Durs Egg vs Deluxe Siler

[Greebe]

I am planning on building an early Lancaster style rifle and I am trying to decide on a lock. I don't have the money right now for a kit so I am going to just start buying pieces here and there.

The two locks I am considering are the L&R Durs Egg and the Chambers Deluxe Siler. I think they both look nice. I do have a visual preference towards the Durs Egg, but I hear that they are both very good locks.

The one thing that I like about the Durs is that it has the semi water proof rain gutters on the frizzen. As a hunting rifle I think that would be a plus, however does it actually work that well?

The Siler I hear is a very quick lock and is made by Chambers which everyone seems to think is the best guy to deal with.

Track also mentions that the Durs is a more complex lock as if that is somehow a benefit. To me more complex seems like a downside as there would be more to break.

Which lock would be more period correct for an early Lancaster rifle and which would be the best most reliable lock?

Thanks,
Greebe

 

[nchawkeye]

The Siler, Durs Egg would have been later than an early Lancaster...

 

[Rusty_Nail]

If you want a rain seal, what about the L&R Classic lock? Has that, and the frizzen has a roller for spring contact. I have read on this forum about the speed of the Classic.
http://www.lr-rpl.com/index.php?op...2185-2100p-2175p&catid=38:lar-locks&Itemid=61

 

[Larry Pletcher]

I've always thought of Lancaster county as a hotbed for German gunmakers. So, I'd lean to the Siler. I like the Manton too and would consider it and Chambers Late Ketland for a later southern gun. There are probably exceptions to the above.
Regards,
Pletch

 

[rich pierce]

The Siler, Durs Egg would have been later than an early Lancaster...

Right on.

 

[Zonie]

As soon as you say "Early Lancaster" and then ask about being period correct you have eleminated the Durs Egg and any other lock with a roller frizzen.

Those locks/features are typically English and later period than the early guns.

There are several German style locks that will be "correct" for the early Lancaster but here's a bit of advice.

Most of the pre-carved stocks that are offered by places like Track of the Wolf and Pecatonica River already have the lock mortice roughed out.

If that roughed mortice is not for the lock you want to use you will have to let the supplier know this.

I don't know about TOTW but Pecatonica River will gladly leave out the lock mortice if you want to cut it for another lock. They usually do not make mortices for locks other than the one they show in their literature.

I've built several of Pecatonica River's kits with different locks but I had to call them and ask that my stock's lock mortice be left uncut.

 

[Vaino]

"Early Lancaster" takes in a big time period and there are very few very early Lancasters existant which have the more curved German locks.

On a "later early Lancaster" a German lock would be appropriate and the following locks would be suitable....all from Chambers who I think makes the best "factory flintlocks". Either Siler lock, the Golden Age or the Dale Johnson would all do. Lately I've been using the Dale Johnson because of the more curved lockplate underside {a somewhat "early" feature} and the slightly "dropped" tail which aligns better w/ the wrist. Below is a "later early Lancaster" w/ a Dale Johnson lock. If a precarve is ordered, the lock inlet should be omitted...none exist for the Dale Johnson.....Fred

 

I concur with Hawkeye. Durs Egg is more of an 1810s and on design. Siler covers a much longer period of use. Alot of Revolutionary and post revolutionary guns had these locks. Another lock that would work is a John Bailes lock. I used them extensively. They are more of a 1780-1820 lock and used alot of American rifles but I dont like the short cock throw on it. I would go with a Siler or a Queen Anne.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Siler covers a much longer period of use.

