The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading Gunsmithing BSA rifle issueGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| BSA rifle issue | Login/Join |
One of Us |
I have BSA CF-2 rifle in 222 Rem with an ejector problem. It is same as the old Herters U9 action. It is a push feed and basically the cases drop off of the bolt face during extraction before they clear the action. Extraction from the barrel is fine and the plunger seems to be intact and working properly. It seems like a design flaw. The gun is built on a long action with a block to stop the bolt for the short cases. But there is so much width inside the large action that it fails to keep the small spent 222 case engaged on the bolt face. Any suggestions greatly appreciated. AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | ||
|
One of Us |
First rifle I stocked was a Herters U9 in 6mm, on a Richards stock, in 1969. Your issue is common with plunger bolt face ejectors, when combined with a short/thin cartridge. By the time the case becomes clear of the receiver ring, and ready for ejection, the plunger is already maxed out and there is no more push left to get the brass to fling out. Solution: easy; longer plunger. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Thank you for the quick reply. Just piddeling around I tried a 223 case. The little bit of extra case helped keep it in position longer and it ejected properly. Im not sure how to remove the plunger, I assume I need to somehow remove the little roll pin set in the bolt lug. ? AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes it will be a little pin. I was going to say that if you have an early one with the blade ejector, it will never work. You will need to make a new plunger on a lathe. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I'm not sure that is going to work because the plunger is already up flush with the front end of the bolt. If the plunger protrudes beyond the bolt, it seems to me that would cause feeding issues. I really hate the thought, but I'm considering re-chambering to make it functional. AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Ok, that's bad. I assume this bolt was bushed from a larger case diameter to fit the 223. | |||
|
| One of Us |
No, not bushed, made factory for the 222. But it is a full size long action with the bolt to match. It was originally machined for the small case head. The rifle is in really good condition otherwise. I guess now I know why.  Thinking about punching it out to 223 AI to make it hold on to the cases better. I would prefer standard 223 but I don't think that would clean up the chamber. ? AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
One of Us |
The information below are excerpts taken from an armourers report on refurbishing a BSA CF2 Varmint rifle in 222Rem; As this rifle was originally designed for the .222 Remington, the loading/ejection port is a shade over 3¼” which accommodates calibres up to .308 Winchester. In summary this is a nice bolt, cycling is smooth, ejection is highly effective, the safety catch engagement is positive and easy to apply and the gun state indicator is highly visual and easy to detect in the dark. However an Armourers note, when new, the spring loaded plunger type ejectors are extremely effective at ejecting a empty case away from the rifle, regardless of what speed the bolt is withdrawn, however as these springs wear and are effected by age, effectiveness drops of rapidly and the empty case is dropped within the receiver, until the spring is replaced. As the pin securing the ejector is a blind hole, repairing them can be a pain. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I wonder why they made it on a full length, long acton, meaning 30-06 length? Yes, check the plunger spring. As for re chambering, there is no need for an AI; most of them are wastes of time and money. The 223 is a bout .060 longer than the 222. You will end up with some original 222 neck. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Wow, thanks for that Eagle27. Very informative. Even if I were able to remove the old spring I wouldnt know what spring to replace it with, since they stopped making these in the 1980's. The blind pin hole is also a real conundrum. The rifle seems very well made, but that sure wasn't the best idea. DPCD, the issue that I see with re chambering to a Std 223 is the shoulder dia. Im just a hobbyist, so I dont know for sure. But the 222 shoulder is .3571 vs .3542 for the std 223. AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I assume you are checking the spring tension against something similar, like a Rem 700. One of which you could replace it with too. Even on a comparative, subjective basis. As for the shoulder OD, you are forgetting that the 223 shoulder is much farther forward than the 222; it's been done many times. The 223 body will clean up at the old 222 shoulder area. | |||
|
| One of Us |
From a strictly subjective POV, compared to a rem 700 and a Savage Model 12 the BSA plunger actually seems more stout. Hmm, it sure would be nice to keep this thing original. Any suggestions on how to remove a sear pin from a blind hole? AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
If it is long enough, and stiff enough, no need to remove it. I would drill it out; no other way. | |||
|
One of Us |
Wstrnhuntr mentions the large size of the action, which reminds me that I read somewhere it had evolved from the P14. Does that ring any bells? | |||
|
| One of Us |
No the BSA is nothing like a P14. And by large, he means long. It is a fairly standard size with a ring OD of 1.35 and a length of 7 inches for short and 7.75 for long. No design features are the same with a P14. Other actions with the same bolt head design operate successfully with the 222. There is something we are missing. It might be the position of the ejector plunger; maybe it is too far out. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I was wrong to say it is a "long" action. It just seems huge for a 222. It is their standard short action to accommodate a 308. Some of the earlier actions may have different roots, I dont know. But I did read that the CF-2 was the last of the BSA sporters and was redesigned/different from the Monarch and their other earlier sporter actions. In comparing to the Remington 700 I noticed that the bolt recess was not as deep on the BSA, which means the plunger has less travel. Happy april fools Saeed, Lol.  AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I am not amused by April fools jokes. Sounds like you are screwed; which is probably a banned word now. | |||
