back action locks.

[ron w]

everytime I see a back action lock, I have to ask my self," why were they made".  I have no problems with varied designs an/or alternative choices, but for the life of me, I cannot seem to see the advantages of a back action lock. all I see is that it makes one heck of a hole in the weakest part of a gunstock, where adding some meat for strength would result in a fairy chunky feeling gun.

[WKevinD]

One reason would be for an oversized barrel like on a chunk gun if there is no room for the mainspring at the front of the lock.

http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=52667.0

Kevin

[Hlbly]

You see more front action guns broken through the lock bolt area than you do back action guns broken through the wrist.

[Hungry Horse]

 In my experience, back action lock guns are very often broken at the wrist. Out here on the left coast a lot of muzzleloaders got built after modern firearms were quite common. Lots of these late percussion guns had back action lock. The strength of the long armed back action locks mainspring was the kiss of death for the wrist of the gun if the lock wasn’t properly installed. If the snail,or drum, didn’t stop the upwards thrust of the lock plate when the hammer contacted the nipple, a broken wrist was the likely result. Sometimes even with good contact with the plate, and the bottom of the powder drum, the wrist would be broken simply because the lockbolt wasn’t properly Installed either through a snug fitting hole in the breechplug, or threaded into the tab on the breechplug, preventing the plate from moving even a little bit. The smallest movement of the plate in the lock mortise often resulted in a broken wrist.

  Hungry Horse

[Bob Roller]

In my experience, back action lock guns are very often broken at the wrist. Out here on the left coast a lot of muzzleloaders got built after modern firearms were quite common. Lots of these late percussion guns had back action lock. The strength of the long armed back action locks mainspring was the kiss of death for the wrist of the gun if the lock wasn’t properly installed. If the snail,or drum, didn’t stop the upwards thrust of the lock plate when the hammer contacted the nipple, a broken wrist was the likely result. Sometimes even with good contact with the plate, and the bottom of the powder drum, the wrist would be broken simply because the lockbolt wasn’t properly Installed either through a snug fitting hole in the breechplug, or threaded into the tab on the breechplug, preventing the plate from moving even a little bit. The smallest movement of the plate in the lock mortise often resulted in a broken wrist.

  Hungry Horse

IF the inletting is to the quality level of a BEST English maker  and,as HH says,
the front of the lock plate supported they are a good lock.MOST of the old guns
we see now with the back action locks are/were at the low end of the quality
scale in workmanship and lock quality.

Bob Roller

[ron w]

according to what i'm reading hear and a little bit in other places, the idea of moving the lock to the wrist just traded breakage locations. I really cannot see where the wrist location would be any stronger than the typical under barrel breech location.   

[Tanselman]

I think the negative sentiment expressed here is not fully in line with what old gunmakers thought about back-action locks. I collect primarily out of Kentucky, but work with rifles from all over, with a preference for Southern and Midwestern rifles. I have not seen a majority of broken rifles [through wrist or through lock plate mortise] that were back-action locks, and from my experience I do not believe they were more prone to breakage; it probably tips the other way from what I've seen.

In Kentucky, the back-action lock was perceived by the better gunmakers as a superior lock, based on the rapid switch to back-action locks by many of the better makers in the larger cities. The superior Bardstown rifles by Jacob Rizer and David Weller went rather quickly to back-action locks soon after the flint era ended in Kentucky. Louisville's best makers, Moses Dickson and Joseph Griffith, both used many back-action locks on better rifles. Benjamin Mills, arguably one of the finest target rifle builders in the United States, and highly admired within Kentucky by most other gunsmiths, went to back-action locks for almost all of his superior rifles after the flint era. There were obviously preferences in some areas for the older front action locks, by both gunsmiths and customers, just as there were preferences for longer barrels well into the percussion era in Kentucky, or preferences for flint guns well into the 1840s in the southeastern hill country, etc. etc.

