Author Topic: Exrtactor tip  (Read 2571 times)

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« on: December 21, 2011, 08:58:53 AM »
One way to strengthen the extractor would be to increase the size to a few thousands less than a half circle.  Will add a little material but will probably not help much.
I like Sparky\'s idea of a recess in the bolt carrier.  Depends on how much material is added.  By combining both Sparky\'s and Roller\'s ideas it would be possible to add material and machine the parts instead of welding.

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2011, 08:22:59 AM »

My modification.


 



[attachment=9515:IMG_0495 (Large)-id=606.JPG]


« Last Edit: December 24, 2014, 04:21:53 PM by Dave »

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2011, 07:07:24 PM »
I am assuming its the bolt on the right in the pic?    Now I am more confused than before!   The extractor hook does not appear to even extend to the .437 dia of the main bolt body.  That would make it even thinner.   I expected to see the extractor hook extend beyond that .437 body of the main bolt for part of its arc.  The bolt on the left appears to be stock per plans.

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2011, 07:33:23 PM »
The bolt with the double step on the end is the modified one.  The step is the original bolt diameter .275, the other diameter is the increased material, .020 per side, but is shaved on the side to fit in the .437 diameter.  The web thickness at the thickest point is now .027 vs the original .007.  Thickness on the .437 diameter tangent side is still thin.  Seems to be working though, extractor tips are not flexing and cracking.

Frank

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2011, 08:05:45 PM »
[quote name=\"Roller\"]The bolt with the double step on the end is the modified one.  The step is the original bolt diameter .275, the other diameter is the increased material, .020 per side, but is shaved on the side to fit in the .437 diameter.  The web thickness at the thickest point is now .027 vs the original .007.  Thickness on the .437 diameter tangent side is still thin.  Seems to be working though, extractor tips are not flexing and cracking.

Frank[/quote]

The original is a poor design.  I have never seen a commercial gun extractor without some means of flex.   Powder residue, dirt, rim variations between brands and more require some \"give\" in that area.   In our case, machining tolerances come into play also.  Sadly, I expect the flexing and cracking to reappear, its just going to take longer.   With the original .007 wall it could happen on the first close of the bolt!

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2011, 08:30:26 PM »
I agree with your observations, however some of my original, flimsy extractor bolts are still intact.  I was having extraction problems with them flexing.  After flexing several times they started to crack, and I decided to beef them up.  At this point I feel this fix is going to work.  This scale (1/3) doesn\'t leave much room for improvements.

Frank

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2011, 08:34:54 PM »

This is a photo of my modified bolt with the belted extractor and the floating firing pin.


Frank


 


[attachment=9516:IMG_0511 (Large)-id=614.JPG]


« Last Edit: December 24, 2014, 04:22:26 PM by Dave »

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2011, 11:31:03 PM »
That pic show it all well !     Now it all makes sense!

  • Guest
Exrtactor tip
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2012, 02:59:54 AM »

Here is a drawing of looking directly at the extractor tip. The space in black could be used to increase the thickness of the extractor or to add a finger extractor without modifing the bolt carriage.


I am not familar with the RG&G finger extractor. What are it\'s dimensions?


 


[attachment=9517:firing pin end-id=621.png]


« Last Edit: December 24, 2014, 04:22:56 PM by Dave »