Agree with most of the posts. Yes, the Siler has almost become the standard lock for contemporary builds. Unquestionably those on the market today are high quality and reliable. (might be a bummer out there I'm not aware of). The L&R Classic is a great lock, considered an "improved" Siler. I have one for a fowler that has been 'in progress' for 12 years (don't ask) and throws a scary big shower of sparks. However the Egg, Olde English and such are good locks and, IMHO, look neat. I have the L&R Olde English double throat on my fowler. They are not the same as everyone else has. I am not one for having things perzactly "authentic" and won't join that argument. This is a do yer own thang game. Stick with quality, and my reccomendation is to do yer own thang. Good luck.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

One possibility dealing with the large Siler that hasn't been mentioned is the lock-makers lock that Jim sells. It is basically a large Siler built on a rectangular plate that allows the maker to alter shape of the plate to an earlier (or later) design. Mike Miller made me an early Lancaster using this lock. The finished lock looks much like RCA #48. It was a very workable solution on my gun, and looks proper for an early Lancaster.
Regards,
Pletch

 

[Dphar]

I am planning on building an early Lancaster style rifle and I am trying to decide on a lock. I don't have the money right now for a kit so I am going to just start buying pieces here and there.

Best choice is the Large Siler or the Dale Johnson version of the Siler.
This is the Dale Johnson on my heavy match rifle.
Great lock and the plate has a slight bend so it looks good on rifles where the original used a "bent" lock
The Durs Egg could possibly be stretched back to the 1770s but its not what would be found on a Lancaster of the 1760s-70s. Egg set up shop in 1772.
The roller frizzen is actually fairly old but its not found on the cheap import locks found on most American arms of the mid 18th c. This feature was not common here, unless on imported arms until circa 1810-1820.

Dan

 

[hanshi]

The Siler or one of its variants would be correct. I have an early Lancaster style flintlock and I chose the Chambers Golden Age lock. This lock has a dropped tail and slightly larger lock plate. Otherwise it's basically a Deluxe Siler. This is a great lock and I really like mine.

My favorite of all is the Chambers early Germanic. I think it's the most attractive lock he sells and it has a fine reputation. For my money on an early Lancaster either of these great locks can't be beat.

 

[Birddog6]

Get the Chambers lock. Regardless of what one it is, it will be better than a L&R & the Chambers lock has a Lifetime Warranty on it.

Keith Lisle

 

[Stumpkiller]

My favorite of all is the Chambers early Germanic. I think it's the most attractive lock he sells and it has a fine reputation. For my money on an early Lancaster either of these great locks can't be beat.

I have one of Jim Chamber's Early Germanic locks on my early Lehigh (rifle in my signature image) and have nothing but praise for it. Unbridles frizzen but that has not proven to be an issue as yet. Probably won't be in my lifetime.

 

[Alden]

ALDEN wants a roller-frizzen lock.

 

[Dphar]

ALDEN wants a roller-frizzen lock.

Then have someone put a roller on the frizzen foot on the Siler. Not that hard to do. But it and the pin have to be carefully hardened. The roller will form a flat otherwise.
If you want an early Kentucky make an early Kentucky with the proper lock. If you want the best LOCK then make a 1815-25 English Sporting rifle and have Bob Roller make a Manton flintlock for it.
The roller is nice but a little grease on the frizzen spring works well too. I use Amsoil Boat Trailer Wheel Bearing Grease. :grin:

Dan

 

[Dphar]

Hmm.
THIS is the Chambers Dale Johnson lock on my 18 pound match rifle.
Gotta stop these "run by" postings and check them before I click "add post"

This lock is excellent and fits the Dickert (Rifles of Colonial America #48) very well even when built with a 1 1/4" barrel.

Dan

 

[Vaino]

Beautiful rifle. Yes, the Chambers' Dale Johnson flintlock fits well w/ all the Lancaster type LRs I've built. Too bad it wasn't cast w/ a lockplate bevel instead of the nondescript lockplate corner break. Not a big deal to file the bevel....but still adds to the time......Fred

 

[user 13289]

Greebe, if you put the wrong style lock on your rifle your build will spotted/labeled a "newby" or "careless" or "ignorant" first-gun builder-no matter how fine the architecture, fit, and finish. Not that there's anything wrong with that. We all start somewhere and most of us tend to improve.

If you're only going to build one. Get all the major points as correct as you understand them for that school/time frame.

Or just build a fantasy rifle and realize that many of the BP enthusiasts will know the difference, but that most Gun Shooters won't have a clue.

Depends on who you want to hang with and how tough you want to make your socio/educational process. Cheers.

 

[Dphar]

Yes, the tail especially needs work as it comes from Chambers. IMO anyway.

Dan