In my experience with these old rifles, many superior builders considered them an advancement over the front action percussion lock in the first 10 to 15 years of the percussion era. I have never read of any old gunsmith's reasons for preferring the back-action, or even the front action for those who stayed with them. But today's collectors generally do not like the look of a back-action lock in a gun...probably because it looks so different from the old flintlock image...and because they can't pretend their percussion rifle may have been a flintlock if it's mounted with a back-action lock. We shouldn't let our modern dislike for back-action locks [based mostly on appearance] make us start believing they were an inferior style of lock. I don't believe the old gunsmiths who used them thought of them that way.  Shelby Gallien

[Eric Kettenburg]

...and because they can't pretend their percussion rifle may have been a flintlock if it's mounted with a back-action lock.

 

Ouch!  Best to rip off the band aid and tell it like it is, though!

[T*O*F]

Back action locks were thought by many old timers to have the fastest lock time of any lock.  The wrist breakage myth comes about because the lock was held on with a single lock bolt, many of which had no escutcheon for the bolt to bottom out on.  This led to overtightening, which in turn formed a crack running from the bolt to the breech area.  That was the weak point which led to wrist breakage.

[ron w]

so, ok,….what made the back action lock be considered so much faster than the front action lock ?. because of it's design,..did the space available for a main spring allow a much heftier spring ?

[mountainman70]

Ron,I built a longrifle with antique back action lock, and similar parts to what msellers has.The sear spring end of the mainspring was gone, I made a separate spring for the sear. It is installed with set triggers, and when I fired it the first time ,it scared me ,it was as fast as a 22.Made a good hole in target. Next 10 rounds,same fast ignition. I didn't like b/a looks initially, still like front actions for most of the reasons given. But ya got to give the devil his due,mine is fast. Have a goodun. Dave

I guess my next backsliding will be a Mule Ear lock on sumpin.lol

[Pukka Bundook]

Bob roller has it right as far  as I can tell.

The back action was reported to offer a stronger stock, than the bar or regular sidelock, If well fitted.
These were used extensively for British doubles, rifles and shotgun.
The ones I have, have stood the test of time and are as sound as ever, and come from a period when sportsmen could and did fire more rounds in a year than we do in a lifetime.
(20,000 rounds a year was not unheard of)  these stocks were thinned down to a bare minimum as well, and look downright "scraggy" compared to many older and newer stocks through the wrist.

Good wood, Well fitted and no bothers at all.
I think the only failure of many later and cheap back -action locks, was in making them look right.   Many plainly didn't!
Too much drop is also very hard on stocks with this action, but this is the case whatever action is used.

[rich pierce]

Like any sort of lock, quality varied. I’ve got an original SxS 18 ga shotgun with quite nice back action locks, and I’ve seen plenty not so good.

[Hungry Horse]

Back action locks had some idiosyncrasies that caused  people not knowledgeable in their function to do irreparable damage to both stocks, and locks. Few of these locks had internal stops in the fired position, so if the gun was snapped without a nipple, or with a short, or battered nipple, the sping often extend beyond the edges of the plate damaging the stock, and sometimes the lock itself.

  Hungry Horse

[Pukka Bundook]

Old Hoss,

My locks don't have that problem.  You are very right though, some Do!

[Bob Roller]

Lots of tricky filing in that pair of locks.Reminds me of the pair of back action
small Brazier locks on the Holland&Holland  double rifle I got from Tom Dawson years ago.
Fine quality,fine fiting,works every time.

Bob Roller

[ron w]

so you might say that along with the decreased lock time, they were the beginning of weeding out the "everyday" gunsmiths and somewhat responsible for gun making becoming a truly specialized niche.

[Pukka Bundook]

Bob,

The locks I showed are Joseph Brazier locks.  :-)  Marked in full and "Ashes"  His Wolverhampton workshops.

Seems he marked his name in full and "Ashes" on his V best locks.

Ron,

I think everyday gunsmiths were probably on the rise, rather than the contrary.  Most didn't make locks.  Locks were made in great numbers by the Birmingham trade, but best locks were a speciality.

I think it was More important to patronise  Good gunsmith in the days of flint and steel, as qickness of fire was essential for fowling pieces.
Still, Good guns/locks last a lot longer than middling ones.
It is a fact that locks by Brazier, Stanton, and some few others, have  a lifespan yet to be determined.
 If kept oiled and rust free, they are as good now as when they were made, about 170 or so years ago.

Best regards,
R.

[Bob Roller]

These locks and others of similar type and craftsmanship were my inspiration
in past years. If something is going to be even marginally copied at least try
to copy the best. I made my first Stanton style in 1987 and took it to Friendship
in the Fall of that year. John Bivens told me he was very glad to see I had taken
an interest in such locks and another man was looking at it and asked "How much for one of these"?
I told him I was going to ask $250 for the time and effort to make it.He handed me
two $100 bills and one $50. I told him it was my demonstrator and show lock and his
reply was "Show and demonstrate it all you want to but be sure I have it before you
go home". That man was R.E.Davis  whose name is still used as a DBA today as a
supplier of muzzle loading items.
The lock I copied was borrowed from Lynton McKenzie and he took it off an original
Alex Henry rifle and when it arrived I stopped everything else and set about copying it
to the best of my ability. I was pleased with the effort and called Lynton and told him
what I had done and told him that my copy's parts,other than the screws would interchange
with his antique lock.He was as pleased as I was.
Later on I borrowed another Stanton 4 pin of a much smaller scale he took from a
Whitworth boy's rifle and I copied it was well.I have made only 7 of these and about
30?-35 of the full size version since 1987.
The Hawken lock Taylor posted for me with the Stanton 3 pin bridle represents what
I consider as major improvement on an American style lock but with the third screw
at the lower edge of the plate it wouldn't look right on a Hawken copy.

Bob Roller

[Pukka Bundook]

Bob,

No photos of the guts of this one, but it is of an Alex. Henry double I used to own.
Pretty sure these were Brazier locks as well.

Ran out of funds and sold it after we came to Canada.   I think I got about $500  for it.
The son-in -law of the chap I sold it to has it up for sale................for $7,600 I think!
Linda took these photos with her phone at a gunshow where he had it.
It is the Only  set of locks I have  ever seen engraved on the Backs of the spurs.
Sorry for poor photos.

R.


image upload sites



infiniti q70l 0 60



Just realized I broke the law here!   
Pics may get removed but will leave someone else to do that, then you may get to see them first, Bob!

[Hungry Horse]

While on the subject of back action locks, I have a question about a back action lock I  bought from Dixie Gun Works, back when old Turner was still doing his version of the pickers in all the old warehouses in Europe, and elsewhere. The lock is very large, with a massive hammer. It was unused, and pretty much unfinished when I got it. It came in a lot of locks I bought cheap from Dixie. It’s a left hand lock, so I suppose it was intended for a large double barreled shotgun. The internals are of reasonable quality, with a link to the tumbler, and a separate sear spring. Have any of you seen this lock used on a modern build? I am trying to get it cleaned up enough to use on a .62 cal. Rifle for my nephew.

  Hungry Horse

[Craig Wilcox]

Richard, luckily I got to see those illegal pictures before removal!

The locks are truly beautiful, with the shaping and with the engraving.  I would like to see the trigger guard, however - it looks exquisitely delicate!  And I imagine that it is engraved as well.

I think that you ought to re-buy the shotgun, and let Mr. Roller duplicate the locks.

[Pukka Bundook]

Craig,

If I buy it back, I'll need some sponsors!  Are you up for it??   Anyone else??

Might have old 35mm photos somewhere. Sold it in pre -digital days..

[Bob Roller]

Craig,

If I buy it back, I'll need some sponsors!  Are you up for it??   Anyone else??

Might have old 35mm photos somewhere. Sold it in pre -digital days..

I could do it but would end up having to build an air conditioned dog house and start
living in it.Such a purchase would provoke the wrath of my wife of almost 50 years .
 Bob Roller

[Pukka Bundook]

Bob,

I  too would incur the wrath of my wife of 41 years.....

That would give us a total of over 90 years of grief between us!

We should spread the stress over a wider base.    I'd accept paypal.  :-)

LOL!