OLD ARMOURERS TOOL NO1 | Trade Me
An enfield? bore gauge?
OLD ARMOURERS TOOL no2 | Trade Me
extractor gauge?
Printable View
OLD ARMOURERS TOOL NO1 | Trade Me
An enfield? bore gauge?
OLD ARMOURERS TOOL no2 | Trade Me
extractor gauge?
First one: The only tool we had like that was the Gauge testing straightness of bore for the old .455" No1 revolver. I had one in the display case at Warminster
Second one: Don't recognise it but if it's from the same bloke, it'll probably be from a No1 revolver too. I shoulkd imagine that the angle is the angle at which the extraction cycle (the extractor rod on the excractor cam) MUST have started to operate to ensure that the cylinder extractor will rise, eject AND snap closed. If it operates too late, the extractor won't snap back into the cylinder. Something similar for the No2 revolver.
Next question.........
OLD ARMOURERS TOOL no2 is one of these.
CATALOGUE NUMBER: SM 385
GAUGE: Inspectors plate, extraction No. 2, Mk. 1
DESCRIPTION: Steel, plate accept amount of extraction
APPLICATION: With a distorted dummy cartridge in the chamber, breech closed, trigger pressed, raise the bolt lever until the extractor grips the rim of the cartridge. Insert gauge with the flat side of the left inside of the body and the small concave portion resting on the barrel of the bolt.
ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION LIMITS: Rifle is rejected when the left side of the column of the bolt contacts the inclined surface of the gauge.
Used with the following weapons: Rifle, No.4 All Marks and Rifle, No.5.
Reference: INSPECTION STANDARDS (PROVISIONAL) PART 3. APPLICATION OF GAUGES AND EXAMINATION OF SMALL ARMS AND MACHINE GUNS, Issue 1, February 1957
Mmmmmm. Should have looked in the EMER to start with as the gauge is listed in the Technical section but...... But to be honest I don't really recognise it and the technical description of its use has me puzzled. Alongside the gauge is a List of Changes number and the gauge does not appear anywhere else in the No4, 5 supplement or the No1 rifle EMER (most of the gauges are common between the 3 weapons of course), either in the X, Y or Z repair schedules.
The test for primary extraction was a visible one using the distorted dummy and was repeated of course during the Out Inspection range and function test. So, not recognising it as anything except the similar one from the No2 revolver I would assume that the LoC alongside it could mean it was obsolete. It's function being duplicated by two other in-house tests on the bench and range.
Just as a matter of interest, can anyone out there in forumland work out how it is/was used? The 'small concave portion' that rests on the bolt has me doubly confused
haha, I love your depth of knowledge! simply astounding!Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
:)
Notice that the the angled "knife edge" if you will, is concave along its length, no doubt of a radius the same as that of the bolt body. Insert the gauge so the "knife edge" is against the bolt body, with the "point" towards the muzzle, so to speak, and the flat of the gauge flat against the inside face of the left receiver/body wall, forward of the thumb relief cut.
As the bolt handle is lifted, the the extractor contacts the rim of the case and primary extraction progressively occurs as the handle rises until the main recoil lug (aka "column of the bolt" ?) is vertical.
So they seem to be saying that if the left face of the main recoil lug is touching the right face of the gauge when the extractor is only bearing against the rim of the case, there is not enough travel of the bolt remaining for primary extraction to occur.
Just playing with a loose action here, watching the bolt head travel as the bolt handle is raised and lowered, the rearward movement of the bolthead does not begin until the left face of the recoil lug is almost half way up to the vertical position, so one can see the application, at least in theory.
Attachment 60226
That explanation would go a considerable way to explain why the gauge was a) not used(?), b) I ain't seen one, c) it's not listed in the last SM gauge catalogue for the No4 rifle and d) was already redundant due to any primary extraction already being bleedin obvious while range and function testing!
Ha Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj
When you're a published expert on a subject and not just from research and reading, admitting in an open forum that you don't know what an item is, seems to require a good deal more honesty, not to say ball bearings, than most people possess.
Most of the Kiwis I've met were stand-up blokes...