| || |
|08-14-2018, 04:29 AM||#2|
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Greater Waxhaw Metropolitan Area
Very interesting Phantom. Thanks for sharing that.
I had never realized there was so much '03 Springfield DNA in Garand's early designs.
I also learned for the first time about primer actuation and lubricated ammo.
One question that wasn't answered and that I'd be curious to learn about: how were the spent primers ejected? It seems that a single little primer that failed to eject properly could have locked up the action pretty seriously.
I didn't see any mechanism or escape path for the spent primers. Perhaps they weren't completely poked out of the pocket, but got reseated by the piston prior to ejection? Maybe someone here knows.
|08-14-2018, 05:21 AM||#3|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St. Augustine, FL
The primer stayed with the case...ideally.
Who notes it was a dead end that several designers pursued.
| || |
|08-16-2018, 07:48 AM||#4|
Join Date: Aug 2003
I've heard of these but never seen one. Thanks.
My understanding of the function depends on something that is normal: when the primer detonates the initial pressure before the powder burns much is enough to move the primer back a bit. We don't see that because the primer is "re-seated" by the normal pressure cycle.
The mechanism has to function based on the initial primer generated pressure. The primer has to stay in the case or the high pressure release could be a bad thing.
|Search tags for this page|
1924 rifle trials,
experimental garand primer-activated 1924 rifle ammo,
primer activated action
Click on a term to search for related topics.
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|US Army - Living in interesting time||GunGeek||Gun Talk||24||08-02-2017 07:03 PM|