Twigg Lock at 18th Century Artisans Show....Lewisburg

[westbj2]

This bridal came from the back corner of a parts drawer, apparently I had it tucked away for reference or ??
At any rate, the small broken-off round pin is about .075" dia.   The lower post, kind of a flattened oval in shape is about .200" wide and .090 at its thickest tapering both ways to a point.  As  you can see, about 1/3 of the end is filed away leaving the remainder to fit in a mating mortise in the lockplate.  In this case, I dont think the broken pin can be interpreted as a design flaw because at least one heathen has messed with it over time dinging up the top screw counter bore.
Jim Westberg

[Jim Kibler]

Wonderful Jim.  This shows things perfectly.  Thanks for taking the time to show this.

Jim

[Dphariss]

This topic is following the vein of a recent thread on gunstock finishes: what's traditional and what's modern.

It comes down to your personal preferences, and what's important to YOU in your gun. You can't successfully argue personal preferences, tho' many have tried.

You can be a total traditionalist, a complete committed modernist, or somewhere in between. Who is right?

But in the world of flintlock internals what/when is "modern"?
Its not as if people were putting in rebounding hammers or self/assisted opening mechanisms as found some late 19th century designs.

Dan

[Jim Kibler]

As mentioned previously, this is all up to each individual.  How historically accurate one chooses to make any part of a gun is personal preference.  Whatever you're happy with is good enough.

From my personal perspective, if I am going to be using a Twigg lock, it would be going on a Twigg styled fowling piece or pistol.  I wouldn't use it on an American gun.  With the huge amount of work required to build a good Twigg fowling piece, I would go to every effort to make the internals appropriate to the rest of the gun.  I would not want to see two extra screws from the outside of the plate either.  I also admire the workmanship in a fine lock a great deal.  If I go to the pains to make a lock, I would want it correct from a historical standpoint.  I see a lock such as this as almost a seperate project in itself.  For a project of this caliber, anything else would be a let down in my view.

Now with that said, most will never try to push gunmaking to this level.  They may use this lock on any number of guns and would be thrilled to have a good functioning lock that will work well for years to come regardless whether it is completely historically correct.  This is ok to. 

Everybody has to draw their own lines with this stuff. 


I hope this makes sense. 

Jim

[Bob Roller]

I drew my own lines years ago  when I decided to do the very best I possibly could with whatever I was making. I chose the Twigg because it was available,good looking and its size lent it to much needed improvements in the "engine compartment". I am surprised at the unfavorable comments on this lock and they should be directed to the production versions of this lock.The one I have here now is unusable in its present condition and it is new,never mounted on  gun. No such criticism arose over my remakes of the L&R Manton,Durs Egg or Ashmore locks and I have done a bunch of them.The Twigg is a very limited run of locks and will not be repeated.

Bob Roller 

[Jim Kibler]

The way I see it there's just one fellow giving you a hard time Bob.  Pay no mind to this fool.  WAY more than enough said about this subject.  Time to move on to something else.

[flintriflesmith]

I've been reading this thread with considerable interest and, since I spent nearly half of my working life researching and attempting to redevelop 18th-century technology in the gunmaking trade, it should come as no surprise that making firearms that are historically accurate (AKA Period Correct) inside and out is important to me.

About 1983 I gave a talk on 18th-century gunsmithing to a bunch of engineers and scientists at the Oak Ridge, TN nuclear research facility. (Your tax dollars at work!) During the Q&A session a question floored me, "Why in the world would anyone waste their time making something that has been obsolete for two-hundred years, especially doing it by hand when far faster and better processes are readily available?" I'm rarely at a lose for words but that question stopped me cold and opened my eyes to the fact that there are individuals out there that see the world and the importance history of differently.

Somewhere on this web site there may still be picture of an improved Siler lock that had ball bearing races in the plate and bridle. Put it on a rifle with a stainless steel barrel and send it to that engineer in TN. Oh, never mind just send him an inline.

That too is a personal choice but not one I would chose to make.
Gary

[Dogshirt]

I've been thinking on this for some time now, and have come to MY conclusions. Copying rifles that have already been built, as in RCA, seems to me to be a total waste of time. Not just from the point of history, me being from the west and "back east" being a foreign country to us west of the Mississippi, but from the point of view that it's been done! If one is going to do something, wether in the old school or by modern methods, do it from your heart and soul, don't copy someone else's heart and soul. Might as well use a Xerox machine.
 I guess if copying someone else's work puts the frosting on your cake, well....OK, but not for me.

[Jim Kibler]

Dogshirt,

Unless you study original work extensively, working in your own new style will likely be a disaster.  There is no better way to learn about gunbuilding and studying work than to make a copy.  Many have tried to go in their own direction without an understanding and respect for original work and it seems to always end up in a mess.

Jim

[Swampwalker]

Jim, I'm sticking with the Twigg lock subject, and have another question - on the second Twigg lock with the stalking safety, the picture of the inside shows what looks like a long thin bar extending forward of the arm of the tumbler (and apparently underneath).  Any idea what that is?  is it part of the safety mechanism, or what? 
Thanks!

[Jim Kibler]

I'm not 100% positive, but I'd bet it's a link that slides a pin from the plate / pan and into the frizzen preventing it from opening.  An additional saftety feature.  I've seen this on other locks and they had a similar appearance.

[Jay Close]

I come at this discussion a little different way, but in parallel to Gary's comment.

I see fine art, architecture, metalwork, textiles, firearms etc. as part of a collective inheritance. These things are a legacy that we honor by preserving and studying. Doing so is a mark of respect for countless unrecognized men and women who made our modern lives possible.

Thousand upon thousand of square feet of museum  space is devoted to preserving objects from our past. Yet, if preserving and studying the products of the past is valuable, what about the processes that made those products?

In my view, those processes, those work habits and approaches are also part of the heritage. The only effective way I know to study those is to attempt to reproduce them. The only way to preserve them is by doing them.

Now, forging a rifle barrel is not for everyone, but I'm gratified that someone knows how to do it. To thoroughly lose those skills would be a loss to our patrimony as much as the destruction of a piece of fine art, or a fine longrifle.

I doubt that the engineer in Gary's story would appreciate any of this.  There is more than one kind of blindness. Some forms can be addressed by education. My hat is off to those such as Gary who have devoted a career to that education.

[Dogshirt]

Perhaps I worded my earlier post wrongly. Let me start over.
 I do tradtional Blackfoot beadwork. When I do a pair of moccasins or cuffs, they are moccasins or cuffs, the function dictates the form. What I NEVER do is copy the pattern of the beadwork! This, to my mind, is the same as "intellectual" or "spiritual" piracy. To copy what another has done is just wrong on so many levels I can't begin to count them! To copy is to steal, even if the original artist IS dead!
Just my $0.02 worth.

[J. Talbert]

I'm most definitely of a similar mind to Jim, Gary and Jay.  My fascination with this whole pastime centers around an interest in the methods, processes and products of the era that we're trying to recollect.  (Or at least I am).  Take that away and there's nothing left as far as I'm concerned.

Years ago I had a similar eyeopening experience, to that of Gary's at Oakridge TN.   I was speaking to a person at work who mentioned that she had just returned from a trip to Colonial Wmsburg.  As I joined in to say that I had just recently been there also, and was about to say how much I loved it; she blurted out how much she hated it.  I was stunned!  Such a thought had never even occurred to me.  
To each his own... there's no arguing with taste.

Jay,  I think you summed it up quite eloquently.

Jeff