Wheellock Mechanism

[rickystl]

Hello. Attached are photos of an original wheellock - double cock - mechanism I am considering adding to my collection. I'm thinking this is either German or Dutch, possibly late 16th or early 17th century? It appears complete except maybe the return chain after the wheel is wound. Anyone's thoughts on this piece? Michael? Thanks, Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

As usually, your guessing was quite close.

This is a North Italian style double dog wheellock mechanism, made in either Italy, or, consequently, in the Italian tradition, in Suhl/Thuringia, or Nuremberg, or Amsterdam in the early 17th c.

It doublessly was designed to be a mililtary musket lock, and there are very few around equipped with a reserve pyyites holder (double dog). The dogs should have extremely strong springs and consequently should be very hard to move!

More on these soon!!!

Thanks for posting, lots of congratulations,
and best as always,

Michael

[Fernando K]

Hola Rick

Lo que falta no es la cadena: puede verse claramente en la fotografía número 3: falta el segundo fiador (sear) y el resorte de doble acción que mueve a los dos fiadores (sear).

Los resortes de las pinzas porta piritas (cock) precisan ser poderosos porque la distancia que hay entre el punto donde se aplica la fuerza hasta el centro de giro es mucho menor que la distancia de este último a las mandibulas (jaw). Esto por la leyes de la Fisica.

Fernando K

Hi Rick

What is missing is the chain is clearly visible in the photograph number 3: Missing second sear (sear) and double-action spring that moves to two catches (SEAR).

The springs of the clamps pyrites (cock) need to be powerful because the distance between where the force is applied to the center of rotation is much smaller than the distance from the latter to the jaws (jaw). That the laws of physics.

Fernando K

[rickystl]

Michael: Thanks so much for the information. Most helpful. Yes, I agree, the lack of overall decoration would suggest military use. Which, in a way, makes the lock even more interesting. Yes, I'm sure there are very few of these around. Thanks, Rick.

Hi Fernando. Yes, now I see the chain. So, it's missing part of it's secondary sear Thank you so much for noticing. Hmmmm. Thanks, Rick.

I don't own this Lock yet. I wanted to get both of your opinions before taking the plunge. Of course, it won't come cheap. I'll have to decide sometime this week. It would sure make a nice addition to the lock collection.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

Due to the losses that Fernando K. correctly pointed out, I think you shouldn't pay too much.

I attached a Suhl/Thuringia made heavy wheellock musket, ca. 1600, mounted with the same type of Italian style mechanism but the usual sort without a reserve dog for the pyrites.

Please note that wheellocks, differring from what Fernando K. said, have dogs and not cocks because they are not cocked and do not strike sparks!

The other gun illustrated in detail is of Nuremberg but Italian style make, ca. 1590, its single dog mechanism quite similar in shape to 'your' lock.


Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

... preserved in the Buffalo Bill Cody Museum, Cody, Wyoming.

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

... preserved in the Castel Sant' Angelo, Rome.

Best,
Michael

[Fernando K]

Hola a todos:

Simplemente para una aclaración:

Matchlock sostiene que confundo dog con cock. Si se mira con atención mi post en español usé la palabra PINZA PORTA PIRITAS, traducida como CLAMP por el traductor.

Si usé la palabra COCK fué porque el post original de Rick, emplea DOUBLE COCK

Fernando K Hi all

Just for clarification:

Matchlock says confused with dog cock. If you look closely my post I used the word in Spanish clamp Pyrite CLAMP translated by the translator.

If I used the word COCK original post was because Rick, uses DOUBLE COCK

Fernando K

[fernando]

Hi Fernando,
I knew it was just a question of language, not of terminology.
It is so good you keep posting here, despite the language frontier .

[rickystl]

Gentlemen: Thank you ALL for your input. The only one wrong using the word COCK is me. My error.
Michael: Thanks for posting the great pictures. I look at them as I wipe the drewel from my mouth Yes, with the missing parts I'm going to try to negotiate the price. But, the current owner basically knows what he has, so it might be tough. We'll see. I'll keep you posted if I decide to take the plunge. Thanks, Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi there,

I sure didn't mean to cause any iconvenience on either side , just intended to make sure that we use the correct terminology.

Best,
Michael

[rickystl]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Hi there,

I sure didn't mean to cause any iconvenience on either side , just intended to make sure that we use the correct terminology.

Best,
Michael

Agreed!! Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

I just found this sample very smilar to the one we've been discussing, in complete condition but the surface ruined by heavy cleaning.

Best,
Michael

[fernando]

This is an example mounted on a military arquebus, kept in the collection of the Portuguese Royal Palace of Vila Viçosa.
It is of German origin, date XVII century. Te walnut stock with brass and mother of pearl insets. The lock plate is marked with a heart crossed by an arrow, unver the initial H S; a German gunsmith that worked between 1640-1660.
The pictures have a different aspect because i took them from two different publications.

.

[Matchlock]

Hi 'Nando,

Thank you so much for posting this fine sample hitherto unknown to me!

The big bore brass barrel seems to indicate that this actually is a grenade thrower, in any case it is not a usual musket but intended for special use. This theory is backed up by the fact that there is no provision for a ramrod.

Please note that the trigger guard is mounted the wrong way round.

I have to differ from what the publication says: this gun is characteristically Italian in every respect, including the form of the buttstock, its iron wire decoration and the two broad straps. Also, the lock maker's mark cannot be German, ca. 1640-60, because this kind of lock in the present shape was usually not made after ca. 1610. The lock on this gun is typical of the 1580s-90s, and this is the correct date for the whole piece.

Best,
Michl

[fernando]

Dear Michl,
You surely know that i don't hesitate to credit your observations rather than the museum labels, which we know are so often far from correct.
One thing only; it certainly is an arquebus or, if you prefer, is not a grenade thrower sort of thing, as the bronze straight barrel is rather thick but has a narrow caliber, thjat of 25 mm.
The rest details are:
barrel length 630 mm.
full length 1060 mm.
weight 6400 grs.
rest length 925 mm.
rest weigth 650 grs.

[Matchlock]

Dear 'Nando,

Thanks a lot for the additional information.

If this gun was not some kind of grenade thrower I still believe it was designed for very special use, as both the brass barrel of rather short dimensions and the caliber of 25 mm are far from being consistent with a regular musket.

Anyway, I will do some research and let you know soon! It should most probably be called some kind of blunderbuss for firing unusually coarse shot or, even more probable, firework items ...

Best,
Michl

[rickystl]

Hi Michel! Thanks for the photo. Oh, what a shame. Yes, lock looks to be way over cleaned. Looks like someone used a wire wheel and Naval Jelly. Too bad. Notice the pawl springs do not match. Maybe an older replacement? But with that much over cleaning, it's hard to tell. Wonder if it's for sale?

Hi Fernando! Thanks for the photo. What an unusual piece. Never seen even a photo of a wheellock with that type of brass barrel. Not only is there no ramrod, there was no provision even made for one. I tend to agree with Michael that there was a special purpose for this piece. Notice the pawls look similar to the ones in Michaels photos.

Well guys, I purchased the Lock!! I'll receive it this week and let you know my thoughts. I was able to negotiate an even lower price than expected due to the missing sear assembly (which I'll have made). Here's a pic of the missing parts. And, I want to thank you BOTH for your assistance helping me decide. (I guess any excuse will work to buy this stuff Rick.

[Matchlock]

Congratutlations, Rick!

We are eager to hear (and see) more.

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Hi 'Nando and Rick,

I found another related musket for special purposes, though equipped with a matchlock mechanism, mounted with a thick and heavy brass barrel of unusually big bore (34 mm), and used for firing a number of musket balls at a time.

It is preserved in the Armémuseum Stockholm and came from Gutav Adolphs army.

Best,
Michael

[fernando]

Do i understand this example is rather longer (and lighter) than the one i have posted?
It is a pity that neither of the publications mentions the practical use of "my" example, but i wouldn't reject the idea that it could have also been developed for multiple shot.
... although a 25 mm caliber could also stand for a single bullet ... thick short barrel, rest fork and all ?
I hope i am not talking nonsense .

[Matchlock]

You're not talking nonsense at all, 'Nando,

I can't solve the riddle either, though, apart from the fact that 25 mm is definitely not a standard musket caliber. Regular matchlock and wheellock muskets of the early 17th c. normally had smoothbores of ca. 19-20 mm.

We just know way too little about these special pieces.

Best,
Michl

P.S. The fuse is coming your way next week.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

...The fuse is coming your way next week.

Oh Michl, i can't wait

[rickystl]

Hi Fernando and Michael!! UPS is holding the Lock for me. I'll pick it up late this afternoon after work. Can't wait to see it. I'll post more pics and information after I get a good look at it.
Those brass barrels make me think of possible Navel use? I copied the pics of both guns and sending to another contact for his opinion. Agree, this is a real mystery. Rick.

[rickystl]

Gentlemen: Received the Lock. Except for the two secondary sear pieces shown above, it appears to be complete. I have a guy that can make the two pieces. I don't know if the new pieces add any value to the Lock, but it won't detract since I'm not altering anything. If you look close, you can see where the missing parts were. Fortunately, nothing was broken, just missing. The plate does have threads which show it was originally installed on a gun. (Wish I had the rest of the gun ) Makes me think the Lock may have been in a gunsmith shop for repair/service, but for whatever reason the work was never completed. These wheellocks probably required a lot of maintenance. Anyway, I'm really happy with the purchase. It's a great addition to a lock collection. And, I appreciate your help identifying the Lock's Italian origin. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

Very attractive piece, as expected!

Everything else, apart from the missing parts, seems to be all complete and original, preserved in very good condition. The scrollwork engraving on the dogs also is characteristic of Italy, ca. 1590.

And you are absolutely right about the fact that these complicated wheellock mechanisms sure needed a lot of permanent attention and maintenance. Looks like your lock mechanism got damaged during use in its early years and taken out of the musket for repair which it actually never saw. The point about these Italian locks are that they usually had very strong springs, with the weakest parts being the chain and sear. Yours, too, should have strong springs.

I do think it will add to the value when it is correctly repaired. Just patinate the replaced minor parts to optically match.

Congratulations again,
Michael

[rickystl]

Hi Michael. Yes, I'm very pleased with it. And the fact that I did not have to over-pay for it makes it even better. It will probably be a couple months before I can start on the new parts. Too many other restoration projects already in the works. I'll post before and after photos once the work is complete. Also, if the new proposed restoation section on the Forum comes about, this would be a good candadite to post.
In your opinion, would I be wrong to say this Lock was probably made between say 1580 and 1610? Thanks, Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

an assigned date of 'ca. 1590-1600' would be as close as possible in my opinion.

Best,
Michael

[rickystl]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Hi Rick,

an assigned date of 'ca. 1590-1600' would be as close as possible in my opinion.

Best,
Michael

OK, thanks Michael. Your opinion DOES count. Rick.

[Matchlock]

I do hope so, Rick,

Thanks a whole lot!

Best,
Michael