Upvote:5
At the time of the changeover from wheellocks to flintlocks, most gun manufacture was bespoke, so it's not easy to find 'retail' prices for equivalent weapons. The best I could find was the following comparison:
In 1631, rates laid down for gunmakers by a special commission allowed Β£3 for a pair of wheellock pistols and Β£2 for a pair of snaphances [flintlocks].
British Military Firearms 1650-1850, H.L.Blackmore (Greenhill, 1994), pg 22.
This suggests that a wheellock pistol was 50% more expensive than an equivalent flintlock pistol. However, cost wasn't the only consideration in the transition to the new lock. There were practical advantages too:
Nevertheless, even when crudely made, as were the military models, the [flint]lock had a reasonably sure action and was thus preferred to the wheellock. Several English writers drew attention to the peculiar disadvantage of the wheellock; if left spanned or primed for any length of time the lock would jam (John Vernon, The Young Horseman, 1644, p. 11).
βOn 6th November, 1613, the Doge and Senate of Venice wrote to their Ambassador in England: "We understand that the use of fusees [fucili] in arquebusses has taken the place of wheels in that kingdom as well as in Flanders and that the former are easier to use, quicker and of less hinderance to the user as well as being cheaper". In this context, the Italian word fucili, from which is derived fusil, meant flintlocks.British Military Firearms 1650-1850, H.L.Blackmore (Greenhill, 1994), pg 21-22.