Possible matchlock conversion system

[bezoar]

Has anyone else thought about converting a low priced, commercially available flintlock into a functioning matchlock of sorts?
Just replace the cock with a serpentine, and a new pancover...just an idea.

 

[arilar]

Bezoar,
An intersting idea. Also has been done in the old days. I have seen an Enfield P.53 converted to a matchlock system.
ARILAR

 

And this would accomplish what?

It would not be PC for use at any historic site or events.

It would not be more efficient than the origional flint system.

It would eliminate all the improvements of 400 years of technological evolution from match to flint.

It would turn an otherwise useful firearm into a demonstration only showpiece of no real value except the quaint curiosity of knowing one could stick a cigarette into the flashpan and fire the flintlock without the reverse engineering.

 

[bezoar]

OF COURSE IT WOULDNT BE PERIOD CORRECT, THATS NOT THE POINT of it. The whole point is to get an idea of what it takes to keep a matchlock working WITHOUT having to buy a $800-1,200 dollar matchlock to find out that the local environment wont support a matchlock.

Besides, it would be alot easier then working flints, i dont think ive seen matchcord that would not throw sparks everytime..

 

[SquirrelsaurusR]

And this would accomplish what?

It would satisfy his curiosity about the feasibility of such a conversion and possibly give him a new type of gun to shoot that he may not be able to obtain otherwise.

Folks, let's please not get into this pointless 'PC' debate again. Just because we shoot old-style guns doesn't mean that every gun and everything about them has to be period-correct. If building/owning guns that are only 100% PC is what you enjoy to the exclusion of all other guns, then more power to ya. But that doesn't mean that everyone else in the world has to conform to your way of thinking. I see people discussing Thompson/Center flintlocks over on the flintlock forum every day, but they aren't PC. They're just nice looking, good shooting flinters that simulate the guns of the past. If all our guns had to be PC, then all T/C's (and many other guns we shoot and discuss on this forum) would have to be dropped from the discussion. He didn't ask if it would be PC or if it would be 'acceptable', he simply asked if it's ever been done.

If everyone can discuss guns that aren't PC on other forums, then why not the Pre-Flintlock forum? This forum isn't here to cater only to those that collect original guns or exact replicas of originals. It's for those that collect or shoot originals, replicas, 'close-enough' simulations, homemade beer can shooting mortars, or anything else that fits into primitive 'Pre-Flintlock' category, whether it's serious, detailed discussion of PC guns or humorous posts just for fun. Just because a certain gun wouldn't be PC at a reenactment doesn't mean it's disqualified for discussion here.

I understand that converting a gun to an older type of ignition would make it less efficient and eliminate technological improvements, but so what? Isn't 'going primitive' why this forum is here? No one is talking about taking an original Brown Bess or Lancaster rifle and chopping it up to see if it could be turned into a matchlock (although if that were the case, he has every right to do whatever he wants to the guns he owns, even though I would never do such a thing myself). Maybe he has has a cheap old flintlock that doesn't shoot well and he doesn't use much, so he thought it might make a good candidate for a little experimentation. The question specifically asks about doing this with a "low priced, commercially available flintlock". I seriously doubt that he's about to take a hammer and chisel to a flintlock that's worth a few bucks, looks nice, and shoots well just to satisfy a passing curiosity (but like I said, even if he is, that's his business). In fact, the question sounds like it was posted just out of curiosity, not necessarily to get help with actually performing such an operation. I don't have any flintlocks that I would be willing to sacrifice to such a procedure just to see if I could make it work, but I wouldn't mind hearing of someone else's results that's willing to try it, just to see if it can be done. If the result is a gun that fires by means of an ignition system earlier than the flintlock, then it would qualify for discussion in the Pre-Flintlock forum, whether it's a homemade hack-job or an exacting replica of an original. Such a gun might not have any monetary or collector value, but if the result is a matchlock that actually works, it might be of great value to him, if he wanted a matchlock but couldn't afford one, for example.

With all the members we have that are so knowledgeable about the guns of the past, this forum is a great resource for history and historical firearms enthusiasts.

But let's not forget that this forum is also here for fun. :thumbsup:

 

[SquirrelsaurusR]

Bezoar,
looks like we posted at the same time. I don't know if it's ever been done. I'd be interested to hear the results, though, if you're willing to try it. Let us know.

 

[Stumpkiller]

One thing that strikes me is you might want to be sure the flash-guard behind the pan is sufficient. The lack of a flint to deflect the flash up somewhat may leave a lot of flash left to make it to your eyes. Flashguards on flintlocks are of all different sizes. You may want to fashion an extra guard that connects where the frizzen was and extends around and behind the pan.

Just a thought.

 

[bezoar]

Squirrelsaurus Rex , Stumpkiller

Thanks for having an understanding of what im wondering about. Alot of people on these boards are trying to figure out what gun is best for the limited funds they have, and i was thinking that it might be good to have a substitute matchlock while they decide on what 1000 dollar caliver they would like to buy.
And think of the possibilities of going to your range with an even odder looking gun to shoot, who knows it might just help us bring more people into shooting, and into using something earlier then flintlocks.

Right now its just a preliminary design phase until I can scrape up the money for a flinter. I was thinking of a brown bess type flash guard (isnt it a FLASH SUPPRESSOR?)

Im thinking id have to make a new lock,lockplate for it to work. I should have some sketchs soon.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I fully understand. I built a $150 smoothbore kit before I dumped $1,200 on a custom Bess to see if I could live with the accuracy of a sightless, unrifled barrel.

14 years later I sold the Bess, but still have the New Englander. Funny how these things sometimes work out.

 

[Musketeer]

Syke's Sutlering has a 36" barrel smoothbore .54 matchlock carbine for $375. At least there's one on their website, I don't know how up to date it is. You might check with them with regard to price/availability. This would seem to be a good "cheap" way to get into matchlocks. http://www.sykesutler.home.att.net :thumbsup:

P.S. This is their musket page. In the bottom left corner of the page is a link to their homepage. :thumbsup:

 

[bezoar]

Handgonne005 for 220 without serpentine and 250 with one, is a far "cheaper" way to get a matchlock. But then again, id most likely want to convert it to a true matchlock or into a wheellock.

 

[Chuck Thom]

I've seen the dutch gun from Stkes Sutlery it's resonably priced and well made also the french gun also well made and good price. why convert? making one from scratch is not hard especially the arquebus with just a serpintine. want some information how to? email me ... [email protected] regards...ChuckThom

 

[benvenuto]

The Rifle Shoppe sell a lock from the 1680's
http://www.therifleshoppe.com/(571).htm
I suppose it wouldn't be too hard to modify to fit into a first model brown bess (a bit farb) or WR musket and thus have a choice of locks you could use.

Building a matchlock is so cheap tho'... all you are paying for is the barrel and the wood

 

[Arquebusier]

I agree with benvenuto. I think that someone may be able to modify this lock to fit the lock mortise of a Brown Bess musket. It would not 100% PC, but it would sort of resemble a 1690's matchlock musket.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I've got one of these locks. The plate is seven inches long and about one and a quarter inches wide. There is a lot of room to reshape and resize the lock plate as the actual action doesn't take up much space. In particular, there is a lot of room at the front of the plate and you could remove around 3/4 of an inch at the rear. It could be narrowed by almost a quarter inch if needed. Not sure if the pan would wind up in the right place on a Bess, though.

 

[Henry]

Funny , in a recent sleepless night
I was wondering about the same thing !

New France history re-enactors
divide the matchlocks in three cat

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

On the 1680 period lock, trigger travel is close to 3/8 of an inch. The lock is not mounted on a gun as yet, so I'm just guessing here, but my feeling is that the trigger pull is apt to be horrendous. Holding the lock plate in my left hand and pushing up on the sear bar with my right, I can
barely move it. The sear spring is nearly as heavy as the frizzen spring on a normal flintlock. I can understand why the tricker lever wasn't replaced sooner.