Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

More Pics To Go With Worn Hammer


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 JDG

JDG

    Long Time Member

  • Regular Group
  • 76 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States of America
  • Interests:WW II military guns. Old Mopar hot rods and '73 to '79 Ford trucks. Peering through my telescope at the stars and planets. Riding my dirt bike and back packing.

Posted 10 January 2005 - 07:57 PM

Sorry, I should have been more specific with my last Topic reference my worn hammer; The gun is a WH 28 with a GI bolt, and a GI hammer (either a Savage or Stevens) and I don't know if the wear to the other side of the hammer is normal or not so I included a picture of it. Something else that seems strange is that the firing pin's large end (excuse my lack of proper nomenclature) and by that I mean the fat head that does NOT strike the primer, is strangly worn around the outside of it, like a piece of 100 grit paper was wrapped around it and turned - it is still round but not at all smooth, as though it is getting some strange rubbing around the inside of the hole in the bolt in which the firing pin travels; I've included a picture of it as well. The firing pin is also marked "S" and I believe that is a Savage "S?" The blish lock is an AOC and seems to have some excessive wear on the "ears," as there is a slight " hang" of metal at the top end of the ear. The bolt, I believe, is a Savage. It is hard to see, but the area of the bolt that is in front of the hammer's channel has a slight lip worn into it, I can catch a finger nail on it, barely; it is in a crescent shape and I can tell that something is definitely wearing there or slamming into it. I don't notice any slop where the hammer's retention pin slides into the bolt, it seems as snug as it can be without requiring a punch to remove it. Any ideas would be appreciated!

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image
  • 0

#2 Sig

Sig

    Respected Member and Board Benefactor

  • Moderator
  • 1626 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 January 2005 - 05:31 AM

My idea is to send it to PK.
michael
  • 0

#3 giantpanda4

giantpanda4

    Respected Member

  • Board Benefactor
  • 2061 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Howell, MI 48855
  • Interests:Mechanical toys - cars, instruments, and of course - guns. The 1921-28 thompsons are the epitomy of perfection for a mechanical device that fills all my interests!

Posted 11 January 2005 - 07:10 AM

Thanks for the pics.

If it were me I would do two things, first inspect the inside of the reciever very carefully for excessive wear anywhere. It is a Westie, so I doubt it was ever cut and rewelded (my first thought - misalignment somewhere). Second and easiest (do the inspection first!) is to chuck all of the interbnale and put in a set of replacements, they are cheap enough.

My guess is someone who already did this on your gun (it could have come with GI internals, what is the S/N range?) may have used worn out or abused parts, thinking if they are GI they are automatically better than what was in the gun.

PK could probably add more here if he recognizes this type of wear pattern as a specific fault, but I do not. My only other guess is it was run a long time without oil (Westies don't have oilers, do they?).

Good luck getting that thing back on the range!
  • 0

#4 JimFromFL

JimFromFL

    Long Time RKI Member

  • Regular Group
  • 1877 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

Posted 11 January 2005 - 08:04 AM

Just wondering....

Did you put in these parts yourself when they were in good shape or did you receive the Thompson with these parts already in them?
  • 0

#5 PK.

PK.

    Technical Expert

  • Board Benefactor
  • 1567 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:CO, USA
  • Interests:Full time gunsmith who loves Thompsons, 35+ years experience.

Posted 11 January 2005 - 09:15 AM

Photographs being what they are, I’ll take a stab.

I don’t see the photo of the back side of the hammer, but the FP and receiver contact surfaces look OK. There are two areas (at 90 degrees) on the back side of the hammer that can contact; one is the seat with the bolt, the other can be hit by the actuator in extreme circumstances. I think I see a bit of raised metal in the bolt photo at the point of hammer contact. This concerns me because both of these parts are very hard and not prone to upset. The only force normally applied to this juncture would be that of the FP spring and any shock force when the bolt is arrested by the buffer in full recoil. The latter should not a problem unless the bolt is moving much more rapidly than it should be.

The firing pin head looks quite normal for one used in a bolt with a sharp edge on the fire pin hole, or undue roughness in the start of the hole; dressing with a bit of emery should solve that one. If the hammer is rotating to far to the rear (as may be the case), it could also cause this condition. The hammer actually pushes the FP up, as well as in. I like to grease the head of the FP and the hammer contact surfaces in any event.

The lock shows a bit of rubbing caused by off an off center bolt pock in the receiver, but the back surface of the locking ear looks fine.

I am not sure what I am seeing on the inside of the bolt (far side of the photo) next to the forward edge of the locking slot, but I don’t like it. Nothing normally in this area would cause the upset I think I see.

All of the parts in question used in WH production were GI; I do not believe WH made any of these parts at any time.

Just because you get a NOS GI part does not mean it won’t have edges or areas that need a bit of touch up to be really good.

  • 0