The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 25, 2014, 09:38 PM   #26
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 1,524
Quote:
amd6547 If your "gunsmith" suggested epoxy as the only alternative, he is not much of a gunsmith. In fact, it makes me think he is responsible.
Nailed it.
All real gunsmiths use JB Weld.
__________________
Need a FFL in north Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me.

$20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)
dogtown tom is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 04:31 AM   #27
peggysue
Member
 
Join Date: May 20, 2014
Posts: 62
The gunsmith I use could fabricate new part pretty easy out of steel. maybe find a different one if yours can't fix it.
peggysue is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 08:35 AM   #28
cjwils
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2010
Location: Washington state
Posts: 115
Be careful about leaving negative feedback against the seller on Gunbroker. I did that once. Then, purely out of spite, the seller left negative feedback against me. He had previously given me an A+, which he changed to a D after I gave him a D (which he deserved, but that is a long story).
cjwils is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 08:41 AM   #29
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
Be careful about leaving negative feedback against the seller on Gunbroker. I did that once. Then, purely out of spite, the seller left negative feedback against me. He had previously given me an A+, which he changed to a D after I gave him a D (which he deserved, but that is a long story).
I recently asked GB about maybe instituting a policy similar to eBay's regarding retaliatory feedback, and this is the reply I got:

Quote:
7/11/2014 4:39:23 PM
GBSupport1111 We will review a situations upon a users request.
7/11/2014 11:39:36 AM
How about considering a policy to prevent retaliatory feedback?
Which makes me believe they really don't give a rat's butt, but you can try contacting them about it.
gyvel is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 12:57 PM   #30
Sid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2009
Posts: 286
I wrote to the seller yesterday morning and he did not respond. So late last night I posted a complaint. In the complaint you are limited to 200 words. So I just wrote that my gun smith had determined the pistol to be be defective.

This morning I received an email from the seller. He said that he would be willing to pay for the repair. I replied that the pistol could not be repaired and I wanted a refund. I am waiting to see what he does now.

It seems that the complaint was a wake up call for him. In the past he simply ignored 2 other emails I had sent him. This was because he had billed me a second time after he had received my money order several days previous and also because he had sent me an invalid tracking number. I don't know what goes with this guy. In the ad he also described this pistol as having a double action, which is nonsense.
Sid is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 12:59 PM   #31
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,754
You really need to post pictures, there are quite a few guys on this forum that I'd trust a lot more than a gunsmith that suggests "epoxy".
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 02:11 PM   #32
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
The ejector you listed is for an all steel Model 1934 and will not work in my pistol which has an aluminum frame. The 1934 has 2 slots milled in the frame and the ejector has 2 flanges which fit into these slots. This provides a really tight fit. My pistol does not have these slots and the sides of the ejector are broken off. It is loose and it moves around very easily.
I'd like to see how that is set up. I have a 948 which also has an alloy frame, but I need to dig it out to look at how the ejector is installed in it.
gyvel is offline  
Old July 28, 2014, 02:31 PM   #33
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,830
I'm really trying to understand how an ejector can't be replaced. I think it can be replaced....by a competent gunsmith. In any event if the gun was broken then the seller should simply accept the gun back and refund your money. If he doesn't, then you have 2 choices:

1. Accept his offer to pay for the repair and find a gunsmith who can do this (there's basically nothing on a gun that can't be repaired, unless its made of pot metal)

2. Tell the Seller he's a cockroach and then post his name here and on Sturmgewehr.com exposing him as a cockroach so others don't get burned like you did.
Skans is offline  
Old July 29, 2014, 07:20 AM   #34
Salmoneye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,345
Isn't the 'Puma' the Beretta Model 70?

If so, then the 'ejector' is not part of the frame...It is pinned in...

http://www.mek-schuetzen.de/Blueprin...ta_70_Auto.png
Salmoneye is offline  
Old July 29, 2014, 08:31 AM   #35
g.willikers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 5,112
Now, thanks to that parts view, it's really sounding like you need a new gunsmith, doesn't it?
__________________
Lock the doors, they're coming in the windows.
g.willikers is offline  
Old August 1, 2014, 03:05 PM   #36
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
Now, thanks to that parts view, it's really sounding like you need a new gunsmith, doesn't it?
No. That parts view is for a Model 70. The guy has already explained that he doesn't have the Model 70 Puma. He has the older model Puma that is based on the Model 1935.
__________________
MIIAA
SIFE
gyvel is offline  
Old August 1, 2014, 03:11 PM   #37
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,754
The 1934 ejector is no more an integral part of the frame than it is in the Model 70.

