Sidewinder extraction?

45flint · May-30-12 16:05

does it look to you guys that there would be full extraction of shells with EB rod length for the LR?

louiethelump · May-30-12 18:05

Absolutely NOT.

22 short maybe

grayelky · May-30-12 18:05

What Louie said.

Uncle_Lee · May-31-12 08:05

That is why I would rather not have the 1" barrel.

Not enough barrel length for a full length extractor rod.

buck · May-31-12 10:05

Not even a single digit serial numbered 1"?

zippovarga · May-31-12 22:05

The "EB" included in the SN sold me, regardless of whether the spent rounds fully extract or not. Oh yeah...and the fact that it's made for Lefties!!! lol



   Placed my order at 12:03AM June 1, 2012 EST and received my confirmation email that the request was being processed at precisely 12:04AM June 1, 2012



   Now comes the waiting. August? Really? Arghhhh!!! hehe..I'm sure it'll be worth the wait!

45flint · June-01-12 04:06

It will be fun to see who opens up EB001!!!!! Yes the EB serial numbers were a great touch.

zippovarga · June-01-12 18:06

That would be awesome. I hope who ever does get a very low number will let us know. Not the actual, but you know what I mean. I plan on making this one my daily carry, and it'll look SOOO Grand with the Zippo touch and PERHAPS a Flint set of grips?!? hint hint...lol

CavScout · June-01-12 23:06

I'm wondering If the crane will need an additional ball detent at the crane with a longer ejector rod?



   One could be easily added by milling a dimple on underside of the crane recess, then fitting a floating ball in the top of the crane (stippled in). A short necked down area on the ejector rod would let the ball drop in its recess when the ejector rod is pulled to release the cylinder/crane.



   The downside would be the requirement to pull the ejector rod forward to close the cylinder... rather than the current snap-in design shown in the 3D model.

Uncle_Lee · June-02-12 05:06

chopprs · June-02-12 05:06

I do not like the ball detent. I think it may open in your pocket.....

Uncle_Lee · June-02-12 05:06

A rubber band around the barrel and ejector rod will keep it closed.

scrounger · June-02-12 05:06

Yes. It will be interesting to see who gets the first serial number. Not that it's everything....but, it's noteworthy as a collector piece. I was lucky to get a super low SN when I purchased my NAA King of Hearts TALO. Got number 3.

gtgoldsmith · June-02-12 05:06

I am betting that the ejector rods will be all the same size regardless of barrel length - economically this would make more sense than having different parts for each barrel length. Also, if one uses a pocket holster the rubber band may not be needed, just remember to draw the pistol straight and not lean it to the right....this is not a political statement - wrong thread for that

CavScout · June-02-12 09:06

Clarification...

The crane detent I was describing would be IN ADDITION to the existing front detent, and the rear alignment pin shown in the image samples from NAA.

louiethelump · June-02-12 10:06

It is not a ball indent. What you are calling a ball is a spring loaded plunger that pushes the rod to the rear. There is a latch at the front of the cylinder according to the line drawing, and for the cylinder to open, you will have to grasp the knurled knob on the ejector rod and push it forward to free the latch at the front of the cylinder and the pin that goes into the recoil shield at the rear. That cylinder is NOT going to come open in your pocket.

chopprs · June-02-12 10:06

I am not paying $470 for a gun that I have to hold together with rubber bands....I think that goes without saying.

CavScout · June-02-12 11:06

Louie,



   I took another look at the *clear* 3D model under the June Soapbox thread... I see the latching ring at the front of the rear underlug, negating any need for the crane detent I described. I rescind same. My misinterpretation was that cylinder retention was only at the front plunger and rear pin.



   I could not tell from the image if the forward underlug had a dimple for the plunger?



   I had no concern about the cylinder opening unexpectedly, only cylinder fore&aft support with a longer ejector rod... now obvious to me as handled by current latch design.



   Chopprs,



   Nobody offered a *serious* proposal for rubber bands as a solution to cylinder retention... rhetorical only.



   Paul

louiethelump · June-02-12 11:06

Cav:



   I don't KNOW anymore than you do, but it APPEARS that the pointed detent is spring loaded inside the ejector rod end (you can see the roll pin holding the plunger) and my GUESS would be that the front lug is just a flat plate. Looks like a groove cut in it to guide the pointed plunger into place, and the plunger is there to apply spring pressure to the rear and to hold both the latch at the front of the cylinder and the center pin that probably runs through the cylinder and engages a hole in the standing breech. This would make sense and be an economical way to do it. I am guessing the longer barrels will have the same extractor but MAY be wrong about that.



   One potential "problem" (but maybe not) is the pointed plunger that rides out with the ejector rod. The end of that rod is where you are going to have to push to extract those 5 fired 22 mag cases and sometimes they are sticky. You will be pushing the the ball of your thumb against a pointed but spring loaded pin in the end of the rod. Could be painful to push out sticky rounds if you get a brand that likes to stick.



   What do you you think?

