Prolblem with inleting L&R Manton pistol lock

[Rolf]

I'm building a pair of Kentucky pistols from blanks and making thimbles, triggergard, muzzle cap, but cap and singel triggers from scratch. I've design the pistols myself and to iron out the worst mistakes, I'm doing practice stocks. This is the second practice pistol.

I used a router to inlet the lockplate. The mortise has a uniform depth of about 1/8". When I put the plate in, it would not lay flat and snug to the barrel. I remeasured the higth of the bolster. Its higher at the rear end (0.162") than at the front end(0.130"). I used a scraper to adjust the depth of the mortise and got the bolster to lay snug against the barrel. This resulted in the nose of the lock going to deep in the lock panel and the tail hanging out of the lock panel.


I've started on the third practice stock. This time I used the Right handed lock and did the inleting by hand. Same result. The rear end of the bolster is higher than the front end. This time I made the blank thicker so the tail is still embedded in the blank.



Are all lockbolsers higher at the rear end ,or is it just the L&R manton lock?

Best regards

Rolfkt

[rich pierce]

I always inlet the barrel, make ramrod groove and drill hole, then inlet lock, then shape the rest.  If you are having trouble keeping the lockplate square when inletting it, make sure the barrel is level (even if it is swamped) in both axis in the vise (lengthwise along the side flat and from top to bottom of the side flat).  Then keep the lockplate level as well as you inlet it.  Should get very close that way.

[Acer Saccharum]

Rolfkt, I think half the thickness of the lockplate should be standing out of the wood. look at the edge of the plate itself. There is a split line running all the way around the lock. You should inlet it to that depth, no deeper. This might mean your lock inlet is only 1/16" (1.5mm) or less.

[Acer Saccharum]

As Rich says, the lock is set only deep enough to fit up against the barrel. So you willkeep taking off the top face of the lock panel as you let in the lock.

[billd]

Mantons again. I have had nothing but trouble with them. The old ones were great, the new ones, not. I measured three locks I have here. One's a Manton. The dimensions were almost the same as yours. The other two are a Siler from Davis and a Late Ketland from Chambers. Both of those measure .135 to .125.  Unless I'm missing something, the bolster should be Parallel to the lock plate.  I think you have a lock problem, your not doing anything wrong.  Except on the first gun, the lock is on the wrong side. 

[George F.]

Rolf, Seems to me that if the bolster is dead up against the barrel, and the nose of the plate is below the lock panel and the tail is protruding outside of the lock panel, then why not adjust the bolster by filing it on an taper, so the lock plate will lie where you want it?....Geo.       Nice work by the way!!

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

From the looks of the barrel. it is a Green Mountain parallel sided octagonal barrel.  The taper you appear to have on your bolster will give you the correct wrist width behind the lock.  Just remove the wood from around the lock until you have the entire bevel proud of the panel.  Then you are good to go.

[jerrywh]

Your not supposed to finish the lock panels until the locks are inlaid.  As it is you can file the bolster to make the locks lay correctly. The lock tails should be wider than the front of the locks. Go slow it won't take as much filing as you think.

[David Rase]

Rolf,  I would measure both bolsters, fromt and rear.   I would then take the lock with the smallest dimension and file the high end of the bolster down until it is the same height as the low end ensuring  it is parallel with the lock plate.  I would then file the second bolster to match the first one you just filed.
DMR

Tom, Can you as an administrator adjust the width of this thread?  What a pain in the neck.
DMR 

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

It's working perfectly on my Mac, Dave.

[Acer Saccharum]

Geeze, it's working perfectly on my MAC, Dave.

Anyone else having to scroll from side to side?

ACer

sometimes it's because the pictures are too wide. They should not be over 700kb. I'll take a look.

[Acer Saccharum]

Any better Dave? If that didn't work, I dunno what to do. Maybe you should get a MAC.

[David Rase]

Any better Dave? If that didn't work, I dunno what to do. Maybe you should get a MAC.

Tom,  Beings I had to scroll to the right to hit the quote button my answer would be no, it's not any better.  What is causing it to be so wide on my computer is that the second to last row of pictures is 2 wide, that's two wide, not too wide.  I think it is too wide because the pictures are two wide.  Does that make sense?
Tom, Now I see,  the real reason you are standing me up at Dixon's this year because  I don't have a MAC but Taylor does.  My IBM is not good enough.   That's alright, Daryl and I will be just finetogether.  You see, I don't care what type of computer he has.
DMR

[Blacksmoke]

Rofkt--I agree with jerrywh.  The problem could be with the lock bolster. I always put a straight edge against the bolster to make sure that they are dead flat before I attempt to inlet the lock and snug it up against the barrel. Even if it already flat you can adjust either the nose or the tail of the lock plate by filing the bolster to make come in to where you want it. Just make sure that after you adjust by filing that the whole length of the bolster is flat. I think that when these pre-assembled locks come from the supplier they use a grinding wheel to take off the casting gates and thus some surfaces are not dead flat as one would like them.                  Hugh Toenjes

[Dphariss]

Geeze, it's working perfectly on my MAC, Dave.

Anyone else having to scroll from side to side?

ACer

sometimes it's because the pictures are too wide. They should not be over 700kb. I'll take a look.

I was having problems with some threads the other day and I have a Mac and am using the wifes Powerbook right now. This thread is OK.
I suspect that occasionally someone, somehow, offends the tiny wizard in the box and he scrambles things in revenge

The lock. You make sure the lock it right first. Clamp it to the side flat of the barrel if in doubt and measure/eyeball everything.  I generally file the bolster to true it so it mates to the barrel cleanly. If its going to cause problems with the lock forming the writs I would fix it before inletting. The bevel on the lock plate edge should stand above the wood. I work this down somewhat as I sink the lock plate into place bringing it to final dimension after the lock and lock screws are in.


I have a love hate relationship with the lock being discussed here (its not patterned after a Manton BTW)
My complaint is how deep the guts have to be inlet in the stock. So I thin the tumbler and rework the bridle and other parts to reduce the amount of wood to remove. I once ran into the tang screw inletting one of these.
I should not say this but why they didn't copy a nice circa 1800 Manton if they wanted a "Manton" I do not know.

Dan

[Larry Pletcher]

I have a love hate relationship with the lock being discussed here (its not patterned after a Manton BTW)
My complaint is how deep the guts have to be inlet in the stock. So I thin the tumbler and rework the bridle and other parts to reduce the amount of wood to remove. I once ran into the tang screw inletting one of these.
I should not say this but why they didn't copy a nice circa 1800 Manton if they wanted a "Manton" I do not know.
Dan

Dan,
I was taping a panel discussion at a spring shoot when LC Rice gave the answer to your question.
This was in 2006; the panel included Mark Silver, Jim Chambers, Bob Harn, Wallace Gusler, and LC.

LC is talking about English locks and lock makers when he describes copying a Staudenmayer lock. 
He says that they decided to call it a Manton rather than have to educate customers as to who
Staudenmayer was. 

The panel discussion is on my web site if you want to hear LC talk about this.  The audio is broken
 into 6 parts because of length.  LC's comment is in Part 5 about 7 minutes in.
http://www.blackpowdermag.com/
Click on the "Audio Interviews" at the top of the page and scroll down to the "Panel Discussion" links
looking for Part 5.  If you have a fast connection click on the "Play" arrow in the box.  You can also
download the audio if your connection is a slow one.  (Your volume needs to be turned up.  I found
out one-on-one interviews much easier to do than  panels.)

Regards,
PLetch

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Larry, I just followed your link and listened to all Six of the panel discussions.  Aside from being entertaining, they are vastly informative, and I highly recommend that every one of you do the same.
With much thanks, Larry, for a valuable job well done.

[jerrywh]

I do the same thing as Taylor. I thin down the internals. also makes a lighter gun. If you pick up an original with your eyes closed you can tell it by the weight. they were very light weight.

[J.D.]

Mantons again. I have had nothing but trouble with them. The old ones were great, the new ones, not. I measured three locks I have here. One's a Manton. The dimensions were almost the same as yours. The other two are a Siler from Davis and a Late Ketland from Chambers. Both of those measure .135 to .125.  Unless I'm missing something, the bolster should be Parallel to the lock plate.  I think you have a lock problem, your not doing anything wrong.  Except on the first gun, the lock is on the wrong side. 

I returned a Manton lock about a year ago because the screw hole in  the sear was waaaaaaayyyy oversize. The clearance between the sear and screw was so sloppy that the sear would cock to one side under spring pressure. Here is the discussion about the L&R Manton.

http://americanlongrifles.org/old_board/index.php?topic=12124.0

I suggest checking out those locks for sloppy tolerances and either return 'em or fix 'em right.

[Dphariss]

Mantons again. I have had nothing but trouble with them. The old ones were great, the new ones, not. I measured three locks I have here. One's a Manton. The dimensions were almost the same as yours. The other two are a Siler from Davis and a Late Ketland from Chambers. Both of those measure .135 to .125.  Unless I'm missing something, the bolster should be Parallel to the lock plate.  I think you have a lock problem, your not doing anything wrong.  Except on the first gun, the lock is on the wrong side. 

I returned a Manton lock about a year ago because the screw hole in  the sear was waaaaaaayyyy oversize. The clearance between the sear and screw was so sloppy that the sear would cock to one side under spring pressure. Here is the discussion about the L&R Manton.

http://americanlongrifles.org/old_board/index.php?topic=12124.0

I suggest checking out those locks for sloppy tolerances and either return 'em or fix 'em right.

I would see this as an excellent opportunity to make a shouldered screw that could be tightened to stay put without clamping the sear tight.

Like many locks its a kit.

Dan

[Rolf]

Thank you for all your suggestions and help. I've double checked the bolsters on the the locks. They are flat and square to barrel but higher in the rear end than the front end. Since the bolsters on both the Right hand and the left hand lock have the same slant, I guess its meant to be there.

All the stocks I've made so far, are just practice stocks and not meant to be used on finished pistols. Thats why I haven't filed the bolsters to fit these stocks.

As Acer pointed out, I'm using straight oct. barrels and slanting the panels to fit the lock will give me a thicker wrist area. This is good ,since I've had problems with getting the wrist thick enough. The down side is that the nose of the lock might go to deep  for a good side panel. I'll tried this on the last practice stock and so far it looks good.
I was surprised about the amount of wood necessary to remove.
On this picture the lock side is filed down and the same slant drawn on the other side. The thickness in front of the panel is 0.045".

Best regards
Rolfkt