Lock Bolt Clarification

[Bill-52]

In determining whether a longrifle was originally flint or percussion, one determining criteria I've read here and elsewhere is lock bolts: 2 bolts = flint; 1 bolt = percussion. I'm curious, how conclusive is this? Were there ever original 1 bolt flintlocks or original 2 bolt percussions? Or, were there one but not the other?

A beginner question I'm sure....

Bill

[WElliott]

Bill,
Late flintlocks sometimes had just one lock bolt.  Even fairly early Southern flintlock longrifles sometimes had just one lock bolt.  The vast majority of original percussion longrifles had one lock bolt. 
But the general perception is just what you stated, 2 bolts=flint, one bolt=percussion.  My advice is to do what you want to do- jut as the early makers did - but be prepared to have folks question you if you vary from the generally accepted perception.

[timM]

Two lock bolts would be typical for most original flint rifles.  Although I knew of  and had opportunity to handle on several occasions one original early J. Dickert rifle with a single lock bolt, which was a bit of a surprise.   I have also seen some late original flint rifles with a single  lock bolt.  Although I  have probably seen more original percussion rifles  converted to flint with a single lock bolt?  tim

[TPH]

One or two bolts will not tell a whole lot about a rifle's "correct" original form. Most original longrifles, flint or percussion had two lock bolts whether they were made originally in flint or percussion.

[Don Getz]

T.P.........I have to disagree with you on this one.  "Most" of the later period percussion rifles (after 1815-1820) had just
one lock bolt.  I have seen flintlocks of this period , as late as 1840, that had two lock bolts.  Of course, this is one of those cases where you can never say this is the way it was done......you will find exceptions.   These occurrences are what I have observed on Pennsylvania rifles, I have no idea of what one might find on southern mountain rifles.....it could
be as you have stated..............Don

[Bill-52]

Thanks all, that general framework helps alot.  Bill

[Arnie Dowd]

One add'l variation is that a single lock-bolt may be used but there is a hook on the inside facing of the forward end of the lockplate which hooks into a staple of sorts which is mounted in the forward part of the lock mortise in the stock.  This is the case with the "Risingson" Lexington School, Kentucky Rifle circa 1815

[mbriggs]

I have owned several North Carolina Longrifles made as early as 1820 that have always been flintlock and only have one lock screw.  I usually look at the lock if I think it is original to the rifle to see if there are any signs it was ever flintlock.  Then look at the stock above and behind the hammer to see if it was cut for a flintlock, and I look for a pick holder below the cheekrest. Those are the best signs for me.

Michael 

[mr. no gold]

Sometimes, we have to look at the maker and/or the school. Armstrong flintlocks, and guns made with the percussion system, all have two bolt locks. So do most of the other rifles made in that region. Ditto York, although you will see some single bolt guns of either system. The Bedford school, almost solidly percussion, very nearly always used two bolt plates. I wouldn't want one that did not.
You see it in other schools as well, e.g. Lancaster. I have an original percussion M. Fordney rifle of 1840 with a two bolt plate. Gibbs and other makers used two bolts to secure the lock in many of their guns.
Tim mentioned an early Dickert that had a one bolt plate; when I saw it my reaction was the same as his. Something seemed to be wrong. But, the English were said to be using single bolt locks as early as  the mid 1700s, and I happen to know who found the rifle in the south, and when. It is quite good and qualifies as a 'Deckard Rifle', by which they were sometimes called, down there. It is shown in the second KRA book (edited by James Johnston with the gray covers): "The Kentucky Rifle, 1750-  to 1850." It may be that Dickert tried it after having heard of its use, made a few, and abandoned the idea. This one is the only one I have ever seen. As you look at his work and its variations, you can see that he seems to have been in favor of trying new ideas and styles so this would not be surprising.
The single bolt lock plate has in its favor the fact that the front bolt does not interfere with the ramrod channel as is often the case with the two bolt. I have seen some rifles with the front bolt nearly filed half in  two to make way for the ramrod. A single would likely have been less expensive and also less work.
So, there must have been many factors modifying gun building decisions way back then that escape us today.
Ideas, anyone?
Dick

[TPH]

Don, as always you make excellent points. Certainly my experience is relatively limited - rifles made here in western Virginia and eastern West Virginia seemed to adhere to the two bolt attachment well into the percussion period though there are exceptions. As Dick said, it seems to be a school or regional specific trait. Things were obviously done differently certain areas in Pennsylvania and I should have considered that before my post. (I need to go back to my military muskets...   )

[Bill-52]

Thanks guys for all the comments and insights.  The exceptions to the 2 bolts = flint & 1 bolt = percussion "rule" based on geography, school, maker, time period and longrifle evolution are most helpful.

Bill

[jwh1947]

Let's go one step further and discuss the form follows function principle.  Why would it be preferable to have two lock bolts in a flint gun rather than one?  Why is the same form less important in a percussion gun?  Pour coffee...discuss among yourselves. 

[Cody Tetachuk]

Why would it be preferable to have two lock bolts in a flint gun rather than one?

Two bolts will pull the lock in nice tight and square against the barrel sealing the pan. One lock bolt could allow the lock to cant rearward as the wood shrinks (or compresses) and the bolt is over tightened allowing the tail of the lock to pull in a bit farther creating a gap at the forward portion of the pan.