Receiver and trigger housing stock clearance differences?

I have new to me Underwood in a Winchester stock (with Inland recoil plate).
There is no clearance between the back of the reciever - trigger housing assembly and the woodwork. In fact there is an impression in the back of the mortice from the contact -perhaps driven home by firing. (see photos)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...97recoil-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...87THrear-1.jpg
Attachment 120651
Are there minor differences between stocks made for different prime contractors?
In particular between stocks intended for companies using brazed trigger housings and those only using machined trigger housings?

Might changing stocks to one made by a company supplying Underwood or IBM have a little moer clearance in the back?
Or am I barking up the wrong tree here?

Is there an issue with accuracy or function?

I have experienced slight TH fitment issues when using commercial housings in GI stocks and vice-versa. Don’t remember any concerns using USGI TH’s in USGI stocks.

Is the recoil lug snug, or does it wiggle? It should be snug. When assembled does the receiver fit up tight to the lug? It may have been fired some with the lug a little loose, which would allow it to creep back a bit. You can check that with a feeler gage when assembled.But if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

Is there an issue with accuracy or function?

---

I don't know yet. The previous owner was supposed to include the adjustable rear sight that he bought it with. I'm still waiting for it...next week I'll go to plan B.
There's no hang to the barrel during assembly, so presumably the barrel will move around a bit during firing. In their book about the Carbine, Ruth and Duff state contact at any place besides the recoil plate will harm accuracy (p.128). How much this may do so, I can't say but am hoping others here might.
My other concern is whether the repeated battering of the stock may eventually cause a crack. I don't see a particular weakness there, and it may be that spreading the impact force has no downside.

While waiting for the sight, I've traded the type 1 extractor and firing pin, since the gun will (hopefully) be my main shooter.

---------- Post added at 02:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:48 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eb in oregon

Is the recoil lug snug, or does it wiggle? It should be snug. When assembled does the receiver fit up tight to the lug? It may have been fired some with the lug a little loose, which would allow it to creep back a bit. You can check that with a feeler gage when assembled.But if it ain't broke don't fix it.

---

When the recoil plate is removed from the stock and fitted to the receiver, they are snug. Not interference snug, but just snug - zero play.
When assembled in the stock there is no room between the receiver and the plate or the reciver and trigger housing and the stock.

Do you have a spare recoil plate handy to try in that stock to see if the fitment is any different? You definitely need a little bit of barrel hang when the action is hung onto the recoil plate. I'm no expert, I'm just thinking what I would do in that situation, and since recoil plates are relatively cheap, I would try that just to see if it made any difference in that stock.

For what its worth, there were some minor changes in the stock milling for the recoil plate during the production of the carbines. Changes were made when different style recoil plates were developed. And then very late in production another change was made to better support the type 3 recoil plate. That change was the elimination of removal of wood directly below the recoil plate to help support it and keep the barrel from sagging into the barrel channel. Not sure when each of these changes were made or which stock makers implemented them, but I do know that changes were made.

Hi Matt,
I wonder if you have a 'Late' Type III WRA stock that has what JimB is getting around to- Having the extra support cut under the Recoil plate along with the wood below being milled at a slightly different angle- also for extra support. In your picture (attached below) it appears below the bottom of the recoil plate to be 2 circled impressions, the top being partial and likely the back of the hole on the TH that the hammer strut and spring go in. The bottom hole for the Trigger housings trigger spring.
Also in the picture to the left of the recoil plate you can see the drain hole impression from the end of the integral op slide rod and spring.
Any way they made these stocks just before they switched over to the long barrel channel Type III stocks.... (I prefer to call these Type IV stocks). I believe Overton/Inland did the same. Both types will have thicker outside rails.

**To be honest I'm having a hard time trying to make out from your picture if your stock is the Extra support or the earlier style** I believe Jim M has a pic you can look at to see for yourself.

But No matter which stock you have..
Best advice has been given from above, I'd tread lightly, it's easy enough to try another Recoil plate.

A while back someone had a recoil plate that wasn't fitting between the receiver legs just right, symptoms similar to what your describing. You could see the indentation type wear on his receiver... like yours is showing.

