Dumb question-Boxlock and sidelock?

04 April 2002, 05:20

<Bjorn Klappe>

Peter,

There are no dumb questions, only dumb answers!

On a sidelock double you can reasonable easy take out the locks to clean them. To clean a boxlock you have to dismantle the entire rifle. With a sidelock you have bigger areas for engravings.

Some say a sidlock is stronger than a boxlock but I do not agree, it is the other way around.

A "Best London gun" is more or less always a sidelock.
Since the sidelocks are more complicated than the boxlock, the sidelocks are always much more expensive, twice or three times the cost of a boxlock in the same caliber.

Regards
Bjorn

04 April 2002, 05:31

Steve

Peter,

Here is a link that has descriptions of various features on double rifles and shotguns.

http://www.hallowellco.com/abbrevia.htm

I refer to it often.

Take Care,

-Steve

04 April 2002, 05:58

MacD37

quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
I have heard these terms used for years but have never known the difference. Can one tell by looking? Where? Which is "better" ie. when would one use one rather than the other, or is it just preference. Is one more expensive or does one "wear" better.
Thanks, Peter.

Peter, this isn't an easy thing to do, but I'll try to explain the difference between the two.

First I better try to make you aware of the names of the different parts of a double rifle action. Looking at the action from the side, the part of the action that runs underneath the barrels, is called "THE BAR". The part that stands 90 degs., and extends up behind the barrels, to hold the cartridges in the chambers,is called the "STANDING BREECH", or "STANDING FACE". The rounded lumps behind each barrel are called the "FENCES", and each fence houses a "STRIKER" (fireing pin). The mateing surface between the bottom of the barrels,and the BAR, is called the "FLATS" as in barrel flats, which is the bottom of the barrels where they contact the BAR, and are called the "BARREL FLATS". The STANDING FACE mates with the breech end of the barrels, and at the point where the BAR, and the STANDING BREECH meet, is the weakest point in the action, and is usually reenforced there by a lump of mettel that goes along the sides around this intersection of FACE, and BAR.

First off to reccognize a side lock, there are seperate plates that extend back past the FENCES and extend back over the wood on the sides, above the trigger guard. On the wood side of these plates is where the LOCK WORK is is housed on the side lock. The LOCK WORK on a Box lock is housed in the bottom of the FENCES, and along the bottom of the BAR supposedly makeing the BOX LOCK weaker, because of the hollowed out steel in the bar, and bottom of the standing breech at the intersection of BAR, and STANDING BREECH for the cocking levers, hammer springs, and hammers. These things are all on the side plates of the SIDE LOCK, except the cocking levers which are still in the BAR. These cocking levers are engaged when the barrels are tipped down, cocking the hammers. Both types have the center of the BAR hollowed out so the LOCKING LUMPS, between and under the barrel assembly , and are engaged by a slideing piece of mettel that mate with a notch to to lock the rifle closed.

That being as clear as mud, the Box locks of today are just as strong, if not stronger than side locks. this is because makers have learned to leave steel in certain places to make up for the steel hollowed out for the lock works. The shape of the reenforcement SWELLS, along with the very good modern alloys used in rifles today, and very close tolerances in machineing, IMO, makes the weakest point in the wood hollowed out for the side locks, makeing the stock weaker at the joint between the action and the butt stock, and more prone to stock breakage.

If I knew how to post pictures I could show you many pictures of the different systems, as there several of each type. Alass I'm computer illeterate, added to my sloppy command of the written word, makes things like this beyond me! Look at this:
http://www.hallowellco.com/boxlock.htm#Boxlock

------------------
..Mac >>>===(x)===>
also DUGABOY1
DUGABOY DESIGNS
Collector/trader of fine double rifles, and African wildlife art

[This message has been edited by MacD37 (edited 04-03-2002).]

04 April 2002, 06:56

500grains

The primary difference between a box lock and a sidelock is $20,000 (sidelock is more).

And a sidelock has more surfaces that can be engraved, in case anyone cares about that.

The locks can be removed from a sidelock in the field. But heck, I never even needed to strip a mauser bolt in the field, so I am not sure what value that feature has. It would be cheaper to take 2 boxlock double rifles than one side lock double rifle.

04 April 2002, 06:59

<Peter>

Wow! You guys are amazing. I have printed out the Hallowell reference as well as this thread. Special thanks to MacD37!
peter.

04 April 2002, 07:26

Fritz Kraut

Peter,

please take a look here: www.merkel-waffen.de/hunting_guns/sidebyside/side-by-side-rifles.htm The upper rifle is a sidelock, the one below a boxlock.

Best regards,

Fritz

04 April 2002, 20:33

aHunter

An advantage of the sidelock is that the triggers may be adjusted down more, as the design encorporates some kind of catching device ( Sicherheitsfangstangen ).

The critical point regarding strength in this discussion is the area around and behind the action at the pistol grip.

The action work hollows out the stock at one of the slimmest areas. The box lock is a vertical slot in the wood. The sidelock removes wood from the sides. One gunsmith told me, he thinks a box lock with false sideplates is the strongest. I am not sure, as this further thins the wood ( replaced with steel ) but then stops where the innards stop too, so there is all the force on only little wood, and pretty blunt at point of engagement, too.

Hermann

------------------