does my lock make my pannel look fat?

[Dave B]

I was flipping through some of my Jaeger photos and realize4d that the  lock panels on this particular piece was  basically non exsistant.  The photos from several of the examples from the KRA book on  Moravian Gun making durrng the revolutionary war shows similar treatment for the lock panel on William Antes swivel breach and the piece with the Dasie finial patch box. Some have a more slender treatment of the top side of the lock panel at the cock area vs under side panel area. I was under the impression the lock panels were suposed to be uniform for the most part but clearly the masters showed some variability in how the panels were done.
.
Here is another example from The Conterporary Makers blog.

[bgf]

I found quite a variety looking through Kentucky Rifles and Pistols one time.  I think they were going for a more sophisticated standard than "no more than 1/8" around lock" or that type of thing that you hear from time to time.  My unscholarly hypothesis is that they prioritized the size of the lock panels in relation to the stock (i.e. flow into wrist and forearm) more than to the lock plate.  I got curious one time when I saw a contemporary with uniformly nut-shell thin molding around lock that made both the panels and the lock look too small for the rifle.  I also saw that various originals seemed to be quite content with unequal amounts of wood in each "quadrant" around the lock, esp. in cases where you could see the lock was tilted (e.g. to keep mainspring clear from breech), and it seemed to vary on an as needed basis, but usually didn't jump out unless you were looking for such a thing.  In a few cases only, however, it was inelegant, enough to make one think they might have carved the stock completely and then stuck the parts in without any regard for further refinement.

Anyway, I'm interested in what feedback you get, as I have no resources beyond my own poor eyesight and bad judgment !

[Dave B]

Here is a Lebanon Co piece that's a good Example of What your talking about. There is no one side that matches the other in consistent width around this lock.

[rich pierce]

I think its commom for the top edge of the molding to be thinner on earlier rifles.  This may result from needing clearance for the cock or maybe just architectural design preferences?  Also sometimes it seems they did not want to mess with the flow of the stock, and the moldings around a lock with some banana curve do not always follow the edge of the lock.  They'd probably get a kick out of our observations- wish we could interview a couple guys from back in the day!  Might also depend on how the ramrod hole came out and how big the lock was.  RCA #78 and 81 Isaac Haines rifles have fat panels compared to some others, but I'd be reluctant to state he didn't know how to build a rifle.