The Brand Value of Rocketman's system is an acknowledgement of what the market seems to value in the brand name itself. It is not necessarily a judgement about comparative quality - that is covered in his Original Quality factor, which is also considered.
Lowell, I have been reading comments like that about the Deeley & Taylor detachable locks lately but they seem tired and repititious regurgitation of other peoples' writing rather than considered comments based on experience or thoughtful reflection on the merits of the system.
The 1897 patent was useful and practical in a number of ways. The engineering advantage of having the locks placed internally and mounted on individual plates was added strength. The hole for the tumbler pivot was no longer needed and since this is drilled through the action close to the radius and in an area subject to flexing, the action was considerably strengthened by remaining solid at this point.
the second piont is that in transit in foreign lands (or indeed nowadays at home or abroad) the locks could be removed and if the gun were stolen, it would be useless. you could also leave it unattended in you house or room and if someone else got hold of it, they could not shoot you with your own gun - quaite acommon occurance even now.
The third practical reason for having quickly changeable locks is that if you were overseas or 'upcountry' on a shoot or an expedition or just a foreign posting, if a sping broke or the lock malfunctioned in any way, it could be changed by hand in seconds. A very useful option.
Bonhams just sold a .577 Westley Richards double rifle with these locks, once owned by elephant hunter James sutherland. He praised the system profusely in his books and he was a no-frills professional hunter.
Unless you have real evidence that a system is wothless, please try not to be so dismissive. It was conceived by gifted men, made in beautiful quality and offered real options that the preceding system did not.
