1939 P08 Ejector Keeps Failing

[Randall_G]

Hello,

I purchased the P08 in the spring of 2018. The original plum ejector failed the first time I took it to the range (image 8798), after maybe 18 rounds. I subsequently installed an ejector purchased from SARCO; this ejector lasted about 25 rounds (image 8840txt).

Next I installed a strawed ejector purchased from InterArms. This just failed today, after firing some 53 rounds (image 0582).

One anomaly: the original matching-number breech block is chipped, as shown on the attached photo (image 8666). I replaced this breech block with a WWII (non-matching) breech block, but by the time I did the strawed ejector was already noticeably bent/deformed (as shown on image 0581).

I’ve been shooting WWB 115 grain exclusively.

Thoughts on what could be causing the ejectors to keep failing? I’d like to be able to shoot the gun (say) once a year, without having to install a new ejector.

Other than the ejector, the pistol is functioning properly.

Thanks!

[gunbugs]

It would seem that the rear of the breech block is catching the front edge of the ejector, and bending/breaking it on the rearward stroke. It may require some fitting to the ejector to get it to clear the slot in the breech block correctly. I would disassemble the breech block from the toggle train, and see how it slides past the ejector by itself. Try to see how it is getting caught up and bent. There should be a slight amount of spring travel to the ejector as the breech block slides past, but it shouldn't be catching on anything.

[DonVoigt]

Maybe just bad luck on the ejectors, as they failed in different ways.

The ejector must fit the receiver correctly, and they can be too long at the front - which interferes with their movement.

While they are "supposed" to be interchangeable, there is enough tolerance shift to create the occasional problem- especially with reproduction/replacement ejectors.

I think the lower one was too long, and should have had a file or stone stroke or ten to achieve sufficient clearance at the forward curve of the ejector/receiver - they should not contact there, so you have to create clearance with some combinations.

[Randall_G]

Thanks guys!

The strawed ejector was noticeably misaligned with the slot in the breech block--had to push a little harder to slide the breech block over the ejector. And, it's scuffed up pretty badly (see attached photo).

The replacement ejector seems to be properly aligned with the slot in the breech block. I took the pistol to the range and fired 18 rounds of WWB 115 gr. No issues, the ejector still looks good (see attached photos).

My current theory is the chipped, numbers-matching, breech block was just a hair out of alignment, or loose, causing the plum ejector that came with the gun (which I presume was fit to the gun) to break, then broke the SARCO ejector, and perhaps bent the strawed ejector, such that it wouldn't align with the replacement breech block I installed. Or, maybe just bad luck, as Don suggests.

If I continue to have issues, I'll update this thread. Likewise, I'll try to remember to update this thread if I experience no further ejector issues, after the pistol has more run time.

[Randall_G]

As gunbugs suggested, I disconnected the breech block from the toggle train, and felt and watched the breech block as it engaged the ejector:

-I felt drag increase while moving the breech block forward, as the ejector slot in the breech block necks down, causing the ejector's "fin" to contact the breech block. I assume this is normal?

-The drag felt linear in both directions, and I didn't observe any binding as I moved the breech block backward and forward.

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by Randall_G

As gunbugs suggested, I disconnected the breach block from the toggle train, and felt and watched the breach block as it engaged the ejector:

-I felt drag increase while moving the breach block forward, as the ejector slot in the breach block necks down, causing the ejector's "fin" to contact the breach block. I assume this is normal?

-The drag felt linear in both directions, and I didn't observe any binding as I moved the breach block backward and forward.

Yes, that is normal.
The breech block has to move the ejector out when it closes, that is the resistance you should feel.
You will also feel additional resistance when the striker engages the sear and the striker spring is compressed.

Where did you find the "original" ejectors in the plastic bag- with made in the EU on it?

[Randall_G]

Yup, I also noticed the increased resistance when the breech block engages the trigger bar.

I bought the "original" ejector here, from Poland:

http://www.stg44.eu/wpis.php?jid=3&katid=7&postid=361


You have to request a part and pay via Paypal. The part fit well, needed only a gentle tap from a rubber hammer to seat the round tab. I needed a machinist buddy's help to get the Interarms strawed and SARCO ejectors to fit.

I also have two plum ejectors I bought from Legacy. I'm saving those for when I'm sure the ejector issue is sorted, as I think plum is period-correct for my 1939 Luger. At least that's what was on the gun when I bought it.

[mrerick]

It would be worth verifying that there are not wear / headspace issues with the gun. Is there much forward / rearward breech block play when the breech is closed on an empty chamber?

What is the spec of the recoil spring? There were a number of different resistance levels in these springs (thicker wire / number of coils). These are detailed in our FAQ document along with the versions of the Luger they were used in.

Is the extractor well clean, allowing the extractor to yield the casing when it hits the ejector? Is the contour of the extractor claw correct?

Are you seeing any peening on the area where the toggle strikes the frame during cycling?

It's a Mauser frame. Is it a matching gun?

[DonVoigt]

thanks for the info and link!

Originally Posted by Randall_G

Yup, I also noticed the increased resistance when the breach block engages the trigger bar.

I bought the "original" ejector here, from Poland:

http://www.stg44.eu/wpis.php?jid=3&katid=7&postid=361


You have to request a part and pay via Paypal. The part fit well, needed only a gentle tap from a rubber hammer to seat the round tab. I needed a machinist buddy's help to get the Interarms strawed and SARCO ejectors to fit.

I also have two plum ejectors I bought from Legacy. I'm saving those for when I'm sure the ejector issue is sorted, as I think plum is period-correct for my 1939 Luger. At least that's what was on the gun when I bought it.

[Randall_G]

Originally Posted by mrerick

It would be worth verifying that there are not wear / headspace issues with the gun. Is there much forward / rearward breech block play when the breech is closed on an empty chamber?

What is the spec of the recoil spring? There were a number of different resistance levels in these springs (thicker wire / number of coils). These are detailed in our FAQ document along with the versions of the Luger they were used in.

Is the extractor well clean, allowing the extractor to yield the casing when it hits the ejector? Is the contour of the extractor claw correct?

Are you seeing any peening on the area where the toggle strikes the frame during cycling?

It's a Mauser frame. Is it a matching gun?

Thanks for the input.

Yes, it's a matching gun. In my mind, I was thinking I didn't replace any matching parts until after I fired the gun the first time. But, looking at my records, before firing the gun the first time, I replaced the following numbered parts:

1. Firing pin and spring, with a reproduction firing pin and spring from SARCO.

2. Extractor, with a reproduction extractor purchased from SARCO. See attached photo (8694) showing original and replacement extractor, and photos taken of the reproduction extractor a few minutes ago (1124 and 1125).

3. Hold open latch and spring from http://www.stg44.eu/wpis.php?jid=3&katid=7&postid=376


I do not feel any forward / rearward breech block play when the breech is closed on an empty chamber. The only way I can get it to move is to pull up on the toggle.

I do not know the spec for the recoil spring--haven 't touched it since I bought the gun. Probably original? I'll read the FAQ, then look at what's on the gun, see if I can determine the spec.

Extractor looks nice and clean to me, see previous photos.

The area where the toggle contacts the frame is shiny, but I doesn't appear peened. But, I have limited knowledge of what "normal" looks like--see images 1128 and 1129.

Thank you!

[mrerick]

Verify no binding in operation of the extractor, and that the well the spring fits into is clear and clean with slight lubrication.

Double check the surface of the extractor hook. I fit's rough consider a light polish.

Are there marks on the back of the frame where the toggle stops and strikes it? The frame ears look like they are slightly worn down. There might be inadequate recoil resistance. It's a finely balanced action.

The ejector has to push the base of the cartridge out from under the extractor hook very quickly. If the base was caught and stuck in the block well, it would try and compress the ejector instead of smoothly being pushed out. If the striking speed was fast, this could be snapping your ejector. Look at the hook profile and see how closely it matches the original hook.

[Randall_G]

Originally Posted by mrerick

Verify no binding in operation of the extractor, and that the well the spring fits into is clear and clean with slight lubrication.

Double check the surface of the extractor hook. I fit's rough consider a light polish.

Are there marks on the back of the frame where the toggle stops and strikes it? The frame ears look like they are slightly worn down. There might be inadequate recoil resistance. It's a finely balanced action.

The ejector has to push the base of the cartridge out from under the extractor hook very quickly. If the base was caught and stuck in the block well, it would try and compress the ejector instead of smoothly being pushed out. If the striking speed was fast, this could be snapping your ejector. Look at the hook profile and see how closely it matches the original hook.

The extractor is moves freely, is clean and lubricated.

The extractor hook is shiny--which I would expect--but otherwise looks good.

No marks on the back of the frame, just shiny.

Near as I can tell, the reproduction ejector matches the original well.

If another ejector breaks, perhaps I'll reinstall the original numbers-matching parts. But, that creates its own risk. Seems better to sort the gun with replacement parts.

A photograph of the recoil spring is attached. I think I count 21.5 coils. I didn't see a spec for a 1939 Mauser in the FAQs...perhaps supposed to be the same as 1934?

Thanks!

[Randall_G]

Another thing I noticed is the ejector drags a bit on the frame. Without an ejector installed, the receiver slides effortlessly on the frame. With an ejector installed, some effort is required to slide the receiver along the frame.

Looking at the design, this seems inevitable. As shown on the attached photo, the hole for the round tab is truncated (just barely) by the slot in the receiver that engages with the frame. Also, the bottom of the hole is (barely) visible beneath the installed ejector.

When the receiver is fully inserted, with the toggle engaged, I cannot discern the drag between the ejector and frame.

Is the ejector rubbing on the frame normal?

[DonVoigt]

No.
The ejector can be "fit" using a file; or a different one selected.
Some are too "high" and can rub on the inside of the "ear", leaving a rub mark that can be seen on the outside of the ejector.

A little contact makes no difference. Some ejector are so far out of tolerance in thickness or in the shape/size/ location of the projections that they will not snap into their recess.

[Randall_G]

Originally Posted by DonVoigt

No.
The ejector can be "fit" using a file; or a different one selected.
Some are too "high" and can rub on the inside of the "ear", leaving a rub mark that can be seen on the outside of the ejector.

A little contact makes no difference. Some ejector are so far out of tolerance in thickness or in the shape/size/ location of the projections that they will not snap into their recess.

As it turns out, I had a hard time just getting the receiver on the frame with the first "Polish" ejector I installed. You can see in the attached photo how much the ejector protrudes into the slot. As you suggest, needs to be filed down. I replaced it with the second ejector, which fits better, as shown in the photo in my previous post (1139txt). Still some drag, though.

Both of the Polish ejectors are sitting pretty flat, so rubbing inside the ear is not an issue.

Perhaps my problem is ejectors that are being forced to snap into their recess. I can't speak for the ejector that came with the pistol, but--as I wrote earlier--I needed help from a machinist buddy to fit the SARCO and InterArms ejectors, which included some filing of the tabs. The Polish ejectors did not require any filing to snap into their recess.

Oh, and I tried to install the plum ejectors I bought from Legacy. Same deal--no matter how hard I tried, I could not get the ejector's round tab to seat. In fact, I looked closer last night: upset/shiny metal is visible (see attached photo).

Thanks Don.

[DonVoigt]

Yes,
the round tab is in the "wrong" spot; judicious filing will make it fit.
Keep the edge perpendicular to the outside, and go slow, use a file with a safe edge so you don't score the body of the ejector- or it will create a likely spot for failure.

You may have to work down the forward, inside angled, edge of the angled tab to let the ejector go slightly forward, it may not have enough clearance to fully enter its recess.

[azlaw]

Does anybody know which replacement ejectors are best for these guns? Seems like a lot of variety out there. The gun is a parts gun/shooter, so originality isn't the most important factor.

Thanks!

H

[Doubs]

Originally Posted by azlaw

Does anybody know which replacement ejectors are best for these guns? Seems like a lot of variety out there. The gun is a parts gun/shooter, so originality isn't the most important factor. Thanks! H

This thread is quite old. You'll have a better chance of getting answers if you begin a new thread. You may also want to contact either Lugerdoc (Tom Heller) or G.T. (Gerald Tomac) who have a lot of experience fixing Lugers.

[Randall_G]

An update, as promised way back in December of 2019!

Just returned from the range, now up to 72 rounds on the current ejector. Looks the same as when first installed (see attached images).

Shortly before installing the ejector, I replaced the original breech block, which has a chip in the extractor area (see attached image). I can't think of a common cause for chipping a breech block and breaking ejectors (any theories?), but my best guess is the chipped breech block was causing the ejectors to break.

Incidentally, the 72 rounds has not included malfunctions of any kind. The pistol is running well. Moving past the paranoia of another ejector breaking, I need to shoot it more!

[Major Tom]

I'm glad you have solved the problem. BTW, great photos which helps tremendously!