The Carbine Collectors Club

Click on the image above to learn more about the M1 Carbine


Forum Home Forum Home > The Club > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login


New owner of Universal “Redux” rifle with ques

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Message
jackp1028 View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps
Avatar

Joined: Jan 01 2016
Location: Cloudcroft, NM
Status: Offline
Points: 1273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jackp1028 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 10 2018 at 8:09pm
Hopefully crimping the end of the spring will resolve the jamming problem. Any additional recommendations that I might make would be based on the assumption that you carbine is similar to a USGI carbine. Based on your description of the guide rod, I'm not sure that is the case with Universal.

I checked the force required to initially move the operating slide. On my carbine collection (excluding Universal) it averaged 2.25 LBS. The force to retract the slide so that the face of the bolt was flush with the rear of the mag well was 8.13 LBS. The Universal was about a pound higher on both measurements. This compares to the loads specified in the recoil spring specification. You may want to do this yourself and see what results you get. It perhaps may point to other problems. Here's the setup I used. You have to remove the trigger housing or you will be measuring the force to cock the hammer too.

JackP
Back to Top
Exodus5 View Drop Down
Recruit
Recruit
Avatar

Joined: Sep 07 2018
Location: Concord, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Exodus5 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 10 2018 at 9:52pm
Originally posted by jackp1028 jackp1028 wrote:

Hopefully crimping the end of the spring will resolve the jamming problem. Any additional recommendations that I might make would be based on the assumption that you carbine is similar to a USGI carbine. Based on your description of the guide rod, I'm not sure that is the case with Universal.

I checked the force required to initially move the operating slide. On my carbine collection (excluding Universal) it averaged 2.25 LBS. The force to retract the slide so that the face of the bolt was flush with the rear of the mag well was 8.13 LBS. The Universal was about a pound higher on both measurements. This compares to the loads specified in the recoil spring specification. You may want to do this yourself and see what results you get. It perhaps may point to other problems. Here's the setup I used. You have to remove the trigger housing or you will be measuring the force to cock the hammer too.



I checked mine. Weight to start the bolt was about 1.65lbs and full pull to the rear peaked at 6.16lbs. This was with the High-Speed spring
Back to Top
jackp1028 View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps
Avatar

Joined: Jan 01 2016
Location: Cloudcroft, NM
Status: Offline
Points: 1273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jackp1028 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 10 2018 at 10:12pm
This means you only have about 75% of the specified force required to feed a round. Why? Especially since the Hi-Speed spring is 10% longer than specified. I would expect the force to be greater, not less! We need to see pictures of the related parts.
JackP
Back to Top
New2brass View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Dan Pinto, Photo Editor

Joined: Nov 29 2015
Location: CT
Status: Offline
Points: 4627
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 10 2018 at 11:26pm
Pics added to your post. I do not think you sent the one with "Mag pulled down"
Back to Top
Exodus5 View Drop Down
Recruit
Recruit
Avatar

Joined: Sep 07 2018
Location: Concord, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Exodus5 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 7:25am
Originally posted by jackp1028 jackp1028 wrote:

This means you only have about 75% of the specified force required to feed a round. Why? Especially since the Hi-Speed spring is 10% longer than specified. I would expect the force to be greater, not less! We need to see pictures of the related parts.


I checked again this morning and I obviously got them mixed up yesterday when I tested them all. The lower readings were from the spring that was in the rifle when I received it. The high-speed spring readings were 5.5lbs start and 9.1lbs to pull all the way back. I have crimped the end to match the original spring but I have yet to test fire it.

Dan, the picture has been emailed.
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 7:48am
OP....have you inspected the spring recess (hole in the receiver) to make sure there are no obstructions preventing the spring from fully seating in the channel?
Back to Top
Exodus5 View Drop Down
Recruit
Recruit
Avatar

Joined: Sep 07 2018
Location: Concord, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Exodus5 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 8:59am
Originally posted by floydthecat floydthecat wrote:

OP....have you inspected the spring recess (hole in the receiver) to make sure there are no obstructions preventing the spring from fully seating in the channel?

Just checked it and it is clear.
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 9:52am
The spring data from my gen-1 is:

length: 10.25 (USGI)
rod length tip-to-tip: 3.42  (blunt end)
rod diameter: .155
*rod flange diameter: .259
spring diameter: .253 (outer) .178 +- (inner)

*If your flange diameter is indeed .250 as reported, it's a bit smaller than mine and could contribute to the override.

I did discover that one end of the spring is indeed crimped and I have never done that. Nor have I ever paid attention to it and have never had an override like you describe. Conclusion is...crimping the spring to prevent potential override is perfectly normal....for a Universal rod anyways. I have not checked any of my GI carbines....but I plan to.
Back to Top
New2brass View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Dan Pinto, Photo Editor

Joined: Nov 29 2015
Location: CT
Status: Offline
Points: 4627
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 11:54am
Added the picture of mag being pulled down. Edit: This is Exodus' picture that I added to his post above.
Here it is again

I do not own a Universal and only lightly read the threads on them.
I do think something was addressed on the aluminum housings and mag not sitting up high enough.
I see it has a USGI mag catch. Does it wobble in housing or a good tight fit?
In one of your (Exodus) pictures it looks as if the mag catch has quite the gap.




Edited by New2brass - Sep 11 2018 at 2:29pm
Back to Top
Exodus5 View Drop Down
Recruit
Recruit
Avatar

Joined: Sep 07 2018
Location: Concord, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Exodus5 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 12:02pm
Originally posted by New2brass New2brass wrote:

Added the picture of mag being pulled down. 
Here it is again

I do not own a Universal and only lightly read the threads on them.
I do think something was addressed on the aluminum housings and mag not sitting up high enough.
I see it has a USGI mag catch. Does it wobble in housing or a good tight fit?
In one of your pictures it looks as if the mag catch has quite the gap.



The two old mags that came with the rifle do wobble a bit, but not what I would call a lot. I just received two new magazines and they’re both much more solid. I did notice the extra room on the magazine release but it seems to be doing it’s job. It looks like if I was going to try to fix that I would have to replace the entire trigger housing? Since this rifle is mostly G.I. compatible with I’ll be able to put a G.I. trigger housing or would I have to find the rectangular commercial housing?
Back to Top
New2brass View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Dan Pinto, Photo Editor

Joined: Nov 29 2015
Location: CT
Status: Offline
Points: 4627
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 12:20pm
Again, Universals are not my strong point and maybe someone familiar can chime in.

I believe early Universals used USGI trigger housings, no idea if later receivers this would work.
I do know that the stock is cut different for a aluminum housing. 
However there are early and late aluminum housing and do not know if the difference if negligible or great. If you put a USGI housing you would have a gap. I do not know if that would effect anything.


This picture it looks as if the mag catch fits much better, I would assume it has a catch made by Universal.


I do know when mag nibs wear or deform the magazine drops slightly which may contribute to failure to feed or stovepipes.

Back to Top
jackp1028 View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps
Avatar

Joined: Jan 01 2016
Location: Cloudcroft, NM
Status: Offline
Points: 1273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jackp1028 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 12:25pm
The mag fit looks normal to me. The later mag catch was redesigned to be loose in the TH. That way the mag catch/safety spring biases the mag forward in the mag well, assisting in better seating of the magazine, particularly when the bolt is open. I had FTF's on my early QHMC with the original earlier, thicker Type mag catch. Replacing it with the later M2 type mag catch solve the problem. The earlier mag catch allowed the magazine to "hang down" in the mag well creating a gap of as much as 1/16" in front depending on the wear of the tabs on the magazine. Also, you may not want a tight fit between the steel mag catch and the aluminum TH. Because of the dissimilar material, too many molecules get exchanged and you end up galling the aluminum resulting in binding.
JackP
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1996
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 1:59pm
I don’t think we have a picture of your TH, but if it is the box type and you want a GI, I have a complete stock set that acceps the GI housing. The internals will switch-over to the GI housing. Might have to polish out a trigger rub. My gen-1 has a T4 in it. The GI housing will still wirk with the square pattern stock, but leaves a huge gap between the housing and the stock. Housings can be had in the $75 area. The Universal GI style aluminum housings are very weak. It requires little effort to crack one.
Back to Top
New2brass View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Dan Pinto, Photo Editor

Joined: Nov 29 2015
Location: CT
Status: Offline
Points: 4627
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 2:25pm
Jack, I do not know if I am understanding you correctly. As I understand it the mag catch was modified to be thinner because debris was causing the catch to stick.
 
Look at the inset picture at red arrow and compare to the OPs photo where the red arrows are. the forward has a sizable gap which would let the mag drop. The second red arrow shows a gap which it to be expected but here again there is no material to prevent mag catch from moving up and down.
 
Floyd, The above picture is the OPs. There are also more pictures on first page about midway
Back to Top
jackp1028 View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps
Avatar

Joined: Jan 01 2016
Location: Cloudcroft, NM
Status: Offline
Points: 1273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jackp1028 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 11 2018 at 4:05pm
Dan, I see what you are saying about the gap. My Universal TH looks a lot like the OP's although not quite as rough but the clearance is double that of my USGI carbines. Some castings were rougher than others and some weren't finished as well as others. Also, the machining tolerances were probably not as tight as USGI. And the Universal mag catch is probably a little rough too.

I understand the intent of making the mag catch thinner was to remove some of the "tightness" inherent in the Type 1 and 2 configuration but a secondary effect was that the resultant "geometry" favored the better magazine fit that I described. Another point, remember that the longer Type 2 mag catch/safety plunger spring came along too (supposedly to improve the safety's reliability), at least for Inland and Winchester, and it would have also contributed to this gift of better "geometry". If you get a chance, switch between a Type 2 and Type 3 mag catch and you will see what I mean. As I said it made a 1/16" difference in the fit of magazines on my QHMC.
JackP
Back to Top
Exodus5 View Drop Down
Recruit
Recruit
Avatar

Joined: Sep 07 2018
Location: Concord, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 13
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Exodus5 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 18 2018 at 2:24pm
New update. I finally got back to the range after crimping the end of the "high speed" spring. I loaded up two mags. One brand new and one old, both 15 rds. The old mag went first and (possibly due to never using soft points before) it would not feed the Monarch ammo at all. The soft point jammed against the feed lip. I tried it a few different ways and then switched to the new magazine. I had 7 rounds in and on the 6th I had the strangest stovepipe ever. The empty casing actually jammed backwards between the bolt and ramp. I fixed that and fired of the last shot, then went through a full 15 round mag with no issues.
I did have one other (normal) stovepipe but the rest of the 50 round box went off without a hitch.
So what do I look at for the stovepipes (Failure to eject)? I have already trashed my two old (very old and worn) magazines and I've got 4 more new 15 rounders on order. I have the full wolff spring kit. Should I swap out the extractor spring? All of the brass flew 5 feet back and to about the 5 o'clock.
Back to Top
sleeplessnashadow View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: Nov 09 2015
Location: SoCal
Status: Offline
Points: 1150
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote sleeplessnashadow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 19 2018 at 8:15am
I apologize I didn't back here sooner. Either I missed the notification there had been posts or didn't get one until yesterday.

There are plenty of experienced people here with plenty of their own experiences. These are just mine and come with no guarantee.

SUGGESTIONS FOR MALFUNCTIONS

The semi-auto action of the carbine is like an orchestra. Watch the animations on the website and you'll see the interactions of the instruments with one another. One instrument out of tune can impact those downstream and upstream.

When testing to see what's causing a problem use standard factory loaded hardball. Testing using soft nosed or hollow points should be saved for after the problem has been corrected. Like getting two instruments in an orchestra out of tune and trying to find them. One or the other other may be contributing to the problem as opposed to the cause.

Likewise when testing replacement parts test only one at a time. And test with more than a few rounds. Which was done with the carbine currently being examined.

Check for CLEANING

This is first as it's a common cause and applies to all .30 caliber carbines regardless of who made them. Switch nothing else until it's been test fired once clean. To include the inside of the gas chamber, piston and gas piston nut. Over time they can get gummed up. If cleaning is clean and the problem still persists, then go to the next step.

Check the Magazines

This is in the top ranking of what can cause feeding, ejection and other problems.

By design, the magazines with the .30 cal. carbines are not a tight fit in the magazine well. Though I've had a few commercial carbines that like tighter fits than others.

Using old magazines as if they have a lifespan equal to or greater than the carbine will inevitably cause malfunctioning at some point. There are a number of things that can wear out or get damaged. Regardless of which .30 caliber carbine they are using.

