Too light spring

[ebiggs1]

I got a brand new lock form L&R. It came with a very light frizzen spring not at all like the other L&R locks I have. Too light of frizzen spring is not good. I am glad I got the chance to see this in action. But a frizzen spring needs to be right. Not too light and not too strong. After this experience though I am going to say if there is a spring error, make it on the too strong side. Anyway I called L&R and talked to Bill. He told me to send it in and they would correct it, no matter what. I did.
You know L&R fixed it with a more robust frizzen spring and sent it back 'overnight'! Less than a week total time and I used regular mail to get it to them. There are good people out there, Bill at L&R is one. You just got to know where to find them. L&R is tops with me.

 

[bchannell]

I'm curious, what was the problem with the light spring exactly? I've been reading up on just this subject and read where some benchrest shooters remove the frizzen spring. I'm really trying to learn something about these locks.

 

[Stumpkiller]

The lock will function without a frizzen spring at all. What it does is keep the pan tightly closed so you don't lose your prime in handling the firelock and it will also prevent a rebound - which really doesn't hurt anything but isn't nice and businesslike.

 

[spudnut]

Love em,I have an old lock that would go off half cocked and they fixed it for free.

 

[Tom Compton]

One of the top flint shooters 25 or so years ago competed for a couple of years without a frizzen spring.
TC

 

[ohio ramrod]

You are the first person I have heard of who had to light of a frizzen spring. Most of the complaints I have heard ( or had myself ) are too heavy of a spring on the frizzen. :hmm: :hmm:

 

[montanatim]

I have a L&R lock on my great plains rifle. It began breaking off the flint on the first or second shot from the frizzen rebounding back from the open position.

I thought weak spring, L&R agreed and I had a new spring installed. Then it would eat flint in 20 shots or less plus it would gouge the frizzen face very badly.

One member here counseled me to lighten up that spring, that was a mistake. The rebounding was as bad or worse.

Even now, with a light main spring and heavy (factory fresh) frizzen spring it snaps off the flint within four shots.

Now the curious part, at full load, 120gr 2f in a Lyman Great Plains rifle .54 this happens. With a charge of 80gr 2f it does not.

I resorted to making the leather flint wrap long enough to cushion the blow from the frizzen rebound, have yet to try it out with full load though.

 

[bchannell]

Well, I do know this, the bottom of the frizzen can be shaped to not rebound with a light spring. I have a large Siler and it would bash flints. The same member mentioned above, (I bet), counseled me on lightening the spring and reshaping the heel/toe, whatever and it now is working like a champ. I don't really care if I can get a hundred shots as some say they do. All I wanted was a properly working lock with good spark and as good a flint life as possible. That is exactly what I have now. So, yes, a too light spring coupled with the wrong geometry on the bottom of the frizzen can cause rebound and flint breaking.

 

[ebiggs1]

To Everyone,
This is my experience with the light frizzen spring from L&R. First I can't say enough about Bill at L&R. He is a fine person to deal with and I highly recommend them (L&R).
Anyway I built a Lyman GPR kit but I used a L&R lock and a Davis trigger.
I have a L&R lock on one of my TC Hawken rifles and I love it. It preforms flawlessly.
I noticed the frizzen spring on the new lock was very weak. It let the frizzen wobble or move without touching but it did keep the frizzen closed. I shot the gun after completion to test it out. The performance was disappointing. It shot 25 out of 35 tries. The lack of reliability was no spark.
I called L&R and told them of the situation and Bill said it did indeed sound like the frizzen spring was too light. They replaced it and now I have shot it with 100% reliability. It shoots every time as it should. This is a wonderful rifle. The rifle Lyman should have produced.
I am a person with little experience with different frizzen spring rates but I am not going to believe someone shot one, CONSISTENTLY, without a spring. There must have been other modifications done. My conclusion is a frizzen spring must be right, not too strong and not too light.
I know the frizzen spring on my Pedersoli Blue Ridge is way too strong but this spring was definitely way too light.

 

[Melton Kidd]

I have been working with a Chambers late Ketland and a Chambers small Siler. The Ketland been working perfectly, no hang fires and no misfires. The flint shortened to a point that the frizzen would not open( after 60 or 70 strikes).

The small Siler would not open the frizzen and I worked on the lock until it would open. Then it started to rebound.

The Ketland uses a 3/4 flint and the small Siler used a 5/8 flint. I didn,t any 5/8 flint so I was using the shortest 3/4 that I had. i moved the flint out on the Ketland and it worked perfectly again. So I wondered what it would do if I put the old flint from the Ketland in the Siler.

Well the Siler started working correctly, The frizzen opened and no rebound. The flint had shortened about 1/8 in The Ketland. I knew that a flint could be to short, but I didn,t know that it could be to long as long as the frizzen would close.

I don,t think this proves any thing, but I will check the length of the flints when the frizzen will not open completely or rebounds.

The Slier was most probably not getting enough momentum with the long flint before it hit the frizzen and the Ketland was not getting enough force with the short flint that would not ride all the way to the bottom of the frizzen.

It would have been a mistake to lighten the frizzen spring on either lock. Something to think about.


Mel

 

[Tom Compton]

Believe what you want.

Tommy worked nights and shot 4-5 days a week at about a pound of powder a week. Frizzen spring broke one day and he kept on shooting swearing the thing went off faster. He shot without a frizzen spring for some time with several large matches won. I shot with and against him 2-3 times a month and could hear the damned thing rattle when he shot and it WAS FAST.

My Cochran lock was tuned by Tom Gillman and has a rather light frizzen spring - it is a fast lock. My L&R RPL and factory Dixie locks almost take a pry bar to break the frizzen over and they, too, are fast. Angle of the dangle? Kinda like one gun shooting better with a load and a similar one taking a different load.

Agree that L&R are good folks to do business with. I messed up the hardening on my RPL frizzen, called L&R and they said I wasn't the first and wouldn't be the last. Sent in and re hardened and returned in a week with a spare (fitted) frizzen and springs I ordered.
TC

 

[tiger955]

Is it possible that your hammer is not holding the flint at the proper angle?
I bought an old TC Hawken several years ago, I learned how to shoot and tweak a flinter with it, and had it so it would fire so quick I rarely heard the hammer fall. I loved that gun. The only problem was it ate fints, I could get 20-30 shots if I was lucky. Sometimes it would break new flints within the first couple strikes, and it gouged the frizzen terribly, I bought those 3-4 at a time.
I heard about a new lock design a year or so ago and emailed TC about it, they told me to send in my lock. Within a week I had a brand new lock in the mail. I haven't fired it that much but now I seem to be getting good life out of my flints and my frizzen still looks new.
It turns out that TC slightly changed the shape of the frizzen, and changed the angle that the flint hits it. I was reading an article recently about tuning a flintlock, and think I remember reading that the flint should strike the frizzen at about 2/3's up from the bottom at about a 18-20 degree angle. Not sure on the numbers, will have to find the article again, but looking at my TC lock it seems right. I have read numerous times about bending the tip of the hammer to get good spark and long flint life, might be worth a try. Perhaps the good folks at L&R could shed some light on this?

 

[ebiggs1]

The frizzen on the now repaired L&R lock would allow the frizzen to move slightly away from the pan with no effort at all. After that experience I still think a lock with no frizzen spring and with out any other contraption to apply some pressure to the frizzen would not fire consistently. Any thing can happen occasionally. But since I am a curious kinda guy I may just try it and remove the frizzen spring from a lock completely and see how well/if it works. It might be fun to test this method. I imagine if you took a survey most would say they want a proper frizzen spring to those that don't want any frizzen spring.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

I have a slow motion video of a Chambers Round face English lock fired without a frizzen spring. It functioned for the video exactly as it should, but the video is of one trial.

I am working on a test of three L Silers in which the frizzen spring on one lock is 2 and a half times lighter than those on the other two locks. So far I have taken measurements but have not done the timing.

