Extractors

I just broke the extractor in my milspec, which was, I believe, and Ed Brown, although I don't think it was a "Hardcore".

After a fast review of the posts here about extractors, it appears that the Real Deal these days is Cylider & Slide, but Brownell's doesn't sell C&S extractors.

So my question is what brand extractor is the one you guys like, and why?

Jammer - I first tried a Brown, and although it worked fine, it protruded out the back of the slide a little too much for my taste. So I next tried a Wilson HD and a Wilson "Bulletproof". They both worked great - one in a Colt Cmdr. and the other in an SA GI; they also fit better than the Brown from an aesthetic standpoint.

If I was limited to Brownells, I'd opt for the Hardcore extractor. I have used Hardcore extractors for tens of thousands of rounds without having to so much as reset the tension on them.

There are a few things that'll break even a good extractor... one of the most common being the hook climbing/snapping over the rim in a push-feed instead of slipping under it in a controlled feed. Your gun can be doing that without your knowing it unless you know what to look for. Most commonly on the last round, with the usual cause being the mysterious missing dimple on the follower. The second most common cause is a weak mag spring.

Without the dimple, the last round can jump the follower in recoil. The round winds up ahead and or above where it should be... The slide pushes it ahead of the extractor with the hook leading the way... and when the slide goes to battery faster and harder because it doesn't have to work so hard at stripping the round... it forces the hook to snap over the rim. The gun functions and all seems to be well until the hook snaps off. If this is what's happening, a spring steel extractor would also have broken, though not so early.

Incorrect headspacing can break an extractor. So can the slide's dimensions from the slidestop slot to the back shoulder of the hook, with the rim bearing against that shoulder... even a tiny bit... when the pressure slams the case back into the breechface.

If the mag spring is weak, the push-feed can occur on the next-to-last round, or even earlier. if the slide is oversprung, it makes these things more likely to happen, and less likely to give a warning in the form of a failure to return to battery with the extractor rammed against the rim.

The correct magazine spring rate is important. The dimple is important.

The correct recoil spring rate is important. The correct mainspring rate is important. All these things add up to make the pistol reliable...or they add in the other direction to make it choke. John Browning set these spring rates for a very good reason, and he put that dimple on the follower for a good reason too.

Details! we need more detail before we can diagnose what broke it.

OK, here's what I know.

The slide and barrel are still stock. I haven't checked them, but they're over 10,000 rounds, so I'm pretty sure they're OK.

The mags were Wilson 47's, (seven rounders, of course) with medium-old springs. The mag in question, as well as all eight mags I was using that day have several thousand rounds on them, with at least a few thousand through this weapon.

(I have four Wilson 47's on carry only duty, and eight on range only duty. The two classes never mix.)

They have the plastic followers, I don't know if you consider them dimpled or not.

The only thing I've changed recently out of your Holy Tripod is ammo. When the extractor broke, I was using American.

I get mine from Caspian Arms. Call Gary Smith and have him send you one or two.

Irregardless of what Roy Huntington said in the latest American Handjobber, AMERC ammo is trash!

Doubt if that caused the extractor to fail though.

Jammer sez:
They have the plastic followers, I don't know if you consider them dimpled or not.

Not. They have a concave surface that lends a little control over the last round... IF... the spring is good. If yours have thousands of rounds through them, the springs are bound to be getting a little tired. Double whammy...

If the extractor is climbing over the rim during the feed/return to battery, the extractor will fail prematurely, no matter what its made of or who made it. Bet on it.

I had a friend who used smooth follower magazines exclusively... including Mec-gars. He was a high-volume shooter and he was breaking an extractor a month... Good extractors... C&S extractors. He liked the 8-round magazines, and nothing would sway him from that line of thought. "They work just fine!" As you wish, Kemo Sabe...

On his 5th or 6th broken extractor, he brought the gun to me to fit the extractor "right". I installed a tweaked C&S... and I kept his magazines. I loaned him two of mine instead, and told him to go shoot the gun hard for 3 months. Three months later, his extractor was fine... didn't even need to be retensioned. I ordered 10 Metalform flat, dimpled 7-round followers, 10 Wolff 11-pound springs and rebuilt his magazines with the components. that was 4 years ago, and he still has the same extractor in the gun. It hasn't required further attention other than periodic removal for cleaning.

Several years ago, I picked up a little paperback written by Ken Hallock.

He advised the reader to file the dimples off the followers. I did it. I began to have extractor breakages and problems holding tension. Bein' a little quicker than the average dummy, I replaced the followers with new ones that had the dimple. My extractor problems disappeared.

John Moses put it there for a reason. Best leave it be...

Chuck said:
AMERC ammo is trash!

Ay-GREED! Worst stuff I've ever seen. I won't even pick up the brass.

Another thing that will absolutely break an extractor double-quick is the extractor groove in the case. If it's made so that the front of the hook is bearing hard against it when the round is in the chamber, the case will get rammed against the hook hard when the gun fires. Can anybody say... Snap, Crackle. Pop? If you can post a picture of a round of Amerc so we can have a loot at the extractor groove... we may have just identified the cause of your bug.

Many years ago I studied 45 ACP case rims and found a wide variety of dimensions. I also noticed that there were many different shaped rims to boot. I think the "CCC" were a lot different than most. I agree that ammo could have something to do with extractor failures. I am a re-loader so I do not have much to do with "Factory Ammo".

Quote:
Not. They have a concave surface that lends a little control over the last round... IF... the spring is good. If yours have thousands of rounds through them, the springs are bound to be getting a little tired. Well...

