Pardus semi not fully extracting

Rating - 100%
39   0   0
Location
Under the arch
Is it normal for the rim on fired shells to be flat on the back face, but cone-shaped on the front?

The extractor is slipping off the conical front of the rim and leaving the shell half extracted every time.

The bolt then locks back, so I know there’s enough oomph in the gas system.

Will post pics when I get back home tomorrow.
 
Looking into it a bit more, I see that these shells are aluminum based. That would be the “cheap shells” thing.

Also, the chamber is rough enough that I can feel the roughness with my fingernail (but not fingertip), somewhere between 32 and 64 for a turned surface on the handy comparison plate.

And I can see gunk in the extractor pin area.

So I’m thinking, a rough chamber+soft shell means that the shell expands to lock into the chamber too hard for the extractor to shift it. A smooth chamber or a thick/hard shell wall prevents expanding to lock into the chamber.

First thing I’ll do is to wrap some crocus paper around my finger and turn the hoop scratches into much smoother axial scratches. It’ll end up a bit cone shaped too, but that’s not a problem either as I have no intent to reload shells.

Then I’ll take out and clean up the extractor spring/piston, and try it again.
 
I started with the sandpaper last night. Turns out the "roughness" is leftover machining marks from when the chamber was cut with what appears to be a single point tool.

I say this because the abrasive paper makes a clear and even tonal "Zeep zeep zeep" sound as you slide the sandpaper over the pattern of ridges axially. Rotating the sandpaper around the bore creates no tone, so the even roughness pattern is all hoop/helix.

After about half an hour to banging away at it the tone is quieter, but still there. Full marks for metal hardness.

On the bright side, a fired shell chambered with the full force of the action spring can now be extracted without the claw slipping off the rim. It still takes a bit of force, but at least it comes out now. A bit more time with the sandpaper and I'll have the outer half of the chamber nice and smooth.

The inner half is just riding on polyethylene, so I don't know that its smoothness is as important. That stuff stretches far enough that elastic contraction after the pulse should clear the ridges.
 
Last edited:
Is it normal for the rim on fired shells to be flat on the back face, but cone-shaped on the front?

The extractor is slipping off the conical front of the rim and leaving the shell half extracted every time.

The bolt then locks back, so I know there’s enough oomph in the gas system.

Will post pics when I get back home tomorrow.

I had one of the 20ga semis and it would shoot Remington and Winchester no problem, but if I remember correctly it was challenger that I had issues with. Like you found the front face of the rim was angled, and I found after handling the shells I had like a waxy/greasy feeling on my fingers that I didn't get with the other brands.

I figured it was a combination of the slanted rim and the greasy coating, but if I staggered them with one rem, one challenger, one rem, etc it would usually work fine, the other shells would wipe off enough of the greasiness to cycle the challenger behind it.
 
Issues with the "Zinc Plated" heads is very common. Esp the Winchester stuff. I've seen a fair bit of them used, and 90% of the failures was because of them. We handed out other "brass rimmed shells" just to prove a point to the shooters, and the guns worked fine ! Went back to the cheap win's...same thing. These zinc shells seem to cause a lot of FTE in mostly semi's and pumps in particular. From what I've heard and read, the metal is not cooling and contracting back to original size quick enuff to extract....the brass shells do, and it shows, no FTE's.

Take a bronze brush and wind it with 0000 steel wool...make it a bit bigger than original size...chuck it up in a drill (on a single pc of shotgun cleaning rod)and on a slow speed you can polish out some minor imperfections in your chamber area.

Give some other "brass head" ammo a whirl and keep us posted on how you make out...ya might save someone else a PITA...lol
 
So it turns out I'm not as clever as I thought. Even with the helix polished out, the FTE is exactly the same as it was before.

More frustratingly high-wall brass-plated-steel 00B shells also FTE (and kick like a SOB), although they at least extract fully (they just don't exit the receiver).

Any chance this thing may be sized only for 2 3/4" shells? I don't know that anyone has built a 2 3/4" only semi since the 80's, but you never know with these off-brand units.

Time for more research, and perhaps an "Is there something I should know?" to the previous owner. Sale's done and all that, but if he can at least tell me which shells did work it'll help a bit.

Also, is there a good reason why the shorter barrel that came with it is mis-marked "18inch" when it is actually 473mm long (bolt face to muzzle)? That just seems like the kind of thing that can cause problematic questions.

Like stamping "30 ROUNDS" in big letters on side of a 5 round magazine. Easy enough to check, but why do it?
 
Last edited:
>your posted sound bites (descriptions)

Hehe. I blame this on reading too many Don Martin comics during my impressionable youth.
tumblr_p48zcul3Kl1t1cmybo1_400.jpg


I tried to smooth out the helical machining marks (like the threads on a bolt) by moving sandpaper in and out axially. I did not use a spinning abrasive because my goal was to replace helical grooves with axial ones. It is now much smoother, but the net effect on extraction has been nil so this achieved nothing other than a sore finger.

I see a partial article on the currently-down NZ shooting forum where someone describes the same problem. A similar thread blames it on a too-soft action spring allowing the bolt to start travelling back before the chamber depressurizes. Ièm not sure I buy that. Ièll check the extractor spring and gas ports first.

A complication is that I am not sure the unit I have is correctly assembled. The piston ring on the cylinder is a single round ring rather than the flat spring I see in the support documentation. The rubber ring between the piston and the action is not shown in the modern units, and not reflected in the documentation.

I may approach what passes for product support and ask them, although I speak not a work of Turkish so I have my doubts how productive that will be.

Now, what would really help is if I posted some pictures...
 
Last edited:
Waaaaait a second.

Is pulling the trigger supposed to release the next shell from the magazine? Or is that only supposed to happen when the bolt is back further?

Right now, here is what happens:

Start empty.
Pull back bolt, bolt latches open
Place dummy into receiver in front of bolt
Press bolt release button, bolt slams forward chambering dummy
Put 3 more dummies into magazine
Pull trigger, hammer releases, hits firing pin
Just before hammer strikes, the little allan key in the trigger block pushes the carrier release and the next shell shoots back onto carrier
Pull back bolt, round (often) ejects
Let bolt go, carrier rises up during forward movement and dummy is chambered

A couple of accounts I have read seem to suggest that the next round is released from the magazine only when the bolt is back far enough to have completed ejection. ?The shell hitting the trigger mechanism then allows it to rise?

I am seeing the next round released when the trigger is pulled, even with the bolt forward. Disassembly (and profanity-soaked reassembly) of the trigger block confirms this functionality.

Can someone else with the same hardware confirm the intended order of events for me?

I ask, because a carrier pushing up on a shell during extraction could explain both the problems I see.
 
Last edited:
Appologies for hammering this thread, but is there anyone out there who can tell me whether the ejector pin is supposed to look like this:

1k1gBN5m.jpg


Its short, nubbin-shaped and has a generous clearance between it and the groove in the bolt. Like a pan head screw.

I'm having, of course, no luck finding any data about what the barrel stub on these things is supposed to look like, but the extractors I see reference to on the 1100 series (that these are loosely based on) is much more of a saw-tooth-looking pyramid with a sharp, flat, perpendicular surface facing the chamber.

Also, this thing is a real mishmash. The trigger group is the spitting image of that on the weatherby SA-08, but the bolt and action are different. The barrel support looks like that of an 1100. The gas piston looks a bit like that from a beretta. Strange.
 
Last edited:
And I learn more. This "brand" exists for marketing purposes only, so there is no support, no manuals and no spares. The unit itself was one of many cosmetically different models jobbed out by a Turkish state-owned factory to various customers around the world. The pieces look similar to others because a number of reputable brands have farmed out manufacture of bargain-basement brand extension to the same factory.

So, I'm on my own and I've decided that I don't like the looks of that ejector knob. Everything else seems to work about the way I expect it to, but the ejector appears deficient.

So I pressed it out (you have to look carefully, but its outline is present on the OD of the barrel extension), drilled the hole to c.2130 and tapped it 1/4UNF28 as I had access to a supply of high quality 1/4UNF28 bolts to work from. Good steel, by the way, although the temper is a bit softer than I would have expected. In any case, it tapped beautifully with lube and a sharp tool. The extension wall is thick enough for almost a diameter of fully formed thread, so the joint has at least the potential to be solid.

F04tNPd.jpg


Then I waxed creative with the saw/file/lathe to make up a couple of different shaped alternate ejectors. That black oxide is pretty, but it sure shows every slip of the tool. It's nice to be working alloy steel again instead of the light metals; the feel of a sharp file cutting steel is pleasing.

VWA907c.jpg


The one on the right is a simple saw-tooth, made to look like what I see in the 1100. I sized it for the width of the extractor groove in the bolt... and then found that the pin is not centered in the groove. 'wasn't expecting that.

The middle was an attempt to move the ejection point forward a bit. It worked, and makes ejection of 2 3/4 shells more assertive. Unfortunately I didn't consider that the length of the receiver port (and barrel) leaves no room to spare for 3" shells. Moving ejection ahead even 3mm causes the shell corona to interfere with the breech face and prevents ejection.

The left-most is what I settled on. Similar to the original stock pin, but taller, wider and sharper. Also nice is that no direct impact force will act to rotate it (being round). This ends up looking much like the ejector pin on the Enfield, which is just about the definition of a proven design.

This next photo shows the two next to each other to show the difference in the profile that sticks up into the bolt path. The visible lighter area of the original pin shows where it protruded. Note the 45deg worn face where the shells actually impact. A screwdriver slot is cut into the bottom of the threaded pin.

eskX7B2.jpg


Comparison of both installed in barrel extensions looks like this:

wXxL3pn.jpg


Now, the assembled unit shows a nice wide pin that fills the slot in the bolt. This image is actually a bit misleading, as I ground a 0.8x0.4mm chamfer onto the end of the bolt slot. The pin now has a height equal to the nominal slot depth in the assembly, but since it was just possible to get it to snag on the pin (if you pushed it against the wall hard while moving forward) I added the chamfer to guide it over the pin if necessary. No such chamfer was required on the sides as the round pin allows a smooth mate.

5uUsjsC.jpg


I will retain the new pin using 262, preceded with a brake cleaner rinse and a shot of 7649 to make sure I get full cure. I'm a bit leery about using a chemical retainer, but gray-haired wrench benders have told me that it works so I'll give it a go. My other option is a plug weld, but that is too permanent given that this may not work. I also don't want to deform the cylindrical interface.

Now to cross-drill and half-plug the front gas block so that 3" shells don't rattle my teeth when the bolt bottoms out in the receiver. Then I'll see about finding a place to test fire it. If both mods work I'll do the same to the other barrel I have.

If not.... then I get to practice Stoic resolve and smile at my failure.
 
Last edited:
Steel wool did absoutely nothing even when combined liberally with profanity, but extra fine grit sandpaper wrapped around a coil of foam rubber, pinched into a folded over bike spoke and spun up in a hand drill made 'em shine like mirrors. I also smoothed off some other interal parts that I didn't like the look of, and confirmed that the extractor and spring are clean and strong.

Thinking about the port sizes it a bit more: I have a 28" barrel which is overgassed for the 2oz 00 buckshot, but appropriate for the #6. I also have an 18.65" barrel that I haven't tried yet.

It may be that the gas levels actually aren't unreasonable for the heavier load in the short barrel. If the big 00 is appropriately gassed in the short barrel, and the #6 appropriate in the 28" then much of the problem is already solved.

Time for some high school physics. Mass and velocity off the box give muzzle energy and recoil. Since the length of the test barrel is fixed, and since muzzle energy is gas force integrated over length, relative muzzle energy stands in for relative pressure. Actual barrel length after the gas port divided by muzzle velocity gives the time for which this pressure is fed to the gas system (as the barrel depressurizes very quickly after it uncorks). Appproximating relative gas drive as the product of relative pressure x time gives:

1.25oz #6 @ 1255fps = 2.5kJ / 13kgm/s. Short/Long barrel gas_drive of 1.5 / 3.0
1.1oz 00 @ 1325fps = 2.5kJ / 13kgm/s. Short/Long barrel gas_drive of 1.4 / 2.8
1.8oz 00 @ 1210fps = 3.5kJ / 19kgm/s. Short/Long barrel gas_drive of 2.2 / 4.4
1oz slug @ 1760fps = 4kJ /15kgm/s. Short/Long barrel gas_drive of 1.7 / 3.4

So the 1.25oz #6 and the 1.1oz 00 should cycle the action with about equal force and kick about the same. The 1.8oz 00 is too high in the long barrel, but if fired from the short barrel is not too much lower than that of the #6 in the long barrel. The slug is between them, but then slug pressure is probably a bit lower than indicated as I neglected setback induced stack friction, and I'm not sure the simple pressure scaling I am using holds for such large changes in muzzle velocity. I may just have to try that to see how it works.

That relative recoil for the big 00 looks low too. I bounced my cheeckbone of the receiver with that load, although that might have been the bolt bottoming out hard in the receiver. Mind you the shell-back is bulged out, suggesting that it unlocked before pressure was all the way released, which would jack up the bolt-bottoming force a lot, so maybe most of the recoil I felt was the concentrated blow of the bolt hitting the receiver back.

Overall the only time I'd need to think about restricting the gas feed is if I wanted to fire the big 00's in the long barrel. So I won't try that.

And it takes an hour of driving and a $50 drop in fee for each test. Ech!
 
Success, mostly.

Extraction/feed test for the shorter barrel succeeded with both the heavy 00 and the slug. Quite the fireball on those short barrels, but the kick wasn't -that- bad.

The side of the fired cases are still shiny (like when new) rather than axially scraped like before, which means that the metal-drag problem is gone.

'might not have been smart to fire the rifled slug through a .695" constriction.

Haven't tried the #6 yet, as the local ranges won't allow lead shot smaller than 00. I can understand why, but it's a snag to deal with.

Also, the bolt levered up against the ejector knob during the pressure pulse and actually displaced metal from the knob which is now dragging on the bolt. Previously it bore on the upper inside face of the barrel extension, but I do now understand why there was a dent in the track where the ejector pin sat. Neat to see. I'll trim it back a bit to restore the clearance that has filled with displaced metal, although a better solution (if I had forseen the problem) would been to have relieved the bolt groove at the site where the ejector pin sits during the firing pulse.

I wish I could get spare parts for this thing; the wooden front guard is cracked most of the way along and so is the trigger guard. Ah well. These are consumption goods, so such things should be expected.

Still, there's enough other things lining up to consume the resources that I'm inclined to quote the first rule of Hero's Duty.
 
Last edited:
Over the last few years there are so many new names of shotguns out there I cannot keep up and most I have seen don't shine of any quality construction
Bottom line for lack of better words they are all just cheaply made clones of another it seems
I read your posts and have always did all of my own work on my guns but that being said how many do today yet they have no problem buying these knock offs to save a few bucks

It should be a big consideration when one buys one of these various cheaper versions IMO. I wonder where one can even get parts in canada for most of them
Kudos to you for taking this on and fixing your gun even though you never should have if made correctly
Cheers
 
Last edited:
Over the last few years there are so many new names of shotguns out there I cannot keep up and most I have seen don't shine of any quality construction
Bottom line for lack of better words they are all just cheaply made clones of another it seems
I read your posts and have always did all of my own work on my guns but that being said how many do today yet they have no problem buying these knock offs to save a few bucks

It should be a big consideration when one buys one of these various cheaper versions IMO. I wonder where one can even get parts in canada for most of them
Kudos to you for taking this on and fixing your gun even though you never should have if made correctly
Cheers

My previous experience had been with mil-surps (Enfield/SVT-40) which are designs with a solid configuration baseline, a strong user community, and a broad supply of spares. I had expected commercial products to be more slap-dash, but I didn't appreciate how much harder it would be to troubleshoot something like this where I cannot find even an actual photo of the parts in question.

I've corresponded with two other people experiencing similar problems, and they've got nothing to work on either. I dont' know that the part and assembly quality are much worse than other run-of-the mill US manufacturers, but there are issues and the logistic limitations are a surprisingly big problem when trying to address them.

>buying these knock offs to save a few bucks

In hindsight I would have been better off to spend more to get a stable design with support and logistics available.

>kudos

Thank you. I`ve still got to check the long barrel, but it already got the same chamber treatment so I have hopes.
 
My previous experience had been with mil-surps (Enfield/SVT-40) which are designs with a solid configuration baseline, a strong user community, and a broad supply of spares. I had expected commercial products to be more slap-dash, but I didn't appreciate how much harder it would be to troubleshoot something like this where I cannot find even an actual photo of the parts in question.

I've corresponded with two other people experiencing similar problems, and they've got nothing to work on either. I dont' know that the part and assembly quality are much worse than other run-of-the mill US manufacturers, but there are issues and the logistic limitations are a surprisingly big problem when trying to address them.

>buying these knock offs to save a few bucks

In hindsight I would have been better off to spend more to get a stable design with support and logistics available.

>kudos

Thank you. I`ve still got to check the long barrel, but it already got the same chamber treatment so I have hopes.

IMo you nailed it. I can only compare to other models I have and none of them have rounded pins like you first shown and some have 1000's of rounds through them
Merry Christmas
 
The ejector pin replacement is documented above, but for reference this is the setup I used to to polish (co?) the chambers:

QA7cJWG.jpg

wTADgiW.jpg


A long wire lets it self-centre, the fold keeps the foam in place, and soft foam gives a low and even pressure which together with the fine sandpaper makes for slow and smooth metal removal.

Note that the sandpaper strip starts inside the foam roll for retention.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom