This old lock - when made and where?

[rich pierce]

I’m hoping to use this in a future build; a composite gun. It will need new guts and cock, pan, frizzen, and frizzen spring. That’s why this post is here versus Antique Guns section.

I’m guessing French and 1740-1760. As I consider castings for it I will ask for additional advice. But getting it located a bit in time and place will help me make better guesses on frizzen, cock, and frizzen spring replacement parts. What say ye?

[Bob Roller]

No idea about who and where but a mainspring of that type broken that way is a first for me,When new that was a really good looking mainspring.
Bob Roller

[deepcreekdale]

If you have a Rifle Shoppe print catalog handy, they have full size photos of all their mainsprings, cocks frizzens etc that might help.

[Clint]

I have just started building a fowler with a 12 bore barrel and a 1717 French musket lock. I would bet the 1717 or 1724 lock parts from TRS could be convinced to join with your lock pretty nicely. These big locks are great fun to build simply because they are so big.

[rich pierce]

I have just started building a fowler with a 12 bore barrel and a 1717 French musket lock. I would bet the 1717 or 1724 lock parts from TRS could be convinced to join with your lock pretty nicely. These big locks are great fun to build simply because they are so big.

Sounds like a good build. I’ll compare with my 1728 TRS lock.

[Tim Crosby]

 Since it is a "a composite gun" how about using newer replacement parts on it instead of putting a time frame on them that match the plate?

   Tim

[Mike Brooks]

I’m hoping to use this in a future build; a composite gun. It will need new guts and cock, pan, frizzen, and frizzen spring. That’s why this post is here versus Antique Guns section.

I’m guessing French and 1740-1760. As I consider castings for it I will ask for additional advice. But getting it located a bit in time and place will help me make better guesses on frizzen, cock, and frizzen spring replacement parts. What say ye?

OK, I'll give you my opinion on this. This is a fairly high end French lock. All of the trade level locks I have seen are not bridled. Also, It's fairly large at what... 6 5/8"? With that much curve in the lock plate I'd say 1750 or before.

[Clark Badgett]

Does look quite French and is of musket size.

[rich pierce]

Thanks fellas. Eric Von A also thought French and 1750-ish and that it was unusually large. I asked him whether the frizzen spring should have an internal or external screw. He said “ Look for threads or none in the lockplate.”  He left out “dummy”.

[Mike Brooks]

So then. Was the frizzen bridled or not? I can't get through the evening with out knowing.

[rich pierce]

So then. Was the frizzen bridled or not? I can't get through the evening with out knowing.

I think you’d better get out your woo-woo stick, Mike.

[smart dog]

Hi Rich,
I think I can give you a pretty precise ID except I suspect the lock was repurposed and used on some later civilian gun.  I believe it matches the heavy first version of the French model 1763 musket. The locks on those were originally about 6 3/4" long.  Troops complained about their weight and the model was very quickly modified by shortening the lock, lightening the barrels and stocks.  The lighter version became what some identify as the models 1766 and 1768 muskets, which many folks in America incorrectly call the "Charleville" musket used in the AWI.  It just so happens the Charleville armory made a large proportion of the surplus muskets sent to us by the French.  Probably most model 1763s, 1766s, and 1768s produced were made at St. Etienne.  TRS should have all the missing components but make sure you order their parts for series 765, the heavy model 1763.

dave 

[rich pierce]

Thanks, Dave. The signature as I try to make it out closely approximates a name of a worker at St. Etiene, from Gladysz’ book.

[rich pierce]

So then. Was the frizzen bridled or not? I can't get through the evening with out knowing.

I think you’d better get out your woo-woo stick, Mike.

The bolster is threaded for the frizzen pivot screw and is not recessed for a screw head on the inside. Suggests no pan bridle.

[smart dog]

So then. Was the frizzen bridled or not? I can't get through the evening with out knowing.

I think you’d better get out your woo-woo stick, Mike.

The bolster is threaded for the frizzen pivot screw and is not recessed for a screw head on the inside. Suggests no pan bridle.

No Rich,
The head of the frizzen screw is on the outside of the pan bridle.  Your lock absolutely had a pan with bridle.  Look up model 1763 French muskets. Just like on a Chambers round-faced English lock, Chambers early Ketland, and others.
Here is one with a US surcharge.

dave

[rich pierce]

So then. Was the frizzen bridled or not? I can't get through the evening with out knowing.

I think you’d better get out your woo-woo stick, Mike.

The bolster is threaded for the frizzen pivot screw and is not recessed for a screw head on the inside. Suggests no pan bridle.

No Rich,
The head of the frizzen screw is on the outside of the pan bridle.  Your lock absolutely had a pan with bridle.  Look up model 1763 French muskets. Just like on a Chambers round-faced English lock, Chambers early Ketland, and others.
Here is one with a US surcharge.

dave

Ahh. Dave, are you surprised to see the engraving and a non-armory signature on my lockplate?  Seems different from most military locks to me (limited experience).
Thanks

[smart dog]

Hi Rich.
I think your lock might have been reused, hence the non military marking. 

dave

[Mike Brooks]

I think there is a possibility it may be from a French rampart gun or a buck an ear. The French rampart guns of that era  were only slightly larger than a regular musket. They weighed  11 to 12 lbs. And a slightly larger longer and larger barrel with a slightly larger bore. You guys have the same books as I  do, cast about a bit and I'm sure you'll find the rampart info. Probably in the Gladyzs book.

[smart dog]

Hi Mike,
The locks on the large rampart guns do not appear to have had detachable pans and bolsters.

Rich,
I found a photo of a French musket lock with very similar engraving that was made or issued to an officer.  The lock was from a model 1754 musket but that practice could certainly have carried on with later models.  The photo is in Didier Bianchi's book "French Military Small Arms" on page 29.  Also the locks on the heavy 1763s varied between 6 3/4" and 6 7/8" long. None of the other French military locks except some of the rampart gun locks (without detachable pans) fit within those bounds. Bianchi writes that the big heavy model 1763 locks were the most reliable flintlocks installed on muskets ever produced by the French government. Testing showed an average of 120 ignitions without a misfire replacing flints every 40 shots.  That compares with 40 shots for the British Brown Bess. 

dave

[rich pierce]

Glad I picked this lock up. Will be fun to repurpose it in true composite gun style!