Opinion on dog locks?

[Commodore Swab]

Unless one is very familiar with what makes a good lock and a lousy lock, is adequate at machinist tasks, has a drill press and a jig set up for drilling lockplates and parts, and has experience heat treating steel for either tool or spring hardness, I would not advise building a lock from sets of castings. One needs to know how to tune a lock to build a lock from castings. All this on a first gun sounds like far too much to take on unless the needed wood and metal working skills are well developed and will be easily transferred to gun building. There are hundreds of little tasks that require knowledge and experience. No one book covers it all. Trying to learn by asking on a forum is like asking 20 different bakers how to make bread.

A very good explanation of why there is a learning curve and practice. It may be beneficial if one wants to learn to buy 2 or 3 sets of castings so as to have something to practice with. Rich, are you still doing flints, if so send me a message?

 

[rickystl]

Nice. I'll keep them in mind. Was it a good price?

Dunlap's has their pricing for stock blanks on their website. Or did. It's been about 4 years ago was the last time I bought a stock from them. I was able to hand select mine from a large display he has every year at the Antique Arms Show in Baltimore since I was already there. I think I paid around $300.00 for the blank at that time. But, that was for a very nice piece of European walnut, which is often not available and can often cost more than curly maple. With whats happening with wood today I wouldn't be able to guess the cost.

If you're looking to build a plain type gun, one option would be to send your barrel to Pecatonica and have them pick a straight grain maple blank from their inventory and have them cut the barrel channel and ramrod hole/groove and send both back to you. That way you only have two shipments versus three. Straight grain maple seems to be readily available and not expensive. I seem to recall the cost of having the labor for cutting the barrel channel and ramrod hole/groove was $125.00. But that was 3-4 years ago. And, they had the work done and back to me within a week.

Rick

 

[Commodore Swab]

Another thought, early barrels in general were large bore tapered octagon to round which can be more difficult to find without a significant wait

 

[rickystl]

Nice. Around what year do you think that weapon was built? Or do neither of you have a good approximate time

The owner said the seller was dating the gun somewhere between 1690-1715. It could have been re-stocked during that time, which was common. But I thought the entire gun was no later than the third quarter of the 17th Century, with the lock possibly from the second quarter.

Rick

 

[rich pierce]

A very good explanation of why there is a learning curve and practice. It may be beneficial if one wants to learn to buy 2 or 3 sets of castings so as to have something to practice with. Rich, are you still doing flints, if so send me a message?

Sorry, gave up making flints to sell a few years ago. It was taking all my “spare” time and no time for building guns.

 

[FlinterNick]

Hi Tx635,
Dog or "ketch" locks were largely made and used by English gun makers. Brian Godwin, perhaps the most knowledgeable expert on these locks also calls them "type 2 English locks". They were England's answer to the French flintlock during the later half of the 17th century. They are sturdy, simply made locks usually with tumblers lacking a half cock notch, hence the dog catch. Being early, they have deficiencies. There is usually no internal bridle supporting the tumbler on the inside. The tumbler is supported only by its post going through the lock plate and the flint cock. That was an inherently weak arrangement that wore over time. The dog catch itself was not liked by soldiers using muskets equipped with them and they much preferred later versions that had half cock notches and then removed the dog catch. The thin cocks often broke. Also they usually did not have fences on the back of the pan allowing the wood of the stock at the breech to get charred from the flask of priming. Their advantage was they were cheaper to make than true flintlocks. Sweden and Norway also made military guns with dog catches late into the 18th century, however, I believe those locks had tumblers with half cock notches so the "ketch" was kind of over kill.

dave

I had asked Jess Melot about why the Swede’s used dog locks into the late 18th century, especially since those locks were often double bridled flintlocks. he mentioned that the dog catches had something to do with the drilling of the soldiers which was never changed until shortly after the French Revolution. I still don’t understand it to this day, probably becuause I don’t care to research Swedish military ranks and drills into the 18th century Lol

 

[rickystl]

Another thought, early barrels in general were large bore tapered octagon to round which can be more difficult to find without a significant wait

That is so true. I used a Colerain barrel which he calls the 1710 Dutch Musket. It's available in .75 or .77 caliber. I ordered it through TOTW. Took one year to the month to receive it.

Rick

 

[Tx635]

After some discouraging comments, I won't be attempt this project anytime soon. Thanks to everyone that replied. You have all been wonderful and a source of infinite knowledge.

 

[toot]

Same as a snaphaunce, the cock goes thru the tumbler and is pinned on the inside. I also have an early original dutch transition lock where the tumbler has a stud that comes out and a nut on the outside holds it on.

thank you it makes since now, thanks for the explanation.

 

[FlinterNick]

Personally I think Dog Locks look really cool on early Fowlers and militia muskets.

One lock is very dog lock like is the early British Sea Service Musket Lock (without the Catch). Its also one of the easier locks I’m told to assemble from castings.

 

[TBone]

The TRS lock kits are in reality a bag of parts with some basic instructions. In some cases they have adjusted the parts for wear so you can tune them appropriately (e.g. the bottom of the steel on the large Snaphaunce, which I have built). The parts quality and steel is very good, but does require proper heat treatment, and that varies by part - springs, steel, etc take different treatment. Good fun to build, but it takes tools, equipment and some skill. I have built a few, and have more in storage for my retirement.

 

[Rudyard]

I had asked Jess Melot about why the Swede’s used dog locks into the late 18th century, especially since those locks were often double bridled flintlocks. he mentioned that the dog catches had something to do with the drilling of the soldiers which was never changed until shortly after the French Revolution. I still don’t understand it to this day, probably becuause I don’t care to research Swedish military ranks and drills into the 18th century Lol

Some of the Danish/ Norwegian muskets converted to percussion & in some cases rifled up had dog catches added at the time of conversion suffice to cap but not touch the hammer face which made sense they added sights & a' Tige' breach at the same time So a late re introduction of the ' Dog.' Rudyard

 

[Grenadier1758]

@Tx635, I have the book "The History of the Weapons of the American Revolution" by George Neumann. There are 4 pictures of early (1690 to 1710) muskets with dog locks. Later there are also pictures of 2 a musketoon and a blunderbuss with dog locks.

A musketoon was defined as large bored, short heavy barreled, heavy stocked gun. The muzzle was generally not flared. The blunderbuss was similar but with a flared muzzle. Of course there terminology was loose and a blunderbuss could have been called a musketoon of any of the various spellings.