Gun Show Hadaway Lock

[Kevin]

Happy New Year Everyone,

I would enjoy a thread about what is good, better, or best in locks in general.  Also, as another member indicated, a respectful conversation about Doc Haddaway's locks would be of interest as well.  In the mid 1970s it seemed to be "the lock" that fellows in the local club, including my father, were using.

Kevin

[Jim Kibler]

Okay, here are my thoughts on this Doc Haddaway lock.   Perhaps it would be good to separate this to form another topic if the original poster is good with it.  Might be good to have the photos for reference.  The intent of this isn't to tear down anyone's work, but to offer critique with the goal of helping others understand locks better.  I understand these locks were designed many decades ago so this must be considered when making assesments of quality when they were originally available.  I've also never handled these locks, but just seen pictures posted.  So my comments are just what can be seen from these images. 

The first thing that pops out to me when looking at the lock is the size of the pan.  It seems quite large relative to the rest of the lock.  In particular it appears to be quite deep.  This looks very much out place to my eye when comparing it to good quality original work of this general styling.  The attached bridle is likewise quite big and overpowering.

The next thing that catches my eye is the cock.  The shape is kind of deformed in my view, especially on the lower area which overlaps the plate.  You can look at it a couple of ways...  The front curve seems quite flat or the bottom curve is stretched to low and creates a point or elbow.  What I'm trying to say is that it's not a fair or pleasing shape to my eye and not what I believe to be representative of best quality original work.  Also the tumbler screw location is off putting to me.  If it were more centered I think it would be visually more appealing.  The size of this screw head is also small in my view.  Finally the spur or top of the cock has some very weird shaping in my opinion.  Not representative of typical germanic cocks this lock is apparently trying to represent.  At least not those I can recall seeing.

Next comes the frizzen spring...  The overall profile is such that it's curved back on itself.  Both the upper and lower limbs.  It's much more appealing if there is some bend in the opposite direction.  Visually this is pretty tough.  The spring would also look much better with some bevels.

Internally the first thing that pops out is the sear positioning.  The lower limb should be very near the bottom of the plate.  This example angles upward a great deal.  Interference with the sear spring can be a result.  Also this requires a taller than necessary trigger to engage it. 

Looking closer, it seems the internal geometry is off.  Draw a line from the tumbler pivot to the tip of the sear.  Next draw a line from the sear pivot to the tip of the sear.  These lines should ideally intersect at 90 degrees for ideal function.  This seems a fair bit off.

The sear spring looks a little cheesy as well.  It's bent from sheet which isn't how it was originally done and the shape is pinched with a big dogleg.  Not what you would expect from good quality original work

I also find the bridle shape to be odd.  Definetely not what you would think of from mainstream quality Germanic work.  A bridle which follows more typical original work would be much more appealing in my view.

And finally, the mainspring looks a little wonky to me as well.  The spring is closed up pretty far for being at rest.   I'd expect it to come close to pinching on itself when at full cock.  If the hook were not quite so tall it would allow the spring to drop down some.  The pre-load would probably have to be adjusted.  Also the bottom limb shape is a little contorted as well.  The overall spring just doesn't have that which we would expect from a good quality lock.


This may seem harsh, but it's coming from what I would expect in a lock or what I wouldn't be happy with.  Others have vastly different expectations.  It may go off in a reliable manner and that might be good enough.  Nothing wrong with either perspectives or any of those in between. 

All the best,
Jim

[JPK]

Thanks for your clear critique of this lock. Your points are valid in my opinion.

[t.caster]

Jim, I appreciate your thoughtful analysis/critique of the Hadaway lock, but most of it was addressed to the cosmetics of it. I agree with pretty much every point you made. But to be fair, you are looking at it through 2020 eyes that have access to modern CNC machinery. Yes, hindsight is 20-20 (pun intended). This one was designed and built 40-50 years ago. At the time the top locks were probably the L&R Durs Egg, and small Silers. Most of us were shooting T/Cs, CVA and Dixie and weren't that concerned with historical accuracy of design. It does function quite well all things considered, and I might be so bold as suggesting, maybe was better than the small Silers that I have had experience with.
To address a couple of the cosmetic issues, that I also noticed before anyone mentioned it, I found the cock from a small Siler flintlock fits perfectly with a little filing to the square hole and a modern larger head tumble screw with 6-40 thd. looks much better. I then carefully ground bevels on the frizzen spring so it doesn't look so clunky, and filed bevels on the frizzen bolster for the same reason.
I haven't tuned the internals yet but I noticed you can tighten the screws all the way down and they don't bind on the tumbler or sear. You can't say that about MOST modern locks!
Here is an updated pic, looks better, I think! (disregard the browning on the used Siler flint cock)

[Jim Kibler]

Tom,

That cock, looks much better.  Yes, I am looking at it from 2020.  This is what I tried to mention in my previous post.  As to CNC, there are a lot of misconceptions.  It can help with production.  Think of it as a tool.  It doesn't help with good design.  In fact, it can be detrimental to good design since it sometimes has limitations that investment casting doesn't.  As mentioned, I didn't post to try to attack the builder or manufacture.  I just wanted to help people understand locks an open their mind to the process of critiqueing them. 

As to most stuff mentioned being cosmetic, yes your right.  A poorly shaped gun stock that still works would fall in the same category.  Cosmetic detail are what counts in this arena!  Without being able to examine the lock, I couldn't comment on much to do with the construction / fit / function.

A small point, when beveling springs such as the frizzen spring, the bevels usually stop and don't continue around the bend.  This usually creates a nice look and tends to create the illusion of more reverse bend to the leaves.

Some might say posts like this are self-serving with us venturing into the lock business,  and that might be in part true, but I also post just because these are the things I notice.  Learning, moving forward and progressing are a good thing.  As I've studied more original locks and learned over time, I've come to realize there is a good deal of room for improvement in the quality of locks being available. 

Jim

[okawbow]

I have an unused Haddaway lock. It seems to me to be as good as or better than any flintlock I have ever tried, mechanically. Everything is tight and precise. It throws a shower of sparks right into the middle of the pan every time. I believe the Haddaway lock was a premium flintlock in its day, as far as function and reliability goes.

As Jim Kibler says; the form is off a little, but most people would never know the difference.

[Hungry Horse]

 I think for its time the Haddaway lock was one of the better performing locks on the market. I had an opportunity to help an old friend build his first longrifle from a stash of parts he had accumulated over about thirty years of shooting muzzleloaders. It was quite an experience to work with parts built by the legends of the sport. The barrel was an early Bill Large, and the triggers were made by our own Bob Roller, the lock was a Doc Haddaway flintlock that worked as well as any high end production lock I have ever worked with. The problem arose when I suggested restyling the lock. The gun was to be a SMR, and the very Germanic features of the lock, along with the aforementioned out of scale features, screamed for a restyling. But, the builder was old school and couldn’t see past the fact that if you restyled the lock, nobody would know it was a Haddaway. So, his son inherited a nice SMR with very special parts and an odd looking lock.

  Hungry Horse

[Kevin]

This continues to be an interesting read.  Mr. Kibler, thank you for sharing your observations & Thoughts.  Tom, thanks for sharing the work you did on your lock.

Kevin

[Pete G.]

These locks were contemporary to the McCrory books, which dealt primarily with building a functioning rifle. We have since learned much more about styling. Many started with a T/C, but we now know better, especilly thanks to those like Jim Kibler.

[little joe]

The Haddaway lock also has  shoulered  screws and a small screw in the tumbler to limit sear engagement, a nice feature I think.

[L. Akers]

Hadaway locks were advertised as having "...tapered bolsters to properly set the tail of the lock out".  Tapered or swamped barrels were not available back then so the tapered bolster gave that illusion and allowed more thickness through the wrist.  Hadaway locks were on a par with Siler.

[t.caster]

These locks were made pre-internet catalog availability, although I believe I saw them in an old Dixie Arms (tiny picture) catalog. None of the dealers in my area had them for sale, so I had no experience with them and don't know anyone who had one in a gun here in Michigan.

Jim K., just out of curiosity, now I have to look at all my locks for the 90 degree relationship/geometry between the tumbler and sear, that you mentioned. I think most will be far more than 90 degrees.

[Bob Roller]

Hadaway locks were advertised as having "...tapered bolsters to properly set the tail of the lock out".  Tapered or swamped barrels were not available back then so the tapered bolster gave that illusion and allowed more thickness through the wrist.  Hadaway locks were on a par with Siler.

The mechanical functioning of the Haddaway locks were identical to the Siler,Chet Shoults,Sutter and some of mine.
In 1970 I got rid of the sliding mainspring in favor of the linked style and never went back.Yesterday I got a lock
back I made in 1990 on the Shoults external parts and I will clean it and reharden the frizzen.The springs and other parts
still look like new and will be refinished to get rid of age/neglect stains.The problem for me will be that due to a problem
with the supplier of these Shoults and other parts I used for years I can't replace anything in the way of cast parts.
The Ketlands I made were the best performers but no way now to replace a badly worn or broken frizzen.I have had very
few frizzens to break but it CAN happen to any lock,mine or not.
Bob Roller

[WadePatton]

Thanks for changing the thread title to fit what the thread has become.  So much easier for folks to find this way.

[Jim Kibler]

These locks were made pre-internet catalog availability, although I believe I saw them in an old Dixie Arms (tiny picture) catalog. None of the dealers in my area had them for sale, so I had no experience with them and don't know anyone who had one in a gun here in Michigan.

Jim K., just out of curiosity, now I have to look at all my locks for the 90 degree relationship/geometry between the tumbler and sear, that you mentioned. I think most will be far more than 90 degrees.

Thanks for playing guys!  I'm not sure how common it is for modern locks to have this 90 degreee relationship.  I've seen originals at 90 degrees but some also vary to some direction either way from this. So why is 90 degrees important?  So, the tumbler notch should be set-up such that it follows a line drawn from the tumbler center of rotation outward.  Now draw a circle such that the center is at the sear pivot point and the radius is the distance from this pivot point to the sear tip.  Placing the sear at 90 degrees allows the sear to pivot without trying to rotate the tumbler.  This helps to minimize the force necessary to trip the sear and therefore lessens the trigger pull. 

With our Colonial lock, we took care to set-up the internal geometry with this relationship.  This and other details resulted in a lock with minimal force required to trip the sear.  I've measured trigger pulls with our locks at 2lb or less.  Details matter!

Jim

[okawbow]

Here is a picture of my Haddaway lock at full cock. The sear breaks cleanly at reasonably light pressure.


are salvaged cars insurable

[t.caster]

Jim, 90degrees makes perfect sense. It's neither before or after TDC, right at the tangent point of the circle! I figured that since you mentioned it, you would have set your new lock up that way. Cool stuff.

[EC121]

An easy test is to remove the mainspring.  Then with the lock at full cock and held nose down(to let gravity do its work) slowly release the sear while watching the hammer.  If all the angles a close, the hammer shouldn't be cammed back or slide forward as the sear bar is pushed.  It should just drop.

[blienemann]

Jim, rather than critique contemporary locks, including those no longer in production, could you post a few old, original locks of a particular style and period, and point out both the design and functional details that make it a high quality or high dollar lock.  I note in the Christian's Spring inventories locks costing from 10 shillings or less up to an occasional lock costing 2 Pounds or more.  There certainly was variety in design and cost back then, as well as now.  Thanks, Bob

[Jim Kibler]

Great idea, Bob.  I'll pick a lock and post some pictures and we can discuss.  If anyone has some they would like to share and discuss that would be great as well.

All the best,
Jim