doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com BOXLOCK VS SIDELOCK

A good boxlock is better than a poor sidelock .The two guns shown are , I would say, of equal quality of there class . May be I'm prejudiced but aesthetically I prefer the Webley , as it stands out more than the fairly conventional sidelock .

What? No trigger plate actions?

Boxlock is the OLDER of the two, patented in 1875 while the Purdey sidelock came along in 1880 and the Holland in 1893.The boxlock introduced barrel cocking that made the sidelock possible.

From an engineering point of view, boxlock is the better action. I would opt for the ones with stock bolt, becaue I can pull the stock and inspect and service the action.

The best engineered boxlock action is the Beretta 626. It beats the Anson Deeley on all points. Beats the sidelock too, so much so that a a comparison would be unfair. But these are thoughts for those that appreciate good engineering, not for collectors.

You guys don't count hammer guns as sidelocks apparently?

When it comes to box locks, some of the French are a whole bunch more attractive.

A hammerless sidelock is just a hammer gun, with the hammers moved inside.

The quality thing is being overlooked, I think. I suspect it is tougher to find a Best work boxlock then a sidelock exhibiting the same.

Most of what I do with a gun does not require a best work gun, either.

Best,
Ted

Ted, I agree on all counts.

It may be a tough comparison to make, but I think if Rocketman applied his formulae to external hammer guns, they would be lower valued than sidelocks, but yet, they have pretty similar requirements for inletting and lock manufacture etc. so it would reflect just the demand in the markets. That said it seems that good quality hammer guns have come up in value a little bit (or gone down less) in recent years. But that may be just my imagination.

Looking over the pictures of these two samples, the boxlock keeps telling me it might warrant a bit more critical looking at. It has nothing to do with the style of action, only that it looks like it might have been enhanced some?

Of the two in the pic, the choice is kind of skewed, due to those checkered panels on the boxlock, along with the tear points as if it was meant to have had sidelocks but couldn't. For that alone the points go the sidelock in the pic.

Sidelocks can sure be pretty, even though they are more vulnerable to stock damage or failure. I've owned a few.
But their primary advantage over a boxlock are the sets where spare locks are included with the gun, so one or both can be changed out after parts fail afield. Perhaps a secondary advantage is being able to pull the locks to dry them after a dunking in the duck marsh (or an oversized gin-and-tonic, perhaps more likely these days).
When is the last time anyone saw fitted spare locks offered with a sidelock?

I have heard of spare locks but never saw them. As for dismantling and drying etc, a boxlock with a stock bolt is the easiest and surest way to dry and relube. And the English did not make those, others did.