Failure to Eject with SA Range Officer

[RickB]

Extractor tension is not nearly as critical, in the sense of the necessity for a very precise and narrow range of adjustment, as some make it to be.

Over the span of more than 1000 rounds, I incrementally increased extractor tension from visible daylight between hook and rim - zero tension - to so much tension the gun wouldn't feed, and it ran perfectly in between.

A gun that has issues with dimensions, such as incorrectly angled feedramp, or the extractor itself, might require some fine adjustment to account for those issues, but the simple test of "spent case is held tight, loaded round droops but doesn't fall off the hook" will work if the gun - 5"/.45 - is well made, and my Springfield RO was very well made.

Since the extended ejector is essentially upside down, compared to the original design, with the contact point very high, you might check to see if the rim is actually missing that high contact point.
Every .45 ejector I have is either angled the opposite way, or it's square on the tip.

[Steve in Allentown,]

I completely agree with RickB.

Many folks will buy the Weigand Extractor Tension Gauge Set and very carefully measure and adjust how much tension is on their extractor. Great debates over what is the correct measurement rage across the internet.

On the other hand, I put great emphasis on setting extractor deflection to .010" as perfectly as possible. I've found that with that amount of deflection I can bend the extractor to add tension without a care in the world and can't recall a time that I've been able to put so much tension on it that feeding has been affected.

A couple of years ago I sent a 1911 to a well known 1911 'smith for some machine work. In the course of his work he examined the extractor I had fit and declared that it had way too much tension on it. I told him to leave it alone since it had caused no problems of any kind in over 10,000 rounds.

In fact, the more tension on an extractor the more consistent is the ejection. However, the trick is you can't get away with a stronger extractor unless it has a minimal amount of deflection. Increase the deflection and tension becomes more of an issue. The late, great Jerry Keefer set the deflection of the extractors in his bullseye 1911s to something like 0.006". Talk about minimal deflection. He also set the tension very, very light. He was building guns for world champion level bullseye shooters and using every trick in the book to eek out every bit of mechanical precision in his pistols.

[HiBC]

Every .45 ejector I have is either angled the opposite way, or it's square on the tip.

I understand what you are saying.The pic of the OP's stock ejector shows the ejector face at an ACUTE angle with the top of the ejector.This puts the point of contact as high on the brass as possible.

If the extractor hook is at 3 oclock,and if the ejector contact was at 9 oclock,the brass would come out at a horizontal flat spin,if it did not contact the slide below the ejection port.

For that reason,lowered ejection port is a popular thing.The ejector is not quite at 9 oclock.Maybe 8 oclock.

I am accustomed to seeing the ejector the OP pictured filed a bit so it is an OBTUSE angle with the top edge maybe 100 deg or 110 or so,to the top edge,for a flat maybe 3/32 down from the top edge. This lowers the ejector contact on the brass,so in tandem with the hook,it gives the path of the brass some more "up" to climb out of the port.I just looked at a Commander clone I have,its angled obtuse for about 1/8 in down.It runs good.


I've changed ejectors before.Its one of those "simple little jobs" that is easy to mess up. I cheat and use a Bridgeport. I have it down to EZ. No problem.
The post that goes into the frame needs a 1/2 hole for the pin. I hate drilling 1/2 holes. I depth mic from the top of the frame to a pin gauge in the hole.
Then I use a little ball mill to mill the 1/2 hole in the ejector post,Likewise,a few measurements allow me to mill the sides and top of the ejector to match fit the slide.Sneer and tell,me you do it with a file.My respects! After 30 years or so,the Bridgeport IS my file.

So I can just boldly file the tip of my ejector to lower the contact point if I think that's the answer.

I hesitate to suggest filing the ejector tip.Supposedly this gun ran with that ejector. Filing the ejector makes the ejector shorter.Its already short.

I might look inside the slide below the port for brass stains,or use marker ink to see what the brass may be hitting.

I can tell you I might order a new ejector and pin to be prepared,then on MY OWN gun,I might try filing the ejector so the face is sloped back some at the top,so it smacks the brass a bit lower. If it doesn't work,I shrug and fit a new ejector. Its on me.

I don't really want to tell you,Tunnelrat,to just grab a file and start cutting steel. I don't know that its the right answer for your gun.

[chuck jones]

Colt's 1911 has been making gunsmiths rich for over 100 years.

I probably own a dozen, but I'm old and learned on one.

Think of it as a blessing, an opportunity to master malfunction drills. Then buy another so you can have one to shoot while the other is being fixed.

chuck

[Steve in Allentown,]

Originally Posted by chuck jones

Colt's 1911 has been making gunsmiths rich for over 100 years.

Sad but not far off the mark. They've gone through periods where you couldn't give me one of their pistols for free and other periods when I wouldn't settle for any other 1911.

[polyphemus]

I blame it on off-and-on poor management and the union mentality.

And what mentality might this be that in your opinion results in a defective product?

[HiBC]

I don't have time right now for the long version of this,

My opinions about unions are irrelevant.Any individual,union,non union,etc,can have a good or poor attitude about the Quality they produce.
I'll agree that conflict and power struggles between labor and management can take priority over delivering a Quality product to a customer.

But,IMO,thats a red herring distraction from the main issue.

Many of us Gun Folks still dwell in a paradigm of the past. The Guild system...from Apprentice to the Master,and Old Joe,the 30 year toolroom Master.

Manufacturing has changed. Old Joe is an anachronism.Unless you have actively worked in manufacturing this side of the 1990;s,it may be hard to understand.

If you want a contract,or even a market to sell your handgun(or other product) they do not want to rely on Old Joe. Joe can die,or get an attitude

Every design,part,material,process,training,inspection…..every detail is documented and must be complied with.

Many parts are farmed out.Suppliers are "Qualified" to "Only ship good parts" .

Tracible lots of parts are received,and ideally,used without the "non value added" process of inspection".

And its absolutely unacceptable for an "Old Joe" to touch a file or a stone to a part.

Line employees are trained how to assemble a product from a "kit" of parts picked in the stockroom per work order.
That line employee is hired per Federal and State laws and regulations such as EEOC.

It may not be lawful to insist that,in the USA,the employee be fluent in the English language.I'm not disparaging or disrespecting anyone. The etymology of the word "babble" goes back to an Old Story about a "Tower of Babel" Manufacturers are limited as far as how selectively they hire.

This Human Assembly Unit is trained per Documented Training policy,and monitored via Statistical Process Control.


Your firearm may never get test fired.


Your pre-war Winchester likely has Proof Marks.I doubt your Bushmaster does.


Define "Quality" Its not so easy. I heard it said once ,maybe from Juran,that a definitive measure of Quality is how the customer feels after spending the buck.

Imo,by many measures,we get more Quality for our buck now than we ever did before...especially if we could deduct costs the mfgr cannot control,from compliance to Health insurance,etc. We pay.


The beauty is,we have choices...from a $375 Philippine 1911,to an "Old Joe" built $3000 Les Baer or Wilson,etc. Or,a S+W or Glock modern expression of a handgun that ,in many ways,may not please our aesthetics...but it MIGHT be lighter,hold twice the ammo,be very reliable,and prices start competitive with the bargain rate 1911's.

And,odds are good,given modern computer design resources the modern gun is designed around modern methods and it will run out of the box.