Ottoman matchlock examples.

[rickystl]

Originally Posted by Pukka Bundook

Rick,

I'm a bit confused by these re-enactors findings re. speed of ignition.
A normal matchlock with a scear -bar can be very fast indeed, certainly the speed of a flintlock.
Re the snapping matchlock;
Many if not most, of these are in fact earlier than the scear-type.
If you go to European forum here, you can see untold amounts of matchlocks, in threads started by Matchlock, (sadly with us no more) and others.
Snapping matchlocks were used for target shooting into the late 17th century, but these were for specific matches, and shot Very well indeed!
Often these took a live coal, rather than matchcord for ignition.

Best,
Richard.

Hi Richard!
Well, your thoughts were the same as mine when I first heard this mentioned. He did say the later sear-activated matchlocks do indeed have a faster ignition speed. But he preferred the earlier lever-activated style for two reasons that I recall: 1. After firing, release of the trigger on the lever style returns the serpantine/matchcord back to it's original positon, giving greater access for cleaning the pan and vent hole if necessary. 2. The matchcord on the sear operated requires more frequent length adjusting.
So, I think he was saying the lever style is more forgiving than the sear activated locks. Maybe this is what he meant by "control" ? But I would think that would be a small price to pay for faster ignition time. Maybe just a matter of what you get use to.
I just recalled the conversation while we were talking about mechanisms. It is curious that the Ottoman/Arab/Indian style matchlocks never adopted the latter sear activated mechanisms. At least I've never seen one.
The only sear activated locks I've personally fired is my own Japanese one. (Which has an additional learning curve LOL). So it will be interesting to try out a lever activated one once my Torador barrel is finished.
Rick.

[Pukka Bundook]

Rick,

The terms we use are at crossed purposes;

With a crossbow or a matchlock, the lever used to be called a scear. This may have been confusing, so I will use the term 'lever'.
The first guns with a lock of any description, was a match -holder attached to the side of the stock, and as you pulled the lower extension backwards, the match lowered forward into the priming.
After this, the Snapping matchlock came into fashion, and in this the serpentine, (match holder) also fell forward into the pan when the button, usually on the side of the stock, was pressed.
After this, the more usual matchlock with the 'lever' came into general use, and in these the serpentine is mounted the other way around, so it falls backwards to-wards the breech as the lever is pressed.
This last style was held in supply (military use) into the early 18th century, but for practical purposes was not used much by the last decade of the 17th C.
The One exception to this is that in Germany and related countries, the snapping matchlock or tinder-lock was retained for certain target matches well into the 18th C.
In the East, and Middle East, the matchlock that went along with the first explorers, appeared to be the earlier snap-lock, and this is what we often see copied by the Japanese & far East. The Indian and Persian locks appear an amalgamation, as the match falls forward as does the snap -lock, but has a trigger usually, rather than the scear bar/lever.
I am guilty in the above of generalizing for the sake of brevity.

All the best and a late happy Christmas!!
Richard.
PS,
I too really fancy making a snapping matchlock! I think one that fired and rebounded to the cocked or even a half -cock position would be interesting.
I did make a European /English one a long time ago, but it had the more usual -to-us trigger rather than the long scear bar.

[rickystl]

Hi Richard.

And a belated Merry Christmas to you too !!!

That's a very good explanation of the matchlock developement. I'm often guilty of using over-generalized/wrong terms when discussing these guns.
Sort of like talking to myself. LOL
Basically, what I was refering to is the earlier style of lowering the serpantine/matchcord to the pan by moving the lever/button, either slow or fast depending on hand speed verus the latter by just squeezing the trigger, as normally associated with most firearms. Sort of tough to explain. But you probably know what I mean (although others might not ? LOL ).

Shooting the Japanese matchlock has a special learning curve besides firing from the cheek vs the shoulder. Even at full-cock position, the serpantine and thus the match sits VERY close to the pan. It's easy for a hot coal from the match to drop in the pan and the gun go off unexpectingly! (Don't ask how I know this LOL ). Anyway, I degress. I'm getting too far away from the subject of this Thread - which has been great fun !!! Thanks to all who participated.
Rick.

p.s. There is another curiosity with these Ottoman style rifles that is still a mystery to me. But I'll start a new Thread this week after taking a couple photos.

[Pukka Bundook]

I look forward to your new thread & questions Rick, as I have a few of my own!