In this diagram, the ejector is part #37 and it's pin is #38.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old August 2, 2014, 02:27 AM   #38
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
Quote:
The 1934 ejector is no more an integral part of the frame than it is in the Model 70.

In this diagram, the ejector is part #37 and it's pin is #38.
Which is exactly what I told the OP in post #8 (gave him the link), but he replied that his 1935 style .32 alloy-framed pistol has a different setup than the 1934 and 35 steel-framed guns. He specified that, while the steel-framed guns have locating slots in the frame, his does not and that the ejector was, in fact, integral with the frame

So I finally went out and dug out my 948 which also has an aluminum frame and the insertion of the replaceable ejector is exactly the same as on all other Beretta 34s and 35s.

I requested photos of the ejector setup, but, thus far there have been no photos forthcoming. Something isn't adding up here.
__________________
MIIAA
SIFE
gyvel is offline  
Old August 2, 2014, 04:45 AM   #39
4V50 Gary
Staff
 
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 16,837
I think the gunsmith is no gunsmith. What's so hard about using a punch to knock out a pin or two and then insert a fresh ejector?
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe!
4V50 Gary is offline  
Old August 3, 2014, 08:22 AM   #40
Salmoneye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 1,345
I apologize for the erroneous info...

I was unaware that the alloy 1935 was called 'Puma' when marketed in the US...
Salmoneye is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 03:26 PM   #41
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
You know, Sid, posting some photos of the frame and ejector would help this thread immensely.

After looking at my .22 cal. 948 which uses the exact same frame as all the other alloy-framed guns, I'm starting to have trouble dealing with your claim that the ejector is an integral part of the frame.
__________________
MIIAA
SIFE
gyvel is offline  
Old August 4, 2014, 03:34 PM   #42
Mosin-Marauder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 18, 2014
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,029
I second the posting of photographs. Would help give us a better idea of what's going on.
__________________
Proud owner of two pieces of history!
K-31, made in 1949 all original, beech stock.
Mosin-Nagant M91/30, 1941 all original.
Mosin-Marauder is offline  
Old August 6, 2014, 11:57 AM   #43
Unlicensed Dremel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2014
Posts: 1,483
The answer is, it depends.

Did the seller, or did the seller not, make representations to you (written or verbal, but ideally written), that the gun worked "good", "fine", "well", "perfectly", or anything of the sort?

(1) If yes, then that's consumer fraud and is actionable *despite* the no-returns language.

(2) If no, then it's tough noogies / buyer beware, since the auction said no returns.

Well, I think in *most* states if not all 50 that is the answer. UCPA - Uniform Consumer Protection Act, as well as common law fraud (misrepresentation, known false, made with intent to deceive, for pecuniary gain) will protect you if you can prove up the misrepresentation (and the other elements). The common law against fraud is definitely applicable in all 50 states, even if no UCPA.
__________________
--Only accurate rifles are interesting, and only *really* accurate rifles are *really* interesting.
--Life is *way* too short to shoot or hunt with ugly plain plastic stocked guns.
Unlicensed Dremel is offline  
Old August 8, 2014, 02:26 PM   #44
gyvel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 30, 2009
Location: Northern AZ
Posts: 5,229
I think Sid has lost interest. He's posting in another thread about .25 ammo, but no response here.

I, for one, would still like to see some pictures of this integral ejector.
__________________
MIIAA
SIFE
gyvel is offline  
Old August 8, 2014, 03:13 PM   #45
amd6547
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Posts: 1,406
The OP never said the Beretta in question didn't work...just that his "gunsmith" said it was broke. He may have never even fired it.
__________________
The past is gone...the future may never happen.
Be Here Now.
amd6547 is online now  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11387 seconds with 9 queries