You mentioned doing a test, firing your lock without a frizzen spring. I strongly encourage you to do this. Every experiment like this adds to our knowledge. In fact, a really GRAND experiment would be to have 100 shooters do this and report results.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[bchannell]

I broke my frizzen spring at the range one day and finished the session by removing the remnant of the spring. No problems whatsoever.
One of the members here helped me tune my lock when I got the new spring. I'm a believer that the frizzen spring A) needs to be balanced with the hammer spring (not equal in weight, but taking into account their geometries and weight). If the hammer spring is much greater than the resistance of the frizzen, then it's possible to shock of the hammer landing could damage the lock. I would imagine it would take a lot of time, but eventually it could happen. and B) the frizzen spring only needs to be heavy enough to hold the frizzen closed when the rifle is in any position. This would mean a couple of pounds of force. In other words, you would necessarily want a 2# frizzen spring and a 40# hammer spring, as the lock MIGHT beat itself to death.
The problem seems to be with 10# frizzen springs and 40# hammer springs, will beat the flints to death rather quickly. So, lightening them both a bit, without going too far, will greatly improve flint life and doesn't seem to affect ignition speed at all. This is what worked on my Siler that beat flints to death. Currently, I have around 3# frizzen spring, and I haven't measured the hammer but it's not super strong like some I've handled, and flint life is much, MUCH better than the 20 or so shots I got before, and I seldom have to knap, as it seems the lock is mostly self knapping. Further testing is in order to make a definitive conclusion.
If you get frizzen rebound, then the foot of the frizzen can be shaped to deter this.

 

[ebiggs1]

It looks like I am going to have to try this experiment. But I must admit I am skeptical that it will work, well. I am sure it probably can work once or even several times but not consistently. The reason for his post was to explain the problems with, “to light of a frzzen spring.” The gun fired about 2/3rds of the time with the light spring. The only change was when L&R put, what I would call a normal frizzen spring replacement. The gun than fired 100% of the time on the very next outting.
I have a couple extra locks, different brands, that I can try.

 

[Tom Compton]

The problem is using data from one experience or situation and extrapolating to ALL situations.

In the same way, I don't take Tommy's reliable firing of 100s of shots without a frizzen spring to mean all locks will do the same every time. As a matter of fact, I have never fired any of mine sans spring.

That said, data from a series of tests with one lock would be virtually useless. The data from several hundred different locks would provide a statistical probability of future performance not a fact.

 

[ebiggs1]

Don't you also think after 250 years, if no frizzen spring was better and faster, our great, great granddaddies would have devised a simple pan cover and got rid of the spring? It could be something similar to the pan cover on a matchlock. Or possibility a better mind could come up with a better cover than that.
I already have the results from one lock, miserable, and I have two more that I can try. That at least may indicate a trend.

 

[Tom Compton]

"Don't you also think after 250 years, if no frizzen spring was better and faster, our great, great granddaddies would have devised a simple pan cover and got rid of the spring?"

No I do not! We need the spring and as I have said I did not, have not and won't shoot mine without a frizzen spring (unless it breaks at an inopprotune time).

The thread started out that a spring HAS to be just so and too weak won't work. No, not always!!! Just like the thread about a rifle discharging with no primer. It has happened, it can happen but I won't be shooting matches or hunting without primer - unless I dry load there too!

Tommy's use without a spring was on a range in very controlled a environment. He said it was faster. I couldn't tell the difference. He didn't keep it that way for years on end but it was consistant enough to go to several matches and place.

The purpose of the spring is to hold the frizzen and prime in place in an environment completely different than our range environment. It is needed.

ONE lock with what may well be a weak frizzen spring for that lock, geometry, main spring, cock and flint, 10-20-or however many attempts and even 100% failures to set off the prime DOES NOT prove that all others won't work with a weak or even no frizzen spring. Not only will some work, some may very well may work reliably. Tommy's did.

This is not a recommendation but a statement of experience that conflicts with your experience.

 

[Zonie]

Actually, a flint/steel lock without the pan cover being a part of the frizzen (also known as a "hammer") is the design the flintlock evolved from.
The Snaphaunce had a separate pan cover and some elaborate linkage that moved it to uncover the powder as the cock was falling. It had other differences that don't belong in this topic but what I'm saying is we've been there and done that. :grin: