The Carbine Collectors Club

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


Forum Home Forum Home > The Club > Safety/ Accuracy/Shooting/Ammunition/Care and Maintenance
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login


New Carbine, New issue (to me)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Rebel92 View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jul 20 2021
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rebel92 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: New Carbine, New issue (to me)
    Posted: Oct 27 2021 at 6:00pm
Thanks everyone. I think I got it remedied (just by feeding it mil-surp). Have only had a chance to dry cycle the ammo, haven’t been able to send any turtles to their meet their maker yet but will one day this week
"If everyone is thinking alike then somebody isn't thinking."

Gen. George Patton
Back to Top
DonFlynn View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jan 27 2019
Location: USA
Status: Online
Points: 392
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DonFlynn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 2:55pm
Originally posted by W5USMC W5USMC wrote:

Don, the OP has Korean surplus ammo which he has stated works fine, he is only having his issues with the Armscor.

Opps, missed that. Strange then, I've run 1000's of rounds of Armscor the past couple years (I found a deal on it before the current panic) and the only carbine it gave me issues with was my Plainfield before I swapped springs in the bolt
Back to Top
W5USMC View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: Apr 29 2017
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 2152
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote W5USMC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 12:27pm
Don, the OP has Korean surplus ammo which he has stated works fine, he is only having his issues with the Armscor.
Wayne
USMC Retired
NRA Life Member
Back to Top
DonFlynn View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jan 27 2019
Location: USA
Status: Online
Points: 392
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DonFlynn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 11:47am
My 2 bits, if the OP can find any of the Korean surplus in stock try that. 2nd choice would be trying S&B, I've never had any trouble with that any carbine I've run it on. I've even been saving a case of 500 of that to use to break in a new Fulton Armory carbine I have on order due soon 
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 11:34am
I hate to belabor the point, but old bored people like me have to pass the time of day doing something. I have looked again at the thread concerning the chamber/ammo revision. One thing they did was to reduce the lead in the chamber, the space between the case-mouth and the rifling. This would in effect require a different taper of the projectile in order for the bullet nose not to solidly contact the rifling. It almost seems like the Armscor was designed with the old chamber in mind?  
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 10:53am
Originally posted by New2brass New2brass wrote:

manufacturing has changed and are the commercial manufacturers holding tolerances or making their product "good enough?"


That's for sure. Armscor on the right. I personally have never had issues with it and it feeds and bangs in anything I shoot, but it's obvious the profile differs. I have noticed they seem to seat the bullets a little deeper, closer to 1.65-.66 on average.




Edited by floydthecat - Oct 22 2021 at 11:18am
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: 3677
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 10:19am
Originally posted by floydthecat floydthecat wrote:

Originally posted by New2brass New2brass wrote:

Basically I believe they found the later profile case should work in all carbines, but earlier cases would have malfunctions in later carbines.

Armscor would be of the later design….I assume. Just guessing here and assuming no commercial manufacturers were producing ammo at that time, thus all commercial ammo would be of the later design and should fit either chamber? I think this is a case of the Armscor bullet profile just not liking the chamber in this carbine. It being a very little-fired and fresh chamber, the crisp rifling in the throat is grabbing it. I bet after some firing and wear, won’t be a problem at all.


Any .30 carbine ammo made after the specification change should have been to new standards.
Ordnance was reaching out to all ammo manufacturers for propellant and primer types to fine tune the .30 carbine.

Fast forward to today, manufacturing has changed and are the commercial manufacturers holding tolerances or making their product "good enough?"

I would default to you on what ammo is better digested than other ammo companies
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 22 2021 at 5:31am
Originally posted by New2brass New2brass wrote:

Basically I believe they found the later profile case should work in all carbines, but earlier cases would have malfunctions in later carbines.

Armscor would be of the later design….I assume. Just guessing here and assuming no commercial manufacturers were producing ammo at that time, thus all commercial ammo would be of the later design and should fit either chamber? I think this is a case of the Armscor bullet profile just not liking the chamber in this carbine. It being a very little-fired and fresh chamber, the crisp rifling in the throat is grabbing it. I bet after some firing and wear, won’t be a problem at all.
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 4:05pm
Gotta luv the carbine world! A mystery at every turn, which makes it all interesting and fun.😁
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: 3677
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (3) Thanks(3)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 4:01pm
OK, so the Inland would have the late chamber.
According to CCNL 334-3 we have seen in the serial range of 1875-1890 RO undated barrels, BA-9-43, Underwood 8-43 and RO 6-43

In another thread we were discussing the change in ammo case profile and chamber profile being changed in June of 1943.

Rockola stopped dating barrels in 6-43 and this may not be a coincidence.
I am wondering if your undated RO barrel may have been one of the first undated and somehow has the earlier profile which is causing the chamber to catch the later ammo a little but more?

Only real way to find out is to slug the barrel. I am sure others can explain how and where to get he metal to do so, if you were interested in doing it.

Basically I believe they found the later profile case should work in all carbines, but earlier cases would have malfunctions in later carbines.

Back to Top
Rebel92 View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jul 20 2021
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rebel92 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 2:54pm
Inland has barrel date of 11-43 serial number is 3072253

QHMC has an undated Rock-Ola Barrel, Serial number is 1881065

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: 3677
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote New2brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 2:48pm
what is the serial number range of the two carbines?
barrel dates if present
Back to Top
Rebel92 View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jul 20 2021
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rebel92 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 2:36pm
Well, FloydTheCat Did it again (Genius). Headspace came back and was within speck. Tried the Plunk test on both carbines with Korean Surplus and Armscor ammo.

On my inland, which shoots anything I give it, had both the Korean Surplus and Armscor seat and come out easily. (no surprise, have no issues at all with it anymore)

Moved on to my QH (one with the perceived "issues"), and the Korean seated and slid out with no pressure with my tweezers. 

Next, I plunked the Armscor in it. I had to squeeze and pull with my tweezers to get the Armscorp out of the chamber. IT WAS TIGHT.  So, I guess it really was the ammunition and how tight my chamber is. Very interesting results, but pleased that's all it is. Luckily I only have a few hundred rounds of armscor, which will be fed to my inland to conquer the turtles taking over my pond! 
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 12:40pm
Yep….hard to distinguish any difference in thousandths, but looks good.

I don’t think the rim is tapered that aggressively on the base in real-world ammo. Looked at that picture before and never noticed that.
Back to Top
Matt_X View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Nov 10 2020
Location: Phila, Penn
Status: Offline
Points: 401
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Matt_X Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 12:34pm
Basically yes.
Take a look at the cutaway from the club's webpages I posted earlier.
This one.

The lower arrow points the end of the barrel.
The entire rim of the cartridge is outisde the barrel. 
The rim of the bolt  is shown touching the barrel face although I suspect that's a slight clearance fit or else the bolt wouldn't rotate in as easily as it does.

There maybe subtlties I'm missing.

Back to Top
Rebel92 View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jul 20 2021
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rebel92 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 10:19am
Something else I guess I had never noticed or thought to ask, does this look right? How far my homemade headspace gauge is coming out of the chamber? 


Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 10:14am
Originally posted by Rebel92 Rebel92 wrote:

the plunk test would be done with a functional round? And just drop it in, and see how easy it pulls out?

Correct. See if it drops in and bottoms without forcing it. Maybe have to use a finger-nail to pull it out. I push on it to insure seating, but it should slide out easily.
Back to Top
Rebel92 View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jul 20 2021
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rebel92 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 9:57am
the plunk test would be done with a functional round? And just drop it in, and see how easy it pulls out?
Back to Top
floydthecat View Drop Down
Hard Corps
Hard Corps


Joined: Oct 13 2016
Location: Mississippi
Status: Offline
Points: 1397
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote floydthecat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 9:54am
Originally posted by Rebel92 Rebel92 wrote:

and is the fine lapping compound un-necessary now?

If you think the chamber is clean and a spec round passes the plunk test and you don’t have sticky-extraction, I don’t think polishing is necessary.
Back to Top
Rebel92 View Drop Down
On Point
On Point


Joined: Jul 20 2021
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Status: Offline
Points: 213
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rebel92 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Oct 21 2021 at 9:48am
and is the fine lapping compound un-necessary now?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

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 0.078 seconds.