• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

French Locks?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

hawkeye1755

54 Cal.
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
0
On the thread "French Fusils" start by tg we can read a lot about the French fusils.
One thing with all the "New French Fusils" astonished me.As benvenuto wrote:"
My only puzzle is the lock. I know none of them are correct..."
My question is, why did none of all the lock producers make a "Real French Lock"?There are wonderful examples.
:hatsoff:
 
Typicaly the concept of a "correct" lock is a recent requirement of the buying public and suppliers tried to make one lock style with some modifications cover as much ground as possible, in time there may be more in the way of correct locks for many guns, the demand is not real great as many do not know the difference or care and the startup cost is considerable when compared to the demand when designing a new lock.
 
During the renaissance of MLing, lockmakers came and went and most were junky till Bud Siler made his flintlocks. he chose a basic germanic styled flintlock appropriate for 1770-1800 or so, which was the "Golden Age" and useful for most guns folks were making then: American longrifles. Tooling is expensive. The Siler developed such a following that it starteds to be used where it should not be used- later timeframes and places where English locks were more appropriate. And the Siler percusion locks had the same appearance but were percussed, rather than looking like locks made during the percussion period. Tooling is expensive.

In the late 1970's, L&R came on the market and offered dozens of styles of locks, and we were all delighted and still are. Then Davis started making a few locks like the Tulle and jaeger locks. Often makers would take a custom or original lock someone had, and develop castings from it and call it whatever they wanted to. The Davis jaeger and Tulle were available by 1980. Then later Chambers bought out Siler and then started introducing his own locks and continues to do so today. As a very general statement he uses the best and most appropriate styles. Why no French lock when we have everything else?

The interest in the "tulle" (I used that word to goad Okwaho who is actually my friend) and other French smoothbores used in America started in the early 80's and is still swelling. But I don't think it interests Chambers at all. These guys all LOVE what they do and what they do is get excited about something then do it. Chambers is a man who most dearly loves the early longrifle and English stuff, from what I can discern.

What it takes (all it takes) is one person making a cock and plate and frizzen and pan that fits one style of French lock and mating it to existing internals and marketing it. Here's the rub. Will it really sell better than what is out there already? What if it only fits one era or style? Meanwhile you can buy and modify an existing lock or you can order a kit or assembled lock ($250 or so) from The Rifle Shoppe and hope you getit before you forget about the project.

if you want it, build it. There was a day when we had nothing but rocks and logs. Just kidding. We walked to our shops uphill in the snow both ways too.
 
I'm pretty sure Kit Ravenshear made a correct French lock. I had 2 of them.
 
Actually , Rifle Shoppe choose to copy a St Étienne lock , not a Tulle , they do look rather similar anyway.
 
Mark Lewis,
Hoooo boooy! You HAD two of them?! Why don't you still have them? Kit sure was a bundle of information. Seems like anything he made might become real valuable.
volatpluvia
 
I've owned a ton of nice stuff over the years. As my interest change, I sell or trade for something new. I do miss the French Marine(1734?) musket, and the 1752 French musket he built.

He also reworked my Italian made Short Land Pattern Brown Bess. It was real nice.
 
He slicked up an L&R Dickert lock for me that wasn't right from the factory. Also he slicked up a small siler for my so it would reliably throw the frizzen forward and fire. I still have that one.

The gonne I regret selling was the Lancaster style long rifle I built, Getz C weight in .54, Siler large rifle flint, German silver mounted. But my daughter needed braces. Sigh.
volatpluvia
 
rocks and logs... :rotf:

OK, so who's game to do the first forum tutorial on fitting siler internals to the correct lock plate and cock? :bow:
 
If this works, you can see a good modern representation of a French lock done by Eric Kettenburg. The thread is here:
[url] http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/199493/[/url]

Have a look.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please forgive my ignorance. Can someone please explain why the French Type C fusil lock that TOW sells is not historicly correct for a 17th century French gun? I have searched the Internet looking for examples of original 17th century French flintlocks and haven't found many.
 
Okay, I was a little hasty in posting the above. After re-reading the French Fusils thread and following the link, I understand better. Thank's for all the great information. I was toying with the idea of some day building a 17th century French blunderbuss, but haven't been able to find any photos of originals to copy.
 
Difficult task you've set yourself. you might want to keep an eye on the Hermann Historica auction website - they have had a lot of early italian blunderbusses through there in the past (auction cataogues 47, 48, 49, 50) and always have lots of original french guns.
:thumbsup:
 
mbritt said:
Please forgive my ignorance. Can someone please explain why the French Type C fusil lock that TOW sells is not historicly correct for a 17th century French gun? I have searched the Internet looking for examples of original 17th century French flintlocks and haven't found many.

First of all you need to forget the terms Types C and D as they pertain to complete 18th century French Fusils.These are sequential letter designations for archaelogical material recovered from various sites. In Hamilton's earlier book,"Early Indian Trade guns: 1625-1775" he listed Types A through R including the aforementioned Types C and D.There were NO Types C and D in the early 18th and 19th century terminology. Coincidentally these two types happened to refer to brass mounted Fusils fin found mostly in the Southeast where most of Hamilton's excavations occurred.

French Fusils and other European guns of the late 17th century reflected the transition from the Classical Louis XIV style to the Berain style and had round faced locks with a banana configuration.Around the turn of the 18th century flat faced locks began to emerge. These still had the banana confguration which gradually evolved into a straighter bottom[url] line.Trade[/url] guns made by St.Etienne and others as well as guns made by Tulle after 1691 {the first contract with the King through the Ministry de la marine} were flat faced with somewhat of a banana configuration which began to straighten out after about 1690-1700.I have long suspected that the reason the locks of early trade level guns were almost universally flat faced is that they were cheaper to manufacture than round faced locks.The locks sold by vendors such as TOW for use on pre carved "Type C and D" stocks are purely German jaeger banana locks which are totally incompatible with French guns.If you are really interested in French guns of the 17th and 18th centuries then get a copy of Torsten Lenk's monumental book, "The Flintlock" and learn about these early French guns from the beginning.

Additionally if you are really interested in the so called "Types C and D" guns and want to build an historically correct gun look at the R E Davis "Fusil Fin" kit{NOT their Type D kit}and see the only really correct Fusil fin kit presently available.You will have to sanitize the lock but that's not really a problem. I took a partially finished kit and laid it beside an early 18th century Fusil fin gun and the architecture of the two guns matched up beautifully.

I didn't mean to go on so long but once started it's hard to stop.I hope this in some way answers your question on the ubiquitous so called Types C and D guns with their German Jaeger locks.
Tom Patton
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One small addition to Tom's detailed description above, most French trade locks were around 6 inches long. Nearly all the kit locks are barely 5 inches long by comparison. Besides finish work to the available locks, they'd have to be lengthened the the 6 inch length. I only know of one maker who does this work but he also insists on using curly maple or American walnut for the stocks which is totally innacurate.
 
Lenk's book has recently been republished in paperback. It's available for under $25. Placing an order tommorow :)
 
American black Walnut wouldn't be completely out of the question. Its quite easy to find a blank that would be indistinguishable from French Walnut even by an expert. If you age it some nobody would ever know the difference.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top