Lacey Place
Bearcat
I bought a SR 1911 5" and a CMD. Is the extractor designed to snap over the rim of a chambered round or must it rise up under the extractor claw as fed from the clip. Don't want to damage anything.
Extractor Question
- Thread starter Lacey Place
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
Under normal operation the cartridge case slides into position on the extractor without camming over the claw. Given the extractor is both flexible and tough I'll let it cam over once in a while never giving it a thought or worrying about damage. The 1911 is a tough gun.
mongochicago
Bearcat
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2014
- Messages
- 32
The extractor claw usually snaps over the rim. The rim - almost - never slides up behind the extractor. I have seen some super slow motion video on this, and although the common belief is that it slides up into position behind the extractor, it simply is not the truth.
Pat-inCO
Hawkeye
Here is what Brownells says:
http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/lid=10261/learn/1911_Auto_Extractor_Adjustment
http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/lid=10261/learn/1911_Auto_Extractor_Adjustment
Brownells said:
Precision32
Blackhawk
The rim of the cartridge slides up under the extractor rim; the extractor hook does not normally snap over the rim. This method of feed is termed "controlled feed".
A properly fit extractor should be able to snap over the rim of the cartridge (push feed) in case the cartridge rim is missed by the extractor. However, this is not normally how the gun feeds.
A properly fit extractor should be able to snap over the rim of the cartridge (push feed) in case the cartridge rim is missed by the extractor. However, this is not normally how the gun feeds.
Precision 32 is correct. Although some people will say that the extractor should never, ever be allowed to snap over the rim, if everything is correctly to spec, it will do so occasionally without ill effect.
As originally designed, the pistol was eventually headed for the battlefields of the world, and it had a detachable magazine. If the magazine were to be lost or damaged, the pistol would be useless unless a provision was made for emergency single-loading.
John Browning wasn't an idiot.
As originally designed, the pistol was eventually headed for the battlefields of the world, and it had a detachable magazine. If the magazine were to be lost or damaged, the pistol would be useless unless a provision was made for emergency single-loading.
John Browning wasn't an idiot.
I've had guns that seemingly push fed every round, with the extractor snapping over every time. I figured this out by it constantly NOT doing it. 
How very frequently it would fail to go into battery ever so slightly. Believe me you don't want a gun that feeds that way all the time.
(No amount of tuning, shaping or polishing solved the problem. A new extractor solved it, but I traded one problem for another, that came with funky ejection issues. Reshaping and eventual replacement of the ejector didn't fix the new issue. After replacing the extractor for a 3rd time, this time with an Aftec, I still had problems. I finally figured out the extractor tunnel was machined wrong. I fixed it, but it was scary going.) :lol:
How very frequently it would fail to go into battery ever so slightly. Believe me you don't want a gun that feeds that way all the time. (No amount of tuning, shaping or polishing solved the problem. A new extractor solved it, but I traded one problem for another, that came with funky ejection issues. Reshaping and eventual replacement of the ejector didn't fix the new issue. After replacing the extractor for a 3rd time, this time with an Aftec, I still had problems. I finally figured out the extractor tunnel was machined wrong. I fixed it, but it was scary going.) :lol:
sliclee
Single-Sixer
Everything supposedly changes for the better. Anything on the 1911 gets changed war goes on to leave it alone thats not the way. If a external extractor makes such a difference, if the 1911 still functions as before thru thick and thin, would it not
be in our best interest to make a change? Lee
be in our best interest to make a change? Lee
Pat-inCO
Hawkeye
Not necessarily.sliclee said:
Many "changes" are proposed to make money for someone else.
Pat-inCO said:
I seem to remember that in terms relative to today's "Lean Manufacturing" model, switching to cheap designs, parts and methods falls under the guise of "value added engineering"....leastways, "value" as it applies to the company and it's share holders. :roll:.
DGW
sliclee
Single-Sixer
My question was about "external extractors" not about part swaps. Many of you 1911 experts, I call that, I have read where you bought a sig instead of colt because of external extractors work better,YES or NO.
I just know your gonna throw me a curve, Lee
I just know your gonna throw me a curve, Lee
sliclee said:
Decide for yourself if an external extractor is better or not and decide for yourself, that is how I do it and forget about others opinions for the most part.
I use the 1911 for target, games and plinking. For self-defense I change to another platform other than 1911. That's my opinion on both styles of extractors.
Precision32
Blackhawk
I don't think it's a question of which is better; they both work. All the extractor does is remove the spent case out of the chamber and move the case backward until it hits the ejector and gets kicked out of the gun.
Precision32 said:
There's the extractor's role in feeding and returning to battery that many don't stop to consider except to talk about tension...but it's a little more complicated than that.
Excessive deflection...too much of the wall behind the claw showing in the breech area...can play havoc with RTB reliability.
Excessive deflection has led to the practice of cutting a heavy bevel on the bottom corner of that wall...often too heavy...and causing problems with ejection.
Excessive deflection has also led to a lot of wrecked feed ramps from incorrect polishing via Ye Olde Dremel.
If the deflection is correct, no bevel is needed beyond just breaking the corner and the pistol will tolerate quite a bit of tension without choking.
The picture below is an example of excessive deflection. In this instance, there's about twice as much of the wall in the breech than there should be, and there's evidence of an attempt to compensate for it with the bevel...which was unsuccessful.
In this particular example, the claw's depth was good at .036 inch. The amount of the wall in the breech was nearly equal to that. (Est. .030 inch) The distance between the two small rectangular guide blocks was .480 inch...which, with .010 inch of the wall in the breech...would have been just about perfect with total deflection of .005 inch with a .475 diameter rim.
This is the part that some of the external extractor pistol manufacturers can't seem to get right, and this is where most of the trouble comes from. It would be a simple matter of revamping their dimensions for locating the front of the extractor relative to the breechface centerline.
