What are the faults of the L & R flintlocks? Technical question only!

[Roger B]

I read & hear a great deal on the faults of the L & R flintlocks, however I traded into another one (an Egg) this last weekend & it seems fine to me.  This one is quick, very smooth, & seems to spark quite well.  I know that people have discussed the frizzens being too hard, but this one seems ok to my unschooled mind.  It does have a bull strong mainspring, but I don't know if that is good, bad, or neutral.  Educate me, will you?  I'm not looking to start a flaming thread, just seeking information.
Roger B.

[Acer Saccharum]

I have a John Bailes, which is a killer lock for speed and reliability. I have had to replace the frizzen spring a couple of times. One was too thin, and was weak, another too soft. But all in all, it is a wonderful lock. Now I have a well fitted and properly tempered Friz spring, and it has performed flawlessly. They make a good product. No doubt about it.

Consider this: L&R never had any faults until Jim Chambers showed up.

[Steve-In]

I have a Late English flint old model.  The only problem I had was the frizzen screw kept breaking.  I replaced the screw with a Silar small flint frizzen screw and I have had no problems.  My brother has a Dbl with the same locks only the new version and he has had no problems.  My caplocks have had just one main spring break after 3000+ shots.  They replaced it no charge other than that the lock performs as new.

[Dphariss]

I have a John Bailes, which is a killer lock for speed and reliability. I have had to replace the frizzen spring a couple of times. One was too thin, and was weak, another too soft. But all in all, it is a wonderful lock. Now I have a well fitted and properly tempered Friz spring, and it has performed flawlessly. They make a good product. No doubt about it.

Consider this: L&R never had any faults until Jim Chambers showed up.

Oh yes they did back to the 1970s.

Dan

[Dennis Glazener]

My 4 John Bailes or Manton, whichever one you want to call it, all had frizzens that were too hard. One of them, and this is strange, why not the others, had the top jaw too long. It rode the frizzen down and caused the flint to be held off the frizzen. I had to grind quite a bit off to get clearance.

The Durs Egg that I had was the best L & R that I have had. The Ashmore lock that I had was great once I annealed the frizzen.

Dennis

[billd]

I have 4 Mantons, 3 are about 20 years old, one is 2 years old. The old ones are great, the new one, no so great (can't say what I really think on a board open to children). L&R told me the lock was redesigned several years ago and was functioning correctly when I sent it back. The new one needed the hammer bent and the stroke lengthened. Basically put the geometry back to how it used to be. Did the work myself. Now it works fine.  Never had any frizzen issues.

Bill

[SCLoyalist]

I only own one L&R lock, an 'Early Classic' that was selected by the builder of my early VA rifle.  Firstly, I've won lots of ribbons at our monthly club shoots over the 18 months with it, so the gun, including the lock can't be too bad.  However, I know that lock isn't working quite right.  It's main problem is with flint life.   After 5 shots on a new flint, all bets are off with respect to whether the pan is going to flash.  I've tried English Flints and Rich P's flints.  I've tried the recommended 3/4" flints and also 5/8" flints.  My current theory is the problem has more to do with the angle the edge is grazing the frizzen than frizzen hardness, spring strengths, etc.    And, after those first few shots, another 10 or 15 shots can be coaxed out of a flint by knapping, swapping bevel up/down, etc.   Still, it would be really nice to start an aggregate or woodswalk without knowing you had one or two flint exchanges in store.    The second problem, which may be due to the set trigger rather than the lock, is that sometimes the hammer doesn't fall after a trigger pull.  I have noticed that when you get one 'click' , others will probably follow, and that when I pull the lock later, the tumbler screw is backed out a little.  Like I said, may be the trigger, but on the rifle, the triggerguard pin doesn't seem to have been drilled all the way through to allow it to be pushed out,  so I haven't felt like trying to figure out how to get the pin out without marring the stock.

Anyway, those are the tech faults I'm working on with my L&R.   SCL

[Benedict]

My favorite lock used to be the Durs Egg.  I have one on a rifle that is 25 years old and going strong.  The lock is used as it came from the factory.  My only complaint is that the flint lands in the jet from the touchhole and gets burnt thus limiting flint life.  Other than that it is fast and reliable.  My other complaint with L&R is that they are now putting the "thing" on the pan cover which is not PC and it makes it hard to fit the frizzen to the pan.  On my current build, I annealed the frizzen and filed it off.  I expect that it will be a good lock.

I now consider all locks to be "kits" even when they come assembled.  They all work OK from the factory but my skills have increased to the point that I can usually improve them with tuning.  I realize that the factory assemblers are in a hurry and cannot spend the time that I do to tune a lock.

Still my preference is now Chambers but I do ocassionally use L&R.

Bruce

[rich pierce]

There have been 2 phases in L&R locks.  When L.C. Rice made them, and now.  Most problems I see or hear of now are assembly-related as the designs of most locks are at least decent.  Assembly is #1 with any lock and any supplier with volume relies on multiple assemblers. I think there's a little more variability in L&R lock assembly quality compared to some others.

Then of course when we are talking about 10-15 models by any one maker, some designs are going to be better than others, easier on flints, faster, etc.  Small locks are faster.

If you get a good Durs Egg it's a very fast and reliable sparker. My first flintlock has one and it's been a dandy for 31 years.  Seeing the above post I agree, the flints get the touchhole blast.  I make flints so don't care.

There are a LOT of good locks on the market now.  Before L&R came out with many models, pickings were very slim.

[billd]

What Benedict said about the flint getting burnt from the exhaust gases........That's the reason L&R gave me for redsigning the Manton. They said a lot of people complained. So they redesigned it so it won't spark at all, at least then the flint doesn't get burnt.

Bill

[J.D.]

I bought an L&R Manton a coupla years ago, that had roughly .010 clearance between the sear screw and the sear screw hole. The excess clearance allowed the sear to cock to one side, not giving full contact of the sear nose to full cock notch.

IMHO, the clearance of the tumble axle hole to the tumbler axle was not what it should have been either, though I don't remember the numbers.

For a comparison, the clearance on the Chambers Late Ketland lock that replaced the Manton has .002" clearance between the screw and sear screw hole. The clearance for the tumbler axle hole, in the plate, to the tumbler axle is .001". That's more like it.  

In talking to a coupla people who are very knowledgeable lock smiths, it would appear the L&R no longer machines their internals, relying instead on quality castings to give the the precision clearance for screws and axles that only machining can provide.

I also have the same issues with the Early Classic as SCLoyalist. I have bent the cock to get a better angle of attack of the flint, with no improvement. The cock may need a longer throw to correct this one issue with this lock.

God bless

[Cory Joe Stewart]

As a western North Carolinian I like Chambers locks, but I will say this.  I have a Fowler that has an L and R lock on it and I honestly believe it will fire under water.  I went shooting just a few weeks ago on a humid day, just after a thunderstorm and in on and off drizzle.  I fired 12 rounds and only misfired on the first shot because the flint needed napped. 

Coryjoe

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Make a lot from scratch - with hacksaw and file.  Then you will appreciate how great L & R locks are, as well as Davis', and Chambers'.  Not that ambitious?  Then buy a parts set from TRS or Blackley's and make the lock.  The end result will be similar.
If you find perceived problems with locks or triggers, use it as a learning experience to gain knowledge and skill.  New parts are readily available so you can't go too far wrong.  Anyone, including Jim Chambers and LC Rice I think, who has the skill to tune locks, learned it that way.
And you have some choices.  Do you want a flint that will last indefinitely, or one that will be guaranteed to give fire when called upon?  Same with a frizzen.  They wear out as do all the parts.  Just replace them, each time making the improvements that make you happy.  I can almost bet that our flintlock rifles fire more shots in a year than the rifles of the 18th century did over their entire life time.  Show me something that doesn't wear out after thousands of repetitions.  It's unbelievable how well these locks and triggers stand up.
When I buy a lock for a rifle for myself, I always buy an extra mainspring, feather spring, and frizzen.  I have friends who order a complete lock as a spare, so that they don't have to worry about break down at an annual event.
It's all fun.

[Dphariss]

Excellent post Taylor.
Dan

[bob in the woods]

I've filed out a lock. Loads of fun, and loads of time spent too. It took a tremendous amount of work just to get it to function, and I did get it to work well. In the end I cheated, and used a Siler tumbler. All the rest made by me. I'd hate to have to do it every time I needed a lock!  I gladly pay the money asked for these wonders! Although I do prefer Chambers, I don't like all my work to look the same, so have tried a few Davis locks and really like them . They would be my second choice.

[Blackpowder Barbie]

Consider this: L&R never had any faults until Jim Chambers showed up.

Speaking from my business management background and not directly toward other lock companies,  I understand how hard it is to maintain quality, much less try to constantly improve on it.  Bottom line - constant improvements and good maintenance cost money.  Since the majority of the time when a business changes hands the new owner has to make payments on the business, the best way to cover costs is to keep producing what the previous owner had.  Over time though, things need maintenance.  If the money's not there for it then the quality will slip.  As time goes on improvements to existing products help to booster sales and new designs help to keep interest in the company but then again the sales have to be there to cover all the costs.  I know none of us like to admit it, but the muzzleloading industry is in a slow downward spiral.  Sometimes perfection will not pay it's own bills so a company must manage itself to the level of quality that it is capable of producing on a consistent basis.

Here at our shop we are picky when it comes to quality.  One of my barrel suppliers even calls us "extremely particular."  To him if the barrel will shoot then out the door it goes.  There are many producers in this industry that feel the same way.  To us even though it shots, the outside is just as important.  I guess it's just a matter of priorities to each business.  

I have to agree with what Taylor said too -  phrased in Barbie terms; ya'll are a little spoiled and that's okay!  

[Tom Currie]

Question for Barbie. Given your quote about the muzzlelodaer industry being decline, are more locks and barrels being sold today versues 10 or 20 years ago, or is just the ability to make a profit harder ? or is the expectation of the customer as it relates to perfect quality more exacting today  ? as in the case of locks, expecting them to be " plug and play" rather than requiring some tuning from the customer ?  With the cost of @!*% near everything else today, I consider the craftsmanship on a Chambers lock a bargain.   

[Acer Saccharum]

Muzzleloader builders never had it so good. We have so many style choices. When I think back to 1960 choices, man, I am in lock heaven.

If you are going to play this game, it's important to learn how to tweak a lock.

Great points on production, Barbie. Thanks for that insight.

[J.D.]

Make a lot from scratch - with hacksaw and file.  Then you will appreciate how great L & R locks are, as well as Davis', and Chambers'. 

While I have not made a complete lock from scratch, I have hand made a number of parts, in addition to modifying parts to make 'em work.

What I don' t like about L&R locks is that quality appears to be a $#@* shoot. Some folks rave about how well they work. Others rave about how bad they are.

IMHO, I would almost rather make a lock from scratch than pay what an L&R costs, and then have to spend the time to rebuild it anyway.

IMHO, part of the frustration with L&R is that they don't seem to care if their locks work, or not. Jim commented that he gets locks returned for the most minor issues, but people will buy an L&R and then spend an extra $60 to make it work.

If I'm gonna spend that extra $60, I'll go ahead and spend the little more to buy a Roller,  Ditchburn, or other custom quality lock to get more value for the dollar.

While I'm not a gross novice at lockwork, I'm not knowledgeable enough to make the Early classic work the way it should. To be honest, I've done everything I can think of to make it spark reliably and consistently, and it still doesn't come close to the reliability and consistency of the Siler.

I'm considering trying to fit Deluxe Siler parts to improve the  geometry and action of this lock. If that doesn't work,  a Chambers gunmakers lock will made to fit the existing mortise. 

God bless

[flehto]

A few years ago I bought a L&R Classic flintlock and found that the tumbler holes in the plate and bridle were oversized so that the tumbler cocked thereby angling the cock away from the plate. Didn't look further and sent it back for a refund. Started building MLers in 1978 and the average flintlock wasn't of good quality so made a few Silers from kits and still have one on my squirrel rifle. A couple of years go I purchased a non-Chambers Siler and wasted many hrs getting it to function properly....a pure waste of time.  I really prefer building LRs and not being a locksmith, so....I've taken the path of least resistance w/ Chambers' flintlocks.......Fred

[Jim Chambers]

Tom,
Thanks for your comment on locks being a bargin today.  Unfortunately, that view is not shared by all.  A fellow called today to order a small Siler flintlock.  He ask the price, and when I told him it would be $130.  His reply was "Last time I bought one it was only $70."  Back when locks were $70 I paid five grand for a new Corvette.  Today that car would be fifty grand.  By that measure the $70 locks back then should be $700 today.
As for the comment about the industry being in decline, from our view point it seems like things peaked (at least for us) around the year 2000.  Lock sales and kit sales have been on a slow decline since then.  Are the other lock companies selling more locks?  From all the negative comments I hear about the other companies and all the good comments I hear about our locks I don't think so, but a lot of you guys are using their locks.  Maybe they are taking more of our business than I think. And, yes, some guys are a lot more knowledgeable about locks these days and expect more perfection (at least from us.)  What I don't get is that guys will buy a competitor's lock and completely rebuild it before putting it on a rifle, but those same guys will return one of our locks for us to fix even the smallest perceived problem. Concerning the rifle kit business, ten years ago we were about the only ones producing a real quality kit (still are), but now everyone is making kits of various quality and price.  With the economy the way it is being able to buy a lesser quality kit and save a hundred bucks seems to be appealing to a lot of guys.
Making a living in this industry has always been marginal, and it is not getting any easier.  I certainly would not recommend anyone get in the muzzleloading game expecting to make a lot of money.

[Roger B]

Jim, I have one of your late ketland locks & it is indeed a high quality product.  I also understand that people have them tuned in various ways to improve their performance.  Is it possible to improve the performance of one of your locks, or are they as good as they can be out of the box?
Roger B.

[Jim Chambers]

Like a lot of other gunmakers I have never made a rifle without doing some fine tuning on the lock.  We make locks that are as precise and tuned as well as we can make them for the price we charge.  Can we make them better, yes.  Would we have to charge more, definitely.  Can we make a perfect lock, no because every gunmaker I know has his own ideas of what makes the "perfect" lock.  Bottom line is we make the best lock we can make for the amount we charge, and we hope that is sufficient for most guys.  All others can do whatever additional "fine tuning" they perfer.

[Artificer]

Jim,

I'm amazed that anyone would think $ 130.00 for a good basic lock nowadays is too much money.  I can't believe you make them and sell them that inexpensively.  Real Kudo's to you for doing that, BTW.  Yeah, I remember when you sold them for about $ 70.00 and even then it was not only reasonable, it was cheap.  (I go back to when Bud Siler made and sold them at Friendship in the early 70's.)  I wonder if you are even making minimum wage or a little bit more than that.  You MUST be doing it for the love of the work because you aren't making any real money on it for the time and cost of materials. 

Regards, Gus

[Osprey]

How about the L&R Bedford locks, any experiences with those?  Got one sitting on the bench for a project and there's not many choices for Bedford styles.