Printable View
Phil,
The drawing looks like its from the plans I posted in the Knowledge Library, just beware some measurements are not correct, it will be obvious on some parts, the barrel nut being one of them, which is in fact 37.6mm (ish) the .6 does vary as the nut does take a few knocks so you need to take a few then work on a average, I,ve made two new Mk V grip clamps for members, the problem is I had to go for an average measurement which was based on two barrel nuts I have and the average was .6
I believe the Mk2 barrel bushings were originally brazed in and the rivets just peened as Flying said. Peter would know for sure.
Look in Peter’s Sten book. IIRC, he describes the repair for loose barrel bushings. That’s the only welding of the original bushing I can think of.
I cut a scrap section of receiver away from a Mk2 bushing a while back and one of the rivets just fell out.
These days the bushings are plug welded in. The closed-bolt semi-auto builds put a lot more stress on bushing than the original FA system. The semi-auto return spring is stronger and the bolt is slammed closed with every shot fired. There’s no API and you hear the ring sound of metal hitting metal as the bolt closes after every shot.
Most of Long Branch Sten MkII (1943,44, 45) production the rear housing ring, trigger mech housing and front trunnions are spot welded rather than riveted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent
I can't say on 1942's as there are soooooo few of them around. Generally the 1942's seem to reflect British production methods (ie. ugly bubbly welds holding on the trigger mech and attaching the mag housing parts).
I seam to think that the ones I took apart years back were silver soldered and the rivets were just there to locate everything and add strength.
The mk1 body side parts (or trigger mechanism housing) of the Mk1 are the same dimensions as the Mk2.
If the bushes were silver soldered/brazed as well this could have been done post production as a repair or refurbishment because the bush was loose. If it was felt necessary to silver solder/braze as well as rivet the bush at the production stage I wonder why the bush wasn't simply welded to the tube?
Maybe they wanted to be able to replace the bushing without a lot of difficulty?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
The barrel bushing is welded in the Carl Gustav M45 (Swedish K) and it doesn’t come out without a fight.
If silver solder was used and not braze it would seem an odd choice of joining the 2 parts together because I would have thought it would result in a weaker joint than if brazed. If braze was not used is any-one able to offer an explanation as to why, please?
I think sometimes the wording of Silver solder is confused with silver brazing rods........ as we use solder for pipe fittings and electric work but never call it silver solder.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
As for brazing think the silver gives a lower melting point than a standard brazing rod....
Silver Solder has a significantly lower melting point than brazing rod and in my experience produces a significantly weaker joint. It's my understanding that brazing was always used for steel framed bicycle joints never Silver Solder.
Some people call Silver Solder "Hard Solder" because it is harder than Soft Solder.
Look on page 292 of Peter’s Sten Machine Carbine book.
Under “Repairing Loose Barrel Seating Bushes”.
“During manufacture, the barrel seating bush was soft-soldered into place within the body casing and secured with four rivets.”
In the next paragraph, Peter goes on to describe the EMER for the repair of the loose bushing.