|
| One of Us |
SCREWED is allowed due to this being the GUNSMITHING forum!  Hip | |||
|
| One of Us |
Fair point indeed! | |||
|
| one of us |
One aspect of the BSA which is similar to the p14 is the angled locking lugs and seats. My Cf-2 in 222 exhibited the same issue unless I opened the bolt quickly. I re-barrelled it in 223 and it works fine. Regards, Bill | |||
|
| One of Us |
Not that it helps, but I once had on lone for about 6 months a CF2 in 222. It behaved exactly like you say and was very irritating. I didn’t mess with guns back then but with careful inspection of the plunger and extractor I couldn’t find an issue. I gave it back before fixing it and it reinforced my dislike of push feeds | |||
|
| One of Us |
Now I have to comment; guess what: there are millions of push feeds in service that perform perfectly well. And every small arm the US Army uses is push feed; so it must work most of the time. And every machine gun except the M2. It is not the design in general that is the problem; just this particular rifle. I can give you the history of controlled round feed design, but I don't have time now. Suffice it to say, it was not for better feeding, or extraction. Contrary to popular belief. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes yes I know I just don’t like them | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have been kicking around the idea of making it a 222 rem mag mostly for that little bit of extra case length to help keep it levered onto the bolt face. But damn, the unobtanium brass is ridiculous. Ive tried cycling fast, slow upside down. It just doesnt like ejecting. AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I would imagine that the ejector spring would be pretty stout to hold the neck of the small 222Rem case hard against the inside of the receiver ring until the case mouth is clear and then flick the case out. From the armourers report info I posted (I have the full article on refurbishing the 222Rem CF2 rifle), it seems case ejection is normally very positive so the spring has obviously weakened assuming nothing else has changed from factory. What is the extractor spring tension like because the extractor will have to hold the case head firmly too? All plunger type ejectors must suffer from some lessening of spring tension with age but usually have plenty in reserve for a long life. Combining the small 222Rem cartridge in a standard length action as in the CF2 likely presented problems with ejection overcome with a powerful spring but with a shorter life than normal? As to removing the ejector rod retention pin, as dpcd said, the only way is to drill it out, while holding the plunger back of course. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Eagle27, To me it seems like a problem with the geometry more than the spring tension. As I said earlier, the plunger spring is more stiff than my other push feed rifle plungers. It still works well. But the short 222 case, when it begins to angle away from parallel with the bore seems to make the plunger run out of travel just before the case ejects. Ive decided to rechamber it to a 222 Rem Mag to help prevent that. I believe I found the article you are referring to here . I noticed that like Bill Leeper, the guy doing the restoration also ultimately rechambered to 223. I dont think that is a coincidence. Perhaps there is a number of things that just get a bit of wear like the plunger, the bolt, the receiver runners etc that adds up to play that wasnt there when these rifles were new. Not sure, but I dont think replacing the spring is what it needs. I will find out in about a week or so. Got some brass on the way and going to rent a reamer and see. I also think there is a good chance that re-designing a new plunger that is more flush than beveled could possibly fix the problem. That would make it push against the case a bit closer to the center allowing more case movement. AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes that is the article. Just seems strange that the armourer makes a mention that when new, the ejection is extremely effective but as the spring wears with age this effectiveness drops off. I have had a bit to do with the BSA rifles having owned a BSA Hunter in 7x57 for a few years and handled most of the other models. The CF2 for a left hander like me was a prick because of the sharp roll over comb. Basically the CF2 was unusable for lefties. I did use one when handloading some ammo for an owner but I can't recall exactly what cartridge it was (not 222, 30.06 from faint memory) and don't recall what the bolt face, extractor and ejector was like on that particular rifle BSA were a reputable manufacturer producing very good firearms, the Hunter a very sort after model especially in 7x57 as the action was a medium length especially made for that cartridge. You maybe right in that a combination of wear overall on your CF2 is causing the issue. If it can be resolved by rechambering to the 222 Rem Mag without having to touch anything else on the rifle then probably is the best outcome. Hope it works, but get rid of that roll over comb on the stock just in case a leftie ever uses your rifle  | |||
|
| One of Us |
Ive noticed the BSA rifles are quite popular down under. The build quality on this one is quite nice much like the article states. Very good read by the way. You would like mine, according to this article mine is the "european sporter" with no white lines and no rollover cheek piece.  AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
222, 223, 222 mag. There is zero reason for the 222 mag to even exist now.  | |||
|
| One of Us |
I tore down the extractor and cleaned it up good. The way it goes together it can harbor crud underneath and keep it from engaging the case. That seemed to help some but sure didn't fix it. The more I look at this and compare to other rifles I think I may need to make a new plunger to get it to work right in any configuration. The original is steeply beveled on the end and I believe that is part of the problem. Too slippery and a tad short in the wrong places. Looking at several other rifles none of them are like that. They are all just flush on the end. Dumb question, would mild steel be ok for a plunger? AK-47 The only Communist Idea that Liberals don't like. | |||
|
| One of Us |
The shanks of HSS drills make good tough pins. Cheap enough to sacrifice a drill for the shank which can easily be cut and filed to make a new plunger. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia