I also agree with Dan on the consistency of performance issue. If performance is the only factor though, I will use my DT-10. Less fiddly stuff to worry about. Those late English features are very limiting in style, time frame and locale from a historical standpoint as he points out. I can still do well enough for myself with a tuned lock, good flint and a counter-bored hole that my guns are not props at all.
This goes back to: What am I using the gun for?
I built the 16 bore rifle because I wanted a good flintlock for hunting, perhaps dangerous game and had the first barrel I had on it been more accurate than a musket I likely would have killed a Grizzly with it. But that window is pretty much closed now. Since F&I re-enacting is not a big issue out here I can take it to any event I want and its 1800-1820 time frame is just fine.
The Nock patent dates to the 1780s. The critical features of the better English locks dates to perhaps the late American Revolution period if not before. The "frictionless" features.
AND from reading Nigel George, who may or may not be right but knew more than I do, the fowling pieces were the technology leaders since thats where most of the interest was with the English "Landed Gentry" etc. So one is more likely to see the latest in technology on a shotgun than a rifle.
George states that the flintlock hung on longer with the rifle than it did with the shotgun in England because the percussion system was a revolution in wing shooting. I believe that the flintlock system was more ACCURATE early on in rifles until the caps became more refined at least.
I guess I run afoul of things here since I look at what the thing will do and what I want it to do before most other considerations. The fact that I really have no use for a shotgun only further confuses the issue I suppose. I don't hunt waterfowl at all or upland birds (though I probably should) at all anymore and I will not pretend I am some smoothbore toting farmer from 1777, its not who I am. I can't see shooting an ounce of lead at a little bitty bird.
I posted the comments on the Nock Breech and the late English locks because if I were building a flint shotgun for myself to actually
use as a shotgun this is what I would have. Its the best system for the purpose prior to percussion ignition.
In rifles I can shoot a plain breech, large or small Siler just as well but from the purely utility standpoint the best quality late English flintlock is better. Its more reliable and has few wear points. But given that the designs are 100 years apart it SHOULD be a better lock.
The L&R 1700 (Manton/Bailes) is a 1780s English design. It is head and shoulders over a small Siler for a pistol since it hardly jars the gun at all. But as purchased is has "issues". So for a SHOOTER its a better lock once tuned. It would be a better lock for a Kentucky rifle as well. For someone who won't allow himself a date later than 1777 because all his clothing and gear is from that date or before its not much good.
Yes a "prop" can be usable. But for someone who wants something but can't have it because his F&I re-enactor buddies whould drum him from camp then the firearm gets into compromise.
Yes I can shoot percussion guns better than flint. But I don't like percussions all that much.
Dan