CavScout · June-02-12 12:06

Louie,



   I don't claim to know more than anybody else here. I'm here so I can learn more, and hopefully contribute. I am GI Bill schooled as a Machinist (both manual and CNC) and Gunsmith at OIT (Oregon Istitute of Technology). And my learning process continues every time I visit here.



   If you look back at the longer barreled prototype photos, you will see the forward plunger is installed in the forward underlug, offering some, if minimal, alignment at that engagement. And a flat ended ejector rod. Similar to Smith & Wesson's engagement



   I'm thinking NAA chose to introduce the SW as a 1" due to the high number of requests for a shorter barrel than the prototype, here on the forum. That required a re-design of the plunger.



   If there is no dimple in the forward underlug to fit the pointed plunger, the plunger would still function fine with a radiused end... easier on the thumb, and an easy mod even if all you have is a drill motor and a fine file. A usable pin punch can be made from music wire available at most hobby stores.



   Making longer ejector rods would only be a matter of loading a different CNC program on a Swiss Turning Center. Tooling and material would already be in place. The only other issue would be which variation of forward underlug to use.



   As far as sticky rounds go... my Smith & Wesson Model 63 only goes a few cylinder fulls of cheapo brick LR's before I have to bore brush the cylinder. Otherwise a soft face mallet is needed to eject empties. Since I have yet to fire my BT, I have no clue how NAA's extractor will behave. I ordered my SW with the LR cylinder "conversion" so I will find out.

louiethelump · June-02-12 14:06

Cav:

I was not suggesting you were claiming extra knowledge. I was just saying I am surmising from what I know about how other guns lock up and how this line drawing that Sandy says IS ACCURATE looks. This lock up and the attachment of the yoke to the frame is VERY much like the methods Charter Arms has been using since the late 1970's. They go about it a little differently, but they still have a lock up in front of the cylinder and a pin at the rear with the end of the rod not really locking anything. It works fine that way, and is really stronger than the S&W lock up at the end of the long rod.

CavScout · June-02-12 21:06

Louie,



   No implication intended... at worst a case of dueling modesty? ;o)



   Smith & Wesson gave up lock-up at the crane decades ago when they changed the old Triple-lock system. They apparently thought a tapered plunger fitted to the cup recess at the end of the ejector rod was enough. I can say from at least one Mod 66 3" I had that the crane can flex outward when the plunger bottoms out before the sides engage.



   Interestingly, Dan Wesson came out of the gate with lock-up at the crane.



   My old Ruger DA .357 had a spring loaded detent plunger on top of the crane. I see at Brownell's that the newer SP101 still uses it.



   Colt chose to have no support at the end of their DA ejector rods. At least the ones I've handled.



   Of course, getting carried away designing a revolver without support at the end of the ejector rod can lead to an unsafe result:

Uncle_Lee · June-03-12 06:06

Cav

   You may be schooled in this and that.

   You may know more about this and that.

   You may be a lot of things, but you ain't a mind reader.



   The Colt Walker had a bad problem when it came out in 1847.

   When fired with full load, the recoil would cause the loading lever to fall.

   This would send the rammer into one of the chambers, locking up the gun.

   The solution to this was to tie a strip of leather around the barrel and the loading lever.



   Do you know why they used the leather strip?



   Because they didn't have a rubber band.



   So Chopprs,

   You could always put a rubber band around the barrel and ejector if you are worried keeping it closed.











   ul

chopprs · June-03-12 06:06

I think your rubber band is already being used to hold something else up Lee. Only long pants when you use the rubber band on the gun....unless you are in the park!

Uncle_Lee · June-03-12 07:06

Sorry Chop,

Just sounds like we just got another very smart person posting.

chopprs · June-03-12 07:06

......don't we always?

Uncle_Lee · June-03-12 07:06

Makes me want to drink my coffee with my little finger sticking up in the air.

miff, miff

CavScout · June-03-12 08:06

Lee,



   I am aware of the Walker's traits... big reason I never got a replica. The problem was quickly addressed with a positive acting latch in the Dragoon series that were next out of Colt's production. However, with a little over 1,000 total original Colt Walker production, they weren't in wide-spread usage. So their legacy did not pop into my mind when I read your post. In a discussion about the NAA SideWinder I incorrectly *assumed* you were not serious about using rubber bands for daily usage of the NAA SideWinder.



   I am by no means a sophisticate... I was raised in a small town with a population of 200. After serving in the Military, I returned here. As of a couple of years ago, we officially became a city, and now have a population of 1500+ with two (2) traffic lights. I live at the back end of 7 acres and feed mule deer, squirrels, chipmunks, quail and various other wildlife just outside my living room window... often in just my skivvies... not a pretty sight!



   I did not intend to offend, nor intend to start any negative diversion from this thread's title. I apologize for my part in the last few posts.



   Paul

Uncle_Lee · June-03-12 08:06

Accepted

RogueTS1 · June-03-12 13:06

Hey Guys; what is wrong with being sophisticated?