If interested in trying another Recoil plate I have a bag of AU Underwoods here. Send me a PM here and I'll mail you one. I'd need a pretty good picture of the rear/top of your receiver and I'll look for a close match.... best I can.

I'd try another recoil plate. If you don't get the accuracy or barrel hang your looking for after that, you can try taking a little wood off where those circular impressions are, which shows your action is pinched in to that stock. But first we'll circle the wagons and give it more thought.

Let me know about the Plate,
If this has made no sense I'll try again tomorrow. I'm worn out :surrender:

Note the Circular impressions from the TH sitting so far back.

https://www.milsurps.com/attachment....1&d=1634233728

"I wonder if you have a 'Late' Type III WRA stock that has what JimB is getting around to- Having the extra support cut under the Recoil plate along with the wood below being milled at a slightly different angle- also for extra support. "

H'm. Compared with the illustration in Ruth's WarBaby! the gap under the installed recoil plate is large, which led me to beleive this is a more 'mid' production stock. However if the the difference is more subtle, then I don't know.

(If its any help on dating manufacture: what is remaining of the acceptance stamp is just the GHD -which I would describe as small letters)

In your picture (attached below) it appears below the bottom of the recoil plate to be 2 circled impressions, the top being partial and likely the back of the hole on the TH that the hammer strut and spring go in. The bottom hole for the Trigger housings trigger spring.
Also in the picture to the left of the recoil plate you can see the drain hole impression from the end of the integral op slide rod and spring.

Yes. Exactly. And if you look at theback of the receiver and trigger housing assembly, the contact surfaces are discolored.

Both types will have thicker outside rails.
Added photos which may help.
I believe Jim M has a pic you can look at to see for yourself. Having an example to compare with would be great.
Attachment 120657Attachment 120658

But No matter which stock you have..
Best advice has been given from above, I'd tread lightly, it's easy enough to try another Recoil plate.

I'll take you up on this.
Thanks! :cheers:

This is exactly why I asked. I didn't want to start buying and trying different stocks if thats mot neccesarily the answer. I was just guessing that the stocks might have had more variation and less interchangibility than other parts. I noticed brazed trigger housing shape fitts snuggly, and has a countersink for the retaining pin that the previous owner missed. :rolleyes:

Attachment 120656

Wow, that is super compressed in there. On the bottom hole indention, you can even see the lines on the bottom of it from the trigger spring pressing against the wood.

Matt,
Is your stock a IR replacement?

Was hoping the Recoil Plate replacement would have helped. Too bad it didn't.
Your likely looking at having to clear some wood out from where the 3 circular impressions I noted above are located.
It must need some relief, with it showing that much compression.

What do you think? A little at a time? I'd try a Dremel where the drain hole end of the integral housing tube is hitting with a rotary type sanding bit.
And maybe some 80 grit wrapped on a file on the back / where the 2 circular impressions are.
Maybe try some flour or chalk on the wood or metal to pin point the contact area's first.

Just some thoughts......

Safe Weekend,

'fraid so. Something about how the mortice was cut as its not quite square, or recoil plate and escutcheon are too far back. Maybe a Win receiver and trigger housing would clear??? But seeing the the cut is angled makes me think the issue is the stock.

Attachment 120843

Attachment 120844


It's a midproduction Winchester stock. The GHD part of the acceptance stamp can still be made out.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...21489GHD-1.jpg
A Midway Italian Return Details - The Carbine Collector's Club

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by painter777

Maybe try some flour or chalk on the wood or metal to pin point the contact area's first.

---

An old trick to make a bedding compound is to mix a little liquid black shoe polish in some vaseline. Smear a light coat on the portion you're trying to bed and insert the assembly. Remove it, where the vaseline is is the place to remove some wood. Repeat until the vaseline doesn't transfer to the stock.

Just to wrap this up, shaved it back in both locations so there is a bit of clearance. The receiver fit to the recoil plate is real tight now. We'll see if it leaves a new impression after shooting, but I doubt it will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt_X

The receiver fit to the recoil plate is real tight now.

