9x19 in 7,63x25 chamber

[Steinar]

Originally Posted by unspellable

The Winchester Tokarev stuff is relabeled ammo from a European manufacturer. S&B if I remember correctly. Which says nothing one way or the other for how hot a load it is.

That's scary news for me. S&B (Seller & Bellot) is a Czechoslovakian company, I guess you beleve they produce them by lisence?
Czechoslovakia have been using some very hot 7.62 ammunition in their CZ-52 pistol amoung others. It will not help reduzing my muzzle shake thinking it might be Czechoslovakian stuff i'm running trough my 70+ year old pistols

[alvin]

Thanks for the input, but I would reserve a little on the "worn parts" theory. It's hard to explain why some Mausers that lost almost all rifling still have straight edges behind the bolt stop, and some guns with excellent bore and much lower mileage have bent/deformed edges. I feel that the latter was still more related with firing higher pressure ammo.

Have not gotten a chance to inspect a damaged gun for detail yet. Will find one.

If the edge behind the bolt stop is very bent (like the 2nd pix above), the bolt cannot close completely. I just did a little experiment. By inserting a tiny cleaning patch between the bolt and the receiver, I created a gap of around 1m/m between them. Then, pushed down the trigger, the hammer did not fall.... the trigger had been disconnected from the sear. So, the gun shown in the 2nd pix is not functional anymore.

[Steinar]

Tried Alvin's experiment with the cleaning patch on the Royal I mention above. On semi auto it can't tolerate any more than just 1mm, but on automatic the hammer will release no matter how far back the bolt is. This gun is quite different internally than a C96 or M712, but I wonder if the same goes for a M712?

As seen on the picture, the top one has a small bulge on the upper part. Showed this one to Alwin earlier, he mention that it might be a softer metal than used in this one compared to the C96/M712.. makes sense to me, as it looks quite unused otherwise.

Is there any way to fix this? Or would that just make the metal more fragile in that area?

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by Morgan Kane

Is there any way to fix this?

Morg -

I think there is a way. I would call it a "Tarantula Clamp" (from the movie "Purple Hearts").

Picture a 3" square block of 1" thick steel. Drill/ream a hole through the middle, same diameter as the barrel section to be 'fixed'. Now drill 4 holes lengthwise through all 4 corners, say 7/16" dia. Saw the block through the center into 4 equal parts. It should now look like a square pie, with 4 pieces. Chamfer all edges, and insert four Grade 8 bolts in the long 7/16" holes. Grease the center up good; grease the barrel. Assemble the Tarantula Clamp on the bulge. Start tightening the bolts sequentially.

I think this will work. I plan on trying it soon.

[alvin]

On Westinger Schnellfeuer (I have not gotten a chance to look at Nickl), the firing control switch does two things: it controls the width of the trigger and the position of the 2nd sear (full-auto sear).

In full auto mode, the width of trigger top is extended to raise the disconnector all the time as long as the trigger is kept pushing down, regardless the bolt position, so the 1st sear (semi-auto sear) does not lock the hammer anymore while the trigger is kept pushing down.

Also in full auto mode, the 2nd sear bar is enabled. The lower tip of the 2nd sear locks the hammer, and it releases the hammer when barrel extension touches its upper tip, just before the barrel extension fully returns to its forward position.

So, on Schnell full-auto mode, the hammer won't fall while the bolt is open wide even if the trigger is kept pushing down, because the hammer is locked by the 2nd sear. But the hammer will be released when the bolt and barrel extension almost returns to battery.

May I assume Royal has only one sear? If that's true, its full-auto mode was implemented more like "slam-fire".....

[Steinar]

Originally Posted by alvin

May I assume Royal has only one sear? If that's true, its full-auto mode was implemented more like "slam-fire".....

The mechanical design is packed down into the frame, it's a hassle to dissemble it.. So I'm not really sure if it has one or two sears. But the hammer does not release until the bolt is completely back into the forward position. First time hammer will fall by trigger pull, is not related to the bolts position on this broom look alike

[alvin]

Originally Posted by Morgan Kane

But the hammer does not release until the bolt is completely back into the forward position. First time hammer will fall by trigger pull, is not related to the bolts position on this broom look alike

It's supposed to be two-sear design then. The behavior matches Schnellfeuer perfectly. When the hammer is cocked by finger, it is locked by the 1st sear. Pull out the bolt, the trigger is not disconnected from the trigger in the full-auto mode (vs in semi-auto mode, the trigger is disconnected), so push the trigger will release the hammer, even if the bolt is open.

Please note, the hammer is locked by the 1st sear in the first time cocking. Why the 2nd sear does not get involved in this step? It's because the barrel extension is in full forward position, so the 2nd sear is in 'release' position. Keeping trigger pushed down, the 1st sear is effectively disabled, the 2nd sear controls the releasing of the hammer in the following firing, until the trigger is released to re-enable the 1st sear, or the gun runs out of the ammo, bolt is hold open wide by the magazine follower.

Regarding "fixing" the minor dimple on the barrel extension.... It's not broken, better leave it alone. "No change in my hands". Just IMO.