Basic Bren question

[Longshaor]

Hey all,

How do I remove the ejector block on an Bren Mk II? Thanks in advance!

Cheers

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Peter Laidler]

Look down from the magazine catch and you'll see a headed pin astride the block. Push this pin out from left to right as far as it'll go. )It is retained in the out and in position by a small spring loaded plunger.) Slide the mag catch forward and it will take the ejector block ut with it. You'll find the mag catch and the ejector block clipped together. But you've got your mag catch out.

Below the catch is the screw used to remove the locking shoulder.

Next question......................

[Brit plumber]

If any one buys a UK deac and this dosn't work, its because some one saw fit to weld the ejector in place throught the locking shoulder screw hole.....Bar stewards!

[Peter Laidler]

Remind me BP........... how is the locking shoulder retained if the screw is removed. Or am I missing something

[Longshaor]

Thanks, Peter!

[tankhunter]

Remind me BP........... how is the locking shoulder retained if the screw is removed. Or am I missing something

Peter, on SOME Deacts. The person/butcher, in certain cases! who executed the work, saw fit to remove the locking shoulder & retaining screw. The resultant hole was untilised to weld the bottom of the ejector base to the reciever from inside. I am uncertain if this is an extra requirement from the proof house in recomendation. Or of an amendment to current spec on Deacting this class of Arm. From what I have heard, the currect London Proof master is 'Tightening things up' quite a bit on his own 'Initiative'! Birmingham have always had a less stringent approach to the layout of specification in certain areas. There is no complete parallel in passing out of a Certified Deacts from the two houses. A LOT of dealers are willing to travel the extra distance to get thier Deacts certified at Birmingham because of thier more 'Enlightened' & Sympathetic approach! This is self evident in the sale of more B/ham proved guns than london! A LOT of collectors wish to have as much of thier chosen item back as they are legally allowed. IE: Firing pins shortened instead of removed, along with the extractor assemblies. Locking shoulders in place Etc. It seems to vary from Deactivator to deactivator in a lot of instancies. I am of the opinion that a lot of section five licenced dealers have the magic ticket. But do not truly understand the ways some weapons function. There are things that are done that need not be done. And corresspondingly, things not done, that SHOULD be done. In some instances, just a little thought before commiting to angle grinder or Milling machine would save some examples from very saddening end results! There is much controversy in the trade over the two proofhouse standards. BUT, at the end of the day, THEY (The Proofmasters) are the ultimate authority on who is able to do what on Deacts!...........

[peregrinvs]

If any one buys a UK deac and this dosn't work, its because some one saw fit to weld the ejector in place throught the locking shoulder screw hole.....Bar stewards!

That's been done on some of my guns and I did wonder why? Does an extractor count as a pressure-bearing component, or is it just to discourage full dismantling?

Mark

[tankhunter]

That's been done on some of my guns and I did wonder why? Does an extractor count as a pressure-bearing component, or is it just to discourage full dismantling?

Mark

An extractor is NOT a pressure bearing componant. (You can legaly buy them,& Deactivated Firing pins) But a Locking shoulder most definately is! However, a LOT of other types of weapon still have there respective locking mechs/shoulders/componants still inside. It would make the item inoperable is some cases to remove them & spoil the engineering layout also. Why cant' Brens also? The previously passsed Deacted Brens have them.I cannot state for sure if this a legal requirement 'Update' of spec from the Proofhouse. (As I havent seen an upto date spec sheet for this class of Deact) OR, one of the Proofmasters 'Recomendations' that seem to become 'The Norm' as dictated by him as a matter of HIS personal choice. After all, HE, makes the decisions as he is THE Proofmaster. It's a difficult call however, as it's not a legal requirement if NOT in the spec sheets or the act for Deacting this class of Weapon. BUT, you try getting it cleared past him If HE decides he wants XY or Z doing!................The Home Office most DEFINATELY DO listen to What HE says/recomends!

[peregrinvs]

Another example being the requirement to pin on flash-hiders, which aren't even part of the firing mechanism. There seem to be two factors: the published 1988 and 1995 deactivation specs, and changing opinions over time from the Proof Houses and Home Office on what the letter and spirit of the law is.

Mark

[Peter Laidler]

Ah, yes....... I was involved as an expert witness in the (?) court case that caused the flash eliminators (FE's) to be pinned on! I won't go into the details but someone was prosecuted for having a FE - that he'd taken off a deactivated L1 rifle! Well, you either CAN have it or you CAN'T and democratic law tells you what you CANNOT do as opposed to the other alternative, that of laws that tell you what you CAN do.

Anyway, they lost the case due to a totally alien concept of, well, everything relating to the case. Great costs awarded but afterwards, FE's were pinned on! Quite WHO changed the law or rules is a bit of a mystery. But as it stands, if you did remove your pinned flash eliminator and then possess a 'firearm' as defined, you could go down the pan for 5 years on the say so of........., well, WHO? Any guesses.........

You foreigners from the colonies or those wild antipodeans can ignore this as it will seem as though some of the law makers and enforcers here are not on the same orbitory planet as the rest of mankind...........