Auction Model M missing action parts - Page 3 - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 07-06-2019, 03:48 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)


Log in to see fewer ads


My second Model M has a higher "hammer lock" post than my first Model M. Measured from outside of the action to the top of the mounting post - second one (#352) measures .390 and #653 measures .341. When I originally switched the carrier over to #352 and tested it the carrier seemed to bind up on the hammer lock post. When I switched the carrier back to #653 and added the bolt from the second "M" it worked. As the first "M" is not in as good a shape I would prefer to have the second "M" the functioning one.
A range test of the first "M" worked fine with .22 shorts except some failed to fire (1950s or 60s stock). Yes, I am old enough to have kept some from back then.
Now before I grind down the post and re-preen is the any other reason the carrier would bind? - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-14-2019, 05:11 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Work in progress

Well I lowered the hammer lock stud and the carrier does not bind on it now but it takes a hard jerk to close the action. Seems to be getting a little better after some tries but not much better yet. The new problem was created when I changed the safety slides. The safety no longer works. I need to fix that before I fix the problem of ejection. I have just been using tester rounds so this may not be a problem at the range. The test round angles toward the ejection port but does not fully eject.
Anyway a work in progress. I need to get it working by Wednesday for Seniors Range morning. If not working by then it will go with me and test some group knowledge. - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-15-2019, 07:39 AM
bone

Join Date: 
Mar 2012
Location: 
South Louisiana
Posts: 
3,590
TPC Rating: 
100% (16)
Bill, good to see she is coming along. Sometime these old rifles just fall together and sometimes, they need to be persuaded. Keep at it, these old pumps are a blast to shoot.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #34  
Old 07-15-2019, 03:31 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Thanks for the reply bone. The safety turned out to be an easy fix and I only broke one finger nail! The action is getting easier but still ejection problems - at least the wall anchor I used to test the safety and dry firing didn't eject. Starting to like this piece of history more and more. - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-15-2019, 07:02 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
A trip to the range to test function. As I suspected the rifle ejected great with real rounds. A couple of the .22 shorts FTF but as they were from the 60s I was not too concerned. Then the CCI Quiet and Rem Sub-Sonic had some FTF, So now looking at the firing pin. The action is getting better with only a couple of hard jerks to close action. - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-15-2019, 09:08 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Well looking at Sav22s information again, it appears I have an early Mossberg bolt. But it seems to work most of the time.



I am not sure how it comes apart and may not want to take it apart if I did know.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-16-2019, 11:47 AM
Sav22's Avatar
Sav22 is online now

Join Date: 
Apr 2008
Posts: 
1,454
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
You have to remove at least one of the extractors to be able to remove the firing pin, there is a sleeve that holds the extractor spring going through a slot in the firing pin, it can be removed from either side. There also is another pin near the back of the bolt through the firing pin.

Your bolt appears to have the extractors held in by pins, if that's correct I think it's a plus and a variance I wasn't aware of, the earliest bolts used very fine threaded screws that with an little corrosion become next to impossible to remove - look at the pictures of the bolts I posted and you will see one with a heavily damaged screw that could not be removed, also notice that none of the bolts have firing pins - that is the one part that is most often broken or missing. I also found that the firing pins vary enough that a lot of fitting can be required, I've only did it once but I had to remove metal from the bolt and the firing pin to get one to fit.

Last edited by Sav22; 07-16-2019 at 12:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-16-2019, 12:44 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Thanks again Sav22. I missed the damaged screw when I looked at the pics but see it now. =Bill
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-18-2019, 12:36 AM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Well a range trip today. 10 rounds Some Rem Sub-Sonic and the rest CCI Quiet. 3 FTF. (1 CCI & 2 Sub-Sonic) so still need to work on the bolt. Grouped 3" c to c vertical and 3/4" wide 1 5/8" left of POA and 3 3/8" low. This was at 28 yards off a rest. Trigger is a little stiff but may work in. Loading and ejecting was good. There was mixed wind but at 28 yards who cares? 6 rounds from my 42M (with peep) was 1 3/8" x 3/4" - 1 !/2" low on the same target. As I was testing for function on the Model M, I could live with that until I work on the bolt again. And now have sights to adjust. Also am looking for a tang sight but will put it away and work on something else for now. -Bill
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-07-2019, 10:53 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Well another parts rifle.......

But this time a Savage 1914 so that I can compare the actions. I had heard comments that the Mossberg Model M was a rip off of the Savage. Now some parts are the same or similar but the action is totally different.
As this is again a parts rifle I will be looking for some parts (but not as hard as I am looking for model M parts). - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-22-2019, 02:12 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Tang sight added to Model M

I was handed a couple of tang sights that I believe are Lyman #1s from the early Patent date. These I think were made until about the 1920s, or at least sold until then. The proper one for the Model M was the 2A.


One of the bases fit the Model M (the other was for a Winchester). The Winchester one had the shorter sight post that I needed for the M so I changed them.


The sight is older than the Model M but I think it looks good on it. - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-22-2019, 04:03 PM
bone

Join Date: 
Mar 2012
Location: 
South Louisiana
Posts: 
3,590
TPC Rating: 
100% (16)
Looks good Bill, I have at least 3 early Lyman tang sights. But canít remember how they are marked.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-25-2019, 09:37 AM
Sav22's Avatar
Sav22 is online now

Join Date: 
Apr 2008
Posts: 
1,454
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
The Lyman tang sights were made into the 1950's, 'Old Gun Sights' say's the No 2's were discontinued in 1955 and I assume the No 1's would have been the same , or close.

From a 1950 Lyman catalog -
The No 1 was held up by a spring, no locking and had a double aperture with a small flip down center.
The No 2 was the same but used screw in apertures.
The No 1A had a lever on the left side to lock it in the upright position & the double aperture
The No 2A was the same with screw in apertures.

The sight you have pictured is a No 1 and the correct one for the Mossberg would have SM stamped on the bottom. Sights for Savage 22's, Colt Lightning 22's and all caliber Marlins have the same hole spacing but the height and angle varys. Since you mention the sight was originally to tall it may have been for a centerfire Marlin. The Colt used #10 screws for mounting and the others #8's. Since the parts on these are easily swapped you may find a correct coded sight for your gun that really is not correct.

Last edited by Sav22; 09-25-2019 at 10:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-25-2019, 05:37 PM
headhunter2's Avatar
headhunter2 is online now
Law Enforcement Officer

Join Date: 
Dec 2013
Location: 
Vancouver Island, BC
Posts: 
647
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
I had it out to the range this morning and the tang sight is shooting about 1" left & 1" high. Not sure how to correct that except to tap the front sight over. Then I would have to tap the rear sight over in the other direction. The elevation I can fix with a spacer on the forward stop (or just position the aperture at its highest point). Note: I was using my Spotshot (& case) as pictured in the AMCA newsletter.

I just checked the Lyman site and the only tang sight still in stock is for the Henry rifle ($105). I will keep looking for a #2A but am happy with this #1 and enjoy shooting it. - Bill
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-25-2019, 06:31 PM
Sav22's Avatar
Sav22 is online now

Join Date: 
Apr 2008
Posts: 
1,454
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Tang sights often have to be shimmed on one side of the base or the other, most rifles had the final polishing done by hand so the surface of the tangs can vary and not always be level to the receiver, you can use paper or thin cardboard. Since you still have the barrel sights you can line the view through the tang sight up to them.

The stem should adjust lower than shown in the picture you posted, if that's as low as it goes you may have the wrong stem, also some of these sight also came with a small pin that was to be inserted in the bottom of the stem to set a bottom stop, check for that.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 PM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x