---

I'm curious now, if you actually tried the fit of the recoil plate to the receiver when you had it removed from the stock? The reason I'm asking is that my Underwood had a "sloppy" fit at the recoil plate - I tried all my spare recoil plates on the receiver and all were loose, but some not as bad as others. I attempted "tightening" a nice PR-B recoil plate using a CMP suggested method, and broke it in half! I ended up using the same method on a cast Post War recoil plate and was able to get the fit I wanted. This was dealing with the actual fit of the recoil plate to the receiver tang, and had nothing to do with the clearance of the the receiver or TH to the stock, though. :confused: - Bob

USGI BOB,
I sent him a different recoil plate. His IR stock has (Had) some messed up inletting. See the pics earlier to see the compressed areas when the action was installed. He's working on relieving this compression and trying to get some barrel hang for this...... His Shooter Carbine.

Charlie, Yep I've been following the thread from the beginning. Didn't think I'd missed anything, but may have. I thought you were confused about the stock, but maybe it's me - did Winchester use some IR stocks? I might be getting this thread confused with another one. It's getting late - I don't know. :dunno: - Bob

Guess I better recap and clarify.
The carbine is a recent Midway Italian return. (I'm the second owner but the first owner made only one possibly two changes; the rear sight, and possibly the sling swivel.)
It's an Underwood with IBM brazed type trigger housing. The stock is a WRA low wood with a revised recoil plate originally from an Inland.

Yes. I did remove and test fit the Inland recoil plate to the receiver.
There was no play, but also no interference. Niether tight nor lose.

Then Charlie sent me an AU recoil plate. Fit of the receiver to AU recoil plate was very slightly snug. Not tight. It would go into place with just a small push.
With the AU recoil plate mounted in the stock, the back of the trigger housing was still contacting the wood stock. I did not notice any real 'hang' of the barrel/receiver at that time.

----->Fastforward to yesterday when I got my basement shop cleaned up and could work on this project again....

First step was remove the recoil plate and cut the woodwork back maybe 1/32". I used a knife, a firmer and mallet, and for the top corner an x-acto curved gouge. This worked for me, but I wouldnt recommend this method except for those already practiced in joyner's work or similar.

Second step was tighten the recoil plate'sfit to the reciever. It's not related to the carving work, except that if I didn't provide the clearance, it wouldn't seat fully.
I understand but prefer not to attempt the hammer method. Someone - somewhere posted that they used a press or vise. I have a BIG machinist vise at the house, so that's what I used - very carefully. I know its possible to break a vise, and its possible to break a recoil plate. Didn't want to do either! The AU plate is the nicer one, so I kept that in reserve and used the other.

To protect the recoil plate I used a scrap of copper sheet. Took a couple tries to get the recoil plate so the flat stayed flat against the one jaw, but once it did, then it was a matter of a few rounds of adding pressure, measuring how much it closed up, remove and check fit on to receiver. When I got an interference fit, I called it done.

The trick when using a press or vise is to just get to the border of the elastic limit of the steel. Can't really see that, so its a matter of feel and for me using calipers to know how much I closed it up in the vise the previous time. - then adding just a little more.

I have some photos, but not of the vise. If you want a pic of that let me know.

Suppose now I should explain what I'm doing with this carbine. It was offered for sale with accessories as a "good shooter" and I thought it was worth a shot. If it really was/is I'll use it for CMP type matches instead of my more collectable SG.

After documenting the parts, I swapped the early extractor and firing pin for later types since reliability and safety are more important than preserving this one as the Italians sold it.

I "think" the barrel band is original. The sling swivel was not, although I don't know if it was an Italian substitute or something the previous owne installed and forgot to mention...
That swivel was thin and the inside edge was sharp. It probably would abraid the sling which is not a good thing in my book. The sling it came with looked to be a cobble job - probably good enough for a WW2 reenactor but I think its a fake not a field repair.

The swivel in the photo above is from Northridge and may need some tweaking but is made of the thicker sheet and has no sharp edges. I bought a surplus slighty used D-tip sling to go with it.

Matt, Thanks for the pics and explanation of your work - clears up a lot of questions I had. I've had (2) of those repro slings, one had still had a sticker on it showing it was made in India - got rid of them both.

