[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;51565215]Last time I brought mine to a gun show the guy at the check in was smart. He took two zip ties, put one down the barrel, then clipped them into eachother.[/QUOTE]
Yeah this is what I've seen every gun show do for stuff like that
[editline]21st December 2016[/editline]
They even did it for my 4506
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;51565215]Last time I brought mine to a gun show the guy at the check in was smart. He took two zip ties, put one down the barrel, then clipped them into eachother.[/QUOTE]
The ties they were using wouldn't fit down the 7.63 barrel, the zippy bit was too thick. They were just running them through the magwell and out the ejection port.
It's been a while since I went to a gunshow, but they tend to ziplock the trigger fully depressed. They used to do magwell or down the barrel, but people trying to sell guns would just rack the slide real quick to cut them off.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51565196]The C96 is drop safe. If you engage the safety while the hammer is down, the hammer is moved away from the firing pin and locked in place. If you engage it while it's cocked, you have to pull the hammer back with your thumb to push the safety up, which has it resting on the safety's block. In both conditions, there is a sturdy physical block preventing the hammer from coming down. In other words, you'd have to hit it hard enough to actually destroy the gun permanently in order for the hammer to overcome the safety.[/QUOTE]
If I lower the hammer and engage the safety, the hammer is prevented from being retracted, but it isn't locked in place- I can push forward on the hammer and it'll engage the firing pin and push it.
It is the 'New Safety' type, confirmed by the fact that I have to pull the hammer further to engage the safety when cocked. Something broken perhaps?
Edit: I also notice that when the hammer is down, it's resting on the firing pin, which protrudes from the back of the bolt. I'm seeing pictures online of the hammer resting against the bolt face. Remember that the barrel/bolt assembly doesn't match the lock frame on this gun, so I suppose it might be due to that, but the thing with the firing pin not being an inertial type when every website says it's an inertial firing pin is really weird.
It sounds like something is wrong with your safety mechanism. Mine is also a NS. When the hammer is down and the safety is not engaged, it does rest on the rear of the firing pin, but the safety locks it away from the pin and prevents it from coming into contact with it. If the safety was off, a sharp tap could detonate a primer if there was a round chambered, but my safety very solidly holds the hammer back when engaged.
What you are describing [I]is[/I] an inertial firing pin -- the hammer resting on it doesn't cause it to protrude from the bolt face, it has to be struck with the full force of the falling hammer. That prevents it from running away in full auto like an open bolt gun.
I would not recommend attempting to fix your safety without doing some research into the mechanism. If you take it apart you may never get it back together. The C96 is a notorious 3D puzzle few have completed without help. :v:
[QUOTE=Zombinie;51565037]I'm a true memester now:
[t]http://i.imgur.com/826zFYA.jpg[/t]
i gave away my AK banana mag to my /k/ secret santa recipient[/QUOTE]
I got my banana ak mag around here somewhere, even has chiquita sticker on it.
I don't even own an AK, I just wanted a banana.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51566337]It sounds like something is wrong with your safety mechanism. Mine is also a NS. When the hammer is down and the safety is not engaged, it does rest on the rear of the firing pin, but the safety locks it away from the pin and prevents it from coming into contact with it. If the safety was off, a sharp tap could detonate a primer if there was a round chambered, but my safety very solidly holds the hammer back when engaged.
What you are describing [I]is[/I] an inertial firing pin -- the hammer resting on it doesn't cause it to protrude from the bolt face, it has to be struck with the full force of the falling hammer. That prevents it from running away in full auto like an open bolt gun.
I would not recommend attempting to fix your safety without doing some research into the mechanism. If you take it apart you may never get it back together. The C96 is a notorious 3D puzzle few have completed without help. :v:[/QUOTE]
My understanding of how inertial firing pins operate is that the firing pin is shorter than the channel it rides it, and requires the momentum from a hard hit by the hammer to protrude and strike the primer. The firing pin shouldn't protrude from the bolt face when simply pressed flush, which is what mine does.
I've already taken the whole thing apart a couple of times, and was surprised to find that for all the Internet bluster about it being impossible to understand, it was still simpler than my Calico trigger group. Anyways, taking it apart and replacing parts is not a problem.
I took some pictures to illustrate what's going on, and I'm not sure it's the safety that's the issue.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/GZOPM4A.jpg[/t]
Here it is at full cock. From what I can tell from online photos, the firing pin protrudes from the rear of the bolt much more than it's supposed to.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/ZFHmDyQ.jpg[/t]
Here it is decocked. The hammer is resting on the firing pin, which stays back due to its stronger spring, but the hammer can be pushed forward which causes the firing pin to protrude.
I tested the gun with the firing pin removed, and found that while the resting position of the hammer with the safety off was against the bolt, engaging the safety retracted it [I]very[/I] slightly, enough to plausibly stand it off from the firing pin if it didn't protrude out the back so far. It didn't actually lock the hammer in place though, as I was still able to retract it about halfway, but it did prevent the hammer from going forward of that standoff position.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/CTZVCbR.jpg[/t]
Here's the firing pin installed and at rest. It's flush with the bolt face.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/NB2QYI8.jpg[/t]
Here's the firing pin with the rear fully depressed. Unless I'm grossly misunderstanding what an inertial firing pin is, the firing pin should not be protruding here- at most it should be flush with the bolt face.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/s1z5a3f.jpg[/t]
And here's the firing pin next to the bolt. Every photo I can find online shows a different shape to the firing pin- mine doesn't have a step on the actual pin part, and the 'button' on the back protrudes way farther than the securing 'wings' than on reference photos. Also, you can't see in this photo, but the pin's takedown groove runs the entire width of the pin, like a flathead screw, rather than just being a groove in the middle like on most examples I see.
Conclusion: This isn't a normal C96 firing pin in my gun. I don't know [I]what[/I] it is because it's close enough to function- maybe an Astra, or a Chinese copy- but it is definitely too long, causing it to act as a positive firing pin and protrude too far from the rear. I'm concerned that while it works, the gun wasn't designed to work this way, and it seems like it'll be much more likely to rupture a primer from the additional firing pin travel.
I'm thinking the best solution is to order a firing pin from Numrich and see what it does.
Oh, yeah, that's an Astra firing pin. Look:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/ND0qdqH.jpg[/img]
That's neat, but wrong. :v: I'm surprised the gun works, Astra parts and C96 parts aren't supposed to be interchangeable. I would replace that ASAP, I can already see the surprise full-auto runaway if that gets fouled up.
I remember seeing a thread on another forum where a guy got a 900 operational using Mauser bolt parts, because the bolt assembly is almost identical and most parts were drop-in or only required minor modification. Seems to me like the previous owner, or a previous owner, broke the firing pin and used what they could find. Who knows. I've ordered a replacement.
Goddamn I love being an American.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/ydKOyjz.jpg[/t]
Finally bit the bullet and bought a Nagant:
[IMG]https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15665471_1327627240600982_650343166847660503_n.jpg?oh=b62ed86146579116884a6f28961aed6c&oe=58AEE5D6[/IMG]
1943 dated, Izhmash manufactured with a Refurbishment mark. Got it with 100 rounds of Sellier and Bellot 7.62x54r. Cost was around 350 euro plus 80 euro licensing.
Gonna do some work on the wood and get a PU scope for it.
I got my tokarev yesterday. Havent shot it yet, but fuuuuuck, it feels manly to rack the slide.
My friend also picked up a diamondback ar carbine, and the shop had a deal where if you buy a $350 burris optic, you get a fastfire 3 for free. He stuck both of those on it and a foregrip thats also a springloaded popout bipod. Ended up with a real fancy lookin ar for around 1000$.
The shop also had an ar5.7 upper with 2 mags for $700. Fuckin neat looking thing.
[QUOTE=Mabus;51569169]Finally bit the bullet and bought a Nagant:
[IMG]https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15665471_1327627240600982_650343166847660503_n.jpg?oh=b62ed86146579116884a6f28961aed6c&oe=58AEE5D6[/IMG]
1943 dated, Izhmash manufactured with a Refurbishment mark. Got it with 100 rounds of Sellier and Bellot 7.62x54r. Cost was around 350 euro plus 80 euro licensing.
Gonna do some work on the wood and get a PU scope for it.[/QUOTE]
Nice, the fp nugget club keeps growing.
I would be part of the nugget club but at the time I was going to buy mine I sort of lacked a thing called a home and I guess that disqualifies you from buying a gun. Now they're like 4 times the price so fuck that.
[QUOTE=Mabus;51569169]Gonna do some work on the wood and get a PU scope for it.[/QUOTE]
I don't mean to sound like one of those 'RIFLE IS FINE' memelords but I'd really strongly advise against messing with it. The wood looks fine in your image, and if you were planning on refinishing it that would kill a lot of its historical value to little benefit. As for the scope, most Mosins are really not accurate enough to warrant one, you'd again be damaging its historical value with unnecessary modification, and mounting the scope requires bending the bolt handle which is additional work.
Ultimately it's your gun and it's your money, but that's a nice gun as-is and you'd be putting money into actively making it less valuable with likely to little practical benefit.
[QUOTE=catbarf;51569890]I don't mean to sound like one of those 'RIFLE IS FINE' memelords but I'd really strongly advise against messing with it. The wood looks fine in your image, and if you were planning on refinishing it that would kill a lot of its historical value to little benefit. As for the scope, most Mosins are really not accurate enough to warrant one, you'd again be damaging its historical value with unnecessary modification, and mounting the scope requires bending the bolt handle which is additional work.
Ultimately it's your gun and it's your money, but that's a nice gun as-is and you'd be putting money into actively making it less valuable with likely to little practical benefit.[/QUOTE]
Knowing myself, I'll probably never do anything with it and use it as is.
Nuggets are shit, SMLE is best milsurp.
[QUOTE=download;51570068]Nuggets are shit, SMLE is best milsurp.[/QUOTE]
Rifle is fine, you are problem.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;51570090]Rifle is fine, you are problem.[/QUOTE]
I dunno, 3-MOA accuracy for a bolt action rifle with five-round capacity is kinda shit.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51570102]I dunno, 3-MOA accuracy for a bolt action rifle with five-round capacity is kinda shit.[/QUOTE]
Enfields aren't exactly tack drivers on average either. I loved my SMLE and it was super accurate but that is definitely not par for the course with them. Enfields are the best because ergo, 10 round detachable magazine and sword bayonets. The Gew98 family is where the accuracy is at.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;51570231]Enfields aren't exactly tack drivers on average either. I loved my SMLE and it was super accurate but that is definitely not par for the course with them. Enfields are the best because ergo, 10 round detachable magazine and sword bayonets. The Gew98 family is where the accuracy is at.[/QUOTE]
My Enfield and my dad's are both plenty accurate. Enfields were actually one of the more accurate guns of the era.
My K98 gets a great, tight group. The problem is it shoots 2 feet high.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;51570333]My Enfield and my dad's are both plenty accurate. Enfields were actually one of the more accurate guns of the era.
My K98 gets a great, tight group. The problem is it shoots 2 feet high.[/QUOTE]
My dad's Remington-made 1903A3 has the same problem, but that's because the lowest sight gradation is 300 yards, and my dad doesn't feel comfortable going past 100.
With the M4 carbine, we were taught to aim for the target's navel when shooting closer than 200 meters. At 50 meters, we were told to aim just above the dirt.
If you ever end up having to use your Karabiner on human targets, aim for the groin.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;51570090]Rifle is fine, you are problem.[/QUOTE]
The maple syrup has clearly addled your brain.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51570528]My dad's Remington-made 1903A3 has the same problem, but that's because the lowest sight gradation is 300 yards, and my dad doesn't feel comfortable going past 100.
With the M4 carbine, we were taught to aim for the target's navel when shooting closer than 200 meters. At 50 meters, we were told to aim just above the dirt.
If you ever end up having to use your Karabiner on human targets, aim for the groin.[/QUOTE]
My Enfield only has 300m and 600m sights. But it hits dead on at 100 using the 300, so I don't know how that translates to the 600 sights. But then again, I shoot my AR 3/4 the time without my red dot even turned on and hit the targets fine... so... I might be doing gatting wrong.
[QUOTE=mastoner20;51571176]My Enfield only has 300m and 600m sights. But it hits dead on at 100 using the 300, so I don't know how that translates to the 600 sights. But then again, I shoot my AR 3/4 the time without my red dot even turned on and hit the targets fine... so... I might be doing gatting wrong.[/QUOTE]
Sounds like your Enfield has one of those extended front sight posts I keep hearing about.
The apertures on my no 5 are laughable
[QUOTE=Levelog;51571260]The apertures on my no 5 are laughable[/QUOTE]
What's wrong with them? The sights on mine are fine.
So Sig Sauer has issued a mandatory recall for 25,000 MCX's. Apparently their bolt assembly is getting a firing pin lock because of a rare issue where the gun will just fire on its own.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51570528]My dad's Remington-made 1903A3 has the same problem, but that's because the lowest sight gradation is 300 yards, and my dad doesn't feel comfortable going past 100.
With the M4 carbine, we were taught to aim for the target's navel when shooting closer than 200 meters. At 50 meters, we were told to aim just above the dirt.
If you ever end up having to use your Karabiner on human targets, aim for the groin.[/QUOTE]
I'm just gonna buy a new sight blank and bring a file to the range with me one day.
[editline]22nd December 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=download;51570785]The maple syrup has clearly addled your brain.[/QUOTE]
My mom got a 3" group with my Mosin at 100m. I can't, but since she did I know that rifle is fine, I am problem.
[QUOTE=download;51570068]Nuggets are shit, SMLE is best milsurp.[/QUOTE]
Fuck off, nugget is life.
M44 is best nugget. you can double it's length with a flick of the bayonet.
[QUOTE=download;51571287]What's wrong with them? The sights on mine are fine.[/QUOTE]
They're fine in terms of all similar rifles but IMO they're pretty poor compared to previous Enfield's and that was also one of the major complaints from testing troops.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
