Hammer heavily dragging BC

[tsg68 1]

Hi, my first post here and looking for a little help. I am sure this has been addressed but I couldn't find much regarding it in a search so I am asking that you lend me a hand addressing it. I (with your help from lurking) have recently converted a S12 and the gun went from feeding anything to feeding nothing. The main problem seems to be that the Tapco Hammer sits very high and is dragging heavily on the bolt carrier and needs to be ground down and polished to cycle effectively. It also appears that the hammer is not resting squarely on the firing pin when disengaged but I am not sure if it's because of being close on an empty chamber I will have to recheck with a spent case. What is the best way to reprofile and polish the hammer to make it cycle well? I don't want to grind on the Bolt carrier, just polish it though in case I decide to switch FCG's. I have tested the hammer and disconnector for correct engagement and everything seems to be in perfect working order there and the trigger is nice and light I guess I'm just aprehensive because I want to make sure I don't take off too much and still make sure the bolt carrier will cause correct engagement when cycling. As it stands right now even with full gas from an MD arms V-plug double OO buck will not cause the carrier to move fully to the rear and eject the spent case. Thanks for all assistance!

 

On a similar note, K-var seems to have a new FCG for the S12 that they claim is directly based on the russian shotgun's factory FCG, anybody have any experience with these?

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

Hi, my first post here and looking for a little help. I am sure this has been addressed but I couldn't find much regarding it in a search so I am asking that you lend me a hand addressing it. I (with your help from lurking) have recently converted a S12 and the gun went from feeding anything to feeding nothing. The main problem seems to be that the Tapco Hammer sits very high and is dragging heavily on the bolt carrier and needs to be ground down and polished to cycle effectively. It also appears that the hammer is not resting squarely on the firing pin when disengaged but I am not sure if it's because of being close on an empty chamber I will have to recheck with a spent case. What is the best way to reprofile and polish the hammer to make it cycle well? I don't want to grind on the Bolt carrier, just polish it though in case I decide to switch FCG's. I have tested the hammer and disconnector for correct engagement and everything seems to be in perfect working order there and the trigger is nice and light I guess I'm just aprehensive because I want to make sure I don't take off too much and still make sure the bolt carrier will cause correct engagement when cycling. As it stands right now even with full gas from an MD arms V-plug double OO buck will not cause the carrier to move fully to the rear and eject the spent case. Thanks for all assistance!

 

On a similar note, K-var seems to have a new FCG for the S12 that they claim is directly based on the russian shotgun's factory FCG, anybody have any experience with these?

 

The images I saw look like a standard AK FCG, and not the original Russian S12 FCG. IMHO, It is unlikely you will see any benefit from using the above mentioned FCG over a Tapco FCG with the prerequisite mods well documented here on the forum.

 

Mike

[cfortune 1]

I seem to have the same problem on my .308. It will still cycle rounds but the hammer seems to catch quite a bit and makes moving the charging handle back pretty stiff right there. It feels unhealthy to say the least.

[tsg68 1]

I think the images at K-var are just stock images of an AK group from their site I may call them though as It seems they've recently developed a great interest in Saiga shotguns. I guess I'll keep looking for info regarding hammer profiling. I tried to go by Selph Arms yesterday but shops closed, #'s disconnected and no further info on website. Is Mr. Selph MIA?

 

Hi, my first post here and looking for a little help. I am sure this has been addressed but I couldn't find much regarding it in a search so I am asking that you lend me a hand addressing it. I (with your help from lurking) have recently converted a S12 and the gun went from feeding anything to feeding nothing. The main problem seems to be that the Tapco Hammer sits very high and is dragging heavily on the bolt carrier and needs to be ground down and polished to cycle effectively. It also appears that the hammer is not resting squarely on the firing pin when disengaged but I am not sure if it's because of being close on an empty chamber I will have to recheck with a spent case. What is the best way to reprofile and polish the hammer to make it cycle well? I don't want to grind on the Bolt carrier, just polish it though in case I decide to switch FCG's. I have tested the hammer and disconnector for correct engagement and everything seems to be in perfect working order there and the trigger is nice and light I guess I'm just aprehensive because I want to make sure I don't take off too much and still make sure the bolt carrier will cause correct engagement when cycling. As it stands right now even with full gas from an MD arms V-plug double OO buck will not cause the carrier to move fully to the rear and eject the spent case. Thanks for all assistance!

 

On a similar note, K-var seems to have a new FCG for the S12 that they claim is directly based on the russian shotgun's factory FCG, anybody have any experience with these?

 

The images I saw look like a standard AK FCG, and not the original Russian S12 FCG. IMHO, It is unlikely you will see any benefit from using the above mentioned FCG over a Tapco FCG with the prerequisite mods well documented here on the forum.

 

Mike

Edited December 9, 2010 by tsg68

[essohbe 47]

Since you mention it, I have noticed my Tapco hammer drags a bit on my 5.45 rifle. WTF? My 7.62 also. Damnit, don't get me started on Tapco ...

[tsg68 1]

The hammer in mine sits high enough that I have to push down hard on the carrier to get it onto the rails when installing it in the receiver. When compared to the Saiga stock triggerless sear the Tapco triggers hooks seem to be higher (further from the pivot point) and the hammer a bit taller (boss to face) than the stock hammer with a different face angle. I still haven't found much here on correct profiles for S12 use but I did find a post by a smith on another forum that says that he mills about .050" off the face of G2 hammers then smooths and polished the face to "fix" dragging caused by switching to a G2 in most AK builds. Seems like people there scoffed at him stating it as a "non-existent problem". To me a hammer that can stop the bolt carrier dead on the rails under recoil is a very real problem.

Edited December 10, 2010 by tsg68

[northernsaiga 4]

I have a 762x39 that seems to drag alot also..tapco g2 single hook...it always runs, but feels different than when it was stock.

 

I had read this on another forum and this thread made me think of it. Took a while but I found the post from the other forum.

 

I think this was from Will who owns Red Jacket Firearms, reguarding a series of rifles he was doing.

 

----------------------------------

"Old fcg holes are filled with std steel rivet's , not plastic . Bullet guide is Bulgy mil spec , held in w/ s/s screw and nut . And , Thanks For a rifle that was built based on a price point , we put a lot into it to make it a rifle to last a lifetime . Oh , for the 922 nazi's , with the non-threaded barrel , these require 5 US parts . These are , pistol grip , forearm , buttstock , trigger , disconnector . [When possible , I always like to retain the original Saiga hammer as I find it superior to US copies .] Enjoy your rifles guy's , Blaine keeps calling for more , so we'll keep making them "

----------------------------------

I added bold and underline to the part I found most interesting

[Lone Star Arms 2,047]

The hammer in mine sits high enough that I have to push down hard on the carrier to get it onto the rails when installing it in the receiver. When compared to the Saiga stock triggerless sear the Tapco triggers hooks seem to be higher (further from the pivot point) and the hammer a bit taller (boss to face) than the stock hammer with a different face angle. I still haven't found much here on correct profiles for S12 use but I did find a post by a smith on another forum that says that he mills about .050" off the face of G2 hammers then smooths and polished the face to "fix" dragging caused by switching to a G2 in most AK builds. Seems like people there scoffed at him stating it as a "non-existent problem". To me a hammer that can stop the bolt carrier dead on the rails under recoil is a very real problem.

 

In fact, you are correct. The G2 hammer is a generic profile and some AK actions will benefit from re profiling the G2 hammer to work more efficiently with the bolt carrier.

 

I covered this problem at length in a number of posts last year, and initially received the same type of reaction on this forum. Since writing those posts, and fostering a performance project where this problem and a number of others were addressed, re profiling or obtaining the services of a qualified gunsmith to reprofile the G2 hammer and polish contact surfaces to reduce drag and friction has almost become standard operation procedure for many on the forum.

 

If done improperly - re profiling a hammer can leave you with a malfunctioning, or unreliable action. With all due respect to the talented DIYers here on the forum who have gotten good results, correct profiling and polishing is not an amateur endeavor, but it is well worth the money invested if done by someone who is knowledgeable and qualified to do this kind of work.

 

We perform this work routinely, but only in conjunction with our full on high performance rebuilds, and don't offer these services individually. However there are forum sponsors who do a very good job with this kind of work. Cobra comes to mind, and if you are interested in addressing specific areas of your action, including hammer profiling - it may be well worth your time to get in touch with him.

 

Mike

[tsg68 1]

Thanks, Mike. I tried getting in touch with Mr. Selph as I had handled some sales samples of his work at GT Distributors prior and they seemed like nice builds and I was hoping he could help me out but as I stated above his shop was closed and vacant his phone shut off and no further info on website. For the cost of a $27 FCG though I may attempt it myself. Seems I would have to figure out the amount of material to take off while still allowing the carrier to cause disconnector engagement and figure out the included angle of the face while in contact with the firing pin minus that material loss to arrive at the correct face angle and height.

[tsg68 1]

northernsaiga, I think Will is right that the stock hammer would work better, but you would still be left with the G2's hook that engages the hammer higher in the action than the stock sear block and still have some dragging not to mention the possibility of incorrect engagement of uncommon parts that would require rather specific work to correct. and you'd lose a compliance part too. If there is no Saiga specific domestic made FCG on the market then you're kind of stuck making a generic work, I guess.

[cfortune 1]

The hammer in mine sits high enough that I have to push down hard on the carrier to get it onto the rails when installing it in the receiver.

 

 

My .308 is the same way but was with the stock trigger too. It just seems worse with the g2 now. My stock .223 is smooth though.

[northernsaiga 4]

northernsaiga, I think Will is right that the stock hammer would work better, but you would still be left with the G2's hook that engages the hammer higher in the action than the stock sear block and still have some dragging not to mention the possibility of incorrect engagement of uncommon parts that would require rather specific work to correct. and you'd lose a compliance part too. If there is no Saiga specific domestic made FCG on the market then you're kind of stuck making a generic work, I guess.

 

I am curious as to what other parts he uses and if/how he modfies them to work with the saiga hammer. I know you would lose a compliance part, but I think he used a us handguard to work around this. When I get some extra time I will try to find out.

 

As I said, my gun runs great, just not as smooth when working the action. I think I will get a different handguard some day, so I may play around with the factory hammer in the future.

 

Good luck with your S12 man

[tsg68 1]

northernsaiga, I think Will is right that the stock hammer would work better, but you would still be left with the G2's hook that engages the hammer higher in the action than the stock sear block and still have some dragging not to mention the possibility of incorrect engagement of uncommon parts that would require rather specific work to correct. and you'd lose a compliance part too. If there is no Saiga specific domestic made FCG on the market then you're kind of stuck making a generic work, I guess.

 

I am curious as to what other parts he uses and if/how he modfies them to work with the saiga hammer. I know you would lose a compliance part, but I think he used a us handguard to work around this. When I get some extra time I will try to find out.

 

As I said, my gun runs great, just not as smooth when working the action. I think I will get a different handguard some day, so I may play around with the factory hammer in the future.

 

Good luck with your S12 man

 

Thanks man, I think I've got the problem on the run, it seems that changing the face angle just a very slight bit may fix the problem without having to remove too much material. I think the main issue is that the transition above the contacting face of the hammer is soooo steep and sharp that it's really what is causing the bolt carrier to hang if I correct the face angle it will bring that down just a tiny bit and then I can smooth out the transitions on the hammer and polish, lube and hopefully = a working gun! I may as well smooth out the bottom of the carrier a tiny bit and polish too, though I really do not want to alter the dimensions of the carrier that much at all. The main thing to absolutely avoid is making sure I don't screw up the disconnector engagement, and end up with a hammer that follows and that I keep the surfaces square. Like Mike said, tricky business but having been a TIG welder and done some machining and metal finishing, I think I can handle it. After checking some other AK's out, some of the dragging is just endemic to the design, I just seem to have enough poor tolerance in mine for it to drag too much and cause malfs.

.

Edited December 10, 2010 by tsg68

[essohbe 47]

Are the Tromix hammers different (will they work better)?

[tsg68 1]

Are the Tromix hammers different (will they work better)?

I think Tromix hammers are just Tapcos with the standard Saiga mods completed and finished no extra hammer work done.

 

Well, after playing with the Tapco group a little more I found that they are just a little too light for my taste especially since there seems to be a point during reset where the disconnect CAN release the hammer to a not so reset trigger hook and the hammer may follow and fire...not ideal really. So after talking to K-var, who told me that their Arsenal SG-922 group is indeed a Saiga 12 specific group designed from an original factory FCG to be a drop in replacement for the transfer bar system. I ordered one to try out. I expect it to be a little long and gritty but I can smooth out the grit I'm sure. I'm just hoping it proves to be a less troublesome fit. If not it'll go back and I'll make do with the G2 for now. I will of course report all findings!

[tsg68 1]

Alright, I got the Arsenal SG-922 group via UPS fri. and upon first inspection it didn't seem all that different than aTapco G2 as Mike had thought but closer inspection shows a few slight but important differences and upon installing it the action was actually even smoother than the original factory transfer bar set up. The carrier group goes into the gun without resistance now and the hammer face is perfectly square to the firing pin now as well. The pull is indeed longer than a G2 which I wanted but isn't as gritty as I thought it would be and not too terribly long at that. With break-in it should smooth out nicely. It is indeed a drop in fit as the K-var rep stated and sits lower due to the triggers pin hole being located differently than the Tapco. This group is not based on the shipped transfer bar set up but on the non-export pistol grip Russian Shotguns trigger group although without an overtravel stop. Only thing required for perfect function was I had to take an exacto knife and trim a tiny bit of plastic from my MD arms pistol grip as it overhung the reciever hole for the trigger and blocked complete trigger return but that is more a problem with where the grip sits and not a problem with the trigger itself. I plan on function testing the gun next week sometime and again will report but so far I am quite pleased with the purchase. The group was less expensive than the Tromix group but more expensive than the Tapco so I think it was a good value for a USA made product that appears to have solved my initial problem and satified my preferences at the same time.

Edited December 19, 2010 by tsg68

[tsg68 1]

John, I believe you are the smith who's pics I had seen on another forum. Some of the members there seemed to be kind of dismissive of the Idea that Tapco's may need to be milled down. Nice work! I have a friend with a Bridgeport if I ever need to complete such work. Do you support the hammer with sine bar, parallels or just scrap stock in the vise? I have fixed the issue with my Saiga with an Arsenal group but still all knowledge is good to have in case I do use a Tapco in a future build.

 

Last thurs. a buddy and me went out and tested the new Arsenal SG-922 set up in my gun and we ran about 150 total rounds of Win #7 1/2 SuperX, Federal #8 bulk pack and some Estate 00buck through the gun using the factory mag, an AGP 10 rounder, a SGM 10 rounder and an MD-20 drum. With the MD V-plug set at 5 the gun cycled through the light loads very well. I had one misfeed with the AGP where a loaded shell popped past the feed lips somehow into the reciever halfway through the mag but didn't engaged the extractor claws and failed to feed without cycling the action by hand. There were a few (maybe 10) stovepipes of light loads most of which were from the shell bouncing back into the action while the bolt was cycling forward to strip another round seemingly after ejection had taken place. most shells were ejected into a 2' diameter circle about four feet forward and to the right of the shooter though and ejection with all ammo was STRONG, spinning the shells quite a bit. The only other problems were from the factory 5 round mag in that no matter what shells were used the last round in the mag stovepiped every time which makes me think the follower is hanging up on the last round so I have to strip the mag and check for burrs and stuff on the follower and maybe stretch the spring. The MD-20 and Surefire mags ran like champs with the MD-20 actually feeding the best of all the mags and seemingly increasing the speed of cycling of the action if that's possible. However the gun fed and fully cycled under recoil with all types of ammunition (OO ammo ran best on setting 3) and with ZERO bolt hang ups as it had before conversion. All issues now seemed to be either from the mags, the speed of ejection or the shooter not gripping the gun correctly (I did not have that many malfs but I think my friend was a little recoil shy) There is still some breaking in to do as the gun had only fired at most 50-75 rounds out of the box before conversion and I think any and all issues will work out with further break-in. The action and trigger were both smoothing out with just the small amount of rounds we ran that day and I am very pleased with the performance of the new FCG it is a true drop-in fit for the Saiga-12 as K'var states. I think the Arsenal FCG is a winner but I know some will like their trigger lighter.

[av8trjohn 0]

John, I believe you are the smith who's pics I had seen on another forum. Some of the members there seemed to be kind of dismissive of the Idea that Tapco's may need to be milled down. Nice work! I have a friend with a Bridgeport if I ever need to complete such work. Do you support the hammer with sine bar, parallels or just scrap stock in the vise? I have fixed the issue with my Saiga with an Arsenal group but still all knowledge is good to have in case I do use a Tapco in a future build.

 

Last thurs. a buddy and me went out and tested the new Arsenal SG-922 set up in my gun and we ran about 150 total rounds of Win #7 1/2 SuperX, Federal #8 bulk pack and some Estate 00buck through the gun using the factory mag, an AGP 10 rounder, a SGM 10 rounder and an MD-20 drum. With the MD V-plug set at 5 the gun cycled through the light loads very well. I had one misfeed with the AGP where a loaded shell popped past the feed lips somehow into the reciever halfway through the mag but didn't engaged the extractor claws and failed to feed without cycling the action by hand. There were a few (maybe 10) stovepipes of light loads most of which were from the shell bouncing back into the action while the bolt was cycling forward to strip another round seemingly after ejection had taken place. most shells were ejected into a 2' diameter circle about four feet forward and to the right of the shooter though and ejection with all ammo was STRONG, spinning the shells quite a bit. The only other problems were from the factory 5 round mag in that no matter what shells were used the last round in the mag stovepiped every time which makes me think the follower is hanging up on the last round so I have to strip the mag and check for burrs and stuff on the follower and maybe stretch the spring. The MD-20 and Surefire mags ran like champs with the MD-20 actually feeding the best of all the mags and seemingly increasing the speed of cycling of the action if that's possible. However the gun fed and fully cycled under recoil with all types of ammunition (OO ammo ran best on setting 3) and with ZERO bolt hang ups as it had before conversion. All issues now seemed to be either from the mags, the speed of ejection or the shooter not gripping the gun correctly (I did not have that many malfs but I think my friend was a little recoil shy) There is still some breaking in to do as the gun had only fired at most 50-75 rounds out of the box before conversion and I think any and all issues will work out with further break-in. The action and trigger were both smoothing out with just the small amount of rounds we ran that day and I am very pleased with the performance of the new FCG it is a true drop-in fit for the Saiga-12 as K'var states. I think the Arsenal FCG is a winner but I know some will like their trigger lighter.

 

 

"T" As you can see My Posts And Pics Are History. Must have pissed someone off with the Tapco Hammer Out Of Specs Post and How To Correct..

[tsg68 1]

Too bad man, seemed like good info to have. Money changes everything don't it?