-
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
L & R Locks
- Thread starter Eric M
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
I haven't had a problem with any of the L&R locks I've used.
There was a time 5-6 years ago that there were some quality issues with the L&R's but they seem to have gotten their house in order.
There was a time 5-6 years ago that there were some quality issues with the L&R's but they seem to have gotten their house in order.
54mountain
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2006
- Messages
- 738
- Reaction score
- 5
I have three and consider them to be a very good lock, and can be made even better with a little polishing of the internals. mine are an L&R Bailes lefthand flintlock, an L&R Durs Egg flint and Durs Egg percussion. I have over 2000 shots fired with the Durs Egg flint and have never had a problem. it is a very fast and reliable lock
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2010
- Messages
- 1,372
- Reaction score
- 42
The first flinter I got has a Durs Egg. I have large Silers on 4 other guns. I must have the best Durs Egg lock they ever made because it has never had any issue and is very fast, gun is very accurate
Walks with fire
54 Cal.
I have a L&R late English lock that came on my RMC Accusporter rifle. It has a real nice no creep trigger and the lock is smooth. It sparks real well and the pan fit and design is wonderful. It is my favorite lock. The other 2 are TC's redesigned hammer/frizzen which are head and shoulders above the original design. Those TC new locks are wonderful. I know it's off topic but the TC's have been shot alot and never once has it failed to fire----not once in hundreds of shots.
I won't say I have a lot of experience, but what I have had with L&R has not been too positive.
I got one rifle with a Queen Anne lock that sparked poorly. No matter what I did, I couldn't get a good shower of sparks or get them directed into the pan. Sent it off to Cabin Creek and had it reworked. The frizzen had to be carburized twice to get enough hardness to provide sufficient spark. Cock was reshaped for better angle of approach to the frizzen. Internals polished. It's better than it was...not anywhere near my Davis Locks.
Second experience was with the above lock, but I had asked L&R about the extremely weak mainspring. They said, Oh yeah, we used some cast springs and they get weak...but for around $30 we'll replace it with a forged spring. Great! When I got it back, the forged spring was a 1/2" wide and of a different design such that it would not fit without taking off metal, especially where it would hit against the adjoining lower flat of the barrel (the old spring has a nice little "drop" so the bbl was not an issue). By the time that was re-worked and shaped to fit it was barely better than the cast spring.
Third experience was with an L&R RPL flint lock for the Pedersoli Frontier/Hatfield. Some of the internals looked like there had been no attempt what-so-ever to smooth them...almost looked like a rough casting surface. Sent it back.
On the other hand, I've had three RE Davis and all have been fantastic sparkers that I'm very pleased with. Others on the Forum have not had good luck with Davis locks. :idunno:
Have two Chambers on the way: one for my next build and one for that Pedersoli I'm converting, so will soon have another brand to compare with. From everything I've heard, I expect top quality with those.
Therefore, based on my experience with L&R, I plan to avoid them like the plague.
I got one rifle with a Queen Anne lock that sparked poorly. No matter what I did, I couldn't get a good shower of sparks or get them directed into the pan. Sent it off to Cabin Creek and had it reworked. The frizzen had to be carburized twice to get enough hardness to provide sufficient spark. Cock was reshaped for better angle of approach to the frizzen. Internals polished. It's better than it was...not anywhere near my Davis Locks.
Second experience was with the above lock, but I had asked L&R about the extremely weak mainspring. They said, Oh yeah, we used some cast springs and they get weak...but for around $30 we'll replace it with a forged spring. Great! When I got it back, the forged spring was a 1/2" wide and of a different design such that it would not fit without taking off metal, especially where it would hit against the adjoining lower flat of the barrel (the old spring has a nice little "drop" so the bbl was not an issue). By the time that was re-worked and shaped to fit it was barely better than the cast spring.
Third experience was with an L&R RPL flint lock for the Pedersoli Frontier/Hatfield. Some of the internals looked like there had been no attempt what-so-ever to smooth them...almost looked like a rough casting surface. Sent it back.
On the other hand, I've had three RE Davis and all have been fantastic sparkers that I'm very pleased with. Others on the Forum have not had good luck with Davis locks. :idunno:
Have two Chambers on the way: one for my next build and one for that Pedersoli I'm converting, so will soon have another brand to compare with. From everything I've heard, I expect top quality with those.
Therefore, based on my experience with L&R, I plan to avoid them like the plague.
An Old English and Classic here. I consider them excellent.
galamb
58 Cal.
Yes, they are good, bad and ok.
Not trying to be smart here. If I'm building a Hawken rifle I use either an L&R Plains Warranted, L&R 100 (aka S Hawken) OR a Davis Bridger - sometimes depending on the exact (style) rifle (J&S or just S Hawken) and sometimes what's in stock at the suppliers.
In that (group) I haven't found one significantly better/worse than the others.
If you are recreating a specific rifle sometimes L&R may have the closest pattern to what you are after, other times Davis or Chambers (unless you want to go totally custom).
I have been advised that alot has to do with "who" assembled the lock - all the "makers" farm out some/all of their assembly work, so just because it's an L&R lock any number of different "builders" could have put it together. So the fit/finish/function may be exceptional on some models and mediocre on others.
I will say, I have found Chambers locks (procured right from Chambers) to be a little better finished than the average lock.
It is absolutely best if you can "shop in person" and pick the lock "from the pile". However, most of us have to trust "mail order", but if you stick with one of the major suppliers and were unhappy with the product, I'm positive they would replace it for you without much of a hassle.
Not trying to be smart here. If I'm building a Hawken rifle I use either an L&R Plains Warranted, L&R 100 (aka S Hawken) OR a Davis Bridger - sometimes depending on the exact (style) rifle (J&S or just S Hawken) and sometimes what's in stock at the suppliers.