The main reason for my earlier question was I had the problem with the fit of the recoil plate on my UEF receiver and thought it could be related to them having made a few that were slightly out of specifications. Also, wondering if your 1st "hang" measurement was made after "bumping" the butt of the stock on the floor (while holding the action in place) or before? I haven't seen anyone mention that procedure lately. Thanks! :thup: - Bob

Bob,
First picture is before any bumping. The stock was stitting in some support stands I cut out of scrap wood. I'm going to try to get out to the range this morning and that ought to seat it!
I did hit the assembly on the butt with my hand enough for the slide to jump a little. Whether its effective at seating, I have no idea.

Short version of the day.
No signs of impact of th ereciever and TH on the woodwork.
A couple of failures to fire, which I think are light primer strikes. However one of the two failed to fire on second attempt. The primer and cartirqdge length appear to be normal. (Korean surplus)
A couple failures to feed. Both times from the korean magazines which work flawlessly in my SG. Not sure about the cause being the magazines in this case.

Accuracy seems about the same as my SG, although the sights point of aim is better centered.

Since they're both cheap, I would replace the recoil spring and hammer spring just to see if it made any difference. I think I remember reading you said it was a Midway purchase so it's hard telling how many miles are on those springs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jond41403

Since they're both cheap, I would replace the recoil spring and hammer spring just to see if it made any difference. I think I remember reading you said it was a Midway purchase so it's hard telling how many miles are on those springs

---

yea. I think it would be a good idea for me to have a USGI spare of each just to have on hand, along with an ejector and extractor spring.

The follow up on the possible light strikes was finding the firing pin key measurements seem in spec, but its movement was gritty. I disassembled and cleaned the bolt throughly again, until everything was free. All of the springs measure a bit short compared to new per drawings. Subjectively the hammer spring feels good on the install, at least as strong as the one on my SG. The op slide spring, measures correct length but the ID is large. I think its a replacement and may be made of slightly smaller diameter wire. I should look at the ends more closely for how they are finsihed.

For the failure to feed, I was able to narrow it down to the one magazine's dimensions. Maybe it got dropped or banged or something. I posted about that in someone elses thread but prob should put it heere too.

First I knew the FTFs were only from the Korean made mags that I had brought to the range.
I didn''t know if it was both or just one of them.
I had already examined the mag catch and observed a little bit of vertical play on the right and recalled the FTs were always on the right, at least sometimes the second to last round.

Second I checked the mag fit into the assembly with the stock off. Then loaded each of the magazines with 15 dummy rounds and cycled them. I did this with all four mags that I had brought to the range. I did this mostly to be sure I wasn't throwing the results by hand cycling at different rates or short cycling.

After getting a FTF from one of the korean made mags on the second to last round, I repeated the test with just 5 rounds in both. This time checked using different cartridges.
So this got me to another FTF from the 2nd to last round.

Then I measured the nib to top hieghts a couple differnt ways on all 4 mags. I also measured the lip openings, and dissassembled all four to compare followers and springs.
In my case I found the magazine had a shortest nib to top height (1.455"), and the narrowest lip opening of the four magazines. The straight section of the nib opening also bowed or bent downward. That could explain why the bolt usually caught the cartridge but then over rode it as it continued further.

To increase the hieght over 1.5" and increase the feed opening required a little bit of sheet metal shaping. After doing this, retested by manually cycling the dummy rounds again.
Ran perfectly!

I try to be easy on my mags when inserting, by always pushing in the mag catch all the way to the left.
It has to be easier on the 2 nubs than just slamming them home.
When bench shooting I try to not rest the carbine on the magazine to eliminate any rocking and rolling.

I often had to tweak the tube feed lips. My Daughter has a habit of getting 16rds in to a 15rd tube :rolleyes:
That can't be good for them and surprisingly hard to strip the extra rd out at times.
I bent the lips on 2 when trying to snap the top cover on a NOS very tight pouch. Bent in enough you could see it right away.

I remember Frank D and I trying to figure out 2 impressions on a stock he was fixing.
When it hit me I realized they might be from a mag being tapped on the stock.
When he set the base of a mag on it, it was a perfect match to the base of the mag.
Guess it wasn't a shooter wearing a combat helmet setting the cartridges tight in the mag.

No matter the price, I just don't want any problems. Shooting time seems to be getting limited. I just try to be careful with the ones I use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jond41403

Since they're both cheap, I would replace the recoil spring and hammer spring

---

JD,
Cheap? :rolleyes: Maybe if I'd of bought just a few, but I stocked up.
Remember my Post about 'What Spare Parts Should You Have'
I nearly went broke the past 2 winters buying up extra GI springs, plungers, extractors, bolt pawls, ejectors... etc, etc.
But now I have them. Wife will be offering them up when I die. I know I have more than I'll ever need / use, because I'm a Hoarder...... :dancingbanana:
Much like you JD with your sagging floor ammo room !

Be Safe All,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by painter777

I often had to tweak the tube feed lips. My Daughter has a habit of getting 16rds in to a 15rd tube

---

A couple nights ago I watched the relevant parts of How to Shoot the US Army Rifle (Garand) - Show her the rapid fire portion where the shooters count their shots out loud. :)

Brought the same two Korean U mags and two production mags to the range yesterday. All ran fine in this carbine. So the tweaking of the mags did the trick. No failures to fire either. Only change there was super clean the bolt. Maybe the cleaning helped or maybe just was unlucky last time with two bad primers.

Groups are getting better. Now I have to work on my offhand with this smoother and somewhat lighter trigger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jond41403

Since they're both cheap, I would replace the recoil spring and hammer spring just to see if it made any difference. I think I remember reading you said it was a Midway purchase so it's hard telling how many miles are on those springs

---

Quick update. I spoke too soon. That carbine failed to fire the same ammo - once during a CMP Garand match. Short version is that both 'duds' fired fine in my SG.
Changed bolts and firing pins but measuring the protrusion (as pictured in the 1947 tech manual) suggested that alone wasn't going to answer.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...61947p57-1.jpg

Installed a new hammer spring and took it to the range last week. Fired 65 rounds of the same ammo as before without a hiccup.

---------- Post added at 02:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:59 PM ----------

Now that its shooting consistantly, to use for competition the stock needs to better fit my hands than the Winchester does. I have an RSG stock on my SG and that fits my hands pretty nicely.

The Winchester just is too square in the forestock and too fat in the wrist for me. :(

Will anything but a Winchester and Marlin will be more to my liking?

Or are the RSG stocks that much different in feel than most of the others (such as Overton, Lumb etc) that ought to narrow my focus?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt_X

RSG stock on my SG and that fits my hands pretty nicely.

---

I'd have to measure a few to compare.
I do know that from the Many RSG hand guards I have that they seem to be the narrowest. At least the early Type I's are.

Agree the WRA and Marlin made stocks are beefy at the wrist. I've found that H&B stocks are pretty beefy also, along with Lumbs.
I've got my Grandson for another week+, might be a good project to measure some stock wrists while I have a few boxes pulled out.
If I do I'll get back to you.

Speaking of hand size, I used to follow a 3rd gen Wood Framer whose hands were so large you felt like you had a child's hand when shaking hands with him.
Back then I was taller, near 6'5" but now shrinking every year :ugh:
He'd face palm you with his fingers nearly touching on the back of your head.

Be Safe,

At a recent local CMP match, a new shooter borrowed a club M1 Carbine. Because of our "laws" rounds bought at the range stay at the range and you need to shoot them all. After the 35 round match there was still a stripper with some rounds but without the magazine adapter to strip them into the magazine. The shooter's dad wanted to fire for effect and loaded the magazine but somehow managed to put in the rounds with the stripper still attached into the magazine! After the rifle would not fire we checked and had to disassemble the mag to get everything sorted out. How he did this I don't know. I put a couple of 0.006" shims in an M1 garand to tighten up the trigger guard. They stuck out slightly into the magazine and I could not get a clip to seat and override the round for the CMP rapid stage. A normal load would work but that extra needed to override was not there.

Dave