-
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
R E Davis Twigg lock
- Thread starter excess650
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,224
- Reaction score
- 10,884
Hi,
The Davis Twigg lock is a mediocre lock. The tumbler hole is too far to the rear such that the flintcock does not overhang the pan very far when the **** is at rest. The mainsprings are usually weak and need to be reshaped, hardened, and tempered. It is a poor representation of the British locks of that period (1770-1785). Unfortunately, nobody makes a good English lock for the period 1765-1785. The Chambers and Kibler Ketland locks are later (1795-1815).
dave
The Davis Twigg lock is a mediocre lock. The tumbler hole is too far to the rear such that the flintcock does not overhang the pan very far when the **** is at rest. The mainsprings are usually weak and need to be reshaped, hardened, and tempered. It is a poor representation of the British locks of that period (1770-1785). Unfortunately, nobody makes a good English lock for the period 1765-1785. The Chambers and Kibler Ketland locks are later (1795-1815).
dave
An early Virginia LR that I built many years ago had a Davis Twigg lock and it went well w/ the English styled LR. At the time some complained of the weak main spring which did bend when at full ****.....only shot it a few times w/o any problems. The lock plate shape is quite nice and adds something to the LR. This LR needed a slightly larger lock and the Twigg accomplished this. By the way, the Bplate on this LR is 2-1/8" wide.....Fred
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,224
- Reaction score
- 10,884
Excess650,
What period gun are you making, mid 18th century (1730-1760) English rifle, late 18th century (1770-1790) or late flint era (1800-1830) rifle? If the first, Chambers round-faced English lock and Kibler's round-faced lock will do very well. If the last, Chambers and Kibler's late Ketland locks would work well. They will work on a big barrel and keep in mind, at that time the fashion was for smaller flat-faced locks with short throw. If you want a late 18th century rifle, you have a problem. The fashion was for flat-faced locks like the Twigg and L&R Durs Egg but I don't like either of those locks. For that period I build my own from TRS parts or I would modify a Chambers early Ketland lock to make it look more upscale for the period. Here are some examples. The first is Chamber's round-faced on a mid 18th century English rifle, the second is a 1770s Twigg copy made from TRS parts, and the third is a Davis late English flintlock that worked fine but needed a lot of working over.
dave
What period gun are you making, mid 18th century (1730-1760) English rifle, late 18th century (1770-1790) or late flint era (1800-1830) rifle? If the first, Chambers round-faced English lock and Kibler's round-faced lock will do very well. If the last, Chambers and Kibler's late Ketland locks would work well. They will work on a big barrel and keep in mind, at that time the fashion was for smaller flat-faced locks with short throw. If you want a late 18th century rifle, you have a problem. The fashion was for flat-faced locks like the Twigg and L&R Durs Egg but I don't like either of those locks. For that period I build my own from TRS parts or I would modify a Chambers early Ketland lock to make it look more upscale for the period. Here are some examples. The first is Chamber's round-faced on a mid 18th century English rifle, the second is a 1770s Twigg copy made from TRS parts, and the third is a Davis late English flintlock that worked fine but needed a lot of working over.
dave
excess650
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2009
- Messages
- 1,671
- Reaction score
- 639
Dave,
I'm debating about whether to go early or late, but late seems to be winning. My barrel is 30" oct-rd, so probably better to lean towards Purdy or his Master, Manton. I was a little surprised to see that Purdy apprenticed as early as he did (1798), and that Manton was building flintlocks until 1825 or so. Regardless, this clears up the suitability of a late Ketland. I was thinking that I would need a larger lock.
I'm debating about whether to go early or late, but late seems to be winning. My barrel is 30" oct-rd, so probably better to lean towards Purdy or his Master, Manton. I was a little surprised to see that Purdy apprenticed as early as he did (1798), and that Manton was building flintlocks until 1825 or so. Regardless, this clears up the suitability of a late Ketland. I was thinking that I would need a larger lock.
I have used the Davis Twigg lock a couple times, and perhaps I don't have as discerning an eye as Dave. To me it is a very elegant looking lock and in its current shape, as done by the Larry Zorne at the Mold an Gun Shop it is a very smooth and reliable lock. With reference to the springs I believe Mr. Zorne has corrected that problem.
Robby
Robby
Similar threads