Finding decent new carbine magazines has been an issue for a lot of people for a lot of years. Pro Mag magazines work in some carbines but not in others. They are usually the least expensive. I've found their magazine springs to be consistently too short.

When testing the magazines to see if they are the problem test magazines from more than one manufacturer. At least two, three if possible. Borrow them from others who know they work fine for them if possible.

Do not test other parts as you are testing the magazines. Trying a combo of parts to see if they resolve a problem should be done later if individual tests don't reveal the issue.

Check the Headspace

This one should be done with every used carbine when someone buys it regardless of who made it. A used gun is a used gun with safety being most important. Improper headspace can also be a cause of various problems related to the function of the bolt, slide and springs.

Recoil Springs & Recoil Spring Guides

One of the first things people think needs to be replaced when something goes wrong. Not always the case. Personally if it's a GI spring and GI guide I leave them be until I've checked most everything else. Unless there is an obvious problem.

Guides first. Several commercial companies (National Ordnance 1965 and later, Universal Firearms for a short time later in production) have used a guide of their own design. National Ordnance for a short time did it because they couldn't get the spring with guide into the receiver with the slide in place or trying to mount them with the slide. Had to do with the slides they were making.

Twin recoil springs and their guides are obviously different than the single recoil spring and their guides. The former being pretty straight forward and part of the reason for the twin springs/guides. To avoid problems inherent with the single spring/guide. In 1942 Inland experimented with twin recoil springs for some of the same reasons Universal used them. I know of 3 prototypes and have pics of one of them. In addition to them being shown in War Baby volume I.

Sticking to the single spring guide, I've encountered the problems with the springs binding when the short guides are used. Instead of crimping the springs I have replaced the guide rod with a GI guide rod. In a few cases I needed to file down the front of the guide rod by 1/16" or so until it worked with the receiver/slide and didn't cause the spring to knot up. My personal preference is not to use shortened spring guides. Though they can work for some people.

Recoil Springs. First it helps to understand commercial carbines may be different than GI carbines as to the length, number of coils and/or the spring tension. Because of the rest of the orchestra and how it was tuned to work together. The weight of the slide, design of the gas piston housing, size of the gas port in the barrel, resistance the slide encounters from changes in part design and the list goes on.

Example are the "heavy duty" recoil springs. They work with some carbines but not with others. This is often a matter of trial and error til you can get one to work. The GI springs and GI guides have been the most reliable for me in every commercial carbine but the twin spring design. I've never trimmed or had to trim a GI recoil spring.

With the heavy duty after market springs I've trimmed more than a few down a little at a time experimenting to see the differences. Sacrificing one or two to learn and experiment. Fired casings failing to clear the bolt/chamber and stove piping when the heavy duty recoil spring is used and this issue wasn't happening prior is a good clue the spring is either too long and/or has improper tension.

A side note as an example of difference in springs and tension, variations in commercial hammer springs can hinder the operation of the slide and it's recoil spring by requiring less or more tension to cock the hammer. Which in turn can cause the failures to feed or eject. Again, we are talking commercial springs.

Some of this is why I leave the recoil spring til after checking other things. But a lot of people are fortunate to have whatever spring they use work fine from the start.

Universal Firearms Trigger Housings

Over time aluminum trigger housings with metal parts, magazines included, wear out in one way or another. The difficult thing is it can be a real challenge to figure out exactly what has worn out where. The most common problem is usually related to the seating of the magazine in the magazine well.

It's not usually something obvious. Sometimes I haven't been able to find it. Replacing the trigger housing was the only thing that worked.

I've found that test firing the carbine while pushing up on the bottom of the magazine, at the front, at the back, in the center usually reveals the trigger housing is the problem.

Obviously the rectangular aluminum trigger housings are no longer made. Buying a used one may or may not solve the problem as it may be sold due to the problems it has.

Replacing the aluminum trigger housing with a GI trigger housing presents a number of issues. With the earlier aluminum trigger housings that were close to GI dimensions some Universal's will work fine with a GI housing. Others require trimming the stock opening a little. A bigger issue is if the lugs on the bottom of the receiver do not have enough spread to allow the GI housing to slide in. Do not force them, you risk breaking the left rear receiver lug. Filing the receiver lugs or trigger housing lugs obviously isn't a first choice but may be required to get them to fit. Try a couple different trigger housings. Minor variations may help.

With the rectangular aluminum trigger housings replacing them with a GI trigger housing usually requires some filing to get the two to fit. Then there is the issue with the rectangular opening in the stock that can be altered by using a GI stock.

A warning with these rectangular trigger housings. Hold a fully assembled GI trigger housing next to the Universal trigger housing and take a look at where the various parts sit in comparison to one another. Also compare them with the Universal trigger housing while it's mounted on the receiver.

The hybrid Universal is not of a GI design. Some assume this is worse when it's simply different. This comes back to what I said earlier about the orchestra. The GI design was the only ordnance approved design. The Ruger Mini 14 doesn't have an ordnance approved design. Yet it still works. They are simply different. As is the Universal hybrid.

Universal Firearms did have drawings and a design approved by whoever owned the company or their appointee. The .30 caliber carbine has a patent, so does the .30 cal. carbine hybrid made by Universal. They are two different patents and designs.

My point being is the position of the parts on the hybrid may not match some of the positions of parts on a GI trigger housing. The most obvious being the position of the hammers. They sit a bit farther forward on the hybrid. This hammer was designed for a different orchestra. Use a trigger housing not designed for this orchestra and it could be unsafe with all kinds of problems.

Use a GI hammer in a Universal or any commercial carbine and it will shorten the lifespan of the commercial bolt. I've tested a lot of commercial bolts used by the commercial manufacturers and have yet to see one that is hardened properly on the rear of the bolt. Some compensate for this with the hammers they used. GI hammers can defeat the safety design of the rear of a commercial bolt.

End Point

I'm not going to go into the differences of the various Universal compared to others. The object of this post is trouble shooting with the related problem of using GI specifications and parts.

The commercial carbines, particularly the Universal hybrid, have all been replicas of the GI carbine of WWII. This wasn't Universal's carbines alone. The modern day Auto Ordnance and Inland Mfg commercial carbines have a number of parts not interchangeable with GI with some of them appearing to be.

There is one exception. The carbines being built and sold by Fulton Armory. They are made to GI specifications.

The end point here is every part on every gun has a lifespan, as does every gun. Rather than try to bandage a carbine into working it may be safer to simply buy a new gun or a newer used gun (get it safety checked before firing). Good example is on page 2 of the Universal carbine history pages. Take a look at the barrels altered to compensate for a different issue caused by the owners 1969-1972. 1962-1969 and 1975-1984 their carbines didn't have this issue.

Enough for now. I'm working on something I hope to share in the next week as to why some of the Universal slides with the open cam cut cracked. Not caused by imperfections in the slide. The same issue exists on all .30 cal. carbines but shows itself somewhere other than the slide.

Jim

A foot note and others please feel free to add your favorites here.

I've been using .30 caliber carbine magazines made by or for the folks at this link and have had good experiences with all of them. https://www.keepshooting.com

Edited by sleeplessnashadow - Sep 20 2018 at 12:20am
Back to Top
sleeplessnashadow View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: Nov 09 2015
Location: SoCal
Status: Offline
Points: 1150
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote sleeplessnashadow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Sep 22 2018 at 6:17am
I didn't intend to stifle the discussion with that prior post. So here's some eye candy to bend you mind with.





Type II mag catch on the left, type III on the right. The type III had the letter M added to the push button to easily identify it from the Type II.

(To view a larger version of any of the following click on the image)


What the magazine encountered with the Type III mag catch (left) vs the Type II mag catch (right)


In the pics that follow two Universal Firearms aluminum rectangular trigger housings are compared to a Type V Inland steel trigger housing. The Inland is in the center of each photo. All three have a GI rotary safety, GI plungers/springs of the same design and length between the safety and mag catch, and a Type III mag catch.

One of the Universal trigger housings was modified by the owner in an attempt to get it to seat a magazine properly due to failures to feed. The other he tried as a replacement without correcting the problem.

I did my best to line them up for the pics. I used the holes for the trigger housing pins. The Inland trigger housing has a slight lean forward given a difference in the outer dimensions from the two Universals.

The focus in each pic was the mag catch in relation to it's position in the trigger housing.

I'm not going to offer any opinions as all I would be doing is guessing. These are offered at face value for what you see as informational only. I do not have a new unused Universal trigger housing for this comparison.

Again, to view a larger version of any of the following click on the image.





























Jim

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.