Ejection problems and patterns: Update

[imarangemaster]

Last year I did a post about ejection patterns, but couldn't find it, so I will summarize and give today's update.

I got my CMP Inland with a flat bolt and type III op rod (slide). The bolt had a Type I ejector. Ejection was very positive and I was pleased. Since I put the carbine in a potbelly Type V stock and it has rear sigh and barrel band upgrades, I replaced the bolt with a new, round Underwood bolt assembly I had, and a type VI slide. (yes, I checked headspace) While is still functioned reliably, ejection energy was PITIFUL! The cases barely cleared the action, landing on my strong hand forearm. I checked and it had a type III ejector. I tried the spring from the flat bolt (appeared to be new and worked great in the flat bolt) and it was still pitiful. I then tried the U extractor, still pitiful. Finally I put the type I ejector in, but hadn't had a chance to shoot it. Hand cycling seemed better, though.

UPDATE:

Today when I took the Inland out and fired it, I notice the type I in the round bolt worked perfectly, putting the brass right where it did with the flat bolt: at about 4 to 5 o'clock, 2-3 feet behind me. Wonderful! I was surprised that with the increased dwell time of the type VI slide, and different cam angles of that and the round bolt, the brass went the same place as it did with the flat bolt and type III slide.

Moral of the story: If you have lack-luster ejection, even after replacing the ejector spring, try a type I ejector.

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.

[Bill Hollinger]

Good advice, thanks