« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Tubelocks  (Read 4770 times)

Online Feltwad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
Tubelocks
« on: September 20, 2012, 12:05:04 AM »
Did the Tubelock type of muzzle loading ignition ever become used in the States ?
Feltwad
Logged

Offline jdm

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1389
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2012, 01:03:58 AM »
Feltwad,
 I need help on this one. What is it? What's it look like? Maybe I know it by another name.........or not!
JIM
Logged
JIM

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 899
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2012, 03:00:48 AM »
No. Which isn't to say no one ever tried to build one... I doubt that anyone knows that. 
Logged

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas A Curran
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2012, 03:19:26 AM »
Logged
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Offline JCKelly

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1434
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2012, 03:25:44 AM »
Tubelock used a copper tube filled with fulminate. Stuck it into the touch-hole, lock made with a hammer to crush it. Great ignition, I think popular with the British for waterfowling before the cap came into vogue.

See p58-59, p90-100 of Early Percussion Firearms, Lewis Winant 1959.

I do not think it would be very much fun to make one's own fulminate tubes.
Logged

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 899
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2012, 04:36:31 AM »
The only other tube locks I've ever heard of, aside from "best quality" British guns, were some sort of experimental Austrian military arms.

Logged

Offline jdm

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1389
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #6 on: September 20, 2012, 05:05:41 AM »
Gentlemen , Thank you for alighting me. I learned something new . COOL!
Logged
JIM

Online Feltwad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #7 on: September 20, 2012, 08:20:41 AM »
The tubelock  was built by several gun makers of London and Birmingham  but was mostly associated to  Joseph Manton. Enclosed are  images of late tubelocks

Clayton 6 bore Tubelock



Clayton Tubelock showing tube barrel and anvil



Cox 6 bore Live Pigeon Tubelock






« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 11:33:58 AM by Feltwad »
Logged

Offline Dennis Glazener

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19360
    • GillespieRifles
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #8 on: September 20, 2012, 04:49:16 PM »
They sure look like they would help with fast ignition. I wonder how reliable they were? Did they tend to leave parts of the tube in the vent hole? I suspect there were problems somewhere along the line or we would have seen more of them. Maybe cost was a factor?
Dennis
« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 04:51:08 PM by Dennis Glazener »
Logged
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend" - Thomas Jefferson

Online Feltwad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #9 on: September 20, 2012, 05:29:28 PM »
Dennis

The ignition is the same speed has a percussion cap .Yes there were problems  with the tubes becoming fast in the vent hole through expansion .I personally when I used the Clayton  gun many years ago for fowling I smeared a little grease on the the tube before entering it in the vent hole which solvered the problem There is  something worth mentioning was that Alfred Clayton was gun maker to Peter Hawker and was mentioned in his diaries.
Feltwad

Tubes

« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 05:32:07 PM by Feltwad »
Logged

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 899
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #10 on: September 20, 2012, 06:51:23 PM »
Cost was clearly a factor. I've never seen an English Tube lock that was not a "best quality" gun. In fact, there will be pictures of a Manton Tube Lock and a "Forsyth's Patent" sliding primer lock double in the next Man at Arms... part of an article on a fantastic collection of British firearms we found while taking pictures of ECW swords this summer.

Keep in mind that Forsyth's patent was understood to apply to all "detonating" arms which is why he was constantly involved in patent litigation with Joe Manton. He did license the use of his patent which is why we see "Forsyth's Patent" on quite a few Rigby guns... Rigby bought a license to use it. Forsyth & Co. were active litigators so there was little incentive for a maker who didn't command serious influence to want to violate his patent.

If the application was simple, the tubes must have been fairly expensive. They were never "mass produced" and were supplanted by the conventional percussion cap (which is far more practical and cheaper) early on. I'd also guess that many of the potential buyers of such guns were perfectly happy with their high quality flintlocks - probably the best ever made - and saw little advantage in a new and expensive innovation. Tube Locks are actually very rare. I think the only reason we see any number of them at all is that they were always very expensive guns. It may also be that the continued supply of tubes precluded their being passed on the the gamekeeper ... I've seen a number of fine English guns that appear to have had very long use after the original owner had moved on to something newer.
Logged

Online Feltwad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
Re: Tubelocks
« Reply #11 on: September 20, 2012, 07:05:37 PM »
Tubelock guns were built right through the percussion  period The two guns in this thread the Clayton and the Cox were built in the 1850,s which at that time included the early breech loaders such has the pinfire
Feltwad

Cox Live Pigeon Gun

« Last Edit: September 20, 2012, 07:09:27 PM by Feltwad »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »