Gunfixr
-
Content Count
1,168 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Posts posted by Gunfixr
-
-
Sure you can, I've done it several times.
But, as mentioned, be sure to take your final measurement with the collar removed, measuring to the end of the fingers.
Otherwise, you'll have an illegal SBS.
-
Wow, haven't been here in several days, and you guys are working it hard.
I just went back to work today, upper respiratory infection. Won't get back to the LRBHO until next week.
-
That's just all commercial hype! Russians made smg ammo as well. Both my toks shoot anything I put in them
First, I never said that no other ComBloc countries made SMG ammo, so don't try to put words in my mouth. Most of the ComBloc countries made two seperate loadings of the Tok caliber, if not more. One would be for handguns, and the rest would be for subguns. The Czechs decided that they didn't want to keep track of which ammo was for which, and loaded it all to the SMG specs, indeed hotter than most of the other countries' SMG specs. They built the CZ 52 to be able to handle an indefinate diet of this ammo.
Does this mean that the TT-33 will not fire this ammo? No.
Does this mean that the SMG ammo will blow up a TT-33? No.
What it does mean is that the lifespan of the TT-33 firing regular diets of SMG ammo is going to be shorter than that of one that hasn't.
ANY gun can be blown up, and most types have been at one time or another. As you go back in the time of manufacture, the materials and efficiency of quality manufacture changes, and you run into a higher possibility of material defects. The right combination of ammunition and defects destroy a gun.
The CZ is a heavier, stronger design gun than the Tok, but it has a larger, less comfortable grip. It was prone to some parts breakage. It is not a perfect design, and neither is the Tok.
If you like the Tok better, fine. If you want to fire SMG ammo in it, fine. I don't care, as it's not my gun. Or my hand either, for that matter.
-
There are 2 reasons I bent the BHO.
One, I am pretty anal about things being as heavily built as I can have them, and bending it allowed me to leave the hb section much thicker. In the work I've done over the years, I've learned a bit about materials and flexing, and know that the thicker it is, the less it will flex, and the more positive it will operate. I had designed my own LRBHO a couple years ago, that worked similar to the old Warfield Armory one, and flexing was a major issue.
Two, in order to get the round in the magazine as high as it is, I would've had to grind the HB section paper thin. With the round lower in the mag, the feed angle is changed, and reliability may suffer. I want the BHO to work, but I also don't want any of the guns' other functions to change, or change as little as possible, as the gun is reliable as it is.
I had to trim one leg of the mag catch spring also. Haven't fully assembled the gun yet, so don't know about the hammer spring problem. It will be late this coming week before I get back to it, as my wife had knee surgery last Fri., and I been home helping her out. I should be back in the shop Wed., but have a conversion to finish up before getting back the BHO thing.
Tom overbuilt the crap out of this thing, and he did it on purpose, so it could fit the widest array of guns that vary widely. But, that means a lot of fitting. It is what it is.
-
Didn't mess with them today, had other more pressing things to do.
Like test fire the Desert Eagle .50AE I just refinished. It had been stolen and ditched in a culvert, to be found a year later.
Anyway, I did get a couple pics. I took one of the modified BHO next to an unmodified BHO. I took a second one of the modified BHO sitting on top of the unmodified BHO, with an FCG pin through the hole on both.
-
It shouldn't slam fire like that. All of these guns are used, some more than others. Either the sear spring needs replacing, or the sear/hammer engagement is out of spec.
The Czech ammo was all loaded to SMG spec, and they just built the CZ 52s to handle it. They didn't want to mess with keeping track of two different loadings. The Czech ammo shouldn't be fired in any of the Tokarev pistols.
-
We SBR'd one at the shop.
It goes pretty much as described. I drilled out the end of the original pin, opened up the hole in the receiver, made a new pin, added a spring, put in the pin and riveted the end to retain it.
Works like a charm.
The only problem part was that the receiver hole wasn't properly lined up, so some adjustment was in order.
Took maybe 2hrs, with making the parts myself and the adjusting, setting up the engraver.
-
I dovetailed an S&W M&P HiViz front sight into mine, and a 1911 white dot rear.
Just measure the factory front and rear height, and go up the same amount on the new ones. I measured the difference in the M&P front, and moved the rear up the same amount. It hits pretty well on.
-
I do want to say that Tom did not tell me to bend it, or even that I could bend it. This was a decision I made entirely on my own.
That said, it does seem to reduce the amount of metal that must be removed by a fair bit. However, it does not seem that it can be bent enough to not need to remove any metal.
Pretty much all bending was done before grinding on the "beak",as that changes the weak points and will cause the bending to happen in a place other than where desired. If you hold the entire beak in a vise, and use an adjustable wrench on the rear end of the body,, you can rotate the body around, which bends it at the "Z" twist, rotating the beak upwards (provided you go in the right direction). The body can be held in the vise and the wrench applied to the beak, but the other way seems to work better.
Because of where it bends, the part that goes vertical up to the beak swings away from the magazine and catch as the beak swings upwards. This reduces the amount removed to clear the magazine catch, and reduces the amount removed to get the round up high enough to feed. It also leaves the beak angled upward, which is the way the round comes up from the magazine anyway, angled upward and pointed directly into the chamber.
I also ground the beak's underside at a slight angle, as it is off center to the cartridge, to match the radius of the rim better. This makes the rim ride a flat spot instead of the edge of the beak, which spreads the contact pressure out, reducing the friction and making feeding smoother.
PS: I'll take some pics tomorrow. I now know why he charges so much to install them, and I don't blame him.
-
Well, having a bag of them doesn't mean I can just screw them up and throw them away, I do have to pay for them.
And, I'm not exactly wasting my afternoon messing with them, as I will be paid to install them. So, technically, I am working.
Yes, I did bend it. It doesn't bend easily, but it will bend. They are hardened, but then tempered to somewhere in the 40s Rockwell C. So they're not brittle. Bending should be done cautiously, a little at a time until you get where you want. You don't want to be bending back and forth.
Grinding on things like this should always be done holding it in your bare hands. That way, you can feel it getting hot. Have a bucket of water to cool it in, and cool it often. Once it starts to discolor, you are starting to draw the temper and soften it.
-
Alright, lets get this crap straight.
First, the whole Encore thing is applicable only to the Encore, nothing else.
Second, it is legal to convert a pistol into a rifle, such as with the Neos kit. You can even go back to a pistol later. Just don't assemble an illegal SBR combination.
Third, once a receiver has been assembled at the factory with a stock mounted on it, it is registered as a rifle, and it cannot be converted into a pistol.
Fourth, if it has never had a stock on it, such as with a stripped receiver, or a complete receiver with no barrel or stock, it is listed as a receiveron on the 4473, as there is a place for that now, and can be built either way.
Fifth, receivers marked "Pistol" and sold as pistol receivers are merely a gimmick to screw you, the customer, out of more money, as a stripped receiver is just that.
That last tidbit is straight from the horses mouth, as I discussed it with a senior ATF investigator.
-
Actually, the two I have doen are much thicker than the one in the above pics.
I went back and was able to save the one I thought I'd screwed up.
To answer some of the questions posted earlier, the spring goes on the trigger pin, with the legs pointing towards the rear. One leg sits on the bottom of the receiver, the other sits agains the underside of the screw head.
The BHO will sit parallel with the receiver if the screw head is ground down some, jut don't take too much.
A lot less material can be taken off the "beak" if it is properly bent upwards somewhat. Also, less has to be taken off the front part underneath the "beak" where it gets in the way of the mag catch.
I guess I'll have to take some pics tomorrow.
-
Well, here is where I piss everyone off, I suppose.
I got a half dozen customer guns which need these installed, so it'll have to be figured out.
I decided to tinker with one today on a gun I have stripped down. I tweaked and ground and cut, and the big problem I had was that the "beak" hit the magazine body and kept the BHO down, so it could not lock the bolt. I figured I'd already screwed the part. I hadn't done the bolt yet, just getting it in the gun.
So I got ahold of Tom and we talked a bit. He assured me I coud cut even more away without problems, as it was sufficiently overbuilt.
However, I started with a one (I have a bag of them), and began over. I've got one working, at least by hand. You can install the BHO and hammer on the hammer pin, the BHO spring goes on the trigger pin, and I put in the shepherds hook to keep the pins in. Then I installed the bolt and carrier with recoil spring. I inserted an AGP mag with 2 loaded rounds in it.
THE HAMMER SPRING WAS NOT INSTALLED, NOR WAS THE FIRING PIN IN THE BOLT.
Anyway, when the bolt was drawn back and let go, it chambered the first round, and when the bolt was drawn back again, it ejected the first round and chambered the second. When the bolt was drawn back a third time, it locked open.
Test fire will be the final proving, but I think I got it.
Took most of the afternoon.
-
1
-
-
Doesn't the precedent from the TC encore case mean anything in this regard?
Yes, if it's a T/C receiver.
Otherwise, no, it cannot be reregistered as a pistol. It would have to be destroyed per ATF requirements, and then remanufactured with a new number as a pistol.
BTW, destroyed per ATF standards would mean several torch cuts through it, each removing at least 1/4" of metal.
-
1
-
-
Cool. That gun was a lot of fun to do, and a lot of fun to play with. People still ask about checking it out, and I have to tell them it's gone.
While I still miss it some, my wallet doesn't miss it at all. LOL
Also, it may have opened up a door, but it's too soon to tell, so I don't want to say anything now.
-
I was born in Hampton, still live here.
There aren't any VA laws against conversion here. There is no assault weapons ban. There is a law about possession of assault weapons, but it relates to possession while commiting another crime, which allows them to tack on another charge of "possession of an assault weapon during the commission of....".
It applies while in possession of any centerfire rifle or pistol with a magazine inserted that holds more than 20rds.
There is a law that bans the posssession of spring loaded drum magazines, that was related to the Street Sweeper ban, but a seperate law. I'm trying to find out whether it applies to the Saiga drums or not, as there's been no mention of it.
-
-
You don't hear of too many of the BHO springs coming off, but I cut a notch in the spring step when doing conversions, and always have, just to be sure.
-
I do believe that may be the longest sentence I have ever seen.
Made my head hurt a little.
-
2
-
-
I originally "eye-fucked" them on (gotta remember that one). But, I ended up with one that wouldn't dial in, and had to change. Like Tony said, too often you end up with a choice; either line them up with the bore, or put them on straight, but not both.
Now, I straighten up the gas block, and tweak the cover to get it somewhat straight. The problem with straightening the gas block is that, in order to do it properly, you end up needing to open up the pin holes to clean them for a tight fit pin so it won't just go back crooked the first time it gets hit on something. Then, I weld the front on, making it straight, then laser align the rear to it and weld it on. Sometimes they do look a bit crooked, but no one has yet complained. Perhaps they came to the same conclusion as I: I'd rather it look crooked and shoot straight than look straight and shoot crooked.
It's real easy to screw up the gas block. I do have the tap, and usually run it in anyway, HK sights or not, as sometimes the threads are tight. I was welding the rear from the underside, or on the inside of the base, but went to the outside. Way too often, the base would move sometime after aligning it and taking off the sight itself, or the cover from the gun, and it'd end up way off. It did look better welded from the underside or inside, but what can you do? Nothing is straight on these, so there's no real way to jig it and it come out right all the time.
-
omg that's nice very seamless does it reciprocate ?whats the lever by the trigger upgraded bho ?and is that a ruger mini safety ?can i see under the hood?
I just saw this. The lever by the trigger is just an extension knob for the factory BHO, so it can be manipulated by the trigger finger easily. Also, it allows the bolt to be dropped by simply pushing that button down, instead of racking the bolt.
The "ruger mini safety" is actually a M14/Ruger Mini 14 style safety that was custom made for the gun.
"Under the hood" ??
-
I got enough to bide my time while I learn how to dress out and cook the neighbors.
-
1
-
-
The only real thing is that the FAL handle is actually too short for full bolt withdrawal. I actually have to yank that one a bit to eject a chambered round, as the handle travel runs out right at the ejector. If the slot were made longer, then the handle would come out too far, and the handle tail wouldn't cover the whole slot.
For the one I'm doing now, I'm going to extend the tail further, and lengthen the track, so as to get more travel.
-
1
-
-
Well, clearly I have customized quite a few guns, not nearly the most, but plenty.
Even some of my own are highly customized.
To me, personally, it depends on what the gun is for. Range toys, do whatever floats your boat.
For serious use, if you even remotely anticipate needing to pick up something else that is the same as what yours started out as, then maybe the customization should be left to enhancements rather than serious changes that make operating the weapon different.
The exception to this would be major changes that improve an odd weapon to work with more readily available components, or an odd weapon that is not likely to be encountered or parts not likely to be encountered.
Bi-metal bullets wear out barrels?
in General Discussion - Any topic is welcome here!!!
Posted
As for the fire hazard, when firearms are discharged, often there are particles of unburnt powder that go out of the barrel, and will land out in front of the firing line. Outdoors, this poses no problems. Indoors, this will build up, and needs to be cleaned up occaisionally to keep the buildup at a minimum. Since ammunition with a bimetal jacket has steel just under the surface, on impact with the steel backstop sparks can occur. These sparks can ignite the unburnt powder under the right circumstances. This residue is why usually people are not allowed in front of the firing line at indoor ranges, even when no one is shooting, as your shoes will pick up this residue.
The steel used is a rather soft steel, and will not harm the backstop, unless it is a rather cheaply made one.
Also, since the steel is rather soft, it won't harm the barrel either, or if it does, it still take more rounds than you are likely to fire in a lifetime.
It is all about cost, really. A very thin layer of copper over a thin layer of steel is cheaper than a thick layer of copper.