I enjoy the fact you bring up concepts alien to the 'typical' American sport shooter. The idea of primary extraction is one such. Good video, excellent displays and pointing out the minute bits. But, as usual... The instructional part begins with pointing to (what seems to be an M1 Garand and is later identified as such) and saying it doesn't have primary extraction, it doesn't need it because it's a semi-auto. Not according to the information given me by instructors in the Marine Corps. The locking action of the bolt in the M1 (and in the M1 Carbine, M14 rifle, M16 rifle, M60 Machine gun - yes I am that old - and a number of other semi and fully automatic weapons) which constitutes the bolt turning a small arc to engage the locking lugs. That action is reversed when the arm is fired and the gas pressure of the cartridge is 'bled off' to operate the action. The slight turning to unlock the bolt causes the cartridge (locked to the bolt by the cartridge head) to rotate a few degrees, breaking the 'grip' between cartridge case and chamber. That is the primary extraction and precedes the bolt pulling the spent cartridge out of the chamber. At least, that was the instruction provided me. The notable light machinegun that did not have the rotational movement of the bolt and consequently poor or no primary extraction was the (Italian) Breda 30. One of the common failures of the Breda 30 was a fired cartridge remaining in the chamber - less the small bit the extractor tore off when the case would not extract - or the forward half of the fired case after separation due to firing and a violent tug by the extractor. Sad story. The idea that due to the gas operation - and subsequent pressure greater than hand or arm - cases can be pulled directly out of the chamber. One may think so, but that is not what happens in practice. Even blowback pistols that do not require a locking system do require an extractor. The exception being a very few pistols using rather low pressure cartridges. (The Beretta Jetfire and Minx come to mind). I do see where the misunderstanding lies. When the Garand 'opens' one does note the rotation of the bolt. It is the rotation of the empty case in the chamber - even without the rearward movement - that IS the primary extraction. The Norinco ammunition 'sticks'. I would have to examine one or more the resultant fired cases, but it sounds like the case material is either roughly finished, a poorly adapted metal alloy or something else. (I spend too much time with the government, obviously.) I see this video is (as I write all this 'full of myself' copy) it is three complete years since the video was posted. So much of what I say may have been discussed since... but. The distorted cases (out of round case necks and mouths) shown are not possible to achieve by firing in a rifle chamber. Stuck cartridge cases are caused by the swelling of the case on firing, depending on circumstances past the elastic limitation of the case material. The fired case is thereby 'stuck' to the chamber due to some metal to metal binding or bonding. If the case is deformed at all during the moment of firing, it is likely split or torn and binding on the interior surface of the chamber. Or due to extreme heat, the case is mildly soldered to the chamber. None of the circumstances are what one would do to a rifle one planned on using later. It is 'destruction' testing or close enough. Also, I must point out deforming the case (any rifle) and then forcing the case into the chamber does a rough 're-sizing' function. This is shown by the almost 'normal' appearance of the once oval neck and mouth of the case.
Yeah, that instruction is wrong, as shown in this video - there is insufficient rearward movement as the bolt rotates to cause mechanical primary extraction. And sorry, but there is simply no "rotation of the empty case in the chamber". That's complete fuddlore. It's just not mechanically possible. You're not the only one to think it, but it's entirely 100% false. It requires the kind of physics and mechanics which only exist on the pages of printed gun magazines. And sorry, but most of the rest of what you wrote there was in a similar vein and I don't have time right now to explain it point-by-point.
@@OldManMontgomery as a Gunsmith I've had to " unlearn" a great deal of what the US Army tried to hammer into me about how a firearm works. The military is a place to learn how to use the weapon in a tactical environment. Beyond that, it's dubious at best. It's not unique to any one branch or Military. It's just one of those things
For the contention to be valid, the extractor would have to grip the case rim with some sort of mechanical advantage--like a set of pliers. Or, not at all like the slip-fit designed to tolerate a wide range of case rim thickness tolerances.
Excellent vid Bloke. I think this is one of your best videos so far and I think your really coming on as a presenter checking some of your first videos and you were more wooden than a Swiss Cuckoo Clock but now your really hitting your stride and becoming relaxed and fluid. Keep up the good work :-)
I hope Bloke will in fact do a review of it. As for me, I immediately assumed it was perhaps stolen from a restaurant in Lucerne by the evil Fu Manchu ( Sir Christopher Lee ) while employed by Hammer Film Productions.
@@towarzyszbeagle6866 I don't know, does it have to be constant, or just happen a few times, or just be possible? I can't say, I've removed the problem from mine but the potential is there if I don't clean it. But besides that, I'm very intimate with the problem, I'll tell you what, it's a 39 Tula that fired thousands of rounds and never cleaned and so when I got it you'd have thought the bolt was welded shut, so I think it's paid off its sticky bolt debt.
I remember reading a interview with a German veteran, mentioning that by late war the quality of the lacquered steel cases was utter crap, and if you didn't work the bolt near instantly, the case would be very stuck.
I just came here from watching a forgotten weapons video talking about 'flapper locked action' and how the lack of primary extraction was a potential problem-makes sense now.
To see the Garand's primary extraction, push the bolt forwards as you pull the oprod back. The reason you don't see the full extent of primary extraction is because with no case to extract, the bolt follows the oprod back as far as the helical locking lug surfaces will allow. The very same action and part engagement that converts the bolt's forward motion into rotation just before the bolt closes, acts in reverse to provide primary extraction. You just can't see it because the bolt is free to float back when not working at pulling a case from the chamber, and so does not engage the curved raceway with left lug as much as it would, were the bolt dragging on a fired case still in the chamber. When the bolt flies forwards, the left lug and curved section of the raceway have no choice but to make hard contact - and you can see it. Why would you imagine that action disappears under firing, converting bolt rotation into primary extraction? You cannot see what you don't want to see...
That isn't primary extraction though. It's just gas pressure pushing the op rod, which rotates the lugs to unlock the bolt, after which the bolt moves straight back, pulling the case with it. The proof that it isn't "primary" extraction is that when that initial rotation happens, the extractor isn't even touching the case rim. It's rotating around it. The first movement of the case is when the bolt starts moving rearward, after the rotation has unlocked it. I mean, it's all a moot point anyway. Primary extraction is defined by the fact that it's an initial, mechanically-assisted stage of extraction prior to the secondary part, which is a non-mechanically-assisted, rearward movement of the bolt by the user. M1 extraction is a single, gas-initiated movement that pulls the case rearward. There is no "primary" or "secondary". See also, Bloke's follow up video: th-cam.com/video/Lp3Ya_py82U/w-d-xo.html
@@hux2000 Garand locking lugs are helical. When the bolt rotates, the lugs "unscrew" rearwards. That is the first part of primary extraction. The second part is when the left locking lugs runs into a curved path that becomes the lug raceway, before it is free to move directly rearward. That curved path turns the rotational momentum into rearward momentum. That action occurring at speed is very potent with regard to pulling the case rearward, if it had any tendency to stick in the chamber. Bloke is clever, but in this case, wrong. That is OK. Just as he has a fixed opinion on this; so do I. My opinion is based on logic and observation. So is his. I am nobody, but Bloke can't ever be wrong. You have made your choice. If you have a Garand to study that would help. I don't have a Garand, but I do have an M1a. The latter is very similar when it comes to the bolt lugs and their motion.
Yet for some reason I keep hearing that the K31 has no primary extraction. That's...quite obviously false. Just like the nonsense claim that it won't fire if the bolt handle isn't completely forward (or worse, can fire out of battery). Great video. I learned something today.
They claim it won't. Which isn't true. If the bolt is forward but not locked when you pull the trigger, the massive firing pin assembly will knock the bolt into battery and then fire.
*sigh* The sear holds the firing pin spring back. Pull the trigger, you lower the sear, and inertia sends the bolt forward with the firing pin. The spring isn't weak enough for misfires to be a concern, and it hardly takes any force to slide it into battery. And no, the operating rod has no reason whatsoever to break. It hardly takes any effort to slide it forward. I can do it with my finger. It's not being slammed forward with a sledgehammer. Even though I doubt you could break it with a sledgehammer. It's certainly not under any more stress than it would be operating it yourself. And even if the operating rod breaks off, it's still impossible for the firing pin to protrude the bolt face unless it's fully locked.
Naturally it didn't feel good jamming that brass into the guns, however, I am glad you did. Before today, I thought, "Oh, after firing, that brass just gets hooked on and extracted." Boy was I wrong.
Rather late to the video but the No. 4's locking surfaces are pretty nifty. I never knew that about the K31 either, it's pretty nice. I think older (1893-1896 at the very least since they have the claw extractor as well) Mausers would have an easier time un-sticking your mangled case for a similar reason it may have been easier for you with a No. 4. They also cock on close. Don't have to fight the cocking piece getting cammed into a ready position and a stuck case to get said case out. I believe a straight bolt handle also helps (the Gew. 98 has that and most pre-1898 Mausers do as well).
Usually I have no issue with my .303s but I was tempted to try the cheapo Wolf Military classic and boy was that stuff bad. Not only did it feed poorly but I had to beat the bolt open on the 8 rifles I tried it out of. The Pakistani, British, Iraqi etc. .303 ammo I have shot has never given me that much trouble. The only sticky ammo I ran in my Mausers was the Turkish stuff but even that wasn't too bad, just had a slight bit more resistance when going through the bolt cycle. Never had extraction issues with my Garand or M1a. My M1A actually ran the Hornady steel case extremely well. It ran the wolf great too but the groups opened up quite a bit. Before I knew to clean the chamber of my Mosins everything stuck. Once I started cleaning the chamber with a 20 gauge bore brush and solvent they ran pretty smooth unless there was an imperfection or burr in the chamber. My 1944 Tula locks up bad because there is a spot of pitting that I didn't notice when I bought it. Never had issues with my K31. Then again It's either Gp11, Commercial ammo, or reloads so that probably explains that. With my Gew88/05 I run light reloads through it with no issue or I shoot the Romanian surplus. That gun loves the Romanian stuff lacquer be damned. Excellent video. I wish content creators like you would get bigger than the guys that just go out and shoot dirt and proclaim that rifle X is the best rifle ever because it's theirs.
Garand does have primary extraction. The bolt turns and goes slightly back before freeing itself from the locking surfaces. The bolt repeats all the same motions that a manual rifle's bolt does.
i do hope. you have installed a aftermarket gas plug. modern ammunition tends to not play nice with the m1's oprod and bolt. have fun bloke! i do dream one day visiting europe. just for shooting. maybe i might add switzerland to my list and drop in for a pint eh?
Bullshit. The "bent op-rod" myth is just that. First of all, op-rods are BENT when they're "straight". They have to be to reach from the centerline of the rifle out around the receiver to externally operate the bolt. And seeing as how "standard" .30-06 Springfield ammo has up to 2675 lb.-ft. of muzzle energy (Lake City Match ammo from the late 1950s and early 1960s) with 173-grain bullets at 2640 fps muzzle velocity and that equals or exceeds plenty of "hunting" ammunition, the chances of "bending" an M1 op-rod with any "modern" hunting ammunition are between slim and none. Most modern "Garand" spec ammo is pretty weak by comparison. Even "hot" 150-grain .30-06 at 3000 lb.-ft. of muzzle energy is tested and "rated" in bolt-action rifles with longer barrels. Can you "bend" an M1 op rod? Sure. If you try. Is it an automatic given with "modern" hunting ammunition? Absolutely not.
Yes bloke good on you for the annotation for the M1. Find the how it works video made in the 40's on the mechanical function of the gun and the twisting with slight backwards movement is officially called 'Initial Slow Extraction '.
"And I feel sorry for those poor saps that had to run steel cases in the Second World War." This poor sap found out the hard way and has many more steel cases yet to extract before justification of another ammo purchase.
I have advice for you. Get a bronze shotgun bore cleaning brush (20 gauge works well), a piece of cleaning rod section, and an electric drill. Chuck the rod and brush in the drill, soak the brush in mineral spirits, and spin the brush in the chamber with the drill for several minutes while re-dipping the brush in the mineral spirits. You may follow this up with a 20 gauge bore mop and some "bore paste" which is a very mildly abrasive polish used for smoothing and polishing rough barrels and removing hard to clean large lead or copper deposits. You could even follow that up with some Flitz metal polish and shine the chamber even smoother. Inspect the chamber and barrek throat for any burrs or irregularities that will catch a case and make it stick. The logic behind this is 2 fold. First, many surplus guns have old hardened cosmoline that is stuck in the chamber. When firing the gun, it heats up and gets very sticky. When lacquered ammo is used, the cosmoline and lacquer combine and stick the case. Even in a cosmoline-free chamber, some melted lacquer will eventually transfer into irregularities in the chamber walls and then grab onto cases when they are fired. The brush and mineral spirits remove the cosmoline and lacquer. The bore paste helps smooth it out and remove any stubborn cosmoline or lacquer that the brush didn't remove. The Flitz or other polish would just smooth out the surface of the chamber even further to make melted lacquer harder to stick. If you inspect the chamber and find a burr or other irregularity, you'll need to remove it. When 60k PSI irons the cartridge case into the chamber wall, that burr will hang on tight to it. You can make a sand paper flapper wheel with a wooden dowel that has a slot cut into the tip. Be VERY careful and slow with sandpaper and don't go rougher than 600 grit. You do not want to widen the chamber significantly, just knock off the burr. If you go too far you'll crack cases, and if you move the shoulder forward you'll affect headspace. With a nice clean, polished chamber you won't have any issues with lacquered cases. Run the bronze brush in the chamber every 200-300 rounds to remove built up lacquer, or when it starts getting hard to extract empty cases. Just use the brush though, no paste. Over time paste will wear away too much metal since it's mildly abrasive. The bronze brush is soft and won't remove any steel at all. If you still have trouble extracting, check the locking recesses and locking lugs for old cosmoline or rough areas, and then the bolt cams as well.
Yes there is on the m1. John Garand engineered it that way because the brass may still be sealed against the chamber walls while the action starts to rip the case out. The Johnson semi auto also had this problem and the tried lubing the casings. M14 kept the garand system for same reason.
I literally showed you there wasn't though... 🤷♀️ And I am unaware of any lubrication of casings experiments with the Johnson, I think you're mixing it up with the Pedersen which had waxed cases cos delayed blowback.
See also: P-14 and M-17 rifles with helical locking. As for "cartridge case material"? Brass is good because it is relatively "soft" and is a goos example of a "dissimilar metal" thet does not do e amolectukar-lefel adhesion under pressure. ALL steel cases need some sort of protective coatings to prevent corrosion. This can be a simple "copper wash", or a copper wash with a lacquer coating, early soviet and lots of Chinese 7.62 x 39) ot lacquer straiggt onto the steel. The problem with lacquers of the traditional type is that they MELT at fairly low temperatures. In your basic AK, SKS etc system, te bolt is bashed open quickly and "robustly"., giving little time for the lacquer to solidify and thus "glue" the case into the chamber. An interesting study is the array of "different" coatings on "surplus" Chinese 7.62 x 39 ammo. I went through a variety that included at least three "shades" of green, lacquered copper wash and then there was the "commercial" stuff with a brown lacquer. This latter stuff was definitely "made to a price". Freshly-fired cases recovered from the range regularly showed cracking and PEELING of the brown lacquer. Where it got really ugly was in bolt-actions. Hard-extraction became the norm. The trick with a bolt action is the "dwell time" between the firing of the round and the operation of the bolt. In semi-autos, the process is almost instantaneous and the case has virtually no time to transfer the heat of propellant combustion to the chamber , via the "lacquer". Owners of various "commercial" 7.62 x 39 bolt-action rifles may have noticed this phenomenon. Side note: In WW2, the Germans and the US produced vast quantities of steel-cased ammunition from pistol sizes upwards. It got tricky for the Germans because of the scarcity of Tungsten Carbide. The ammo makers needed the material to make the tooling to produce steel-cased ammo and the troops at the front needed it made into armour-piercing shot to punch holes in tanks. The soviets were sitting on huge Tungsten ore deposits, so they were OK. Enter: "Polymer coating". The Russian cousins had obviously picked up on all this, as they started introducing ammo with cases coated in a GREY material that is noticeably "slicker" than the traditional lacquer.I first encountered it with their ".223" sporting ammo, then it turned up, briefly in small batches of 7.62 x 39. Whatever the coating is, it seems more mechanically robust and decidedly more "heat-resistant". Then there was 7.62 x 54R, in steel cases; "copper-washed". A true classic was the Chinese-made 7.62 NATO in copper-washed cases which sported bogus RG (Radway Green) Brit headstamps. It was cheap; but quite "dirty" and uses your classic "Com-bloc", insanely corrosive primers. Copper-plated, steel jacketed bullets; "Mil-spec' accuracy. It does the job....
Great video, but it leaves me with several questions. 1. Is steel cased ammo always horrible, or was this specific to late-war Germany being unable to pump out enough ammo properly? 2. Is the cam type of the Mauser inferior by definition, or could this be solved by having a less extreme angle on the camtrack?
1) No, problem lies in the lacquer used. Post-war lacquers are more thermally resiliant than what was on hand for supply then, especially with logistics problems. The melted lacquer myth surrounding post-war Russian ammo comes from these wartime coatings on other ammo (the crud for them is actually blow-by from faster shrinking steel). 2) Yes, the sharp angle is the problem, otherwise it would be very similar to the SMLE. However, cam path machining can be very expensive (especially at that time) so the Mauser is more cost-effective than the SMLE.
The M1 has a cam path, so almost inherently that is the mechanical advantage of 'primary' extraction... Don't forget the barrel's gas port is all the way at the end of the barrel almost, so the M1 action is given some time to begin cycling.
That cam path simply exists to unlock the bolt by rotation, though. The rotation isn't doing anything to the cartridge case. (Mechanically it can't.) Extraction on any autoloading firearm is a single stage process: gas pushing the bolt rearward, whether directly (as in blowback operation) or via some intermediary device (e.g. a piston). There is no distinct "primary" and "secondary" like there is with a bolt action.
So essentially it has to do with the ratio between bolt rotation and axial movement? The No4 and the K31 extraction is "lower geared", hence more powerful than the K98? As a total geek, may I present a fact: The cam angle on the Enfield locking shoulder is equal to the helix angle of a thread of 14 TPI.
I had trouble with steel cased Romania 7.92 Mauser ammo.. my 98k would got stuck every couple of rounds.. and when I do the hard extraction ( beat the bolt handle against a tree or something ), the extractor would sometimes rip a piece of the cartridge rim off… and that case is in there for good😂 I have to cool the gun off, or wait a few hours then use a cleaning rod to get it out
The tiny movement you see is a combination of two things: 1: The extractor snapping inward to grip the cartridge rim as soon as the locking wedge clears its recess. It is forced radially outward a few mm when the bolt is fully closed. 2: Again when the locking wedge clears the receiver recess, residual tension in the mainspring causes the outer cylinder to move infinitesimally back toward the cocking piece. This could also be due to wear and tear in the bolt of this rifle, which is a bit tatty. The bolt is simply not constructed to provide positive mechanical camming action to force a case out. I removed the extractor and mainspring and repeated the process, which resulted in zero bolt movement. All my cases are loaded at the moment so I couldn't definitely test a mangled case so I'll have to remember to test one when on the range to vindicate my assertion :-)
The Chap Well sir, I consider myself corrected! Interesting about the wear and tear bit, I honestly didn't consider it. Rather stupid of me to be honest given the age of the rifle. Spot on response by the way. Damn good show!
No worries, it took me a good while to figure out the residual spring tension issue inside the bolt, the extractor was the obvious source of movement but there was still a tiny bit of movement once the extractor removed, so by deduction the only guilty party remaining was the mainspring.
Hang on, I just posted a comment but it disappeared,,,, Oh, Well. Another Brit here living in the USA now. Thanks for a fascinating video. I was in the ATC too. Shot Lee Enfields and Bren guns in .303 back in the sixties. Loved the Bren. Pete.
I had a Mark III that was chopped down to hunt deer when I was a kid. It must have been around the world 3 times with all the stamps on it, but was quite accurate. The thing about the Enfield series is that mega extraction is a moot point. It is going to pull the head off the case anyway because of the rear locking system stretching the case. I used to check my rebarrel jobs with out an extractor. You should be able to pick up the rifle and tap the stock on the table and have the case fall out. Most of the time the case would fall out just from picking the rifle up and holding it vertically. A hot rifle or a hot load in a rifle will jam it, but the usual result is the rim broken off the case. I am not sure what point you are trying to make here.
You never heard of case head separation on Enfields? They are notorious for that because of the sloppy machining on a lot of war production rifles. They are not the best rifle to reload for because of that reason. Not the worst military bolt action ever made, but hardly the best. It is clear you know nothing about extraction problems. It is almost always a massive overload which jams the rear of the case into the face of the bolt so it cannot turn. The primer welds itself into the firing pin hole and around the pin. Retracting the firing pin is what makes extraction hard, not pulling the case out of the chamber. I used to check my rebarrel jobs without an extractor on the bolt. You should be able to fire/open the bolt/pick the rifle up in a vertical position/ tap butt on the table/ case falls out. Most of the time the case falls out when you get the rifle in a vertical position. Does anybody here really think that the silly little extractors on British and Russian bolt guns will pull out a seriously stuck case without slipping off or tearing the rim?
You are the one that wanted to compare the .303 to other rifles. Of course the bolt on an Enfield turns. What do you think unlocks it? The problem IS almost always the firing pin when a bolt is jammed. Why don't you tell us how a case can get stuck in a .303? It is a low pressure round. I am guessing the chamber is pitted. I have several model 99 Savage lever actions. The extraction is about the same as a .303 British, straight back with little cam action. The extractor does not even hold the rim to the bolt face. It just kind of drags it along back. Some of the rifles are old rimmed cartridges and some are high pressure rounds. 22-250/.243/.308/.358 I never get stuck cases, but I can get "Sticky" extraction with really hot rounds. This is caused by the receiver "Springing" because of the rear locking bolt (Just like on a .303). Nothing wrong with a .303. I used both a .303 and a Russian bolt gun to hunt deer in my younger days. I would take the .303 over a Russian to hunt with any time, but they are hardly the faultless rifle you try to make them out to be.
That is bull shit. I fired hundreds of 6.5 Japanese rounds that were made in the 50's by the Chinese. Brass cased, corroded, almost everyone split at the neck. About 3 out of ten misfired, but all extracted. I have fire formed ammo and had no extraction problems. "Rough brass, rough chamber". Maybe if you didn't fire junk ammo, you would not have problems like that. I would like to know where you are getting steel cased .303 ammo, or is the junk ammo reserved for your "Test" rifles? If you have to "Beat the bolt" open on a rifle and it locked in OK, you probably had a pressure problem. Romanian 8mm is REAL junk and corrosive.
I watched the video. You convinced me. I will never buy another .303 British. Obviously can't handle extraction like an Arisaka. Over the years people have brought me guns that they did stuff to that was unbelievable. I usually asked "If you saw something was wrong, why did you keep firing it?" There is a big difference between "Sticky extraction" and beating a bolt open with a mallet.
You just made some of my points. Do you really think a .303 extractor is any stronger than the extractor in Russian a bolt gun? You have to be a little slow to think that a .303 extraction set up is stronger than Mauser. The amazing thing is all you guys give bad examples involving other rifle designs using the worst ammo you can find, but then insist on using the best ammo in your .303. The "Sprung" receiver was a bad example to use. It happens, but the .303 is a pussy round and is loaded down to avoid it. To be fair when testing different rifles, you would have to take a step down in power. The Carcano, Arisaka, 98 Krag (This round would be close), MAS 36 and similar rifles. The .303 is a great old rifle, but hardly the greatest old rifle. Nobody copied it except third world countries. Like the Russian bolt guns, they were given as aid or forced on other countries.
hello bloke have you ever looked at the videos on the ross rifle done by Ian at Forgotten Weapons and Othais at C&Rsenal i believe they made a similar point when they discussed canadian made .303 rounds of being so well made to point that one of the issues that contributed to the ross rifles extraction problems was the rather lackluster standards of the brit made .303 at the time the ross had very tight chambers because the canadian board that approved the ross had basically wanted a target rifle for a standard service rifle it is a very interesting story
I appreciate Mausers and I own a K98K (Czech). However, I judge rifles based on their merits, good and bad. Emotional attachment to a mechanical device is... interesting. I really do need to add a No. 4 to my collection though...
Its chance of skipping the over the extractor grove/rim are a lot less than an Enfield. I have always liked the straight bolt a bit more, my first Mauser was 1896 swede and the extra leverage seems to help a bit. I think I am a bit faster working the 1896 then my 98(bent bolt) actions
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the M1903 is, despite it being a Mauser derivative, is more close to the No.4? There is an angled lug sort of wrapped around the bolt body that acts in a cam surface in the left rear of the reciever.
The 03's extraction is different to both - it's an improved version of the Mauser camming surface, and was copied pretty much 1:1 on the P14/M17. The MAS36 does something similar, but the geometry is different. Unless you do some pretty funky and difficult stuff, it's hard to use the locking lugs themselves for primary extraction (Swiss straight-pulls do it, Austrian M95 Mannlicher straight pulls do it), but the machining for it is horrible.
Good day! I do have a question about your claim that the back of a Mauser’s locking lugs are flat. I’m not saying you’re wrong but when I had the bolt out of my K98 last I swore that the locking lugs has a slight angle to them. I mean no animosity and I’m just curious. Thank you and have a nice day!
I get what primary extraction is... But I don't get why it's important. How can pulling the bolt back with force not be as effective as a little pull back from camming?
Because you can't apply enough force straight back to unseat a sticky case, and the camming action multiplies the force massively. I've had to hammer bolts open before on rifles with inadequate primary extraction (Swing, Sportco, M1 Garand).
I'll agree with never putting Norinco (or any steel-cased ammo for that matter) in my M1. I have no issues feeding it to my WASR-10, though, as it eats the stuff up like the most delicious of candy.
Bloke on the Range so this means the bolt is unlocked in less than 90 degrees. This means the locking surfaces are more narrower than the locking lugs?
Extreme mechanical disadvantage when not firing, against the op rod. When firing, extreme friction. Friction is proportional to the forces pushing the surfaces against each other, multiplied by the friction coefficient for whichever materials / surfaces. The thrust of the cartridge against the bolt should stick the lugs to the receiver enough that the torque from the slanted lugs. cannot overcome it.
Refer to the film "Rifle U. S. Cal. .30 M1: Principles of Operation" Official Training Film, T.F. 9-1172, U.S. War Department, Army Service Forces, Signal Corp Productions. It gives an extremely detailed look at the operation of the Garand. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
hotdog-hallway chamber, fast short bolt throw, rear locking cock on close, ghost ring sight, 10rd mag, rip-the-rim-off extraction, "it will do" accuracy. yup you brits made yourself a fighting man's bolt rifle!
If you watch the original training videos on the M1, they do mention that it does have primary extraction, but it obviously isn't very much. th-cam.com/video/GJJeBXZeVZU/w-d-xo.html
yes. More in depth explanation of what I meant is that When the bolt is being carried by the op rod, especially moving forward, only flat surfaces bear against each other. This means the bolt is not trying to rotate closed when it encounters the resistance of stripping a cartridge from the clip and therefore doesn't put unnecessary friction and wear on the lug raceways of the receiver. Then, when the bolt hits the cam surfaces in the receiver at the forward limit of travel, this bumps the flat surfaces on the rotation lug and the op rod out of alignment. Then the cam on the op rod takes over to fully lock the bolt. Clever design feature also present on the AK, to avoid wearing the stamped receiver rails with the harder bolt. Arguably more necessary there, since the receiver was not forged as on the garand style actions. The AR15 family lacks this feature and consequently the steel cam pin will wear a groove into the aluminum upper over thousands of rounds from the lugs prematurely trying to engage when the bolt encounters the magazine. However, whether this should concern users or not is often up to the advert departments of different gun companies.
Primary extraction occurs as bolt rotation BEGINS. Not as it finishes. At least on good rifles. And you're full of shit if you don't think there is primary extraction in a semi-auto. Primary extraction occurs prior to axial bolt travel. M1 Garands have it. MOST rotating bolt rifles, shotguns and even the few rotating bolt pistols that exist HAVE primary extraction.
DEEREMEYER1 Interesting - what quantum physics do your rifles employ that allows the locking lugs to phase through the shoulders without anything else moving? Is there a cheat code I can enter for this? On a semi auto how do you ensure that this phasing only occurs once the pressure is low enough that the pressure of combustion doesn't drive the bolt through the rifle (not that it matters as presumably on this God mode the bolt just phases through the operator's face...)
I saw this piece of wisdom on a TH-camr's channel: *"I just want to make the videos I want to make. You can decided if what I have to say is of any value to YOU. But I'll tell you now if its NOT, that's not my problem. You can probably find someone else on TH-cam who makes the videos you want to see. I suggest you go find that person or at least look instead of trying to change me."* I think you could follow this advice, especially given that it's your own advice.
Yeah, the rifles have little to do with it. I don't get the whole argument and competition. I love the Enfield, the Mauser, the Mosin, Swiss rifles, etc etc. All have their faults, but all did their jobs. You could have swapped the primary rifles in any way you like between all the participants in the war, and the outcome wouldn't change. The Germans would have needed Nuclear weapons to have come back from the hole they dug themselves.
I enjoy the fact you bring up concepts alien to the 'typical' American sport shooter. The idea of primary extraction is one such. Good video, excellent displays and pointing out the minute bits. But, as usual...
The instructional part begins with pointing to (what seems to be an M1 Garand and is later identified as such) and saying it doesn't have primary extraction, it doesn't need it because it's a semi-auto. Not according to the information given me by instructors in the Marine Corps. The locking action of the bolt in the M1 (and in the M1 Carbine, M14 rifle, M16 rifle, M60 Machine gun - yes I am that old - and a number of other semi and fully automatic weapons) which constitutes the bolt turning a small arc to engage the locking lugs. That action is reversed when the arm is fired and the gas pressure of the cartridge is 'bled off' to operate the action. The slight turning to unlock the bolt causes the cartridge (locked to the bolt by the cartridge head) to rotate a few degrees, breaking the 'grip' between cartridge case and chamber. That is the primary extraction and precedes the bolt pulling the spent cartridge out of the chamber. At least, that was the instruction provided me.
The notable light machinegun that did not have the rotational movement of the bolt and consequently poor or no primary extraction was the (Italian) Breda 30. One of the common failures of the Breda 30 was a fired cartridge remaining in the chamber - less the small bit the extractor tore off when the case would not extract - or the forward half of the fired case after separation due to firing and a violent tug by the extractor. Sad story.
The idea that due to the gas operation - and subsequent pressure greater than hand or arm - cases can be pulled directly out of the chamber. One may think so, but that is not what happens in practice. Even blowback pistols that do not require a locking system do require an extractor. The exception being a very few pistols using rather low pressure cartridges. (The Beretta Jetfire and Minx come to mind). I do see where the misunderstanding lies. When the Garand 'opens' one does note the rotation of the bolt. It is the rotation of the empty case in the chamber - even without the rearward movement - that IS the primary extraction.
The Norinco ammunition 'sticks'. I would have to examine one or more the resultant fired cases, but it sounds like the case material is either roughly finished, a poorly adapted metal alloy or something else. (I spend too much time with the government, obviously.)
I see this video is (as I write all this 'full of myself' copy) it is three complete years since the video was posted. So much of what I say may have been discussed since... but. The distorted cases (out of round case necks and mouths) shown are not possible to achieve by firing in a rifle chamber. Stuck cartridge cases are caused by the swelling of the case on firing, depending on circumstances past the elastic limitation of the case material. The fired case is thereby 'stuck' to the chamber due to some metal to metal binding or bonding. If the case is deformed at all during the moment of firing, it is likely split or torn and binding on the interior surface of the chamber. Or due to extreme heat, the case is mildly soldered to the chamber. None of the circumstances are what one would do to a rifle one planned on using later. It is 'destruction' testing or close enough.
Also, I must point out deforming the case (any rifle) and then forcing the case into the chamber does a rough 're-sizing' function. This is shown by the almost 'normal' appearance of the once oval neck and mouth of the case.
Yeah, that instruction is wrong, as shown in this video - there is insufficient rearward movement as the bolt rotates to cause mechanical primary extraction.
And sorry, but there is simply no "rotation of the empty case in the chamber". That's complete fuddlore. It's just not mechanically possible. You're not the only one to think it, but it's entirely 100% false. It requires the kind of physics and mechanics which only exist on the pages of printed gun magazines.
And sorry, but most of the rest of what you wrote there was in a similar vein and I don't have time right now to explain it point-by-point.
@@BlokeontheRange In that case, none of the semi-automatic or fully automatics in the U. S. Inventory work. Including those I used.
@@OldManMontgomery as a Gunsmith I've had to " unlearn" a great deal of what the US Army tried to hammer into me about how a firearm works.
The military is a place to learn how to use the weapon in a tactical environment. Beyond that, it's dubious at best. It's not unique to any one branch or Military. It's just one of those things
@@sethshacklettShacksGunsmithing As one who has had 'several' occasions to separate wheat from chaff, I quite understand.
For the contention to be valid, the extractor would have to grip the case rim with some sort of mechanical advantage--like a set of pliers. Or, not at all like the slip-fit designed to tolerate a wide range of case rim thickness tolerances.
The more I learn about the SMLE, the greater my admiration of the design.
Excellent vid Bloke. I think this is one of your best videos so far and I think your really coming on as a presenter checking some of your first videos and you were more wooden than a Swiss Cuckoo Clock but now your really hitting your stride and becoming relaxed and fluid. Keep up the good work :-)
I was mesmerized by the pokey fondue fork of doom. Do you plan to do a review of it?
I hope Bloke will in fact do a review of it. As for me, I immediately assumed it was perhaps stolen from a
restaurant in Lucerne by the evil Fu Manchu ( Sir Christopher Lee ) while employed by Hammer Film Productions.
Moreover, is it patented?
Wow very impressive. I wouldn't have thought the Lee Enfield or the K31 would have better extraction than the K98. Thanks for this video.
They've all got better extraction than the Mosin.
Look up "sticky bolt syndrome" if you wanna know exactly what I'm talking about.
@@TheJohnsoline if you're not bashing the bolt handle on the nearest hard surface is it really a Mosin?
@@towarzyszbeagle6866 I don't know, does it have to be constant, or just happen a few times, or just be possible? I can't say, I've removed the problem from mine but the potential is there if I don't clean it. But besides that, I'm very intimate with the problem, I'll tell you what, it's a 39 Tula that fired thousands of rounds and never cleaned and so when I got it you'd have thought the bolt was welded shut, so I think it's paid off its sticky bolt debt.
I remember reading a interview with a German veteran, mentioning that by late war the quality of the lacquered steel cases was utter crap, and if you didn't work the bolt near instantly, the case would be very stuck.
I just came here from watching a forgotten weapons video talking about 'flapper locked action' and how the lack of primary extraction was a potential problem-makes sense now.
To see the Garand's primary extraction, push the bolt forwards as you pull the oprod back. The reason you don't see the full extent of primary extraction is because with no case to extract, the bolt follows the oprod back as far as the helical locking lug surfaces will allow.
The very same action and part engagement that converts the bolt's forward motion into rotation just before the bolt closes, acts in reverse to provide primary extraction. You just can't see it because the bolt is free to float back when not working at pulling a case from the chamber, and so does not engage the curved raceway with left lug as much as it would, were the bolt dragging on a fired case still in the chamber.
When the bolt flies forwards, the left lug and curved section of the raceway have no choice but to make hard contact - and you can see it. Why would you imagine that action disappears under firing, converting bolt rotation into primary extraction? You cannot see what you don't want to see...
That isn't primary extraction though. It's just gas pressure pushing the op rod, which rotates the lugs to unlock the bolt, after which the bolt moves straight back, pulling the case with it. The proof that it isn't "primary" extraction is that when that initial rotation happens, the extractor isn't even touching the case rim. It's rotating around it. The first movement of the case is when the bolt starts moving rearward, after the rotation has unlocked it.
I mean, it's all a moot point anyway. Primary extraction is defined by the fact that it's an initial, mechanically-assisted stage of extraction prior to the secondary part, which is a non-mechanically-assisted, rearward movement of the bolt by the user. M1 extraction is a single, gas-initiated movement that pulls the case rearward. There is no "primary" or "secondary".
See also, Bloke's follow up video: th-cam.com/video/Lp3Ya_py82U/w-d-xo.html
@@hux2000 Garand locking lugs are helical. When the bolt rotates, the lugs "unscrew" rearwards. That is the first part of primary extraction. The second part is when the left locking lugs runs into a curved path that becomes the lug raceway, before it is free to move directly rearward. That curved path turns the rotational momentum into rearward momentum. That action occurring at speed is very potent with regard to pulling the case rearward, if it had any tendency to stick in the chamber.
Bloke is clever, but in this case, wrong. That is OK. Just as he has a fixed opinion on this; so do I. My opinion is based on logic and observation. So is his. I am nobody, but Bloke can't ever be wrong. You have made your choice.
If you have a Garand to study that would help. I don't have a Garand, but I do have an M1a. The latter is very similar when it comes to the bolt lugs and their motion.
Yet for some reason I keep hearing that the K31 has no primary extraction. That's...quite obviously false. Just like the nonsense claim that it won't fire if the bolt handle isn't completely forward (or worse, can fire out of battery).
Great video. I learned something today.
ootdega won't or will?
They claim it won't. Which isn't true.
If the bolt is forward but not locked when you pull the trigger, the massive firing pin assembly will knock the bolt into battery and then fire.
That's true
So, by your own definition, it WILL NOT
...It will fire when you pull the trigger if the bolt handle is not completely forward.
What part of this do you not understand?
*sigh*
The sear holds the firing pin spring back. Pull the trigger, you lower the sear, and inertia sends the bolt forward with the firing pin. The spring isn't weak enough for misfires to be a concern, and it hardly takes any force to slide it into battery.
And no, the operating rod has no reason whatsoever to break. It hardly takes any effort to slide it forward. I can do it with my finger. It's not being slammed forward with a sledgehammer. Even though I doubt you could break it with a sledgehammer. It's certainly not under any more stress than it would be operating it yourself.
And even if the operating rod breaks off, it's still impossible for the firing pin to protrude the bolt face unless it's fully locked.
Naturally it didn't feel good jamming that brass into the guns, however, I am glad you did. Before today, I thought, "Oh, after firing, that brass just gets hooked on and extracted." Boy was I wrong.
BotR is a true bolt gunner. He seems to be extremely expertised in such area than any other rifles or muskets.
Interesting video. I had never before considered the different methods of extraction between bolt rifles. Cheers
Rather late to the video but the No. 4's locking surfaces are pretty nifty. I never knew that about the K31 either, it's pretty nice.
I think older (1893-1896 at the very least since they have the claw extractor as well) Mausers would have an easier time un-sticking your mangled case for a similar reason it may have been easier for you with a No. 4. They also cock on close. Don't have to fight the cocking piece getting cammed into a ready position and a stuck case to get said case out. I believe a straight bolt handle also helps (the Gew. 98 has that and most pre-1898 Mausers do as well).
Usually I have no issue with my .303s but I was tempted to try the cheapo Wolf Military classic and boy was that stuff bad. Not only did it feed poorly but I had to beat the bolt open on the 8 rifles I tried it out of. The Pakistani, British, Iraqi etc. .303 ammo I have shot has never given me that much trouble.
The only sticky ammo I ran in my Mausers was the Turkish stuff but even that wasn't too bad, just had a slight bit more resistance when going through the bolt cycle.
Never had extraction issues with my Garand or M1a. My M1A actually ran the Hornady steel case extremely well. It ran the wolf great too but the groups opened up quite a bit.
Before I knew to clean the chamber of my Mosins everything stuck. Once I started cleaning the chamber with a 20 gauge bore brush and solvent they ran pretty smooth unless there was an imperfection or burr in the chamber. My 1944 Tula locks up bad because there is a spot of pitting that I didn't notice when I bought it.
Never had issues with my K31. Then again It's either Gp11, Commercial ammo, or reloads so that probably explains that.
With my Gew88/05 I run light reloads through it with no issue or I shoot the Romanian surplus. That gun loves the Romanian stuff lacquer be damned.
Excellent video. I wish content creators like you would get bigger than the guys that just go out and shoot dirt and proclaim that rifle X is the best rifle ever because it's theirs.
Yeah, I wouldn't trust any Wolf ammo in any gun that's not a Kalashnikov rifle.
Garand does have primary extraction. The bolt turns and goes slightly back before freeing itself from the locking surfaces. The bolt repeats all the same motions that a manual rifle's bolt does.
i do hope. you have installed a aftermarket gas plug. modern ammunition tends to not play nice with the m1's oprod and bolt. have fun bloke! i do dream one day visiting europe. just for shooting. maybe i might add switzerland to my list and drop in for a pint eh?
Bullshit. The "bent op-rod" myth is just that. First of all, op-rods are BENT when they're "straight". They have to be to reach from the centerline of the rifle out around the receiver to externally operate the bolt. And seeing as how "standard" .30-06 Springfield ammo has up to 2675 lb.-ft. of muzzle energy (Lake City Match ammo from the late 1950s and early 1960s) with 173-grain bullets at 2640 fps muzzle velocity and that equals or exceeds plenty of "hunting" ammunition, the chances of "bending" an M1 op-rod with any "modern" hunting ammunition are between slim and none. Most modern "Garand" spec ammo is pretty weak by comparison. Even "hot" 150-grain .30-06 at 3000 lb.-ft. of muzzle energy is tested and "rated" in bolt-action rifles with longer barrels. Can you "bend" an M1 op rod? Sure. If you try. Is it an automatic given with "modern" hunting ammunition? Absolutely not.
Yes bloke good on you for the annotation for the M1. Find the how it works video made in the 40's on the mechanical function of the gun and the twisting with slight backwards movement is officially called 'Initial Slow Extraction '.
"And I feel sorry for those poor saps that had to run steel cases in the Second World War."
This poor sap found out the hard way and has many more steel cases yet to extract before justification of another ammo purchase.
I have advice for you. Get a bronze shotgun bore cleaning brush (20 gauge works well), a piece of cleaning rod section, and an electric drill. Chuck the rod and brush in the drill, soak the brush in mineral spirits, and spin the brush in the chamber with the drill for several minutes while re-dipping the brush in the mineral spirits. You may follow this up with a 20 gauge bore mop and some "bore paste" which is a very mildly abrasive polish used for smoothing and polishing rough barrels and removing hard to clean large lead or copper deposits. You could even follow that up with some Flitz metal polish and shine the chamber even smoother. Inspect the chamber and barrek throat for any burrs or irregularities that will catch a case and make it stick.
The logic behind this is 2 fold. First, many surplus guns have old hardened cosmoline that is stuck in the chamber. When firing the gun, it heats up and gets very sticky. When lacquered ammo is used, the cosmoline and lacquer combine and stick the case. Even in a cosmoline-free chamber, some melted lacquer will eventually transfer into irregularities in the chamber walls and then grab onto cases when they are fired. The brush and mineral spirits remove the cosmoline and lacquer. The bore paste helps smooth it out and remove any stubborn cosmoline or lacquer that the brush didn't remove. The Flitz or other polish would just smooth out the surface of the chamber even further to make melted lacquer harder to stick. If you inspect the chamber and find a burr or other irregularity, you'll need to remove it. When 60k PSI irons the cartridge case into the chamber wall, that burr will hang on tight to it. You can make a sand paper flapper wheel with a wooden dowel that has a slot cut into the tip. Be VERY careful and slow with sandpaper and don't go rougher than 600 grit. You do not want to widen the chamber significantly, just knock off the burr. If you go too far you'll crack cases, and if you move the shoulder forward you'll affect headspace. With a nice clean, polished chamber you won't have any issues with lacquered cases. Run the bronze brush in the chamber every 200-300 rounds to remove built up lacquer, or when it starts getting hard to extract empty cases. Just use the brush though, no paste. Over time paste will wear away too much metal since it's mildly abrasive. The bronze brush is soft and won't remove any steel at all. If you still have trouble extracting, check the locking recesses and locking lugs for old cosmoline or rough areas, and then the bolt cams as well.
Thank you very much for the advice! I'll make sure to be careful.
Just to be clear, this is what you're suggesting:
m.th-cam.com/video/bdTAq7uud6k/w-d-xo.html
Good vid. Was very interesting to see this plainly demonstrated.
Yes there is on the m1. John Garand engineered it that way because the brass may still be sealed against the chamber walls while the action starts to rip the case out. The Johnson semi auto also had this problem and the tried lubing the casings. M14 kept the garand system for same reason.
I literally showed you there wasn't though... 🤷♀️ And I am unaware of any lubrication of casings experiments with the Johnson, I think you're mixing it up with the Pedersen which had waxed cases cos delayed blowback.
Great video. Very useful and practical . Well done!
See also: P-14 and M-17 rifles with helical locking.
As for "cartridge case material"?
Brass is good because it is relatively "soft" and is a goos example of a "dissimilar metal" thet does not do e amolectukar-lefel adhesion under pressure.
ALL steel cases need some sort of protective coatings to prevent corrosion. This can be a simple "copper wash", or a copper wash with a lacquer coating, early soviet and lots of Chinese 7.62 x 39) ot lacquer straiggt onto the steel.
The problem with lacquers of the traditional type is that they MELT at fairly low temperatures. In your basic AK, SKS etc system, te bolt is bashed open quickly and "robustly"., giving little time for the lacquer to solidify and thus "glue" the case into the chamber.
An interesting study is the array of "different" coatings on "surplus" Chinese 7.62 x 39 ammo. I went through a variety that included at least three "shades" of green, lacquered copper wash and then there was the "commercial" stuff with a brown lacquer. This latter stuff was definitely "made to a price". Freshly-fired cases recovered from the range regularly showed cracking and PEELING of the brown lacquer. Where it got really ugly was in bolt-actions. Hard-extraction became the norm. The trick with a bolt action is the "dwell time" between the firing of the round and the operation of the bolt. In semi-autos, the process is almost instantaneous and the case has virtually no time to transfer the heat of propellant combustion to the chamber , via the "lacquer".
Owners of various "commercial" 7.62 x 39 bolt-action rifles may have noticed this phenomenon. Side note: In WW2, the Germans and the US produced vast quantities of steel-cased ammunition from pistol sizes upwards. It got tricky for the Germans because of the scarcity of Tungsten Carbide. The ammo makers needed the material to make the tooling to produce steel-cased ammo and the troops at the front needed it made into armour-piercing shot to punch holes in tanks. The soviets were sitting on huge Tungsten ore deposits, so they were OK.
Enter: "Polymer coating".
The Russian cousins had obviously picked up on all this, as they started introducing ammo with cases coated in a GREY material that is noticeably "slicker" than the traditional lacquer.I first encountered it with their ".223" sporting ammo, then it turned up, briefly in small batches of 7.62 x 39.
Whatever the coating is, it seems more mechanically robust and decidedly more "heat-resistant".
Then there was 7.62 x 54R, in steel cases; "copper-washed". A true classic was the Chinese-made 7.62 NATO in copper-washed cases which sported bogus RG (Radway Green) Brit headstamps. It was cheap; but quite "dirty" and uses your classic "Com-bloc", insanely corrosive primers. Copper-plated, steel jacketed bullets; "Mil-spec' accuracy. It does the job....
Interesting stuff,keep up the good work. Ben
My goodness, I hope that you have The Chap on hand with his first aid kit when you need it!
Great info.Thanks for the demo!
can we look forward to pokey fondue fork of doom merchandise or even the chance to buy our own licenced pokey fondue fork of doom?
Great video, but it leaves me with several questions.
1. Is steel cased ammo always horrible, or was this specific to late-war Germany being unable to pump out enough ammo properly?
2. Is the cam type of the Mauser inferior by definition, or could this be solved by having a less extreme angle on the camtrack?
1) No, problem lies in the lacquer used. Post-war lacquers are more thermally resiliant than what was on hand for supply then, especially with logistics problems. The melted lacquer myth surrounding post-war Russian ammo comes from these wartime coatings on other ammo (the crud for them is actually blow-by from faster shrinking steel).
2) Yes, the sharp angle is the problem, otherwise it would be very similar to the SMLE. However, cam path machining can be very expensive (especially at that time) so the Mauser is more cost-effective than the SMLE.
The M1 has a cam path, so almost inherently that is the mechanical advantage of 'primary' extraction...
Don't forget the barrel's gas port is all the way at the end of the barrel almost, so the M1 action is given some time to begin cycling.
That cam path simply exists to unlock the bolt by rotation, though. The rotation isn't doing anything to the cartridge case. (Mechanically it can't.) Extraction on any autoloading firearm is a single stage process: gas pushing the bolt rearward, whether directly (as in blowback operation) or via some intermediary device (e.g. a piston). There is no distinct "primary" and "secondary" like there is with a bolt action.
So essentially it has to do with the ratio between bolt rotation and axial movement? The No4 and the K31 extraction is "lower geared", hence more powerful than the K98?
As a total geek, may I present a fact: The cam angle on the Enfield locking shoulder is equal to the helix angle of a thread of 14 TPI.
So basically it's an interrupted thread?
You didn't know 14TPI by looking at it by any chance? ;-)
@@myparceltape1169 Read it in a book.
I had trouble with steel cased Romania 7.92 Mauser ammo.. my 98k would got stuck every couple of rounds.. and when I do the hard extraction ( beat the bolt handle against a tree or something ), the extractor would sometimes rip a piece of the cartridge rim off… and that case is in there for good😂 I have to cool the gun off, or wait a few hours then use a cleaning rod to get it out
Those who think the Mannlicher 1886 doesn't have primary extraction say "AYE"!
The Chap Nay? From the brief video I think it has just a tad
The tiny movement you see is a combination of two things:
1: The extractor snapping inward to grip the cartridge rim as soon as the locking wedge clears its recess. It is forced radially outward a few mm when the bolt is fully closed.
2: Again when the locking wedge clears the receiver recess, residual tension in the mainspring causes the outer cylinder to move infinitesimally back toward the cocking piece. This could also be due to wear and tear in the bolt of this rifle, which is a bit tatty.
The bolt is simply not constructed to provide positive mechanical camming action to force a case out. I removed the extractor and mainspring and repeated the process, which resulted in zero bolt movement. All my cases are loaded at the moment so I couldn't definitely test a mangled case so I'll have to remember to test one when on the range to vindicate my assertion :-)
The Chap Well sir, I consider myself corrected! Interesting about the wear and tear bit, I honestly didn't consider it. Rather stupid of me to be honest given the age of the rifle. Spot on response by the way. Damn good show!
No worries, it took me a good while to figure out the residual spring tension issue inside the bolt, the extractor was the obvious source of movement but there was still a tiny bit of movement once the extractor removed, so by deduction the only guilty party remaining was the mainspring.
The Chap It being a bit loose due to the age I suppose?
Hang on, I just posted a comment but it disappeared,,,, Oh, Well. Another Brit here living in the USA now. Thanks for a fascinating video. I was in the ATC too. Shot Lee Enfields and Bren guns in .303 back in the sixties. Loved the Bren. Pete.
I had a Mark III that was chopped down to hunt deer when I was a kid. It must have been around the world 3 times with all the stamps on it, but was quite accurate. The thing about the Enfield series is that mega extraction is a moot point. It is going to pull the head off the case anyway because of the rear locking system stretching the case. I used to check my rebarrel jobs with out an extractor. You should be able to pick up the rifle and tap the stock on the table and have the case fall out. Most of the time the case would fall out just from picking the rifle up and holding it vertically. A hot rifle or a hot load in a rifle will jam it, but the usual result is the rim broken off the case. I am not sure what point you are trying to make here.
You never heard of case head separation on Enfields? They are notorious for that because of the sloppy machining on a lot of war production rifles. They are not the best rifle to reload for because of that reason. Not the worst military bolt action ever made, but hardly the best. It is clear you know nothing about extraction problems. It is almost always a massive overload which jams the rear of the case into the face of the bolt so it cannot turn. The primer welds itself into the firing pin hole and around the pin. Retracting the firing pin is what makes extraction hard, not pulling the case out of the chamber. I used to check my rebarrel jobs without an extractor on the bolt. You should be able to fire/open the bolt/pick the rifle up in a vertical position/ tap butt on the table/ case falls out. Most of the time the case falls out when you get the rifle in a vertical position. Does anybody here really think that the silly little extractors on British and Russian bolt guns will pull out a seriously stuck case without slipping off or tearing the rim?
You are the one that wanted to compare the .303 to other rifles. Of course the bolt on an Enfield turns. What do you think unlocks it? The problem IS almost always the firing pin when a bolt is jammed. Why don't you tell us how a case can get stuck in a .303? It is a low pressure round. I am guessing the chamber is pitted. I have several model 99 Savage lever actions. The extraction is about the same as a .303 British, straight back with little cam action. The extractor does not even hold the rim to the bolt face. It just kind of drags it along back. Some of the rifles are old rimmed cartridges and some are high pressure rounds. 22-250/.243/.308/.358 I never get stuck cases, but I can get "Sticky" extraction with really hot rounds. This is caused by the receiver "Springing" because of the rear locking bolt (Just like on a .303). Nothing wrong with a .303. I used both a .303 and a Russian bolt gun to hunt deer in my younger days. I would take the .303 over a Russian to hunt with any time, but they are hardly the faultless rifle you try to make them out to be.
That is bull shit. I fired hundreds of 6.5 Japanese rounds that were made in the 50's by the Chinese. Brass cased, corroded, almost everyone split at the neck. About 3 out of ten misfired, but all extracted. I have fire formed ammo and had no extraction problems. "Rough brass, rough chamber". Maybe if you didn't fire junk ammo, you would not have problems like that. I would like to know where you are getting steel cased .303 ammo, or is the junk ammo reserved for your "Test" rifles? If you have to "Beat the bolt" open on a rifle and it locked in OK, you probably had a pressure problem. Romanian 8mm is REAL junk and corrosive.
I watched the video. You convinced me. I will never buy another .303 British. Obviously can't handle extraction like an Arisaka. Over the years people have brought me guns that they did stuff to that was unbelievable. I usually asked "If you saw something was wrong, why did you keep firing it?" There is a big difference between "Sticky extraction" and beating a bolt open with a mallet.
You just made some of my points. Do you really think a .303 extractor is any stronger than the extractor in Russian a bolt gun? You have to be a little slow to think that a .303 extraction set up is stronger than Mauser. The amazing thing is all you guys give bad examples involving other rifle designs using the worst ammo you can find, but then insist on using the best ammo in your .303. The "Sprung" receiver was a bad example to use. It happens, but the .303 is a pussy round and is loaded down to avoid it. To be fair when testing different rifles, you would have to take a step down in power. The Carcano, Arisaka, 98 Krag (This round would be close), MAS 36 and similar rifles. The .303 is a great old rifle, but hardly the greatest old rifle. Nobody copied it except third world countries. Like the Russian bolt guns, they were given as aid or forced on other countries.
Great video!
What kind of a rear sight is on the K-31?
hello bloke have you ever looked at the videos on the ross rifle done by Ian at Forgotten Weapons and Othais at C&Rsenal i believe they made a similar point when they discussed canadian made .303 rounds of being so well made to point that one of the issues that contributed to the ross rifles extraction problems was the rather lackluster standards of the brit made .303 at the time the ross had very tight chambers because the canadian board that approved the ross had basically wanted a target rifle for a standard service rifle it is a very interesting story
What sight is on that K31, it looks interesting.
wrt the extractor, push on back portion of the extractor and it will spring the front portion out a little bit
Tell me about the peep sight on the K31 at time stamp 8:15
Is this only possible on rotating bolt firearms?
