doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Sidelocks vs Boxlocks

Functionally speaking, are there inherent advantages to sidelocks over boxlocks (sideplated boxlocks excluded)? It would seem the delicate wood inletting required for sidelocks would make them less able to handle stout loads than a thick shouldered boxlock. I'm trying to understand why sidelocks are generally more highly regarded, unless it's mostly due to aesthetics.

Sidelocks: More room for engraving, more of them with intercepting sears, maybe somewhat better triggers. If they're hand-detachable, very easy to pull the locks and clean the innards.

Boxlocks: Pull trigger, go boom. Just about every country that can make a decision on what colors it's flag should be has a population with the skill to produce a sound boxlock-sidelocks, not so much. A sidelock is pretty much a hammer gun with the hammers moved inside, and when things go wrong, they require talent, expensive talent, usually, to make it right.
Boxlocks are far better at frustrating Murphy's law. Period.

Best,
Ted

Mark, for the most part, an argument over asthetics and fashion. Many people feel their choice (in all things) must be "right" and any other choice "wrong," or at best substandard. Among sidelock owners arguments rage over which brand is best. Same for boxlock supporters. Per Larry above, precious little of substance to debate.

When I first met Dig Hadoke some years ago, he was a strong sidelock man, Purdey's if you please). You need to read his new book on boxlocks, if you have not yet done so.

DDA

Just finished Diggory's splendid book, The British Boxlock Gun&Rifle. It strengthened my bias that I didn't go wrong by choosing boxlocks (except for my LC Specialty). Suggest read it and make up your own minds.

I think part of the answer, other than personal preferences, has to do with the gauge, ammunition used and ultimate end purpose of the shotgun in question. If you prefer a side-by-side for heavy loads, long range work and with long barrels and tight chokes, I would probably go for the boxlock. When John and Spencer Olin developed the 3" Magnum load- with the Askins-Sweeny barrels and chokes of the 1920's- they went with AH Fox, who then developed the heavy and solid HE Magnum for that load. Ditto a few years later, when they took the already potent 2 & 7/8" 10 gauge and bumped it up to 3 & 1/2"- they went to Lou Smith at Ithaca and his designers re-vamped slightly the fine NID boxlock for that cannon. But for a fine upland 12 bore, I'd take the English styled sidelock made by R.G. Owen for the late Captain Paul A. Curtis- shown in his book "Guns and Gunning"- 1934. There is something about a fine sidelock with a straight handed grip and a splinter forearm that almost defines class-- and if you chose not to agree with me there, that is fine-- but consider this- how many existing boxlocks, Parkers and M21's, were treated to faux sidelocks by Pachmyer and others in past years??

I like them all but if they would have invented box locks 1st they would have never invented side locks.

Of course boxlocks are far inferior to and will always live under the sidelock�s imposing shadow. Poor fellows, always trying to outdo its older brother but never quite measuring up.

Burrard came out in favor of the sidelock and according to Boothroyd "Some of the aspects he considered important included safety, efficiency, strength, trigger pull, ease in cocking and quickness and that the lines of the box-lock cannot compare with those of a really well designed sidelock". Gough Thomas stated "the sidelock is a more elegant weapon than the box-lock, usually better balanced with superior trigger pulls. Everlasting in the best grades if well treated". IMHO it's hard to argue with experts like Burrard and Thomas who clearly favored the sidelock.

I think that the Brits were slow to change on lots of things. From flintlock , to percussion and those in between, to pinfire, etc. All of those resembled or were sidelocks. Then , in the latest of the 1860s, centerfire was grudingly accepted, long after the same was started in France 50 years earlier. Still , guns had sidelocks. In 1875, or so, the Anson and Deeley came out. Neat design, but not widely accepted, verses the sidelock for a long period of time as being "good". I think lots of that still exists today. Look at the dress clothing, too, and how hard it is to change since Grandfather did it so well. There are exceptions like the Mousetrap, but they were just exceptions.