If you say so.

But...

I said SEVEN-rounders.

They have a convex follower, not a concave follower. The eight rounders have the concave followers.

Is it still a "Not", or is the convex follower a bump?

Are Wilson 7-rounders, therefore, not of the 'Tuner annointed classes of magazines?

You're probably right, of course, about the springs. I probably need a complete rack of new springs.

I'll try to get some pictures of the American ammo up, and I'll take some measurements, to the best of my carpenter's ability, later tonight.

And THAT all said, I've been noticing some of the very failure-to-completely- return-to-battery stuff you've been talking about, and the explanation of the round not being under the hook makes perfect sense to me, and the amount that the slide didn't travel was just about that much.

It happened mostly when the weapon had gone six or seven hundred rounds in a day, and was dirty.

Small push, back in battery.

P.S. I have two Brown Hardcore extractors in the air from Brownell's now. I intend to break out the dremel and grind them down to your specs as soon as they get here.

P.P.S., (edit) If it's pushing the round in front of the extractor, how can I diagnose it? How can I rule this in or out? What should I look for, how can I test it?

If it's happening, I want to be sure to fix it!

Concave/Convex

Okay Jammer... I see that now. Whenever I see Wilson 47, I tend to automatically think "47D" since 8-round, flush-fit mags are all the rage these days. I consider this class of magazines to be range/game only, and not for serious purpose.

The top of that plastic follower is still pretty slippery, and when the springs go south, they'll let that last round slide forward too far, and the slide knocks it straight toward the chamber instead of the round coming from under the breechface under the extractor. There is a point which the round has to stop moving forward and start moving upward. That's known as the timing of the release point, and that timing (and that release point) is important to proper function.

It's not as critical until it gets to the last round because of the added spring tension that those rounds provide, since the last round has minimum spring tension to fight the effects of inertia during recoil. Of course, if the spring is really weak, the problem will start to show before the last round. Here, you have the next to last round ejecting from the gun... live... and the last round chambering. It slipped past the release point, and the upcoming last round launched it from the port. Ever found a live round among your fired brass? Ever had the slide lock on empty with the last round lying on top of the mag still in the port? There's your sign!

The telltale signs are burrs right on the edge of the rims of some of your brass that the front of the hook kicked up as it climbed the rim. If your tension is heavy enough, the hook will snap over fairly easily with a push in the event of a failure to return to battery with the rim ahead of the extractor. A failure to go to battery with the rim UNDER the extractor isn't the same thing. In the fromer description, you can feel and hear the hook snap over. With the latter, you just feel a smooth resistance when you push.

The push-feed condition will also take the tension out of an extractor quickly... more quickly if it isn't spring-tempered steel. When that starts to happen, the failures to return to battery often stop, and the shooter assumes that the problem "worked itself out", but the gun still isn't functioning correctly. At that point, either the extractor will continue to lose tension and fail to extract...o r it will continue to function until it breaks.

If you get a chance to look at a NIB Springfield Mil-Spec... take a look at the mag follower. The little-bitty round tit that you see is the dimple of which I speak. It halts the forward movement of the last round and coincides with the release point of the round, letting it move upward on the breechface and under the hook, as per the design.

Fresh springs will help greatly, but may not cure the problem completely.

Now I'm thinking that I don't have this problem, as the push is smooth. I haven't looked at the brass, I guess I'm just going to be forced to go back to the range and make bullets into brass...

I haven't found a live round in the brass, or had a lock back with rounds in the chamber or mag.

Maybe I don't have this problem.

Jammer said:
Maybe I don't have this problem.

Maybe not... but something broke your extractor. Not even an MIM extractor will break very easily if all the rounds do a controlled feed. Lose tension quickly... yes. Break... no. Not very easily. A heat-treated barstock extractor like the Hardcore should last for 10s of thousands of rounds unless it gets hit hard repeatedly.

Those symptoms are usually noted as the condition gets fairly advanced. Earlier on, the push-feed can occur without stopping the gun or causing a problem at all... until the hook breaks. Shoot the gun a few dozen times and check for the burred/dinged rims right on the edge. It will probably be rounded in shape, with a sharp burr right on the edge of the rim. The mark nearer the center is the ejector mark, and doesn't mean anything. It's the one on the edge to watch for. If possible, mark the bottom rounds in the magazines and look at all of them closely. That'll cut down on time spent if the last rounds all stand out from the rest.

While you're at it, check the forward angle in the extractor grooves of your fired brass. If the hook is getting hit by the case, that'll break one too.

Now here's another thought.

I can't test the weapon the way it was.

The extractor broke. Therefore, I have to replace it.

If I replace it, and I fit it correctly, is it possible that I HAD this problem, and fitting a new extractor corrects it, leaving me with a Genuine Mystery that I'll never solve?

Jammer said:
If I replace it, and I fit it correctly, is it possible that I HAD this problem, and fitting a new extractor corrects it, leaving me with a Genuine Mystery that I'll never solve?

Maybe... The only way to know is to shoot the gun and see.

I would advise that if you're going to use the specs that I gave...to approach the .125 dimension on the front pad carefully... a little off the pad at a time. It's entirely possible that you won't have to remove any at all... or maybe just down to .130 inch or so. The right side of the center pad is reduced to provide more spring to the extractor... and to give it a little more room for dirt to go without causing problems related to too much tension. The left side of the center pad can be left alone if you want. I've tried it both ways and can't tell any difference.

