Author Topic: First Experience with Chambers' Late Ketland (Read 9027 times)

Hawken62_flint · « **on:** February 21, 2013, 04:10:28 PM »

I recently installed a Chambers' Late Ketland lock in a rifle for a friend and he wanted me to shoot it, so on George's birthday, I went to the range and burned some powder. I just want to say that I am really impressed with this lock. I got possibly the fastest ignition that I have ever gotten from any lock with this Ketland. While the pan was flashing, it seemed that smoke was already coming out of the muzzle. It was pretty much instantaneous. I will say that it seems a little hard on flints, but sparks like a banshee !!! My next lock if the style fits the build will be one of these locks from Chambers.

LH · « **Reply #1 on:** February 21, 2013, 05:42:03 PM »

As long as it don't start rebounding it's a great lock. I went through four or five months of trying to get mine to quit (frizzen bouncing back) New springs, new roller, stronger frizzen spring, weaker, on and on til last fall the frizzen snapped in half. When I went to drill the new frizzen, I noticed that the original was mounted forward somewhat so I slid the new one all the way back till it contacted the fence and drilled it right there. Now the flint strikes the frizzen about 2/3 of the way up from the bottom, and in the past 500 or 600 shots it hasn't offered to bounce back. The answer is easy if you know it. Of course, there's probably 49 different things that "could" have cause all that bouncing back. I guess if I had any sense I'd be shooting a centerfire.

Jim Chambers · « **Reply #2 on:** February 21, 2013, 06:32:05 PM »

The frustrating thing about the "bounce back" is that just a few of those locks exhibit that problem. If all of them did this we could quickly isolate the problem and make the needed correction. But, most work great. We have done several things trying to eliminate this. The latest thing is to slightly increase the diameter of the roller on the frizzen spring and to take some of the tension out of the mainsprings. This seems to be working so far. It always amazes me that each lock is an individual even though they are assembled from exactly the same parts and done in fairly large batches with each assembled exactly the same. Just like a class room full of kids, some are just wonderful, and some need to be sent to the principal's office for an attitude adjustment.

D. Taylor Sapergia · « **Reply #3 on:** February 21, 2013, 08:17:32 PM »

Jim, my latest effort to stop the rebounding frizzen and the consequential loss of 1/4" of flint, is to file a very serious bevel on the mainspring in an effort to reduce its power. The jury is still out on it, but the masking tape and inletting black test shows no rebound so far. I hope I have it licked.

Bob Roller · « **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2013, 09:33:10 PM »

When I get the late Ketland from Jim Chambers. It comes to me with frizzen and spring installed
and the frizzen is hardened.The cock is assembled.I make a mechnanism with a link or stirrup
connecting the mainspring to the tumbler and both main and sear springs are forged from 1075 and
the mainspring has a good preload.I have made 5 of these locks ( I think)and not one gave any rebound
problems.I used both English black flints and the German cut gates from Guenter Stifter and still no
problems.I would think that with the sudden,abrupt snap my mainsprings furnish that there would be a
problem but so far,so good.I might also mention that I do not modify the frizzen or frizzen spring on
these locks and use them as delivered. I mount the flints,either English or German flat side down and
they produce a lot of fire,more than is needed to ignite the prime.

Bob Roller

Hawken62_flint · « **Reply #5 on:** February 21, 2013, 09:41:45 PM »

What I didn't say about this lock, is that I took about 1/16 inch or a little more off the mainspring, so that I didn't have to take the lock mortise any deeper than necessary and I felt that the mainspring was too stiff. But what do I know about lock building--I just shoot them. Don't know if this prevented me from having the "bounce back" problem, but I saw no signs of that when I was shooting it. It was just really fast and threw a lot of sparks.

bgf · « **Reply #6 on:** February 22, 2013, 12:02:44 AM »

I didn't like the flint being mounted upside down (bevel up) for an English lock, but one trip to the range with this lock made me very happy. Extremely fast and reliable as it was shipped to me and the flint looked new when I was done. The lock was unmodified except being re-assembled with moly grease after finishing, and I bevelled a miniscule portion of the mainspring near the bend for additional clearance with the breech/barrel (it was a big barrel).

One thing I wonder about is that some people mention using "3/4"" flints, but the Chambers site recommends "5/8"" which is what came installed on this one -- maybe the smaller flint works better. I have a Durs Egg that will rebound if the flint is too long or too far forward, but works well within a narrow window.

duca · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2013, 02:45:43 AM »

Site says 3/4''x 5/8"

Late Ketland Flintlock
(available assembled only)

Late Ketland Flintlock
Model #L-16

By 1800 the style of lock being produced by the Ketlands had changed to this later form. This style was commonly imported and used in virtually all areas of the country involved in producing guns. This lock incorporates a roller on the frizzen spring and uses the time-tested and proven internal parts from the large Siler lock. This lock is fast, reliable and easy on flints.

Dimensions: 5" x 15/16"
Flint Size: 3/4" x 5/8"

bgf · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2013, 03:26:37 AM »

duca,
That is the smaller size, compared to "3/4" x 7/8"". That is what I meant, anyway, even if it didn't come out right

.

PS. This caught my attention when I was looking at that lock, because TOW recommends the 3/4" flint (7/8"x 3/4") for this lock.

LH · « **Reply #9 on:** February 22, 2013, 02:19:34 PM »

Jim, I certainly didn't mean to make any negative implications about your locks in my post. You have been very helpful and more than generous in supplying parts and information. I'm no expert, but over the past three or four decades, I have shot a variety of flintlocks and shot them a lot. I don't recall ever owning one that absolutely "would NOT" bounce back. Some just do it more than others, but if you shoot one long enough, it will eventually do it. Mis-diagnosis has been the main problem for me all along. When something is happening so fast that you cant see it, it becomes hard to figure out where the problem lies. It can be very frustrating at times, but it's also part of the fun of shooting flint guns. They're all mechanical devices and subject to failure as such. Fixing one and keeping it fixed are just a fun part of it for me. I hope you will always be around to help with that.

Jim Chambers · « **Reply #10 on:** February 22, 2013, 05:56:11 PM »

LH,
No offense taken at all. You're right about all frizzens rebounding. It would be impossible to make a lock where the frizzen didn't rebound to a certain extent. In slow motion they all rebound (most several times) before finally coming to rest. What we don't want is for the frizzen to rebound hard enough to hit the flint and break it off. Extending the leather far enough for a badly rebounding frizzen to hit it instead of the flint is a temporary solution, but the best fix is to modify the lock so the frizzen doesn't rebound back far enough to hit the flint. Usually, either a stronger frizzen spring or a weaker mainspring seems to be the best solution.

Larry Pletcher · « **Reply #11 on:** February 23, 2013, 01:20:47 AM »

Regarding rebounding frizzens, in teh 80+ videos I have, the only lock that did no rebound was one in which the frizzen came down on David Prices thumb. We watched many times to see what was different and then saw the frizzen/thumb impact.

An interesting test was suggested by Lowel Gard (bevel up). We used his Chambers Late Ketland, starting with a fresh flint. We videoed try 1, 11, 21, 31, 41, 51, and 61. Lowel snapped the lock 10 times in between. In watching the rebound, I noticed that the rebound grew slightly as the number of tests went on. It never hit the flint, but came closer as the flint gradually grew shorter. After thinking about this my conclusion was:

As the flint shortens, the flint contacts later and farther down. Because it is traveling farther, it isfaster, it hits with more force. The frizzen opens more forcefully, and impacts the spring with more force. The spring conmpresses more and rebounds slightly farther.

Regards,
Pletch

duca · « **Reply #12 on:** February 23, 2013, 02:26:16 AM »

Ok this is weird; Look at this

http://www.flintlocks.com/locks5.htm

it says Late Ketland Flintlock. Track of the wolf has it as the Classic Ketland an 1810-1820 era flintlock, by Jim Chambers.

http://www.trackofthewolf.com/Categories/PartDetail.aspx/724/2/LOCK-KL-FL-RH

Dennis Glazener · « **Reply #13 on:** February 23, 2013, 02:45:49 AM »

Same lock different names to make you think its different!
Dennis

Bob Roller · « **Reply #14 on:** February 23, 2013, 03:11:37 AM »

TOW has the L&R small Manton as "Bailes". I owned the moulds
that made the Bailes parts I used for a number of years for a German
pistol project.I got them from TOW in 1979 and gave them to Les Barber
a couple of years ago.I still have a few bits and pieces from them.
This Manton/Bailes is also a twin to a Henry Nock flintlock that Lynton McKenzie
loaned me in 1980. Three locks,three names,one and the same.I always used
the Bailes name.The German made a Boutete represention with these locks.

Bob Roller

duca · « **Reply #15 on:** February 23, 2013, 03:21:17 AM »

Hi Dennis, Just wanted to make sure what Lock "Hawken62_flint" was talking about.
Or was it this?

http://www.trackofthewolf.com/Categories/PartDetail.aspx/724/2/LOCK-LK-F

Lol. So witch Late Ketland are we talking about?

duca · « **Reply #16 on:** February 23, 2013, 03:22:49 AM »

Quote from: Bob Roller on February 23, 2013, 03:11:37 AM

TOW has the L&R small Manton as "Bailes". I owned the moulds
that made the Bailes parts I used for a number of years for a German
pistol project.I got them from TOW in 1979 and gave them to Les Barber
a couple of years ago.I still have a few bits and pieces from them.
This Manton/Bailes is also a twin to a Henry Nock flintlock that Lynton McKenzie
loaned me in 1980. Three locks,three names,one and the same.I always used
the Bailes name.The German made a Boutete represention with these locks.

Bob Roller

Hi Bob, Yep I know. I always called it the Manton. Love that lock.

Hawken62_flint · « **Reply #17 on:** February 25, 2013, 04:42:53 PM »

The lock is the Jim Chambers late Ketland and TOW has it listed as the Classic Ketland. They are the same lock--quess Track just wanted it to sound better---they buy them from Jim.

Hawken62_flint · « **Reply #18 on:** February 25, 2013, 04:47:24 PM »

It is not the one by Davis that Duca has in the link in his post.

mjm46@bellsouth.net · « **Reply #19 on:** March 09, 2013, 06:06:07 PM »

I just got my Chamber's Late Ketland lock back from Chamber's. It had a rebounding problem and was smashing flints. When I talked to Jim he said to return it, they had a fix for it. Well it seems that they corrected the problem fine. I tested it yesterday and I could see no sign of the frizzen hitting the flint. So problem gone. Thanks Jim.

I need to go shoot!

News:

Author Topic: First Experience with Chambers' Late Ketland (Read 9027 times)

mjm46@bellsouth.net