Leonardo's snap lock. The missing link ?

[Raf]

Hullo again Fernando . Just found this image in an old post of yours . It looks relevant so I am re posting it . You obviously know about Portuguese firearms so where in the sixteenth century would you place it ? The stock looks early
and the lock has some similarities with the Spanish aqujeta but with an internal mainspring . Since it hasn't got a half cock dog do you think it has an additional separate flashpan cover?

[Fernando K]

Hello, Raf.

No. This is a key (lock) called "molinhas todays date". The average riding (half cock) is achieved with the piece that sees before the cat foot) cock) moving manually to engage the tooth can also be seen in the front of the foot cat (cock). In turn, to reach its maximum position (full cock) a projecting part of the shoe (cock) on the bottom hook removed in (dog) and keeps out the tooth. It is a variant of the mediterranean keys.

http://www.invaluable.com/auction-lo...pistol-carbine

Fernando K

[Marcus den toom]

Just a picture,

[Raf]

Hullo Fernando. Interesting . Does the release sear work directly on the cock or on the tumbler ? Does it move horizontally or vertically and is their a second locking prop ?

[Fernando K]

Hello, Raf:

The sear (sear) acts on walnut (tumbler) horizontally with two sureties, primary and secondary.

There is also an evolution, which is named key (cock) half "of molinhas fecho" half and key (lock) means "French", with walnut (tumbler) and sear (sear) vertical, and the key to the French spark.

Sincerely .. Fernando K

[Fernando K]

Hello,Raf:

See:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ortuguese+lock

Sincerely. Fernando K

[Raf]

Continuing the theme of early snap locks with combined steel and pan cover. This Spanish combination weapon has slideing steels and pancover. Royal Armoury, Madrid, C 1580. Any comments ?

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Raf

Hullo again Fernando . Just found this image in an old post of yours . It looks relevant so I am re posting it . You obviously know about Portuguese firearms so where in the sixteenth century would you place it ?
The stock looks early
and the lock has some similarities with the Spanish aqujeta but with an internal mainspring . Since it hasn't got a half cock dog do you think it has an additional separate flashpan cover?

Hi Raf
You must have noticed by now that there are two Fernandos going on; the one that knows a significant lot about locks and has been replying to your questions is Fernando K; the one who has posted the petronel picture (and not only) is Fernando (no K), who knows extremely less about the subject.
Perhaps you like to have a look at this link; it will possibly complement the answers to some of your questions about these Portuguese locks:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...light=molinhas

And by the way ... the petronel you have asked for the precise date in this post, was made in the Lisbon Arsenal circa 1560 -1580.

[Fernando K]

Hello, Fernando and Raf (Rafael?)

I'm just a love of the mechanisms (locks). At one time, I knew nothing of the keys (locks) Portuguese. Fernando explained to me some issues.

Affectionately. Fernando K

[Raf]

Hullo to all Fernandos.. wherever you may be . Sincere apologies for confusing you and thank you both for your contributions. As your probably aware I am new to this forum and am still trying to work out who everybody is.
All I was trying to do was research early snaplocks, on the assumption that such a simple intuitive idea ought to have existed at a much earlier date than the examples we have ( C1580 ) I just find it fascinating trying to imagine how these early ignition devices ; including wheelocks might have first developed and what stages they must have gone through in the development of the idea.
Rafael.

And Fernando ; sans K . Just for clarification. Do either of two locks you illustrate, Anselmo and Molinhas have single horizontally moving sears or sears with a prop as in wheelocks ? Difficult to see from the pictures. The relationship between these Portuguese locks , early Italian toe locks , the Aquijeta and Algerian toe locks is obviously very close and I would have thought have to be the earliest examples of a combined pan and frizen. The earliest suggested date for the Lisbon petronal (c1560) would make it roughly contemporary with the earliest vaguely dateable snaphaunces.

[Raf]

In pursuit of the earliest ( or in this case worse ) snaplock here is a Mongolian version. The trigger release is breathtaking in its elegant simplicity...
Also interesting is the lack of a frizen spring and no evidence that one was ever fitted at least to this gun. Which suggest what I suspected; that early snaplocks may have relied simply on the inertia of a relatively heavy steel creating enough resistance to create a spark. Difficult to argue that something like this could not have been knocked up by any blacksmith sometime in the fifteenth century...

[Fernando K]

Hello, Raf:

I think the key (lock) has broken the shortest branch mainspring: the square hole in the plate (plate) seems to prove it. Also that the bowl (pan) in the ball and seems to be drawing the battery dock.

I think any key (lock) could depend on the inertia of a rake (Frizen) heavy, without spring, because any sudden movement would that moved out of position. There is, in any museum or collection, a gun (or its remnants) with this feature.

Affectionately. Fernando K

[Raf]

Hullo Fernando.
I did find a different example of a Mongolian lock. Sorry cant post it , so you will have to trust me on this one . It also appeared to have a single leaf mainspring and no frizen spring. But what was interesting is that it had a decorative fence to the end of the flashpan very similar to the one illustrated below; 17C Russian. Appears to be missing from the example above. See also the rearward projection on the steel as in Lenks primitive snaplock. So I think we can assume that the origin of these Mongolian locks are a version of Russian snaplocks and that the primitive release mechanism is an example of reverse engineering adapted to local manufacturing skills , or lack of them !
I know claiming a snaplock without a frizen spring will work is eccentric but I have tested it on Dutch snaphaunces with the spring removed and they do still spark up .

[Philip]

Originally Posted by Raf

Also interesting is the lack of a frizen spring and no evidence that one was ever fitted at least to this gun. Which suggest what I suspected; that early snaplocks may have relied simply on the inertia of a relatively heavy steel creating enough resistance to create a spark. Difficult to argue that something like this could not have been knocked up by any blacksmith sometime in the fifteenth century...

Hi, Raf
There are a number of extremely primitive snaplock guns kicking around the States, having been brought back by American servicemen during the Vietnam War. Smallbore, pistol grip stock not fitted for ramrod, and a very rudimentary flint mechanism with external mainspring and no screw-tightened jaws for the flint which was apparently lashed in place with rawhide or the like. THESE LOCKS OFTEN LACK A FRIZZEN SPRING AS WELL.

The guns do not even belong to the Vietnamese culture-sphere, they are aboriginal artifacts associated with the diverse tribes of the Annam/Lao/Cambodia highlands.

As re your comment about the inertia of a heavy frizzen, my examination of a good number of these guns indicates that the steel is not especially massive, and is a rather loose fit on its pivot. But apparently, these things worked! Unfortunately I do not have a photo handy at moment, if I do locate an image, will post it here.

[Raf]

Hi Philip
Reposted here is an excavated Russian snaplock originally posted by Evegeny. K . Evidence for the possible early evolution of these primitive locks will have to wait until one turns up in an establishable archaeological context.