1911 Firearm Addicts banner

21 - 37 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
I'm not positive of what you're describing. If you're saying that beveling the rear underside of the barrel hood allows the ejector to be longer, I'd have to say that's not the purpose of the bevel. Its purpose is to prevent the feeding cartridge from getting hung up on a sharp edge.
B

IMG_20201124_102222.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #23
Vol 1
My hood isn't beveled there, so at some point I'll bevel it there anyhow.
Thanks for taking the time to point thest things out to me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
Hey Steve -
Well - I made the decision to get to work on that extractor last night.
Too bad I started on the new WC one - I thought for sure that one would be close to perfect, but it needed about .020" removed, then by that time the tension wasn't right.
But I have it figured out how to sculpt one of those little things ... I think I overdid it a bit
I have 3 more extractors to play with if it's not right... We'll see
Cycling it by hand, the ejection pattern was noticably different.
Thanks

Enjoy your Thanksgiving!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #27 (Edited)
Surface E
In the diagram... Might have been .015" but it was a lot more than I expected I'd need to remove.
I lost track of my measurement.
Then before I was done, I'd taken enough material away that there wasn't any tension.
I had to bend it - Per Jerry Kuhnhausen's specs.
I didn't remove any material from the hook though.
I was concerned that in the process of polishing surfaces C&D I may have rounded the edge of the hook
But the hook stayed sharp.
I taped some pieces of fine hacksaw blade together to make a tiny file and get into the groove.

At this point it's a bit tighter than spec.
But before, I was running it with clearance between the case rim and the groove of the extractor, as the extractor came out of the package.

I have 3 other extractors to work opn to get it right after I find out how this goes

Screenshot_20201126-134047.png
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
Surface E In the diagram...
Good start.

Removing material from the locating pad is what you need to do to set the deflection. As you lower the height of the locating pad the more deflection there will be. Each time you remove material you need to test fit the extractor to see what the resulting deflection is. You need to bend the extractor a little each time you remove material from the locating pad so that when you shove the extractor back into the slide the locating pad will be in contact with the tunnel. If it's not in contact with the tunnel, you will not be able to get a true reading of the amount of deflection.

The most common way to screw this up is to remove too much material from the locating pad resulting in too much deflection. You don't want more than .010" of deflection if at all possible. I've been there, done that, and have the t-shirt to prove it. Learn from my mistake.

Then before I was done, I'd taken enough material away that there wasn't any tension.
This would be unusual. Even if you completely removed the locating pad, the extractor could be bent to contact the case rim and apply pressure. In fact, with no locating pad you'd have way, way too much deflection and no matter what the tension was on the extractor (within reason) the pistol would have functional problems.

Not long ago I tried to fit a couple of Wilson extractors to a couple of Caspian slides but the locating pads were so short that even right out of the box these extractors could not be adjusted for deflection. In other words, they had way, way too much deflection even with their unmolested locating pads. Those extractors could not be fit to those slides without doing some fancy welding to add height to their locating pads.

I had to bend it - Per Jerry Kuhnhausen's specs.
So now you know the extractor will always have to be bent so that the locating pad is in contact with the tunnel wall. Forget Jerry's specs. Set the deflection first and correctly. Then add tension. With minimal deflection you'll have a tough time bending the extractor enough to compromise feeding.

I didn't remove any material from the hook though.
Remember to check that the edge of the hook claw isn't in contact with the case as you go through the fitting process. It's not unusual to experience this contact as the height of the locating pad is reduced. The claw depth should be as long as possible without contacting the case. A range of .030" - .034" is considered good.

You already know that setting tension comes after setting deflection. Also, after setting deflection you can set the claw depth. Stop short of the range I noted and test fit.

Don't just file the claw down to .030" at the beginning. It's an iterative process. Step by step. Tiny bites at a time. Once the steel is gone, it's gone forever.

I taped some pieces of fine hacksaw blade together to make a tiny file and get into the groove.
You're talking about surface C the tensioning wall, right? Be careful. You don't want a 90 degree angle where the tensioning wall and the hook meet. That will weaken the hook and can lead to the hook breaking off from the extractor.

But before, I was running it with clearance between the case rim and the groove of the extractor, as the extractor came out of the package.
Yeah, that's obviously not right. The case rim and the groove (tensioning wall) must make contact. They must be the only contact point between the case and the extractor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
That's interesting - Once someone figures out how to make a miniature sculpture using some hand made tools, it's a lot easier to make progress.
I also cut a slice off a diamond stone to make myself a miniature file.

I was surprised that there ended up being no tension on it after I'd taken about .010" off the locating pad.
Anyhow, just discovering the basics about the geometry of this thing.
I think I get the concept at this point.
I have to study the finer points of the geometry of the bend/tension. Because that should have been done first.

I'll follow along with what you said and see how my next one turns out.

Probably add some pics when I get home and dig through my stuff

Thanks
 

·
I gotta have more cowbell
Joined
·
3,480 Posts
I once had a similar ejection pattern in a commander. I experimented with recoil springs. The heavier the spring , the farther the casings ejected toward the front of the gun . The extractor tension was just fine. But a 22 lb recoil spring made it kick out at about 3:30 and with much less force .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
Merry Christmas to anyone reading
I put this project on the back burner for a while. I'm sure you kno how that goes.
But I'll be back at it pretty soon.
But - Something I've discovered is that my Commander is one of the type that has full-size internal dimensions.
I searched and found info on that and from what I see it isn't unusual.
But I'm sure that would have something to do with the ejection pattern, as the stroke is shortened, compared to how it would be if it were a true Commander frame.

Thanks for any information - As always
Cheers!
 

·
1911 Pistol Smith
Joined
·
9,773 Posts
One thing I haven't seen mentioned and maybe I'm off base with this, but maybe not. It's hard to tell from your ejector picture if it's a sub-caliber ejector or not? A Cmdr pistol requires a sub-caliber or one could say a 9mm ejector.. and you are correct with a full length frame with Cmdr slide you open yourself up to multiple possible issues. Short cycling can cause a plethora full of complications. I just shortened the rails snd guide rod abutment on a clients Les Baer Stinger. The thing with the sub caliber ejector is that it's cut in such a way that the nose of the ejector is closer to the firing pin hole.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
I have the feeling that I'll end up shortening the rails and guide rod abutment on this one as well, by the time I'll be happy with it.
I have a different Commander frame that's a proper design and I'll try it out and I'm thinking it will probably be right.
Something else I'm seeing with the Commander based on a GI frame is that there's more pre-load on the recoil spring and it makes it harder to pull back the slide by hand..

Thanks for the reply - Christmas cheer to you
 

·
I gotta have more cowbell
Joined
·
3,480 Posts
It has new recoil springs and a new WC extractor and ejector.
I looked up the specs on the recoil springs on the site where I bought them. The specs weren't printed.
I got a WC shock buff kit that came with 2 recoil springs that were specified as being EP and RP (extra power & reduced power) I used the lighter one.
Would using the heavier recoil spring change the ejection pattern?
Probably would.

I guess that the question that remains is: Does that extended ejector look like the right part for a Commander?
I see ejectors that are a lot of different lengths in the front, I'm sure that would have an effect.
Are there any suggestions on where to go with modifying that, should the heavier recoil spring not remedy the issue?

(The pic of the ejector is on my first post)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
How you tune your pistol by swapping springs depends on your objective.

If your objective is to get back on target as fast as possible, you'll want the pistol to end up parallel to the ground after the pistol returns to battery without having to move it up or down yourself.

Here are a couple of videos that may be of interest in this regard:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter #36 (Edited)
Good videos- Thanks
I have a Govt size 1911 that I'm going to experiment with and see what I can figure out by playing mr potato head with extractors and ejectors.
I also ordered a longer ejector for my Commander
When I bought my ejector, it was supposed to be extended for a Commander, but I think that it's possible the Commanders that are build on an original Govt size frame require a longer one.
 

·
Chief Steward of Man Law
Joined
·
668 Posts
I built a .45 ACP Commander based on some parts that I already have around plus whatever I could get on Ebay at bargain basement prices for new stuff.
It's been a great learning experience! I'm very happy with what I have
I'll give a more detailed explanation about my build on a different thread, when I have a chance to put some pics together.
Here's the only real issue I'm having so far: The spent cases eject almost straight up and maybe slightly to the right. But they were hitting the ceiling over the bench at the range and bouncing off fairly forcefully.
I'd like to keep track of my brass for reloading, so If I could change that somehow, that would be nice.
The attached pic shows my ejector - Maybe I could modify that to tune the ejection pattern?
- Or maybe a different slide spring?

View attachment 645259


Thanks in advance for any help
Ok. If I'm understanding you correctly, what you are wanting is for the spent cases to eject more to the right instead of straight up and with maybe a little less force. You were on the right track with tuning the ejector. all the other stuff I'm seeing offered is not going to help you much.

What you want to do is this:

1. with a file (or a dremel and sanding disk if you are skilled with it) true up the tip of your ejector so you have a flat, vertical tip.

2. Undercut the tip about 10 degrees from the bottom to 1/3 from the top of the tip. (see edited pic)
681668


3. Put the same bevel from left to right.

Now only the top left 1/3 of the ejector will contact the case head. This means it will contact higher and farther to the left, which will cause the case to be pushed more to the right and less vertically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayBeeKay
21 - 37 of 37 Posts
Top