Bring the right side down to give you a .195 total diameter and it'll be fine. Then begin the tension check on the front pad. Check for contact with the extractor groove with the front of the hook, and relieve as needed with a smooth radiusing cut.

Check also for any sign of the front of the hook making hard contact with the barrel. That can happen once in a blue moon, and will snap a hook off pronto.

Jammer, I have noticed this on 2 Springfields I've fitted Caspian extractors to, the nose of the extractor would touch the barrel/breech/hood whatever you want to call it... Anyway, make sure your aftermarket extractor isn't bumping the barrel.

The Ed Brown extractor may not be as long as a Caspian but it's something to look for. It only takes a little relieving to end the contact.

The other thing to check that can cause an extractor hook to break is whether or not it is clocking. If the extractor clocks when going into battery, part of the hook has to snap over the rim. I've broken one that way. Mine broke the hook at a diagonal.

Kruzr said:
The other thing to check that can cause an extractor hook to break is whether or not it is clocking. If the extractor clocks when going into battery, part of the hook has to snap over the rim.

Yep...Clean fergot about that one.

Thanks Kruz!

Many things can cause an extractor to break. To repeat:

That the gun functions doesn't necessarily mean that it's functioning correctly.

Here's the measurements I took on the American ammo, copying the specs on page 22 of Kuhnhausen Vol. II:

Overall length: 1.253, specs 1.200 to 1.275: In Spec.

Diameter: .473, specs .473: In Spec.

Base Diameter: .475, specs .480-.010, In Spec.

Base Thickness: .045, specs .049-.010, In Spec.

Diameter of the bottom of the "slot": .400, specs .400, In Spec.

Brass Length: .899, over length by .001. (shouldn't matter, as the overall length is good.)

The headstamp is "AMER". The brass is brass.

I may get a picture up later tonight.

O.k., now you've done it Tuner. I'm scrounging my brass to look at rim marks. What will be next.

My question to Tuner, Bill Z, Old Fuff, Mr. Rogers, Jim Keenan, Mr. Sample and the other gurus whose names I've forgotten.

My brass has barely distinguishable burrs on the rim, presumably from the extractor claw and a very definable mark or ding in the groove of the brass (sorry the technical term exscapes me) presumably from the head of the extractor hitting the brass. Is this a cause of concern? Is the extractor too long? Will this also lead (potentially) to a broken extractor?

Just for the record, the pistol is a Springfield "WWII" Milspec and I am having no problems with feeding or extracting. Just trying to learn.

The barely distinguishable burrs are probably normal extractor marks. The one caused by a snapover feed will look like it was made by a dull punch, with the brass swaged to the edge of the rim. You can duplicate it by loading a round into the chamber and dropping the slide on it... once.

The marks on the forward angle of the extractor groove may or may not be a major concern. Headspacing is probably the culprit there. The case moves backward under pressure until it's either stopped by the breechface or the walls of the case are expanded tightly against the chamber walls. As long as the front of the hook isn't making hard enough contact on the angle to actually cause it to spring open when the pistol goes to battery, it won't likely cause a problem for a long time... if ever... depending on how hard the case hits it when it sets back. It's not a good thing, but not nearly as bad as having a pre-load before the pressure pushes the case into the hook. When that happens, the right side of the hook often bottoms out against the channel wall, and produces a hammer and anvil effect.

You can test for that by letting a round chamber from the magazine at full speed. There will probably be a light mark in the groove... but not a deep one that comes from the extractor hook pushing on the case after it headspaces on the chamber shoulder.

You can also look for it by taking the slide off and chambering a round in the barrel, wiggling it into the slide into the in-battery position, and looking at it from underneath with a flashlight. Push the barrel back into the slide until the hood hits the breechface, and watch the extractor to see if it springs open... even a little bit.

Then, take a dowel rod and push it through the muzzle against the round to see if it makes contact with the extractor. It probably will touch lightly on this test, but as long as the extractor doesn't bottom out against the side of the channel, it'll be okay.

I suppose to be safest, taking out the firing pin before doing the checks wouldn't hurt, as long as the fp stop is in place? Right.

Bemo asked:
I suppose to be safest, taking out the firing pin before doing the checks wouldn't hurt, as long as the fp stop is in place? Right.

You can do that, but unless your FP stop is press-fit, it'll probably drop out of position and catch on the back of the hammer... and stop the slide. Better to just do it in a safe place. When I have to chamber a round at full speed at the bench, I just point the gun at a two-foot thick stack of dry newspapers. Cheap bullet trap.

OK, my new extractors are here.

Out of the bag, they both measured bigger than we've been talking about - the diameter of the center pads was .205 on both of them.

So the Dremel is warming up, and I'm going to bring both of the outboard center pads down to a full measurement of .195, and then we'll see how they fit in the weapon.

The center pad came right down, but the pad right behind the head was huge- it was almost .148, and grinding it down to .130 took almost 20 minutes.

I thought better of using the dremel, and used a cylinder on my drill press. By the time I finished that front pad, I was glad I did.

The next thing I notice is that the extractor is dead straight - installing it, it drops right back out, and the firing pin stop won't stay in when the firing pin isn't installed.

I'm going to prop both ends up, and beat on the center until it takes some tension. More soon.

OK, unless I've completely mis-understood what everyone is saying, I think I've found no less than three separate problems.

First, and most significant, the new extractor bottoms out in the extractor groove of the brass. In fact, with the slide off the weapon, an empty piece of brass can't be forced against the breech face- the extractor holds it completely off the breech face so that when you look straight down, you see a wedge of daylight between the breech face and the base of the brass, with the large end of the wedge on the side of the extractor. I can only imagine what happens when you pull the trigger, or when the round chambering forces the round back tight to the breechface.

Second, when the extractor has sufficient tension to hold an empty piece of brass, the firing pin stop is still much looser than it was- it doesn't have the nice, snug press fit that it used to have.

Third, I can't tell if the extractor is clocking or not- it seems to be at a slight angle that I've never noticed before.

It seems to me that the most significant problem is the fact that the tip of the extractor is too long- it's not supposed to hit the brass at all, and it certainly isn't supposed to hold it off the breech face.

Do I just grind away at the two obvious places, the tip of the hook, and the outside, front tip that touches the brass?

That all said, I notice that with the alterations to the two pads, it takes a far smaller bend in the extractor to produce quite a bit of tension- I can see how a piece of metal would be able to hold this smaller bend for a much longer time.

If all you're saying is true, it sounds like you may have some spec or tolerance issues between your extractor and slide.

Slide off the frame:

Look at the breechface and see if any part of the pad behind the hook is past flush with the breechface. If not, proceed to:

Get a round under the hook and push the barrel over the round and into lockup. Use a dowel rod to push the round back against the breechface while you look at the underside of the slide to check for contact between the front of the hook and the forward angle of the extractor groove. You may not be able to tell that it's making contact by looking at the contact area... Watch for the extractor to spring to the right side of the channel.

Your hook may also be too long from the wall of the slot to the bottom of the extractor groove. Hold the extractor up to a light and engage the rim in its normal position. Does the tip of the hook bottom out in the groove? If not... push the extractor forward until the rim is about centered in the slot. Does the front of the extractor touch the forward angle of the groove?

You said:
Third, I can't tell if the extractor is clocking or not- it seems to be at a slight angle that I've never noticed before.

You may need to fit an oversized FP stop in order to keep the extractor squared up. If you do... Fit the stop to the slide first, and then check/fit it with the extractor installed. The stop doesn't have to be a hard fit. All it has to do is touch the slot to prevent clocking. Note that the thickness of the oversized stop may need to be reduced. Cut material from the side that goes against the slide by laying a file on the table and drawing the stop backward on it... in the direction that the file cuts. Do likewise on the sides. This will keep them square. Take equal amounts off each side for the pre-fit. Check the right side with the slot to see that it fits flush. No light showing between the inner wall and side of the stop. Bevel the edge of the stop to get it deeper into the slot and against the wall of the extractor slot.

If the front of the hook is making contact with the angle of the extractor groove, reduce the hook by radiusing it, but stay off the tip of the hook... the part that pulls on the inside of the rim. If you're not careful there, you can shorten the hook too much and it'll jump off the rim as it tries to extract the case.

If all else fails, you can send me the slide assembly with an extractor and oversized stop.

There is supposed to be some clearence between the slide (breech) face and the back of the hook. What holds the case is extractor pressure on the edge (outside diameter) of the cartridge's rim. I have some macro photographs that show this clearly, and that's someting I need to discuss with Tuner because in this like may other cases, a picture would save a lot of words. In some other pistols (the Luger for example) the extractor snaps over the rim and holds the case/cartridge tight against the breech face. However Browning's .45 wasn't designed that way.

When I adjust an extractor's tension I use a VERY expensive tool that I will be glad to duplicate for any member for only $1,000.00 (Tuner can get a discount.)

Take a piece of hardwood and drill a hole through it just big enough so that you can insert the front of the extractor. Clamp this block in your vise. Take the slide and put the extractor back in its hole, but reverse it so that it’s sticking out the back rather then in the normal position. Then put the front of the extractor in the block’s hole, going in to the point there you want to bow it. Use the slide as a handle and you can easily and precisely bend the extractor in any direction you want.

Now folks, this little block of wood is very professional, so I think $1,000.00 is very reasonable. Do I have any takers?

Quote:
Look at the breechface and see if any part of the pad behind the hook is past flush with the breechface. If not, proceed to:

I studied that carefully, and the pad is behind the breechface- none of the pad is proud of the face.

Quote:
Get a round under the hook and push the barrel over the round and into lockup. Use a dowel rod to push the round back against the breechface while you look at the underside of the slide to check for contact between the front of the hook and the forward angle of the extractor groove. You may not be able to tell that it's making contact by looking at the contact area... Watch for the extractor to spring to the right side of the channel.

After careful study, this is what I found:

The front of the hook hits the angle of the brass in front of the extractor groove.

I followed your directions carefully, and found that when a round is inserted under the extractor, and the barrel pushed over it and into lockup, the round doesn't touch the breech face. I measured the gap with feeler gauges, and found it to be approximately .026.

I then painted the bottom of the round and the tip of the extractor with dykem blue, and put it back together, put the barrel into lockup, and pushed the round back against the breech face with a cleaning rod.

I found the dykem blue had been disturbed on the round on the forward angle of the extractor groove.

Studying the situation from the bottom, with a strong magnifying light, I saw that the extractor moves to the right as the round is pushed against the breech face.

The tip doesn't reach the bottom of the extractor groove- no dykem blue had been disturbed there.

It's too long. The tip of the extractor is hitting the brass forward of the groove.

Quote:
Your hook may also be too long from the wall of the slot to the bottom of the extractor groove. Hold the extractor up to a light and engage the rim in its normal position. Does the tip of the hook bottom out in the groove?

No, it doesn't. I held a Surefire light under it, and you can see that the tip doesn't reach the bottom of the groove.

Quote:
If not... push the extractor forward until the rim is about centered in the slot. Does the front of the extractor touch the forward angle of the groove?

Yup. That's it. It's too long.

The other thing I noticed is that the force necessary to push the round against the breechface is exactly the force necessary to push the extractor back against the wall of it's channel.

The extractor is hitting the forward angle.

No wonder the old one broke.

How do I make it shorter?

Interesting problem. I do not do extractors like Tuner or Old Fuff so I can't help here. I do not wish to get in their way. What kind of extractor did you purchase?

Dave, I got an Ed Brown Hardcore.

We've been doing this privately for about a week, while hurricane season took THR off line, and I've learned a lot.

I was going to do everything publicly, if these guys are willing to help me, I was willing to be the training dummy.

If there's a stupid question to ask or a mistake to make, I'll find it...

Anyway, to bring everything up to date, I bought two extractors, knowing myself as well as I do, and calmly proceeded to grind the first one down two far.

It works, but it's only .100 where the drawing in figure 84, page 61, Volume I of Kuhnhausen says it should be .115- .117.

We're (Old Fuff, 'Tuner and I) are negotiating the destruction of my second new extractor now.

Now, if Mother Nature will cooperate, and allow THR to stay online, I'll post everything here.

Here is a CLUE. I use Caspian Extractors and it takes me about 15 minutes to fit one on a slow day. Let me know how you do!

Our friend Jammer's got a spec problem somewhere in the slide or the barrel, or both... The Hardcore extractors have all been in-spec since I tried my first one. They're a little overlong in the butt, and ya usually gotta blend'em with the back of thw slide... but the critical dimensions have always been on the money for me. Unless there's a problem with specs and dimensions, about 15 minutes is average time for fittin' and tweakin' a case puller-outer.

He might hafta take this one up with Springfield.

I put an Ed Brown Harcore on my SA loaded, and it took very little fitting. Like Tuner mentioned, I did have to blend the butt with the back of the slide, but it was pretty much on the money.

Case puller-outer? I thought it was a hook a-mabob?

This is a picture of the measurement I was talking about.

Kuhnhausen says it should be .115 to .117, and when I was done grinding, it was .100.

This picture is of a new extractor, and is about .120-121.

Tomorrow, I'm going to take measurements of everything, the slide and the new extractor, take pictures to show what measurements I'm talking about, post the pictures, and post a comparison of the measurements I take to the specs in Kuhnhausen.

Old Fuff says measure first, swear second. Or something. So I'm going to take his advice.

I figure that should give everyone something to grin about, and then my heros 'Tuner and Old Fuff can argue about what I should do next.

Then I'll do it, post pictures, and everyone can grin all over again.

Okay Jammer... Remember that the front of the hook CAN be allowed to touch the forward angle of the groove, as long as the extractor doesn't move sideways when you push the round against the breechface using a rod through the barrel. That's one reason that I reduce the outboard pad on the extractor. It allows the extractor to spring to the right without stressing the hook too much... and it lets me put a curve along the whole length of the stem.

In some examples such as yours, I'll reduce the pad a little more... maybe .005 inch more... to allow it to move a bit easier. Don't get carried away on that. Too much and you'll be fitting an oversized stop to keep the extractor from clocking... which will work, but will cost another 15 bucks for the stop and more time. That may be the only way if you wind up with a lot of contact with the extractor groove.

I HATE it when the specs are outta whack...

Well, now you tell me...

I did all that work because I thought it couldn't touch at all.

OK, here we go. First, Old Fuff told me to measure a couple things:

This is the breechface to front of firing pin slot measurement.

I note from the drawing on page 87 of Volume II that those two surfaces are not parallel, so I made the measurement as close to the top of the breech face as I could.

That measurement was 2.170.

Figure 69 on page 86 of Volume II gives that measurement (I think) as 2.178- 008, so this measurement, as accurately as I can see, is at the extreme minimum of that spec.

This is the second measurement Old Fuff asked for, and is the distance from the front of the slot to the tip of the new extractor. I took this measurement on both the new extractor that I haven't touched yet and the extractor that I installed.

The distances are:

New extractor: 2.316
Installed: 2.311.

That spec is in figure 129 on page 141 of Volume II, and is 2.320-008.
Both measurements fall within that spec.

Old Fuff then goes on to say: "Subtract the first measurement from the second, and it will tell you how far the front of the extractor is protruding forward from the breechface - not exactly but close enough for what we are doing to start with."

Performing that calculation gives us .146 for the new extractor, and .141 for the installed extractor.

Old Fuff then directs me to "Then measure from the barrel face to the back of the hood."

There's a problem, I don't know where the barrel face is. The only place I see that might be it, judging by your other comments, is the space marked "7" in Figure 86, on page 102 of Volume II. Is this it, 'Fuff? Doesn't really line up, you then said "If the slide is butted against the breechface when the pistol is in battery, and the hood depth is less then the extractor's protruding, one can strongly suspect that it might be hitting the barrel, in which case you would probably fine a little mark."

Doesn't make sense, that way, because the hood protrudes beyond that face way, way more than the extractor protrudes out of the slide...

So I don't understand.

You then said "As Tuner pointed out a short chamber can cause the case to stick out far enough to bind an extractor, and these day many makers are using short chambers because that's what they perceive their customers want. This could be quickly checked with a plug gage, but who uses inspectors anymore? For a quick check drop a cartridge into the chamber and then hold a straight edge across the base of the cartridge and see if you see any light between the end of the hood and the straight edge. If you do the chamber is too short. If you hold the straight edge across the hood and see light between the straight edge and cartridge base the chamber is too deep, but a little of this is O.K. and even desirable on a service pistol."

I checked this carefully, and the second condition applies. There is clearly a wedge of light between the straight edge and the base of the cartridge. This appears to put the chamber fears to rest.

'Tuner, do you agree?

'Fuff, I haven't executed the final paragraph of your instructions, but I will tomorrow.

Gentlemen, those are my measurements, and I await your directions.

It's BEST if the extractor doesn't touch the case at the front of the extractor groove, but it's not a major issue if it does... as long as it's not HARD contact that gets the front of the extractor into a solid bind under the forces of case setback when the round fires.

That's one reason that I reduce the outboard pad on the extractor...to allow a little more free movement in the channel and prevent its getting into a bind if it does happen. Just a little wiggle room in case things aren't always in- spec. It's not good for it... but creating that extra room holds the effect to a minimum. If contact there causes the extractor to spring open, the reduction keeps the amount of movement within the elastic limits of the steel, and doesn't tend to "straighten" the extractor stem. it also minimizes stress in the event of a snapover feed. These mods, along with preventing contact at the front have allowed me to get even MIM extractors to last far longer than they normally do. Think of it as a shock absorber.

I'm not exactly sure what Fuff meant by "barrel face", unless he meant the distance from the front of the first locking lug...which is the front step on the barrel hood... Old armorers don't always use the same terminology or even speak the same language... or so it seems sometimes.

The poor Ol' Fuff is going to have to find a better way to explain things.

Anyway, what I called the "barrel face" is the back end of the barrel not counting the hood - in other words the same surface the throat is cut into on the bottom.

If, when the slide is in battery, the back end of the hood touches the breachface, and the extractor is protruding out further then the length of the hood, it is possible (but not necessarily certain) that the front of the extractor will hit the barrel when the gun goes into battery, especially if the chamber is empty. If this happens very often a mark should be left on the barrel, and if no correction is made, the battering could over time cause the extractor to break.

It is unlikely this condition will exist unless one or more of the parts involved (the slide, extractor and barrel) are out of tolerance or there is a bad tolerance stack-up. During the "good ol' days" this seldom happened, but these days with manufacturers buying parts from all over the map one never knows.

Anyway, if a problem is suspected the first thing too do is look, measure, and observe rather then start removing metal. You can save a lot of money that way.

Aw hell, Fuff... I just call that the back end of the barrel... back end of the hood, etc. I reckon I oughta open Kuhnhausen's books and read a little.

OK, I think we're getting there.

I'm about to go down and grind my new extractor down.

What do you guys use to polish the groove once the fit is OK?

Numrich/The Parts Corp (I think their web address is www.e-gunparts.com) but I'm not sure. Anyway They used to have some extractors for about $5.00. Why so, ah ... inexpensive? Because they're investment cast, and Tuner may have a fit just because I brought the subject up. But while I would never put one of these in any gun I cared about they are perfect for learning on, and if they aren't badly out-of-dimension they'll do for experimenting - and it beats making mistakes on those good ones that you're playing with now.

Remember, you don't have to have "the best" to learn on, just to finish up with.

Ready... Set... STOP!

Don't grind it... File it a little at a time and check it often. You can use a Dremel to reduce the pads... IF... you're careful and follow the radius closely.

Use a light touch.

To polish the bottom of the slot, try a popsicle stick edgeways with a piece of 600-grit paper wrapped around it and held tightly. You don't want to change the angle at the back of the hook or make that part too smooth. Just knock off any sharp edges... Think of it like the breechface.

I really have tried to stay out of this but... you seem to be "Grinding" on a part that I have fitted hundreds of and have yet to "Grind On One"! Buy a STOCK CASPIAN Extractor, put a little tension on it by inserting it in it's hole in the slide backwards with the hook facing the inside. Grab it with some household pliers with the claw inside the jaws and bend it inward slightly, install it back in the gun and see if it shoots. The bend is at the aft end of the donut and it doesn't take much. Let me know if some pictures would help here. Put that book away! I have taught over 40 students online to fit extractors and we have yet to have a malfunction after they are fit right. I must know something! Old Fuff mentioned the tip hitting the back of the barrel at the throat area. 38 Super/9mm barrels are relieved in this area for that reason and it may be a bad bunch of dimensions that are causing this problem. I really doubt it , though. I am not going to get into what I do to revise the claw and hook but I have never reduced one in the area that you seem to be "Grinding" on. Keep us posted.

OK, no grinding.

I'll use a cylinder on my drillpress to do the pads, and I'll use a file for the hook.

Fuff, you old dog, why didn't I think of that? That's what I should have done- not only would I be about $25 ahead now, but I could have made a couple extras to take to the league as back ups.

Now that I think about it, maybe I will, anyway.

An Extractor Tip

Here's a little-known thing concerning "springy" steel.

Back when I was dabblin' with automotive machine work, an old race engine builder showed me a little trick on straightening steel crankshafts... which have a certain amount of "spring". Using a hydraulic press to unbend one exceeds the elastic limit of the steel on the surface and compresses it underneath... so he used a large hammer to shock the crank in the appropriate direction.

An extractor is basically a leaf spring... more or less... and the same applies. Bending a leaf spring is much the same as stretching a coil spring... It weakens the spring, and causes it to fail early because the bending operation exceeds the elastic limit of the steel.

Laying the extractor on the jaws of an open vise, with the ends supported and center hangin' in the air... and using a small hammer to bump the center pad shocks the steel into changing shape... and doesn't stretch the surface steel or compress the stuff underneath. The grain structure realigns without damage... and the steel not only holds that shape longer, it's retains its full measure of springiness.

OK, to bring everyone up to date, and resurrect a dying thread, I finally had time today to work on the next (second) extractor.

I have it down to .110, which is longer than the first one I did. It was just .100, using the measurement I sent you during hurricane season. (The first one, incidentally, extracted 100 rounds in a row without a single failure.)

I used the dykem-blue on the base of a piece of brass method, and the extractor is in fact hitting the forward angle.

Then, just for grins, I took the extractor out of my loaded model and measured it, and it measured out to .108-.110, which is at least .005 less than Kuhnhausen says it should be. The hook is also considerably shorter (the tip is closer to the breech face) than the new one, too.

I'm starting to think that Springfields like really short hooks on short extractors...

It's still hitting, according to the dykem blue, but I swear I don't see it move when I push back against the breech face. I'm going to take material off the tip before I make the hook any shorter.

Incidentally, I got vol. one of the AGI series, and his section on extractors doesn't say anything about specs, and the only time he mentioned length, I think he said it backwards. I was disappointed.

It so happens that I had a go at another forum member's Loaded Springer last night. The hook was .027 inch... and it had been tweaked... so they may be on the near side of too short for a reason. I think I've discovered why... at least on his pistol.

When I installed the Bulletproof, the hook was a little long, and pulling the extractor back out of the channel caused the hook to catch on the breechface. I had to spring it to the right to get it out... even AFTER it was brought down to .034 inch. It appears that there's an issue with his slide that I didn't really go into due to other things that I had to do.

There was also a weird problem with fitting the EGW firing pin stop. He had ordered a Series 80 type stop... but no prob. Me... I've used those before without issues. It had been in and out about 5 times, and was almost perfect. It pressed in with just a little more than thumb pressure...when all of a sudden it wouldn't come out. Nothing would help. I wound up cutting it up the middle with a cut-off wheel in my Dremel... c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y... and finding a standard stop that was .010 wider than his old one. The old extractor had been clocking, and having various failures to extract and stickin' the last empty back in the magazine.

Anyway... It could be that some of Springfield's slides are seriously out of spec, which causes them to shorten the hooks out of spec in order to get them to feed. Hard to say if they even test-fire'em before shippin'em. Your issue with the extractor hook bottoming out in the extractor groove is probably just such an issue. I think yours is a stack-up between the slide length from the firing pin stop centerline and the breechface... and headspacing.

The SA's are metric and they have different specs. No one seems to be able to get ahold of this, but I have re-built a few of them and they are fun to work on. The rear tangs are different, the hole for the front sight is about.0185-0186-0187-0188 or so, and the slide dimensions vary from gun to gun. A metric copy of an SAE 1911 has to be slightly off. They are great guns to use as is, but I would never consider working on one to any extent other than a reliablity tune up. I never use Jerry's dimensions as I have to fit each part just so and his books are no help for that. Each 1911 is different. Perhaps just a tiny bit, but not the same. All the parts have to be happy with each other no matter who the maker is. If they aren't, bad things happen to good guns.

METRIC?

SERIOUSLY?

They'll be for sale if that's true...

According to my sources:

Before and during World War Two, Brazil was an important ally in the war against Germany. When Argentina aligned itself with the Axis Powers, Brazil’s support became even more critical. While Uncle Sam was more then willing to send military supplies to Brazil, doing so was difficult and dangerous because of German U-Boats. Even so, Brazil was one of the few South American countries that received regular shipments of USGI 1911-A1 pistols through Lend-Lease.

Following the war in 1945-46, the U.S. Government decided that it would be advisable if Brazil could produce its own pistols in case another re- supply issue developed in the future. Surplus manufacturing machinery, along with Colt and Government engineers set up the program, and besides the machinery provided drawings, jigs and fixtures, material specifications - in other words the whole ball game. Springer buys their frames from the successor to this program, and they are still made to those original USGI drawings and dimensions.

I think that Tuner needs another source. Look at the grip tangs on an SA and then look at one of your GI Guns. Then tell us they are made to those specs.

Yep. I know those are .220 radius... but everything else... the areas that really count... are true to print specs and usually within tolerance... or as near as I can determine. As to why they went with that particular radius, I can only guess. Maybe something to do with the fact that several custom smiths were using Springfield slides and frames for ground-up builds at one time, and requested that dimension? The Gunsite Gunsmithy was usin'em almost exclusively at one time, until Springfield stopped delivering. Maybe somebody with the inside skinny can enlightent us on it...

I have one of those Gunsite Springfields. I really don't know about the metric part. But, it is tough and still running. In my haste one night at a IDPA shoot. I loaded a 40 SW round in my mag. It fed, fired, and fried. Made a really interesting sound. Got a good chewing from the SO. But, I finished the shoot. Learned a good lesson. Gun was filty.

Most of the other countries in the world do not use SAE measurments. These are converted to the system that they use and are very close to the inch measurments that we use. Brazil use to build great VW BUGs and they were metric to start with so they were near perfect copies. I am not picking on any manufacturer, but rather just stating the facts. Things happen in clones and as long as they work, I do not care. I have mentioned the obvious differences that I have found in these guns. The Chinese do not care about metric/SAE, they just do an exact copy. They have been doing that for centuries. If you want an exact SAE 1911 copy, look at a 1927 Systima. Made in Brazil.

Hmm... In that case, maybe Springfield has made the GI Mil-Spec closer to an exact copy than first suspected...

Most commercial Colt and all my spare, (NOS) USGI parts would drop in and work with two WW2 Mil-Specs like they were made for'em. Mine and my step- son's. Other guys around here report the same results with their standard Mil- Spec Springers too.

When I upgraded my WW2 Springer, even the thumb safety fell in and worked perfectly with the OEM Springfield sear and hammer. The early Colt commercial hammer dropped in and worked perfectly with the OEM sear... and only when I used the Nowlin Pro-Match sear did I have to work on it. The Nowlin sear had a thicker pad, and the safety wouldn't work.

Instead of fitting the safety, I stoned the pad until it would just barely engage... too tight... and fine-tuned the rest of the fit with the safety so I'd have plenty of metal left to peen and refit the safety in the future if need be.

Colt and Remington-Rand barrels that I tried strictly out of curiosity dropped in perfectly, and the slide fit flush with the frame... Even the USGI mag catch went in and worked without a hitch. Ditto for the grip safety. Ditto for the trigger. Ditto for the Briley disconnect... The only problem that I had was with a S&A mainspring housing. The holes didn't line up... but (you guessed it) a USGI mainspring housing fell right in. No contact with the new Colt strut... No problem with the sear spring... No problems. Except for the Nowlin sear, everything was a drop-in swap.

So, if the metric issue is real... How does all this figger into the overall picture?

Jammer's got a spec problem with his slide or his barrel... or both. I'll know more about it by Tuesday night or Wednesday afternoon... It's gonna be overnighted to me on Monday, and I'll report as soon as I know.

I know you is a "guru" and all of that, but ...

Dave Sample:
If you want an exact SAE 1911 copy, look at a 1927 Systima. Made in Brazil. End of this discussion.

The truth of the matter is that the "Pistola Sistema 'Colt' Modelo Agrentino 1927, Caliber 11.25 mm." was manufactured in Argentina (not Brazil) by the Direcci'on General de Fabricaci'ones Militares, at the F'abrica Militar de Armas Port'atiles factory. Thus they are marked on the left side of the slide: D.G.F.M. - (F.M.A.P.).

The pistols were manufactured on a licence granted by Colt in 1927, but production didn't start until 1945. The pistols were manufactured in accordance with 1927 drawings and specifications provided by Colt, and the parts were interchangeable with Colt pistols of the same period. They were incidentally 1911-A1's not 1911's. This is not to say that the Argentine military didn't use model 1911 pistols, because they did. But those were known as the "model 1914" in that South American country, and they were made by Colt in Hartford, CT.

Quote:
The only problem that I had was with a S&A mainspring housing. The holes didn't line up... but (you guessed it) a USGI mainspring housing fell right in.

Tuner, I did one of these, it was the most ill fitting beast I ever played with. The holes on the S&A were way off, I ended up filing cussing, filing and more cussing. I finally got it to fit, I thought I had just gotten a bunk one, but maybe they are all out. This was on a original Colt, which was to spec as three other Colt mainspriings all fit right.

Quote:
The pistols were manufactured on a licence granted by Colt in 1927, but production didn't start until 1945.

Are you sure of the production dates? I have one that is marked 1927 and its not a contract gun. Nice gun but there are some very subtle differences from the Colts, check out the triggers, I have never seen a Colt with the same knurling on the trigger and the hammer knurling is different also.

I think I need to take my Sistema and one of my Colts apart and do a mix and match to see how the stuff all fits together ( everything should fit right together ).

I'd heard a few references to the metric/SAE argument with Springfield pistols, and never have found it to be the case. As noted... if anything is metric on the guns, the dimensions aren't separated widely enough for it to make a practical difference... so they musta split those metric dimensions into fractions thereof. Measurements generally fall well within blueprint tolerances, and seem to be held to to even closer tolerances than many new Colts.

Schromf... Oddly enough, that S&A mainspring housing fell into an Essex frame like it had been fitted. It almost worked in one early Colt 1991-A1 and went into a NRM Government Model with just a little persuasion... and it was all about hole location. Go figger. On the dates... I think Fuff was referring to military contract pistols. The Argentines probably did as they pleased with the contract on a commercial or civilian (polizia) level. I may be wrong on that point... Anybody want to correct or clarify?

I was just wondering if this extractor issue was ever solved. I also have a Springfield loaded model that I bought used which had an AFTEC extractor in it. I replaced it with an Ed Brown and had the problem of the extractor dinging the forward angle in the fired case extractor grooves, even after considerable stock removal on the end of the extractor. I replaced that extractor with a Wilson and although it does not ding as much, it still does.

Wow... Talk about reviving a long-dead thread! Good one to bright back to the top though. I had occasion to wonder where this one was a couple of days ago, and hadn't had the time to start searching.

Yep. The gun is fixed. Jammer Fed-exed the whole top end of the gun to me shortly after the date of the last post before yours. I altered the nose of the extractor to provide the clearance that it needed, set the tension, and... if I remember correctly... installed an EGW firing pin stop with a small radius on the bottom corner. Not sure on that last point, though... Jammer?

Anyway... Jammer provided follow-up reports via PM and E-mail, and to the best of my knowledge, the problem is history.