Features of Fast Flintlocks

Features of Fast Flintlocks
by Fred Stutzenberger
“I have rarely seen an application of 20th century design to 18th or 19th century locks or
rifles that has resulted in an improvement over the original.” (Silver 68)
Every flintlock shooter wants to speed ignition, and there are
but a few who are not tempted to experiment with their locks in
various ways to “tune” them for better performance. A welltuned flintlock is a joy to shoot. A flintlock with more “hisses”
and “klatches” than “ka-booms” is enough to make a shooter
take up knitting. Part of the problem is that flintlocks, while more
interesting than caplocks, are also more demanding. Just about
any old caplock, even those poorly designed and indifferently
assembled will pop a cap. On the other hand, it takes a welltempered and geometrically correct mechanism to get consistent ignition from flint scraping on metal.
When I started muzzleloading well over a half century
ago, there weren’t good flintlocks available on the market
(except a few old originals that were far beyond my price
range even if they had been for sale). Today, there are many
good flintlocks available in a variety of styles representative of the 1750-1850 time period (see suppliers for a partial list). Some are a little faster than others (Stutzenberger
& Pletcher 50). Some can be downright cantankerous (but
curable). A few, particularly those of foreign manufacture,
are no-hopers. A well-designed lock can be improved a bit
by a few hours of care that is beyond what is economically
practicable for the lock manufacturer to do in their assembly. This article describes some techniques to allow a flintlock to cycle smoother, faster, and more reliably.
Embarrassment is a powerful stimulant. A couple of years
ago, I had done some experimenting on a problem lock. I
thought I had the problem solved and went blithely off to a
weekend shoot in north Georgia with the expectation that my
lock troubles were behind me. As it turned out, the lock got
more recalcitrant as the day wore on (and I mean really wore
on) until it got to the point that I thought about dropping out
without completing the match. I persevered, but was so slow
that the awarding of the prizes was delayed on my behalf. I was
so embarrassed that I promised myself that I would always do
my homework beforehand, not use a shooting match as my
experimental laboratory.
There are three general categories of lock problems: slow,
inconsistent, and non-functional.
Slow is the easiest to correct. Locks that are basically
well designed but have maladjustments or misalignments,
Chamber
White
Lightning touchhole
inserts, available in
three sizes (left image
sectioned to illustrate interior cone,
image from http://
www.flintlocks.com/)
Fig. 1 - Chambers touchhole inserts are turned with a stub “handle” that
facilitates its being screwed into place and is then cut off before final filing
level to the barrel flat.
December 2013
such as the hammer or the tumbler scuffing on the plate,
tend to be slow.
Slow may also have nothing to do with the lock itself, but
rather with the conformation of the touchhole. I have had the
misfortune to experience all three categories. Larry
Pletcher’s computerized system also showed us how lack of
lubrication could markedly affect speed.
In some instances, the touchhole is the easiest part of the
ignition chain to improve. Many shooters have gotten on to
the touchhole insert advantage offered by Jim Chambers’
White Lightning (white for stainless, lightning for fast,
Fig.1). Flintlock shooters are fussy about their ignition, but
I have never heard a single growl about Chambers’ inserts.
Before he came out with his inserts, I turned them out of
stainless rod (Fig. 2). They weren’t hard to make on the lathe
and they could be sized to fit a particular width of barrel flat.
I used a slitting saw to slot the outer face of my inserts so
that they could be removed to allow inspection/cleaning of
the breech area. Chambers’ inserts are designed to be permanently installed, but of course they can be drilled and removed
with an “EasyOut” tool on the off chance of burnout after
thousands of shots.
Fig. 2 - Part of my vent insert “collection.” I always keep a lot on hand
to make sure I have one in which the screw slot lines up longitudinally
with the barrel.
Larry Pletcher (11), in a series of well-designed experiments,
has shown that 1/16" (0.0625) is the smallest touchhole that
provides consistent ignition. Bigger might be a little more reliable under some circumstances, considering that if you double
the diameter of a drilled hole, you increase its area four-fold.
That little formula, area = π• r2, is a powerful one when it comes
to touchholes. If you decide to drill your touchhole 1/16",
your cross sectional area exposed to the flash is 0.00307 square
inches. If you decide to go just 1/64" bigger (the next larger
size in a fractional drill bit set), you increase your touchhole
area by 56%. Incidentally, Pletcher was the pioneer who debunked the myth about having your priming powder stacked
7
away from the touchhole. So much for touchholes, let’s move
on to locks.
If a lock is just slow, it usually can be improved by polishing the internal parts followed by proper lubrication. Chambers recently told me that some years ago he was confronted
by an irate customer who complained that his Siler Germanic
lock was just not worth a hoot. Chambers lubricated the lock
(which had been so dry that it squeaked when it was cocked),
cycled it to produce a shower of sparks and handed it back to
the astonished (and probably embarrassed) customer.
Non-functional should be divided into two categories: it
cycles normally but does not spark, or it does not even complete a cycle. If the lock can complete its cycle, the problem is
probably a poorly tempered frizzen or poor quality flint (although
good locks will spark with other types of cryptocrystalline siliceous stone besides flint). If it cycles but does not spark with a
proper flint, it could be that the top jaw is pushing the frizzen
away from the flint face (look for a shiny spot on the front edge
of the jaw). If the lock cannot complete its cycle (the flint hangs
on the frizzen), the frizzen face is too soft, the mainspring is weak
or the internals are binding. If the cock stops abruptly at the
halfway point of its cycle, the sear is catching in the half-cock
notch (not only frustrating but unsafe to boot). Usually this is
because the tumbler needs a fly, or the fly is improperly shaped
so that it does not flip forward to shield the half cock notch.
Foreign made locks are bad for any of the above. In that situation, the shortest route to flying sparks and fast ignition is lock
replacement with a high quality American lock. Ironically, two
centuries ago, the best locks came from overseas. Those Europeans have forgotten a lot about making good flintlocks.
Through the American Colonial period, most of the locks on
American longrifles were imported from either England or Ger-
MB
Give us a call for all your flint and muzzleloader building needs. We
handle four of the major barrel makers and all three of the major lock
makers. We do not import any gun parts!
BLACK ENGLISH FLINTS
5/8", 3/4", 7/8" Bags of 50 – $80.00 – $24.00/doz.
1" & 1 1/8" Bags of 50 – $87.50 – $26.00/doz.
many. However, by the last quarter of the 18th century, the prominent English lock makers had far outpaced their German counterparts in flintlock development. While the Germans retained
the friction-type frizzen cam and the one-piece tumbler, the English were experimenting with modifications that ostensibly reduced friction, speeded ignition, and imbued grace and elegance
Fig. 3 - Comparison of a much-used small Siler lock with its old style
tumbler (and a helper spring insert) and a newer style lock with stirrup in
the tumbler.
NO MORE COLD FEET!
When you’re wearing one of
Arrow’s
Sheepskin
Lined
Moccasins.
FRENCH FLINTS are now available in
5/8", 3/4", 7/8", & 1"
To place an
order or obtain
a brochure call
or write us
(same price as Black English)
Visit our website for a
complete listing of our products.
www.stonewallcreekoutfitters.com
Stonewall Creek Outfitters
3598 Paradise Road, Concord, VA 24538
(434) 993-3557
Soulier de Boeuf
www.stonewallcreekoutfitters.com
[email protected]
• Dealers Welcome
• Watch Muzzle Blasts for future product and pricing information.
• We accept VISA & MasterCard
8
Muzzle Blasts
Fig. 4 - Early John Manton lock with friction style frizzen cam.
to the basic flintlock mechanism. Back then, there were no computers, torque meters, or high-speed photography available, but
there were inventive, intelligent Englishmen such as Durs Egg,
John & Joseph Manton, H. W. Mortimer, James Purdey, John
Twigg, and Robert Wogdon, who all competed for a larger share
of the trade in what was a pretty thin market in tough economical times. If patents were the criteria for judging lock-making
ingenuity, the Manton brothers took the prize. By the time the
Mantons came into the trade in the early 1780s, the swivel tumbler (Fig. 3) with its “stirrup” that reduced friction had already
come into common use (George 116). However, there were other
refinements awaiting their inventive minds.
There are many examples of extent Manton locks that illustrate
the progression of lock evolution during the late flint period. The
John Manton lock of 1782 is a good starting point (Fig. 4, Neal &
Fig. 5 - Slightly later John Manton lock with push safety and roller on
frizzen cam.
Back, plate 48): it has a “non-rainproof” pan, an in-curving comb
on the cock and no roller on the frizzen spring. The lock plate was
tapped for the conventional two cross bolts. Compare that lock to
a slightly later one that shows some transitional features including a semi-waterproof pan and an anti-friction roller on the frizzen
cam, as well as a push-type safety that engages the tumbler (Fig.
5, Neal & Back, plate 49). In 1791, the “rainproof” pan was still
evolving, the angle of the cock’s comb was now more out-curving to change the angle of the flint’s action against the frizzen, but
the roller remained on the frizzen cam (Fig. 6, Neal & Back, plate
51). Ten years later, the frizzen roller had moved from the cam to
the spring arm and was much larger (Fig.7, Neal & Back, plate
52). The lock plate and cock were embellished with engraved
borders and floral designs. A lock produced in 1808 (Fig. 8, Neal
& Back, plate 53) was similarly engraved, but now sported the
graceful French-style “spur cock” with the re-curve enclosing the
December 2013
Fig. 6 - A 1791 John Manton lock showing the precursor of the “rainproof” priming pan.
Fig. 7 - Ten years later, the “rain-proof” pan was still evolving. The
roller has moved to the frizzen spring.
Fig. 8 - A Manton mid-period lock (1808) makes its appearance with
the French style spur cock. Both the plate bolster and flash fence share
the shock of the falling cock.
tip of the top jaw screw. Note that the force of the falling cock is
now distributed between the lock plate bolster and the thickened
top edge of the flash fence. The priming pan conformation is
approaching its final form in this example.
An 1817 example (Fig. 9, Neal & Back, plate 54) has its
flash fence moved still further away from the pan, while the
roller on the frizzen spring was reaching its limit of allotted
space on the bob-tailed lock plate. A John Manton lock in its
final form (1826) has its flash fence completely removed
from the priming pan. The shape of the pan might be described
as a “rounded triangle” with a dovetail joint between mating
surfaces that would seem to shed water better than previous
designs. The spur cock has reached its final form. The tail of
the lock plate is now completely rounded; its front extension
9
Fig. 9 - The plate on this 1817 John Manton lock is bobbed and the
priming pan is V-shaped to provide a greater surface for catching sparks.
shows no hint of a cross bolt hole, suggesting that its attachment is by a hook on the inner surface of the plate engaging a
screw in the lock mortise. The shape of the lock plate fore and
aft presages the coming percussion age; the flint plate has a
flattened edge at the front with the same contour as the percussion plate would have beneath the nipple bolster of the cast
breech (were flint and percussion plates interchangeable here?).
Finally, a prominent screw head showing on the lower tail of
the plate suggests a vertical sear/spring combination (Fig. 10,
Neal & Back, plate 58) that is acted on directly by the vertical portion of the trigger blade instead of the horizontal portion. Although the big screw was ugly, it did proclaim there was
something different and improved inside.
Following the lead of the Manton Brothers, I built a little jig
(Fig. 11) to precisely drill and install rollers in the frizzen cams of
several Germanic locks (Fig. 12, 13). A few years later, commer-
Fig. 10 - A John Manton lock in 1826, its final form with the priming
pan now completely separated from the flash fence and the sear moved
from horizontal to vertical.
