: The lockplates were VERY warbly, crooked and lumpy. The pan did not match the plate, and the frizzen did not match the pan. The tumbler did not match the bridle, which I don't think even matched the lockplate. This lockset was made from parts from at least two, and probably three, entirely different locks. It made things....difficult.

 

[Story]

Just so the Peanut Gallery can picture what a 1740 Prussian musket looks like -

 

[Stophel]

I never understood that ugly comb...

I have a photo I took of a very attractive "Prussian type" German musket that has a more normal stock design...and a lock that looks just like these. I'll see if I can dig it up...

The Prussians also had a "coned" breechplug, and a large touch hole, which provided for a self priming pan...saving a step in loading. The soldiers were to pour the powder down, tap the butt on the ground, and the powder would run into the pan. The Prussian soldiers were supposed to be able to fire 4 shots a minute, as opposed to the English and everyone else "only" firing three.

 

[Mike Brooks]

I believe thos e ugly butts compensated for lack of drop in the stock. I figure they stuck there face up near the wrist when they shot. Er, ah, at least thats' the only way I could see down the barrel when I handled one...... :winking:

 

[Story]

D.F.D & M.B.
Those 'cow's foot' buttstocks can be found on alot of pre-Seven Year's War muskets made throughout the western Germanies. Even the Prussians acknowledged that they sucked for accuracy, but their platoon fire tactics of the time required an 18th century version of the submachine gun.
I think the 'nicer comb' musket is a reworked 1782 (which is an 'upgraded' 1740), made during the Napoleonic Wars. F.D.F, I've got an article that explains it but your email is bouncing like mad. Drop me a line directly.

 

[Stophel]

Something was wrong with my internet connection at home. I couldn't get online Sunday or most of Monday. Finally, Monday evening, it worked, and it let me on. When I checked email messages, I got 23. Now, normally, I get about 50 a day (most all junk), so I should have gotten about a hundred. I figured I had lost some mail... :hmm:

 

[Stophel]

My email is supposed to be working now.

Here's the photos I took in a little museum in Valley Forge. The stock has the style of the "cow foot" (a term which I don't understand....), but the maker obviously didn't want to go as far as the Prussian makers did...he kept his butt to normal proportions and normal positioning. The gun has absolutely no markings on it whatsoever. The screws come all the way through the lockplate, as opposed to being blind.

I've never been into military things, so I am not totally familiar with this kind of stuff. I have a really nice book here somewhere titled "The Armies of Frederick the Great", which goes into detail on...well, on everything, from tactics, to battles, to uniforms, to equipment, to the soldiers tying their mustache ends up with thread at night to keep them in shape. I haven't looked at the book in quite some time.

 

[Story]

The particular musket is from Neumann's collection and I believe appears in the NRA magazine article on RevWar muskets that's been linked elsewhere around these parts.

The problem with the majority of Germanic/Prussian/Hessian style muskets is the variation within even a standardized type - the article I sent you last night mentions that the 1782 had a wide selection of bore diameters and barrel lengths (although I think the 1740s built during Frederick's era would have been subjected to a more stringent standard).

Amsterdamn, Suhl, Potsdam and others supplied both marked and unmarked muskets to the German states (and to the Americas, pre-RevWar), so the "Potsdam" lock as you finished it is perfect for either an "as-Issued" piece, one of the many styles of issued rebuilds or the core of a post-war civilian fowler/rifle**.

** A decade or so after the Revolution, the US Goverment still had @800 "Hessian" muskets in stock. The theory is that these were sold off as surplus for their parts.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Here is a link to an article about Prussian rearmament for the Napoleonic Wars on JSTOR. While slightly later than the period under discussion, it is describes Prussian amament thought in the 18th Century and is very informative concerning the muskets in use at the time of our Revolution:
[url] http://www.jstor.org/view/00222801/di955003/95p00042/0[/url]

JSTOR has a search feature at:
[url] http://www.jstor.org/[/url]

that may provide more information, you can find almost anything on history at JSTOR. Hope this helps. (I still like those locks Chris! )

 

[Story]

That's what I sent him. :grin:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

That's what I sent him. :grin:

:shocked2: Great minds and all that. :rotf: