turn a siler into an english lock?

[bowkill]

Have a tip curtis dubbs fowler pre carve stock. Of Course it has the siler inlet, he dont have them not inlet. Someone on here sent me some pictures of a siler that had been reworked to look more english, that is what i am wanting to do to this lock. I know i can round the pan somewhat but what else could be done? Might be able to round the tail some since this is a l&r lock and are made a tad bigger.

[JoeG]

This was done from a siler kit many years ago

[flatsguide]

JoeG, nice looking work on that lock modification.

[smylee grouch]

Chambers used to make the gunmakers lock and you shaped the plate and whatever else to your own ideas of what you wanted. Would this be a better option for you?

[SR James]

Sorry the quality of the picture is not better but I think that you can get the idea.
If your stock is pre-inlet, there's not much you can do to the tail of the lockplate but you can still do a lot of modification.  Essentially, this large Siler was modified by rounding the pan, cock, and lockplate, with some additional smoothing of the back of the frizzen.

[bowkill]

That is what I am looking for thanks for posting that picture..

[conquerordie]

Kit Ravenshear had some instructions on altering a Siler to look English in one of his Craftsmanship manuals. I love those little books!

[Bob Roller]

The Chambers late Ketland makes more sense if you want an English styled lock.

Bob Roller

[smart dog]

Hi Joe,
You ask good questions.  I've built quite a few guns and I have used every manufacturers locks.  KLMoors is bang on. L&R locks require a lot more work to get fitted, cleaned up, and tuned than the others.  Taylor and others (including me) use L&R locks for some projects because they have the appropriate look for their particular projects.  Regardless, the only locks I have used that did not require a great deal of tuning and never had a quality problem are Chambers.  All the L&R locks I've used needed a lot of finishing work to get rid of rounded corners, poorly shapes features such as pans, poor fit of parts. L&R is not alone.  I had the bolster on a Davis lock turn to dust where I drilled it for my lock bolt because of a huge void in the casting.  I had to forge a frizzen spring for a Davis Harpers Ferry lock because the original spring was so weak.  I have never had similar problems with Chambers locks.  The swivel breech gun I recently posted uses the internal parts from an L&R back action lock.  The main spring was so weak that the flint would not move the frizzen 1/8".  I had to add 20 degrees of preload to the spring to get it to work right.  I typically spend four times the time fitting, tuning, and finishing L&R locks compared to Chambers.  Don't get me wrong.  They can be made into fine locks but that requires quite a bit of work and knowledge.

dave

[Joe S.]

Thanks guys for answering my questions as always I get an education every time I come here.Probably be asking for pointers to tune my lock when the time comes.I don't want to clog up somebody else's thread with unrelated subject matter,thanks,Joe

[JTR]

On the other hand, I have a L&R Durs Egg that is 34 years old and running just fine, with no failures of any kind.

I also have 2 brand new L&R Mantons that seem to work perfectly out of the box, and cosmetically are as good as any other makers.  
Go figure,
John

[Dennis Glazener]

PS, Also, any moderators reading, what happened to the rule on this forum not allowing slamming of suppliers? Or am I mis-reading the rule, or does it only pertain to certain suppliers?
Just curious.

Been gone and just reading this. I will try to explain what our policy:

There is a difference in "slamming" a supplier/manufacturer than giving honest feed back on products. We as moderators/admins try to differentiate the difference. Views of these type post are subjective so different different moderators will vary on how they respond.  I hate to see criticism of any kind posted on ALR but I think honest criticism should be beneficial to both the user and the manufacturer.  Others will have different views.
Dennis

[Hungry Horse]

 The round tailed percussion Siler lock uses the large Siler internals. So by rounding up the Germanic pan from the large Siler flint, and fitting to the new plate, you have a workable English style lock.

   Hungry Horse

[rich pierce]

If you intend to make a rounded English styled lock from a Siler I'd be sure you can do it well before starting.  It's a lot of filing and I'd want it to look good.

On the subject of lock quality by manufacturer, I've had locks from all makers that needed work just to spark and have the pan open.  I've seen plenty with bad leverage, the hook of the mainspring riding nowhere near the tip of the tongue of the tumbler.  Makes for a weak mainspring action and weak sparking.  So if possible always buy a lock in hand, looking at 3 or so and picking the best.

I don't build much anymore and have not bought an L&R for a few decades.  But my Durs Egg from 1978 is still a great fast lock.

[bowkill]

they are solid locks, you just need to spend a couple hours filing and polishing them to make them work.

[T*O*F]

have not bought an L&R for a few decades

I believe that this statement underscores the negative comments made by many.
L.C. Rice started L&R decades ago and much of the bad publicity comes from locks of that era.
Yet, I believed that L.C. builds the Deluxe locks for Chambers and no one hesitates to recommend them.
This in itself presents a dichotomy.

L&R is under new ownership and the new owners are doing everything they can to improve their products.  However, if you don't buy directly from them, you run the risk of getting old stock stuff which doesn't have the improvements, and there are tons of them still out there.

If you haven't bought the new products or are basing your opinions on experiences you had decades ago, then you are no longer entitled to your opinion.  You are just blowing smoke.

[Bob Roller]

have not bought an L&R for a few decades

I believe that this statement underscores the negative comments made by many.
L.C. Rice started L&R decades ago and much of the bad publicity comes from locks of that era.
Yet, I believed that L.C. builds the Deluxe locks for Chambers and no one hesitates to recommend them.
This in itself presents a dichotomy.

L&R is under new ownership and the new owners are doing everything they can to improve their products.  However, if you don't buy directly from them, you run the risk of getting old stock stuff which doesn't have the improvements, and there are tons of them still out there.

If you haven't bought the new products or are basing your opinions on experiences you had decades ago, then you are no longer entitled to your opinion.  You are just blowing smoke.

T O F is right on the target. The early L&R locks were assembled from castings that were not the quality needed and L.C. told me years ago that most foundries had no idea as to what was wanted in quality control and was told,as was I that "We don't do quality control,we do production."
The current owners of L&R Lock Co. are trying to improve their products and I have used a number of the parts they produce by buying the plate,cock and frizzen and frizzen sprig from the Egg,Ashmore and small Manton
and have had NO reported problems. They are using 52-100 for frizzens and told me they wished they had done so sooner.I just finished a pair of left and right small Mantons for a man up North  for a double gun he's making for his brother.These three locks for me are ideal for the mechanisms I make for them as is the Chambers late Ketland. The L&R locks of today are much better and I know for a fact they are doing their best to make locks to a better standard.

Bob Roller

[Joe S.]

How can you tell a newer L&R lock from an older one?Is there tell tale casting marks?slightly different parts?ect.I assume mine is a newer one but after reading what TOF had to say who knows?My lock seems to function properly but I have not tried it with a flint yet,not to that point but would like to know if its an old one.