doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Sidelock vs boxlock

Never having owned a sidelock...is there anything one should be aware of or check when evaluating a sidelock?

Look for small cracks around the lockplates, are all the pins (screwheads) in completely, they should slightly protrude from the lockplate. I would also check trigger pulls. It would be great if you could take the lockplates off to check the condition of the lockwork.

Ditto, but add pull the locks off and inspect edges of the lock plates to ensure they are beveled. Square plates can crack the wood. Check hammers for cracks just below the head. Check sear engagement. It is not unusual to find more wear on the right lock. Check plate inletting.

Seems to me I heard somewhere some sidelock makers had double sears on their actions...Do you know anything about this, like who may have done this?

the double sears you refer to, I think is what is termed an interceptor. So when I pull the trigger on my sidelock guns, the trigger blade actually pushes up two sear limbs, one is holding the hammer the other will block the hammer if the trigger isn't pulled.

I have never owned a sidelock either. I guess I never liked the looks of them. Plus there is the problem of the wood being weaker around the receiver.

I see interceptors as being the "ultimate" design in gun safety. Growing up with "Elsie" and seeing what can happen if one get dropped or bumped harshly makes you very aware of the inherent risks of any gun's design.

Now...is this overkill(?) a superfluous addition that will add cost and complexity without really addressing a need...maybe. I see my modern Spanish sidelock (with it's faithful copy of the beautiful H&H design) as being about as "safe" as a gun can be, because unless the trigger get properly "pulled" it simply won't go off, period. That's comforting for a moment or two and then real life intrudes and you move forward into whatever you're doing next. It's clearly a strong sales point to make to any new gun buyer and it does help address the learning curves that many new hunters have to successfully navigate but...is it really needed? I now own several older (& very old) guns that are of a very rudimentary design (single underbites, & no real safeties other than a half-cocked hammer) and I use them without fear, but that's because I know the inherent risks and I take pains to avoid doing anything stupidly dangerous with them.

Boxlocks originally had interceptors too, but after a bit of time had passed folks realized that the bearing surface of their trigger and hammer sears were of sufficient size (& stability) that they weren't really needed and as time went on they became less common. Modern boxlocks (well, less than 100-years old) don't even bother with them anymore.

I think whether a gun has interceptors isn't necessarily a sidelock vs boxlock thing although the sear engagement of sidelocks being more crisp and able to be made light would indicate an interreceptor as a real plus. I think from my readings the gunmakers of boxlocks felt the interceptor wasn't needed.
Now as someone that has witnessed first hand an accident with a boxlock falling and discharging, I can say having an interceptor is a great thing.

Can you describe a little bit more about
Failure? Were there worn parts or extra gunk in critical places or anything like that?

Brent makes a good point here (that I hadn't fully considered), with time and wear all of man's devices go out of adjustment. An intercepting safety sear would be a big plus at this stage of gun ownership.

I have two very old LC Smith guns (1890 & 91) that I've had professionally inspected, cleaned and gone through. I don't shoot them often (mainly because of their substantial weight and then overall fit for me) but when I do (& I make a few sighting adjustments in my use of them) they work just fine for me. I do treat them extra carefully, however, because I starkly remember the day (over 50-years ago now) when an Elsie Field grade gun almost "bit" me, and very badly.

When I shoot my Arrieta on game and on targets (this one fits me perfectly as it is a "made-as left" gun) I do have a higher level of confidence as to how it will perform, and while that's admittedly for several reasons, the fact that it has "interceptors" is in the back of my mind...