In that (group) I haven't found one significantly better/worse than the others.
If you are recreating a specific rifle sometimes L&R may have the closest pattern to what you are after, other times Davis or Chambers (unless you want to go totally custom).
I have been advised that alot has to do with "who" assembled the lock - all the "makers" farm out some/all of their assembly work, so just because it's an L&R lock any number of different "builders" could have put it together. So the fit/finish/function may be exceptional on some models and mediocre on others.
I will say, I have found Chambers locks (procured right from Chambers) to be a little better finished than the average lock.
It is absolutely best if you can "shop in person" and pick the lock "from the pile". However, most of us have to trust "mail order", but if you stick with one of the major suppliers and were unhappy with the product, I'm positive they would replace it for you without much of a hassle.
ohio ramrod
75 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 7,473
- Reaction score
- 2,208
Only experience I have had with their locks is the older ones ( ten years or more ) and they were all good locks! :hmm:
Nessmuck56
40 Cal.
My L&R was tuned by David Price and it's as quick as a cap !!!
I haven't had any problems with mine but as has been pointed out they all can use some degree of polishing the internals. Durability not withstanding, I would recommend a Chambers lock over an L&R.
flintlockmdj
45 Cal.
- Joined
- May 6, 2005
- Messages
- 507
- Reaction score
- 0
I don't have much to say for or against L&R locks. I ordered a Dures Egg lock and the attitude of a sales rep killed any desire to purchase that lock or any other from L&R.
My Classic had an interior that could have been used as jewelry. Beautiful. Sadly, my Old Englishw as dunked in a powerful browning solution and very heavily browned. I never saw the pre-destruction interior on that but the lock now works very well.
I have an L&R Queen Anne lock in my early Lancaster rifle and it has been great. Fast lock with plenty of sparks. I lost the frizzen spring once when I had the lock apart and I called them up to get a new one. They suggested I send it in and they'd be happy to put a new one on for the price of the part. I asked them to take a good look at it while it was in just to make sure everything was good. Inside a week later I had it back with the new frizzen spring and functioning perfectly. They included a note that said, "nice lock!
Based upon my lock and my experience, I have only good things to say about L&R.
Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:
Based upon my lock and my experience, I have only good things to say about L&R.
Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:
I have several L & R's, they are fine, but like most items when purchased, require a little tinkering to make them perfect ( in my eyes )
My Chambers are the same.
Pedersoli locks, well that is a different story.
They are pretty, I'll say that, but mostly, they suck.
Every lock, if you take the time to polish every area and piece on the back side of the lock, will result in a finer, faster, and more positive functioning lock.
Fred
My Chambers are the same.
Pedersoli locks, well that is a different story.
They are pretty, I'll say that, but mostly, they suck.
Every lock, if you take the time to polish every area and piece on the back side of the lock, will result in a finer, faster, and more positive functioning lock.
Fred
True. I can't count the number of import locks I have done that to. Many (most?) on the range for other guys when I should have been shooting.
galamb
58 Cal.
One added benefit with L&R is their "refurb" service.
If you have an L&R lock that's older and out of warranty they will repair it for a flat rate of 15 bucks, plus the cost of parts/shipping.
Pretty good deal if it's something you either can't fix yourself or would take more than $15 of your time...
If you have an L&R lock that's older and out of warranty they will repair it for a flat rate of 15 bucks, plus the cost of parts/shipping.
Pretty good deal if it's something you either can't fix yourself or would take more than $15 of your time...
galamb
58 Cal.
Yes, my first ML was a Lyman trade rifle. I loved it.
Anyhow, swapped out the lock with one of the RPL's (didn't really need fixin but wanted to "hop up" the rifle - honestly, didn't notice any difference).
The L&R's have a little (thicker) plate and configured a little differently so you do need to remove some wood. It can be done with an exacto knife or small chisel and a bit of sandpaper and alot of patience.
I did this before I started building rifles myself, so it was my first go at inletting. I read somewhere that you could smear lipstick all over the parts you had to inlet and it would transfer to the wood that needs removing.
Now, it worked, but it left a horrible "greasy" mess.
Lamp black (hold the metal over a candle or oil lamp (works much better)) or commercial "inlet black" is super messy, but works well (and at least it's not greasy).
If you undertake this, always remove less wood than you think you should. It's tedious to put it lightly (remove a bit, replace the lock, see how it fits, re-black, remove a little more, repeat), but certainly not beyond the average owner.
Anyhow, swapped out the lock with one of the RPL's (didn't really need fixin but wanted to "hop up" the rifle - honestly, didn't notice any difference).
The L&R's have a little (thicker) plate and configured a little differently so you do need to remove some wood. It can be done with an exacto knife or small chisel and a bit of sandpaper and alot of patience.
I did this before I started building rifles myself, so it was my first go at inletting. I read somewhere that you could smear lipstick all over the parts you had to inlet and it would transfer to the wood that needs removing.
Now, it worked, but it left a horrible "greasy" mess.
Lamp black (hold the metal over a candle or oil lamp (works much better)) or commercial "inlet black" is super messy, but works well (and at least it's not greasy).
If you undertake this, always remove less wood than you think you should. It's tedious to put it lightly (remove a bit, replace the lock, see how it fits, re-black, remove a little more, repeat), but certainly not beyond the average owner.
+1 to patience while installing the RPL. You can rush it and do a hash job of it, like I did, but it won't it won't look that great. Also using inletting colour is definitely crucial with any type of inletting.
Here's a link to my topic on the RPL: http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/281401/post/1297318/hl//fromsearch/1/
Aran :hatsoff:
Here's a link to my topic on the RPL: http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/281401/post/1297318/hl//fromsearch/1/
Aran :hatsoff:
Last edited by a moderator:
