Questions on Flintlock Lock Design

[Thomas792]

Three questions.

Why is the cock dog legged? Would not a straight cock be more efficient for the use of materials and stronger?

Does the shape of the pan matter? Wider vs longer vs deeper?

What makes a pan "water proof"? I was looking at a thread on here and the pictures to me seemed to be contrary to the titles of "water proof" and "standard".

 

[Grenadier1758]

The so called "waterproof" pans will have an indentation on the frizzen that fits into the pan. When grease is applied around the edge of the pan that will tend to make the lock more water resistant but not really waterproof. There will still be a tiny water seepage area where the lock meets the barrel although that too can be greased Just don't get grease in the pan to contaminate the priming powder.

The shape of the pan matters a bit. Wider pans and longer pans will distribute the powder over a wider area to be more likely to catch sparks and ignite. A deeper pan will hold a bit more powder for a longer burn. Wider and longer is what I prefer, but the location of the touch hole is just slightly more important, and we want the touch hole centered on the pan and just slightly above the top of the pan. That's the so-called sunset position with the touch hole just beginning to set into the pan.

Not all cocks will be dog legged or offset. That is done to better align the cock to the pan and can be dependent on the thickness of the bolster in the positioning of the lock to the barrel. The dog leg or offset does not adversely affect the strength of the cock. Efficiency of function was the goal, not efficiency of use of materials. Some of the early locks were forged and the shaping was done on the forge and not much extra time was required when a cock was being forged.

 

[James Kibler]

Sunset position for the touch hole is a myth. Sure, it often works okay, but a hole lower in the pan has been proven to be as fast or slightly faster. Reference the work done by Larry Pletcher and his timing equipment. I sure wish this myth would die.

As to a waterproof pan, there may be some marginal benefit in terms of water resistance, but it’s not as much as the name might suggest. I wouldn’t pick a lock one way or the other based on this supposed benefit. There are far more important considerations.

 

[Thomas792]

Great info. I don't plan on shooting in the rain but I do like the look of L&R Manton lock but want the size of the L&R Late American lock (4 3/8" vs 4 3/4"). That extra 3/8" is slightly messing up my CAD design for the pistol I would one day like to build.

Maybe I was not understanding correctly on the "dog leg". I was thinking it meant a cock that looked like an "S" that meandered from the pivot to the lower jaw. What I actually meant was "goose neck" compared to a straight neck. I can fully understand how the "double throat" is stronger (L&R website terms).

 

[rich pierce]

Let’s call it serpentine. Many things are fashion choices.

 

[James Kibler]

I would suggest considering some other lock manufacturers...

 

[tenngun]

L and R make a late english water proof lock. You see on a flash pan a raised fence at the rear. This serves to direct the flash away from the shooter. This was invented in matchlock days.
On the Land R the fence is detached from the pan. The pan is about a sixteenth off a once smaller all around the foot of the frizzen. This was the ultimate design of tge flintlock, coming out when percussion was being invented. It’s very rain resistant.
Some of the wheellock designs could actually fire submerged, this was done about 1625, but was so complex it was real prone to failure
A good cows knee goes a long way. But rain is your enemy

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

Sunset position for the touch hole is a myth. Sure, it often works okay, but a hole lower in the pan has been proven to be as fast or slightly faster. Reference the work done by Larry Pletcher and his timing equipment. I sure wish this myth would die.

Hunt much?

 

[Thomas792]

I would suggest considering some other lock manufacturers...

So what do you recommend in the small size (4 3/8” or smaller) with a waterproof looking pan. Want to make a pistol that looks similar to a later years Wogdon.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

So what do you recommend in the small size (4 3/8” or smaller) with a waterproof looking pan. Want to make a pistol that looks similar to a later years Wogdon.

I think LC Rice is selling a small english looking lock in that size. I have no experience with it. I wonder why my phont changed?

 

[Grenadier1758]

I really like the L&R Manton lock I have in my SMR. It's fast and if I watch over my flint and keep the flash channel clear, it's very reliable. The Small size of the lock is perfect for my 36 caliber rifle.

 

[Sidney Smith]

Wider and longer is what I prefer, but the location of the touch hole is just slightly more important, and we want the touch hole centered on the pan and just slightly above the top of the pan. That's the so-called sunset position with the touch hole just beginning to set into the pan.

I think you mean you want the touch hole centered in the pan with the hole slightly above the bottom of the pan, or in line with the flats on the top of the pan. Placing the touch hole above the top of the flats of the pan can cause delayed firing.

 

[EC121]

If you want to keep water out of the pan, the only sure way is to not hunt in the rain.

 

[hanshi]

+1

 

[Thomas792]

I really like the L&R Manton lock I have in my SMR. It's fast and if I watch over my flint and keep the flash channel clear, it's very reliable. The Small size of the lock is perfect for my 36 caliber rifle.

I like the look but at 4 3/4” it is much larger than the lock on the Wogdons. Dave Person said his measured under 4”. Some day I want to build a pair of modest replicas of his. L&R has a “Late American” that is the smallest I see they make.

 

[James Kibler]

I would modify my plans. 4.75” is reasonable for an English pistol lock. Perhaps not the exact pistols you have in mind, but still within reason. Maybe study additional original work.

Lock quality and function is very important.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

I think you mean you want the touch hole centered in the pan with the hole slightly above the bottom of the pan, or in line with the flats on the top of the pan. Placing the touch hole above the top of the flats of the pan can cause delayed firing.

Nope. All wrong. No offense meant. When the frizzen is closed the hole should be covered or nearly so. This way there is no banking of the powder over the hole no matter how you shake the gun around. As soon as the flash goes the heat goes instantly into the main charge.
I'm a bird hunter and skeet shooter and this is the fastest ignition you can achieve, I don't care what the computer models say. It's the heat of the ignition you want. You don't want your hole buried in the powder.

 

[James Kibler]

Sorry Mike, but I think you are wrong! No offense meant either... The computer testing isn't a model. These conclusions were based on actual measurements. Measurements by instruments that are superior to the ability for us to accurately discern time. I know you are basing your beliefs on lead for bird hunting, but I'll trust the scientific testing. I don't shoot a lot, but in my personal experience, touch holes lower in the pan seemed every bit as good as those higher. Also, Larry tested powder banked against the barrel and found it to be slightly faster! I've been loading this way since, and lock time seems quite good.

Also, you see many great locks with a relief under the frizzen. This does nothing to support your theory. And finally, most originals I recall seeing had the hole relatively low in the pan.

So, everytime this subject gets brought up, you can tell me I'm wrong and I'll do the same to you! No offense taken or meant.

 

[Grenadier1758]

The theory of the sunset position is a reasonable starting point. As has been observed the slight differences in position seem to have little adverse effect on the speed of ignition. I do think we shoud pay attention to the results of Larry Pletcher's actual findings.

 

[rich pierce]

I’ve never seen results of lab tests that mimic hunting conditions, just fresh and clean and dry components probably loaded less than 10 minutes before the test. And it’s likely that everything is clean as fresh and dry for the next test. Water and moisture run downhill. Have you ever seen mud in your pan? I did on Friday morning. I can only infer that if the touchhole was near the bottom of the pan that the gun would not fire, period.

Load the gun, place it under a mister for 10 minutes, let it sit an hour, then fire it. That’s a test of hunting conditions versus shooting under a covered range. I think Larry Pletcher’s studies are top notch. But the results of any study are influenced by the conditions under which the experiments are done.