Winchester Woes.....

[sean69]

Working on bringing an 1892 Winchester SRC in .25-20 back to life. Have most of it together, new stock made, rebarreled, missing a few bits, but nothing to keep from taking it to the range today for a functionality test.

It did not go well, consider these images:

I was testing it with 8 grain loads of Alliant 2400 behind a 85 grain lead bullet (no gas check) in a resized new .32-20 case with CCI 400 primers.

1. I had multiple light strikes, literally every round had to be recocked and shot again
2. When it did shoot; 2 out of about 18 rounds had gas escaping behind/around the primer and one blew the primer out completely
3. the "bubble" on the spent primers fits exactly the wear around the pin on the bolt face (exactly!)
4. does not faithfully fully #### when the action is worked - it will stay on full #### once it's there but only fully cocks 1/3 times.

So:

1. it appears that the firing in may be too short. The mainspring is good and strong. What is the correct length & protrusion for the firing pin? I was thinking I could file it's shoulder back a little bit to allow it to protrude from the bolt face a little more.
2. it (light strikes) does not appear to be a headspace issue, the action locks up tight in full contact with the barrel and the cartridges sit absolutely flush with the bolt face.
3. it seems that 8 grains of 2400 is too much for this cartridge - even though I have 2 published (and several internet) sources of that specific load data. I have 20 rounds of 9 grains and another 20 of 10 grains..... but I quit after that primer blew out completely. (not looking forward to pulling those!)
4. The serial number is high enough that this was originally smokeless, but the erosion on the bolt face looks severe - who knows if the bolt was originally black powder?
5. I'm really eyeballing that bolt suspiciously - I'm wondering if the hammer not fully cocking could be related to a bolt with excessive play in it.


So I have a perfectly functioning 92 here that I can compare parts on for the not cocking issue, if it's a worn sear or hammer - it appears that it was tuned at one point, and very well, the fit is excellent (between the sear and hammer) and once it is cocked you can't push/pull or jar it out - you have to pull the trigger.


So, the bolt, obviously lots of erosion around the pin hole, no obstructions inside the bolt preventing the pin from going forward, so am wondering if that is fixable or if it's time for a new bolt....


What are everyone's thoughts?

 

[FLHTCUI]

Well, I know I am having a better day than you and I didn’t go to the range.
I am tagging for interest as I too own a Model 92.
Look forward to your success.
Rob

 

[sean69]

Well, I know I am having a better day than you and I didn’t go to the range.
I am tagging for interest as I too own a Model 92.
Look forward to your success.
Rob

I have a feeling that when I measure the pin it is going to be too short .... fixing up the erosion though ... I dunno!

 

[Potashminer]

Maybe some help? A friend asked me to add a "new reproduction" firing pin for a Winchester 1892 in one of my recent orders to Numrich Gun Parts Corp. For what it is worth, the overall length of it is 3.628". From the round tip of the pin back to the shoulder where the flat part of the firing pin starts, I get .860". He has not yet picked it up, so I can't say that it works, but it is what I have here. I do not have the old one that he is replacing - I think his original firing pin tip actually broke off.

 

[Leeper]

It's hard to say if the enlarged hole is from wear, corrosion (evident), erosion, or a combination of all three (most likely). No matter, the bolt face should be bushed or re-built to clean up the face, minimize headspace, and to tighten up clearance between the pin and bolt.
The non-cocking issue is undoubtedly related to wear on the bolt, receiver, hammer, or all three. There are solutions for any and all. Some are quick and dirty others are more involved. If one could find a bolt in better condition, that would be a big start.

 

[sean69]

Maybe some help? A friend asked me to add a "new reproduction" firing pin for a Winchester 1892 in one of my recent orders to Numrich Gun Parts Corp. For what it is worth, the overall length of it is 3.628". From the round tip of the pin back to the shoulder where the flat part of the firing pin starts, I get .860". He has not yet picked it up, so I can't say that it works, but it is what I have here. I do not have the old one that he is replacing - I think his original firing pin tip actually broke off.

I have a functioning pin here (probably 2 or 3) just need to dig it out of a rifle Yes, I have had the tip break off a pin before as well - using a smokeless pin in a black powder bolt face will do just that...

It's hard to say if the enlarged hole is from wear, corrosion (evident), erosion, or a combination of all three (most likely). No matter, the bolt face should be bushed or re-built to clean up the face, minimize headspace, and to tighten up clearance between the pin and bolt.
The non-cocking issue is undoubtedly related to wear on the bolt, receiver, hammer, or all three. There are solutions for any and all. Some are quick and dirty others are more involved. If one could find a bolt in better condition, that would be a big start.

I'm looking around and not seeing any stripped bolts available or that will ship to Canada. I've done a bushing in a Vetterli before, this however looks quite a bit more complicated, there is not a whole lot of material there.

the vetterli was easy as it was just a flat face, not too sure how to do this one reliably.

I'm wondering if the primers are stretching and allowing the gas to escape that way...


I'm thinking mill the bolt face back 20 thouish and solder a tool steel or stainless bushing in there....

 

[fingers284]

I suspect your cocking problem might be from wear on the under-lug of the bolt that meets the hammer nose when the action is worked, if suitable metal isn't there the bolt wont push the hammer back far enough to catch the full #### notch in the hammer.

I have a 92 in 32-20 that was a bit loose in the headspace dept. and it had some "wear" in the locking plates (both the locking plates & the notches cut in the bolt for them to slide up into). I didn't want to go thru the machining process of removing the barrel-cutting new threads, re-chambering and new dovetails all required to set the barrel back a bit so I got ahold of a small slab of high carbon steel and made some new locking bars that pushed the bolt ahead on lock-up, taking up the little bit of slack that was there in the bolt movement cured the headspace issues. Those plates took an hour to build & heat treat then 2 hours in the wifes oven at 400 deg. to temper and have been tested with many hundreds of rounds since then.

Your light strikes could be a # of things...pin protrusion is usual culprit but it could be at the other end as well were the hammer hits. I have seen old lever guns with not enough pin left out for the hammer to give its full force too (kind of acts like a rebound firing pin if the hammer hits the back of the bolt instead of the pin head) and I have seen Hammer-firing pin engagements wore to such an angle that when the hammer strikes it pushes the pin against the pin barrel in the bolt instead of down the bolt hole, the friction of the pin binding on the bolt barrel sides slows it enough to cause lite strikes ( I have a Marlin 1895 that was like that).

Another small fix for your 92 when you've got it apart anyways will treat your fragile brass a bit better. Every 92 I have ever owned flattened/caved in the lip of the brass when ejecting especially those fragile 32-20 brass. That spring that pushes the ejection plunger just doesn't have to be as severe as it is so I cut a coil or so from them to weaken the force a bit. They are a very short spring to begin with so kind of sneak up on the desired force you want by cutting 1/2 coil at a time.

 

[sean69]

I suspect your cocking problem might be from wear on the under-lug of the bolt that meets the hammer nose when the action is worked, if suitable metal isn't there the bolt wont push the hammer back far enough to catch the full #### notch in the hammer.

could very well be that as well, though even pushing down on the back of the bolt when it is fully open will not engage the full #### notch. I swapped out the hammer from my other 92 and it works perfectly. It is dimensionally identical to the one that does not work, so if there is a difference it is in the thousandths of an inch. I tried swapping the bolts as well and measuring them - same, same results. If I work the action REAL FAST it will engage, every time, if I work it slow it will engage none of the time... a closer inspection of the trigger and hammer engagement is in order I think - not the biggest issue though.

I have a 92 in 32-20 that was a bit loose in the headspace dept. and it had some "wear" in the locking plates (both the locking plates & the notches cut in the bolt for them to slide up into). I didn't want to go thru the machining process of removing the barrel-cutting new threads, re-chambering and new dovetails all required to set the barrel back a bit so I got ahold of a small slab of high carbon steel and made some new locking bars that pushed the bolt ahead on lock-up, taking up the little bit of slack that was there in the bolt movement cured the headspace issues. Those plates took an hour to build & heat treat then 2 hours in the wifes oven at 400 deg. to temper and have been tested with many hundreds of rounds since then.

nope - this one locks up solid and tight, no play and no movement in the lugs or bolt.

Your light strikes could be a # of things...pin protrusion is usual culprit but it could be at the other end as well were the hammer hits. I have seen old lever guns with not enough pin left out for the hammer to give its full force too (kind of acts like a rebound firing pin if the hammer hits the back of the bolt instead of the pin head) and I have seen Hammer-firing pin engagements wore to such an angle that when the hammer strikes it pushes the pin against the pin barrel in the bolt instead of down the bolt hole, the friction of the pin binding on the bolt barrel sides slows it enough to cause lite strikes ( I have a Marlin 1895 that was like that).

I had the pin out and compared to the pin in my other 92. it is visibly shorter (in the tip), like 0.0625" shorter!! also the bolt is 100% black powder, the other pin I have is a black powder pin - same clearance around the pin hole - I have a feeling that getting a BP pin will eliminate most if not all of the primer issues. However not to say that bolt face does need some attention. there is wear that should be fixed up.

I was thinking something similar to what I did to this vetterli:

a stepped bushing like that would allow me to fine tune the headspace - though I do not see a headspace issue here, primers were not backing out at all, they were just flowing into the recesses around the pin. Though I would still like to lay hands on a no-go/go gauge set. (if I did a stepped bushing I could also solder and pin rather than just solder it.

Another small fix for your 92 when you've got it apart anyways will treat your fragile brass a bit better. Every 92 I have ever owned flattened/caved in the lip of the brass when ejecting especially those fragile 32-20 brass. That spring that pushes the ejection plunger just doesn't have to be as severe as it is so I cut a coil or so from them to weaken the force a bit. They are a very short spring to begin with so kind of sneak up on the desired force you want by cutting 1/2 coil at a time.

Good tip - and yes, the ejector spring in this one is pretty strong, it flings brass a good 15 foot! I did notice the case mouths getting flattened on one side as well. though not severely.



So I'm going to try the BP pin on Saturday to see how that goes with the light strikes and primer "flow" - the hammer, a good inspection of the trigger/hammer and maybe a good polish, hopefully it's just a burr or something. As for the bolt face - that is on hold until I figure out whats going on with my late! I chucked a 3/8 end mill in my tail stock and tried a few on some test scraps ... some the holes it was making were 0.4300"!!! - more than just a runout problem. Looks like another project - or maybe just head on over to my buddy's place and borrow his mill... probably easier to set the bolt up on the mill anyway.

 

[superted]

I don't see an extractor in any of the pictures ...?’

 

[sean69]

I don't see an extractor in any of the pictures ...?’

I removed them to work on the bolt.

 

[matt bradley]

Sean clean out your inbox

 

[sean69]

Sean clean out your inbox

cleaned

 

[sean69]

I had it out today with a black powder pin in it, much better results with the primers, though I had about 20 each of 7, 8, 9 and 10 grains 2400 .... 7 behaved much better, but the other loads maybe 2 or 3 of each would either have gas leaking out around the primer or blow it out completely. also got some key holing issues.

think this bolt needs more attention than I originally thought...

Also thinking on making a headspace gauge anyone know what the correct dimensions for a .25-20 go/no-go/field gauge set are? (or can I get that info directly from the SAMMI (SAAMI) specification?

(never mind, the headspacing is actually on the SAAMI spec (it's 0.065min/0.072max) )

 

[fingers284]

I wouldn't worry that much over sourcing or buying the gages for a 25-20. You can do a simple test just using a primed empty case. Just remove the ejector spring & plunger from the bolt and re-assemble the gun, load the primed empty cartridge and fire it. The pressure attained between the primer & flash hole will always push the primer out against the bolt but there is no pressure on the cartridge pushing it back to re-seat the primer as it would with a fully loaded round, and then you measure the amount the primer protrudes from the case base. With the pressures these little cartridges develop this will give you a "close enough" idea of your headspace (do it 4 or 5 times to get a solid average measurement).

I have measured primer headspace up to or over .045 on a couple of brass frame 44-40 lever guns and that is very worry-some but with the minimal pressures and thin walled cases that seal easily like these cases I don't worry much about headspace until its over 18 thou. In your case, with the firing pin hole needing a bushing, if I discovered more headspace than I was comfortable with I would cut a pin bush with a flange on it that fits flat & tight against the bolt face...kills 2 birds with one stone sort of thing.

Hopefully your key-holing problem is just a problem that goes away with bullet sizing (powder coating is your friend here).

 

[sean69]

I wouldn't worry that much over sourcing or buying the gages for a 25-20. You can do a simple test just using a primed empty case. Just remove the ejector spring & plunger from the bolt and re-assemble the gun, load the primed empty cartridge and fire it. The pressure attained between the primer & flash hole will always push the primer out against the bolt but there is no pressure on the cartridge pushing it back to re-seat the primer as it would with a fully loaded round, and then you measure the amount the primer protrudes from the case base. With the pressures these little cartridges develop this will give you a "close enough" idea of your headspace (do it 4 or 5 times to get a solid average measurement).

I have the drawings right here for the headspace gauge, Won't take more than 20 minutes to make... that will tell me whether or not I go with a pin bushing or a flange bushing. there's a lot of variables present with the primer method.

I have measured primer headspace up to or over .045 on a couple of brass frame 44-40 lever guns and that is very worry-some but with the minimal pressures and thin walled cases that seal easily like these cases I don't worry much about headspace until its over 18 thou. In your case, with the firing pin hole needing a bushing, if I discovered more headspace than I was comfortable with I would cut a pin bush with a flange on it that fits flat & tight against the bolt face...kills 2 birds with one stone sort of thing.

Hopefully your key-holing problem is just a problem that goes away with bullet sizing (powder coating is your friend here).

The barrel is questionable - I've been looking for a new one ... not having much luck though.

 

[fingers284]

Actually I consider the "primer method" more relevant than a gauge...Primer method gives you a measurement the gauge only tells you "yes or no", it "no" is the outcome you need to keep building more gauges until you get the fit you want.

Another method I saw my old man use 50 yrs ago is very simple & may counter your primer fears...and you get a measurement when your done. He used a simple #4 lead shot from a shotshell. He flattened the shot a bit with a hammer & measured thickness then tried closing the bolt on a chambered empty case (this was a Lee Enfield .303 so a rimmed case as well), it the bolt wouldn't close he removed the lead and gave it a slight tap again over & over again until the bolt would close with a bit of pressure...you now have a measurable tolerance. I don't remember the measurements but that particular gun (local hardware store buy) was separating case heads on every 1st time reload that was fired in it...that lead pellet was still quite thick when the bolt did close.

When I was looking for usable (key word here) 25-20 barrels at gunshows I found them pretty well unattainable and settled for 32-20 barrels both times .

 

[sean69]

Actually I consider the "primer method" more relevant than a gauge...Primer method gives you a measurement the gauge only tells you "yes or no", it "no" is the outcome you need to keep building more gauges until you get the fit you want.

You do have a point there - my plan was to make a go and no-go punch out some brass shims (I have a ton of different shim material about) and 'find' the amount of wear from there....

Another method I saw my old man use 50 yrs ago is very simple & may counter your primer fears...and you get a measurement when your done. He used a simple #4 lead shot from a shotshell. He flattened the shot a bit with a hammer & measured thickness then tried closing the bolt on a chambered empty case (this was a Lee Enfield .303 so a rimmed case as well), it the bolt wouldn't close he removed the lead and gave it a slight tap again over & over again until the bolt would close with a bit of pressure...you now have a measurable tolerance. I don't remember the measurements but that particular gun (local hardware store buy) was separating case heads on every 1st time reload that was fired in it...that lead pellet was still quite thick when the bolt did close.

Interesting - I do have a ton of lead about (muzzle loader)

When I was looking for usable (key word here) 25-20 barrels at gunshows I found them pretty well unattainable and settled for 32-20 barrels both times .

Homestead parts carries them, green mountain carries some blanks in some calibres... I actually found the guys that make the barrels for homestead ( http://www.winchesterbarrels.com ), but they won't ship to Canada ~ and homestead is perpetually out of stock - they have not answered any of my emails (in months) about the barrel availability....

The barrel I have for it came from the EE here, it's questionable at best. Since I have decided that if a barrel is used and not on a gun - there's a good reason for that. pretty much done with used barrels.

 

[sean69]

Actually I consider the "primer method" more relevant than a gauge...Primer method gives you a measurement the gauge only tells you "yes or no", it "no" is the outcome you need to keep building more gauges until you get the fit you want.

Another method I saw my old man use 50 yrs ago is very simple & may counter your primer fears...and you get a measurement when your done. He used a simple #4 lead shot from a shotshell. He flattened the shot a bit with a hammer & measured thickness then tried closing the bolt on a chambered empty case (this was a Lee Enfield .303 so a rimmed case as well), it the bolt wouldn't close he removed the lead and gave it a slight tap again over & over again until the bolt would close with a bit of pressure...you now have a measurable tolerance. I don't remember the measurements but that particular gun (local hardware store buy) was separating case heads on every 1st time reload that was fired in it...that lead pellet was still quite thick when the bolt did close.

When I was looking for usable (key word here) 25-20 barrels at gunshows I found them pretty well unattainable and settled for 32-20 barrels both times .

had it apart last night - got the extractor & ejector out of the bolt, tried a brass shim on top of a spent case........ it's right on the wire, these starline cases are a little under at 0.063" +/_0.002 the shim was 0.010" (ish) the bolt would close on that pretty easy (0.071-0.075) so that puts it right on the edge.

looks like a flange/stepped bushing is in the future....

 

[fingers284]

I probably wouldn't worry about 10 thou headspace between the bolt face & cartridge base face...I think it will be tough to cut a flange less then 10 thou (you do need some play there so even the full 10 thou might turn out to be tight on some brass (rimmed brass isn't all absolutely "correct" to design) . A "less than" 10 thou thick flange will be very flimsy and will probably fold or wrinkle when a cartridge is fed in with the lifter,

 

[sean69]

I probably wouldn't worry about 10 thou headspace between the bolt face & cartridge base face...I think it will be tough to cut a flange less then 10 thou (you do need some play there so even the full 10 thou might turn out to be tight on some brass (rimmed brass isn't all absolutely "correct" to design) . A "less than" 10 thou thick flange will be very flimsy and will probably fold or wrinkle when a cartridge is fed in with the lifter,

the plan was to mill the bolt face back by probably 0.0625" maybe up to 0.09375 and make the flange part 0.0630"(ish) to 0.098"(ish) that should give a flange that is not too difficult to get to size and still have good strength.

yes, this starline brass is undersize by about 4 thou. so.. yes, tolerances need to be accounted for.