Somebody show this to Alex C. formerly of TFBTV. He seemed to claim the Mauser primary extraction was superior, but perhaps not...
I appreciate Mausers and I own a K98K (Czech). However, I judge rifles based on their merits, good and bad. Emotional attachment to a mechanical device is... interesting.
I really do need to add a No. 4 to my collection though...
+Nil S None of us would be at this channel if we didn't have a certain amount of emotional attachment to our mechanical devices ;-)
Its chance of skipping the over the extractor grove/rim are a lot less than an Enfield. I have always liked the straight bolt a bit more, my first Mauser was 1896 swede and the extra leverage seems to help a bit.
I think I am a bit faster working the 1896 then my 98(bent bolt) actions
TFBTV have more opinions than facts.
He always gave me the feeling that he thought he and his stuff was superior idk just a certain smugness he had I can't put my finger on.
nice video but kar 98 k condition is down last time bolt not working after the fire when you move the on wooden block thanks for this video
Ah that might also be why the Enfield was designed to cock when pushed home rather than on extraction to take mechanical force away from extraction.
nom nom nom
Bloke on the Range does it make much of a practical difference?
Could that be a reason why some countries kept producing Mauser 98 bolts with a straight handle? To provide more leverage, maybe?
Most probably.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the M1903 is, despite it being a Mauser derivative, is more close to the No.4? There is an angled lug sort of wrapped around the bolt body that acts in a cam surface in the left rear of the reciever.
The 03's extraction is different to both - it's an improved version of the Mauser camming surface, and was copied pretty much 1:1 on the P14/M17. The MAS36 does something similar, but the geometry is different. Unless you do some pretty funky and difficult stuff, it's hard to use the locking lugs themselves for primary extraction (Swiss straight-pulls do it, Austrian M95 Mannlicher straight pulls do it), but the machining for it is horrible.
Good day! I do have a question about your claim that the back of a Mauser’s locking lugs are flat. I’m not saying you’re wrong but when I had the bolt out of my K98 last I swore that the locking lugs has a slight angle to them. I mean no animosity and I’m just curious. Thank you and have a nice day!
They're not at an angle, they're perpendicular to the bore.
@@BlokeontheRange ok, thank you! I appreciate it.
I get what primary extraction is... But I don't get why it's important. How can pulling the bolt back with force not be as effective as a little pull back from camming?
Because you can't apply enough force straight back to unseat a sticky case, and the camming action multiplies the force massively. I've had to hammer bolts open before on rifles with inadequate primary extraction (Swing, Sportco, M1 Garand).
No love for the Red Menace?
Weeell, no
Great video, but why in hell would you ever use Norinco ammo?????
Well that makes sense.. Europe is amazing but tough for shooters. Makes me cringe thinking about putting that my M1's though.
through
I'll agree with never putting Norinco (or any steel-cased ammo for that matter) in my M1. I have no issues feeding it to my WASR-10, though, as it eats the stuff up like the most delicious of candy.
I'm confused. When primary extraction occurs, how does the locking lugs have room to rotate without engaging the opposite receiver lugs/female bits.
Bloke on the Range the mauser.
Bloke on the Range so this means the bolt is unlocked in less than 90 degrees. This means the locking surfaces are more narrower than the locking lugs?
Bloke on the Range ah yes, now I understand how it finds room. I though it was a much more complex mechanism. Thankyou.
I really want an 1886 Man Licker.
its not ,,Man Licker`` its ,,Mannlicher´´ its not licking a man
Can someone explain how the k31 bolt does not cam out of battery with its slanted locking lugs on the bolt
Extreme mechanical disadvantage when not firing, against the op rod. When firing, extreme friction. Friction is proportional to the forces pushing the surfaces against each other, multiplied by the friction coefficient for whichever materials / surfaces. The thrust of the cartridge against the bolt should stick the lugs to the receiver enough that the torque from the slanted lugs. cannot overcome it.
If the tan of the angle of inclination is less than the coefficient of friction it cannot shift. This is how nuts and bolts work.
For what it's worth, the M1 Garand does indeed have primary mechanical extraction.
Refer to the film "Rifle U. S. Cal. .30 M1: Principles of Operation" Official Training Film, T.F. 9-1172, U.S. War Department, Army Service Forces, Signal Corp Productions. It gives an extremely detailed look at the operation of the Garand. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
On TH-cam at Rifle U.S. Cal. .30 M1--WW2 Training Film.
Thanks for the prompt response, I'm a big fan!
Hey there @Bloke on the Range the M1 does have primary extraction; see here in this video: th-cam.com/video/PxeTMQc_6ic/w-d-xo.html
I like your beard.
is it one of those scary "Assault" fondue forks of doom?
hotdog-hallway chamber, fast short bolt throw, rear locking cock on close, ghost ring sight, 10rd mag, rip-the-rim-off extraction, "it will do" accuracy. yup you brits made yourself a fighting man's bolt rifle!
"It will do" accuracy that was on average way ahead of a Gew 98 and Kar 98k, contrary to popular belief...
If you watch the original training videos on the M1, they do mention that it does have primary extraction, but it obviously isn't very much. th-cam.com/video/GJJeBXZeVZU/w-d-xo.html
I would think the bit of camming action serves more as an anti-pre-engagement of the bolt lugs feature than for primary extraction.
yes. More in depth explanation of what I meant is that When the bolt is being carried by the op rod, especially moving forward, only flat surfaces bear against each other. This means the bolt is not trying to rotate closed when it encounters the resistance of stripping a cartridge from the clip and therefore doesn't put unnecessary friction and wear on the lug raceways of the receiver. Then, when the bolt hits the cam surfaces in the receiver at the forward limit of travel, this bumps the flat surfaces on the rotation lug and the op rod out of alignment. Then the cam on the op rod takes over to fully lock the bolt. Clever design feature also present on the AK, to avoid wearing the stamped receiver rails with the harder bolt. Arguably more necessary there, since the receiver was not forged as on the garand style actions. The AR15 family lacks this feature and consequently the steel cam pin will wear a groove into the aluminum upper over thousands of rounds from the lugs prematurely trying to engage when the bolt encounters the magazine. However, whether this should concern users or not is often up to the advert departments of different gun companies.
That flat camming surface on the kar98k made me go "eww" internally.
Also the more I see the K31 action, the more perversely I want one.
Cf., "Why I abandoned my Mosin".
"The Lee-Enfield has bad primary extraction"
Mauser fanbois innit
Primary extraction occurs as bolt rotation BEGINS. Not as it finishes. At least on good rifles. And you're full of shit if you don't think there is primary extraction in a semi-auto. Primary extraction occurs prior to axial bolt travel. M1 Garands have it. MOST rotating bolt rifles, shotguns and even the few rotating bolt pistols that exist HAVE primary extraction.
DEEREMEYER1 Interesting - what quantum physics do your rifles employ that allows the locking lugs to phase through the shoulders without anything else moving? Is there a cheat code I can enter for this? On a semi auto how do you ensure that this phasing only occurs once the pressure is low enough that the pressure of combustion doesn't drive the bolt through the rifle (not that it matters as presumably on this God mode the bolt just phases through the operator's face...)
I saw this piece of wisdom on a TH-camr's channel:
*"I just want to make the videos I want to make. You can decided if what I have to say is of any value to YOU. But I'll tell you now if its NOT, that's not my problem. You can probably find someone else on TH-cam who makes the videos you want to see. I suggest you go find that person or at least look instead of trying to change me."*
I think you could follow this advice, especially given that it's your own advice.
dave38x That made I larf! Perhaps his D20 is loaded so he never rolls a critical.
No wonder the Germans lost the war the Enfield is far superior and as much as it pains me to say the m1 was good
Yeah, the rifles have little to do with it. I don't get the whole argument and competition. I love the Enfield, the Mauser, the Mosin, Swiss rifles, etc etc. All have their faults, but all did their jobs. You could have swapped the primary rifles in any way you like between all the participants in the war, and the outcome wouldn't change. The Germans would have needed Nuclear weapons to have come back from the hole they dug themselves.