kuraki
-
Content Count
17 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Last post, page 1, I did just that. Helped, but not much.
-
Thanks. You all have been very helpful. You have a fantastic community here.
-
Sold Pending Funds I realize I am a new poster here. Please see my feedback on AR15.com http://www.ar15.com/member/member.html?id=125898 as well as Ebay http://myworld.ebay.com/minrott1979 Now, to be perfectly up front and honest. This gun doesn't work. It never has, since I've owned it. It's had days, where it would trick me into thinking it was working, only to make an ass out of me the next when I tried to run it in a 3 gun match. I'm a mechanical person, I make things for a living, I don't believe in ghosts, but I'm pretty sure that this shotgun is some reincarnated fiend w
-
Thanks Nemo. I have tried. I give up. It's not worth it to me any more. Now I just need to decide whether to part it out or sell it as is. I'll buy a JM 930 and shoot tactical iron or scoped. I like tinkering and modifying guns, but this is ruining any enjoyment I might get from 3 gun, and 3 gun is the only reason I even own the thing.
-
80%. With my higher, longer ejector I'm at 80%. I have to go back to this morning Jack, when you asked about the bolt raising during the recoil cycle. I pulled on the carrier and it did not raise. I should have pulled on the bolt. There is enough slop in the bolt that when it impinges on the hammer, it does indeed raise. My higher, longer ejector I believe is masking that. Currently reprofiling the hammer to limit or eliminate that bolt head movement. I'm actually confident for the first time in a long time that I might have this licked.
-
Tested. No change. I firmly believe it's the ejector at this point. Either the bolt is raising and it does not sufficiently engage the cartridge during carrier movement, or, it is positioned too far to the rear, or it was undersized to begin with, or a combination of all three. With the enhanced extraction above, the bolt maintains control over the hull through the entire carrier travel range. The next shell in the magazine does not force the spent hull away from the feed tab, both are securely engaged on the rim until it reaches the extractor. When hand cycling a spent hull out of
-
It would be worth a try, but I have tested with no fore end, stock fore end, bottom rail only, etc. I am curious, I did not notice before but the feed tab on the bolt has a slight groove in it to help retain the spent shell until it can impinge on the ejector. Mine was very faint and narrow, so I deepened and enlarged it slightly. Just a small change made a huge difference in how much force was required to dislodge the rim, so I am off to the range to test fire again.
-
Could someone post a picture of what their extractor looks like when holding a shell like I did above? Making a new extractor would be very simple.
- 65 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- malfunction
- fte
- (and 2 more)
-
Jack, Yes I believe I am. If I lay my hand across the receiver at the rearmost travel of the charging handle and fire a shot, I get spanked by the charging handle quite sharply. I cannot get the bolt high enough for the ejector to not hit the shell by hand cycling and pulling up. In fact I cannot feel any lateral play against the rails when pulling up. Here is an image of my ejector to bolt clearance. I'm leaving for work now. I have to build a few fixtures and then my plan was to work on this. I can access the forum via my phone so I will check back in and can respond/post p
-
Before I leave for work I thought I would try a few rounds with my puck installed correctly, flat side to piston. Setting 1 - Hull not withdrawn from chamber Setting 2 - Same Setting 4 - "classic" failure to eject (see picture) Setting 5- Ejected first round, classic failure 2nd round Setting 6- Classic failure This is what I'm calling my classic failure. 90% of the time it's some variation of this. You'll see that the spent hull is free of the bolt, the bolt has begun it's travel forward and has started indexing the next shell into the chamber. I can replicate this failure by h
-
No, the nipple is toward the piston Isn't the nipple supposed to go forward? (if im looking at the right puc and piston being the op rod) (from CSS website) CSS Performance Puc installs easily with the flat side towards the back of the gun and the "Nose" towards the Front. Anyways i don't think that'd be the main cause of all your problems since it was doing it from stock. Post pictures of EVERYTHING from as many angles as you can. There are quite a few guys on here that are pretty much wizards when i comes to troubleshooting and building ridiculous running S12s. Facepalm.
-
Multi quote, nice function. No, the nipple is toward the piston I concede that it is possible, but would argue it was out of tolerance initially. There is currenly 0.002" clearance between the ID of the gas chamber and the OD of the puck. The puck would not pass -period- prior to honing. You could force it through with a hammer and wood dowel. The original puck had more like 0.007" clearance, and passed with slight resistance. I believe my ejector may very well be out of spec, but I have no way of knowing what spec is, either length or position, because I have nothing t
-
I have tried: My own reloads (1.125 oz 7.5 shot over 18 grains Red Dot, AA hull) Winchester AA Super Handicap Winchester AA Heavy Target (have been the "best" reliability, say only 30-40% failure to eject) Federal Bulk Winchester Bulk PMC Slugs Remington Slugger Winchester Super-X Slug Federal Premium 00 Buck Estate 00 Buck Like I said, I don't think it can be a gas issue any more. The bolt carrier is definitely traveling all the way to the rear trunnion. I just think, at this point, (and probably 1 gas port ago too) that the bolt would "drop" the shell before it would impac
-
I will go to the shop tomorrow and try this ejector modification. http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?/topic/59161-fte-fix-for-12-19-bbls/?hl=%2Bejector+%2Bweld
-
I can understand that. I just never envisioned having this much trouble with it. I have a lot of experience modding guns, and am a machinist for a living. I've never gotten myself into a project I couldn't work my way out of, and I figured if people can get 7" SBS Saigas to run, there's no reason I wouldn't get this one to. I should have sent it in right away, before converting it, but simply assumed the "normal" issues that are typically resolved with the various aftermarket gas plugs and pucks. By that time I had it converted and was past the point of sending it in for repair.