Fig. 11 - This little jig has a pilot hole to guide the bit for drilling the
frizzen cam to install a roller.
Fig. 12 - Close-up of a roller installation in the frizzen cam of a small
Siler lock.
10
Muzzle Blasts
Fig. 15 - Roller on the frizzen spring of an L&R lock.
Fig. 13 - All these frizzens have rollers and some have been modified to
prevent crushing of the powder in the pan (probably not a good idea, knowing what I know now).
Fig. 14 - Roller in the cam of an L&R frizzen.
cial lock manufacturers began producing later period locks, and
they too incorporated rollers, either in the frizzen cams (Fig. 14)
or in the frizzen springs (Fig. 15). We all thought that it was the
thing to do, but I did have a bit of a comeuppance in this regard
when Pletcher found that my frizzen cam roller installed on a
Davis early flintlock produced an eight millisecond longer lock
time than that measured for the same lock with an enlarged priming pan and stock frizzen cam. I thought sure that the frizzen cam
roller would speed lock time. I guess that the Mantons thought
so too (although they didn’t have Pletcher around to prove
them right or wrong).
Which of the aforementioned features were genuine mechanical improvements and which were just marketing gimmicks? In
December 2013
justification of gimmicks, it must be admitted that the London
gunmaker’s trade of the early 19th century was a highly competitive environment. Only the rich or royal could afford to buy guns
produced by the likes of Manton or Purdey even though labor in
London cost less than in America. At the turn of the 19th century,
British workers were differentiated by skill, seniority, and place of
employment. A coachman could make up to £26 a year (plus board
and keep), but because independent artisans had to provide their
own food, lodging and clothing, they needed to earn substantially more. Overall, £15 to £20 per year was a low wage in Britain,
and a figure closer to £40 was needed to support a family. The
middle class life required much more and could not be lived comfortably for under £100 per year, while the boundary between
middle and barely rich was in the region of £500 (British First Lord
of the Treasury made £4,000, a relatively much greater interclass
spread than our top government workers enjoy).
Compare the above annual income levels to the cost of
good quality firearms. In the 1820s, a single barrel scattergun
from a reputable maker cost £20-30, a good double cost £5060 and a rifle up to £80, all depending on degree of decoration and wood quality (Unsworth, 142). Even for the middle
class, a good quality firearm was a hefty investment.
Within this economic context, the stylistic changes (such as
the spur cock) would have to be considered fluff to catch the
eye of the well-heeled customer who insisted that he shoot only
the very best equipment of the most current and sophisticated
design (like the young iPhone aficionados I see around campus). That leaves only a handful of substantive changes: the
tumbler stirrup, the frizzen roller, the “rain-proof” priming pan,
and the vertical sear/spring combination. Of these, only the first
two can confidently be construed to speed lock time.
As electronically measured by the Pletcher computerized lock
testing system, the lock times of twenty Germanic style locks
(lacking stirrup and roller) were compared to lock times of thirteen
late period locks having both stirrups and rollers (Stutzenberger
& Pletcher 52). The average lock time for all of the Germanic locks
was 44.7 milliseconds (mS). The average for the late period locks
was 39.2 mS, an improvement of 14%.
Is a 14% improvement in lock speed significant? It would
hardly seem so, considering that the average human reaction
time is 215 mS, forty times the 5.5 millisecond average improvement yielded by the cumulative “friction-fighting” effects of the stirrup and roller.
Based on these numbers, it appears that all of the “improvements” wrought by the Mantons* and their colleagues in the
flintlock redesign continuum between 1770 and 1830 were simply drops in the bucket of a system that was already about as
efficient as it was going to get. If Mr. C.E. “Bud” Siler could
have been around in their day, he could have told them that
11
Fig. 16 - The cross sectional area of this pan was enlarged about 35%
using a 3/8" ball end milling bit.
and saved them a lot of trouble. Back in1960, Bud made and
marketed the first Siler locks by copying a pristine Germanic
style flintlock that had been produced around 1770 (Wigginton
284). Years after Pletcher did the computerized comparison, I
mentioned to Siler that I had been disappointed that the late
period locks, for all their changes, were not much faster than
the earlier Germanic locks.
He replied mildly, “I didn’t think they would be.”
In summary, most lock “improvements” will add more to
their preparation time than to their performance. Of course,
that is not to say that polishing of the plate and its working
parts will not benefit, provided it is done carefully and thoroughly. Any scuffing of moving parts against a rough or
warped plate surface will add to lock time to the point where
ignition becomes unreliable. In my experience, one such lock
was so rough and slow that it would not spark. Three hours
of polishing and straightening turned it into a real performer.
That was time well spent. It goes without saying that proper
lubrication is also necessary for best performance.
Finally, for those who just cannot resist fiddling in their attempts to find The Holy Grail of lock performance, I would offer
the results of this little experiment: I spread SaranTM plastic wrap
over the surface of an empty priming pan to catch the sparks,
closed the frizzen down on it and cycled the lock. Inspection
under a 10X dissecting scope revealed that most of the tiny
burn holes in the wrap were located forward of the pan center. If
you find this to be the case, enlarge the pan forward (Fig. 16) to
catch more sparks. If the lock is doing its job (Fig. 17), that
modification alone might reduce lock time by about 20%
(Stutzenberger
&
Pletcher 53). If the lock
is throwing just a spark
or two, the wider pan
might still catch it and
change a “klatch” into
a “boom!”
Fig. 17 - Larry Pletcher’s photo of one
of my customized locks, taken in the
dark with an empty pan. If only all my
locks would spark like this.
12
Henry Staudenmayer lock at 29.9 mS. Even though from the
statistical point of view, two locks are a pitifully insufficient
sample, it is a 24% improvement over the average of the modern late period locks. So, maybe John and little brother Joe
learned a thing or two in their fifty years of gunmaking (including not to dabble in artillery development that put Joe into
bankruptcy by 1826).
Suppliers
Jim Chambers Flintlocks Ltd., www.flintlocks.com
L&R Lock Company Inc., www.lr-rpl.com
The RE Davis Company, www.REDavisCompany.com
References
Darkhorse. “Slow Flintlock Ignition. Part I,” Georgia Outdoor News (Sept. 2004).
http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=431917
George, J. N., English Guns and Rifles (Platersville, SC: SmallArms Tech. P. Co., 947).
Neal, W. Keith and D. H. L. Back, The Mantons: Gunmakers
(New York: Walker, 1966) Flintlock plates 48-59, p. 16a-d.
Pletcher, Larry, “Touchhole Ignition Timing,” Muzzle Blasts
(Feb., 2000).
Silver, Mark. “Stump the Experts” (Bevel Brothers ed.),
Muzzle Blasts, (July, 1998).
Stutzenberger, Fred and Larry Pletcher, “A Flash in the Pan,”
Muzzle Blasts (Oct., 1995).
Wigginton, Eliot. Foxfire Five: Ironmaking, Blacksmithing,
Flintlock Rifles, Bear Hunting and other Affairs of Plain Living (Garden City, NY: Anchor/Doubleday, 1979).
Unsworth, Patrick L., The Early Purdeys, (London:
Christie’s Pub., 1996).
Vallandigham, P. Post #302214, Topic 196966. “Frizzen Not
Fully Opening,” Muzzleloader Forum, 09/04/06.
MB
MB
*Addendum
In all fairness to the
Mantons, it should be
mentioned that an original Manton flintlock
turned in the fastest
lock time (29.7 mS) of
any tested in the
Pletcher computerized
system,
followed
closely by a Samuel
Muzzle Blasts