discap
AH member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2015
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 52
- Location
- Wichita, KS
- Member of
- SCI
- Hunted
- USA ,Mexico, Namibia, Argentina, Texas
I probably shouldn't get into this but..... No, a sidelock is not easier to either build nor assemble. A box lock has a sear, hammer, cocking lever and spring. That is it. The only critical dimensions and fitting is the hammer/sear interface. There are pins instead of screws (typically) holding each of the pieces in place. Just making a screw, aligning the slot and engraving takes hours for each one. The finish of each of the previously mentioned parts is not critical because no one takes them out to look at them, unlike a sidelock.
Assembly/disassembly Boxlock - one screw holding the trigger place and 3 pins, done. As fast as it sounds.
Sidelock - one or two screw to take off the lock. Separate screwdrivers sized for the 5 screws holding the parts onto the lock - Main spring, hammer, bridge, sear, intercepting sear, intercepting sear spring, trigger spring etc. And all this is for only one side.
Strength - from a practical standpoint a properly designed boxlock and a comparable sidelock are both plenty strong for the job. Look inside the action of a boxlock most of the metal has been removed for the hammer, cocking lever and sear to fit. A sidelock has 1 1/2 to 2 time the amount of structural metal remaining.
I have never personally seen a sidelock off the face from shooting pressure (not talking about a worn hinge pin). I have repaired at least one boxlock that was actually "bent" at the radius between the face and water table. ( A screw Grip P. Webley)
As far as stocking, a sidelock is much more time consuming because of the additional inletting required. Heading up either a boxlock or sidelock is about the same, but with a sidelock you are less than halfway done at that point.
Most sidelocks have intercepting sears, very few boxlocks do. I have Francotte 12 ga boxlock with intercepting sears, but this is the only one I have personally seen that has them. My personal opinion is that these are a true safety item, unlike the "trigger blockers" that most other guns have.
From a hunting perspective either will do the job equally. Boxlocks exist because they will do the same job cheaper. To say that they are better mechanically, is a conclusion not based on the facts.
I have been working on fine doubles exclusively for about 40 years. I count Bailey Bradshaw and Arron Little as friends.
Every one is entitled to their opinion
Over and out
Bill
Assembly/disassembly Boxlock - one screw holding the trigger place and 3 pins, done. As fast as it sounds.
Sidelock - one or two screw to take off the lock. Separate screwdrivers sized for the 5 screws holding the parts onto the lock - Main spring, hammer, bridge, sear, intercepting sear, intercepting sear spring, trigger spring etc. And all this is for only one side.
Strength - from a practical standpoint a properly designed boxlock and a comparable sidelock are both plenty strong for the job. Look inside the action of a boxlock most of the metal has been removed for the hammer, cocking lever and sear to fit. A sidelock has 1 1/2 to 2 time the amount of structural metal remaining.
I have never personally seen a sidelock off the face from shooting pressure (not talking about a worn hinge pin). I have repaired at least one boxlock that was actually "bent" at the radius between the face and water table. ( A screw Grip P. Webley)
As far as stocking, a sidelock is much more time consuming because of the additional inletting required. Heading up either a boxlock or sidelock is about the same, but with a sidelock you are less than halfway done at that point.
Most sidelocks have intercepting sears, very few boxlocks do. I have Francotte 12 ga boxlock with intercepting sears, but this is the only one I have personally seen that has them. My personal opinion is that these are a true safety item, unlike the "trigger blockers" that most other guns have.
From a hunting perspective either will do the job equally. Boxlocks exist because they will do the same job cheaper. To say that they are better mechanically, is a conclusion not based on the facts.
I have been working on fine doubles exclusively for about 40 years. I count Bailey Bradshaw and Arron Little as friends.
Every one is entitled to their opinion
Over and out
Bill
