.22LR Chamber question.

As I have mentioned in another topic I installed a Lilja tight bore barrel that was chambered with Lilja match reamer in my homemade conversion. My old barrel worked fine as to function but I never tested it for group size. Now with the tight bore lilja barrel chambered with lilja .22 match reamer (both reamers were new from Manson) I get failure to eject. Has no problem loading a round from the magazine but ejection fails. Either the empty round is in the chamber or trapped between the breech face and slide long ways not stove piped.
 I was thinking I would have to increase recoil spring weight because the tighter bore would increase pressure but it seem recoil spring is to heavy! My old barrel was sleeved with barrel from Brownells using a Bentz chambering reamer. Both barrel have 1-16 twist.
 I covered all areas of possible contact between barrel and slide with magic marker, no rubbing detected.
 Any thoughts or suggestions? Tomorrow I'll try some HV 22 rounds.

Lilja Match ??? Bolt gun? Or 10-22 more likely. 

Pistol, Bentz.

My bolt guns, Calfee. .225 straight with a 2 deg leade.

Maybe the cartridge is too long or has a different ogive shape, try different ammo. I had the same experience with Eley and CCI in a CPC barrel. Wouldn't seat the rim flush had to push it, then tried Aguilla Target SV and it would drop flush and I didn't have anymore problems. 
 Stan

As mentioned in a different topic I did plunk test, round went in to the rim, no gap between rim and breech face. Inserted round without magazine, made sure slide was completely closed, same results. I did try SK Standard (Yellow box) SK Match (Green box) and RWS Rifle match (1085fps) all did the same. I know I did have a box of CCI Standard, not sure if I used that in other barrel. Will have to look to see if I have some, was using SK ammo so I have quite a bit of it. Did have some Red box rifle match, will have to check to see if I have some. I do have one CCI standard round that I used for plunk test as well as the SK green box, bullet looked dam near the same, OL of the CCI was .010" longer than SK but both passed plunk test. Test on Bentz chambered barrel slide did lock back after last round in magazine fired. What I expected from Lilja chamber was possible failure to feed and having tighter bore higher pressure so recoil spring will need to be increased. Seems all is the opposite of what I expected!  Using HV rounds might surprise me too! I'm thinking I have a lot to learn about firearm chamber design!
 Yes the Lilja chamber is slightly smaller in diameter and shorter in length, plunk test was good, rim was tight against breech face and I made sure slide was completely closed. Hard to tell how much the slide was opening but probably not far enough to eject case or to strip another round from magazine, possibly a few were lucky to align with chamber and slide closed while others hit bolt face. Slide did move enough to cock hammer. However CCI Standard Velocity is 1070fps similar to RWS velocity.
 Does tighter chamber hold the blow back longer. I do have Teslong Digital Borescope, Chamber looks good, smooth and reamer new never used prior to this chambering, Viper Venom from Manson used as reaming lube. Prior to test firing to see how round fitted the chamber I covered the bullet side of the rounds with Blue Magic Marker about 1/2 the length including the bullet. SK had very slight contact and CCI had slightly more on the end of the brass after doing about 5 plunk tests on each round.
 BTW the main spring is lowest EGW has. Recoil spring is 1911 style from Wolf, if memory is correct I used Reduced Power variable rate 5lb spring, a few coils were cut to allow other slide to lock back! My slide is tool steel not aluminum with full length recoil spring guide. Guide is tubular so barrel locking screw fits inside.

Sk green box...is that SK Pistol Match? I have found them to work best in my Nelson conversion. About 0.0005" smaller in diameter than SK Standard+ and more oily. Some would also recommend polishing the chamber. Also, cutting recoil spring coils reduced the force the slide exerts when closed but actually increases the spring rate.

If the reamer was designed specifically for a bolt gun or under the assumption of significant barrel length that could be the problem. A typical target 22 riffle has like 20ish inches of barrel, your conversion has like 5-6, that changes things significantly.

The college team I help coach has 21 Benelli .22 pistols, about a 50/50 mix of MP90S's & MP95E's.  I've been working on getting all of them to work reliably with Aguila SV.  My two personal MP90S's love the stuff.

Over the years, Benelli has made lots of changes to the strength of the recoil springs, and they don't come with date stamps.  They appear to have been making them stronger & stronger over time.  Between that & previous coaches swapping stuff around, I have no idea what pistol has what in it without careful measurements.  I've got a spreadsheet with over 25 springs in it, with calculated open & closed bolt force.  Out of curiosity, I also ran calculations on what happens when you cut an average spring down.  For what it's worth:



The closed bolt force drops a bit faster than the open bolt force.  As a result, for example, if you are having trouble with the slide not coming back all the way and you cut down the spring, you run a disproportionally higher risk of developing chambering issues.

I agree with cutting springs that are the length required in the 1911 45. I don't cut them, simply use a different spring. I do have a complete set of the standard Wolf 1911 recoil springs and those color coded ones. However what I'm doing is making my own version of the .22 conversion. I noticed all the Marvel look a likes have one issue I don't like as compared to all the .22 pistols available. When round is stripped from magazine in Marvel, Nelson and AA conversions there is about a 1/4 gap the round must jump after leaving magazine lips before entering the chamber yet all other .22 pistols and other calibers the bullet is partially in the chamber before release! So I simply moved the barrel back about 1/4". I made a steel slide not aluminum, rounded the top of the rear side of the slide like a 208 to lower weight, other cuts were also done to reduce steel slide weight. See attached photo of almost completed gun using Caspian as a designated frame, scope mount from Nelson because I wanted irons sights so as to shoot it in Distinguished .22 matches.
 I therefore needed a recoil spring, do have the Nelson spring set but decided to buy those Variable rate springs from Wolf from 5 to 10lbs. I'll have to check the remaining springs but my guess is I used the 5lb spring since I cut it so as to get lock-back, didn't cut much since the gun worked but didn't lock-back. Recoil spring worked great on the other barrel that was also one piece not like the screwed together 2 piece but to get rifling I used Brownells .22 sleeve. As mentioned used new unused Manson Bentz reamer. Worked great, functioned flawlessly no issues chambering or ejecting! Never got to testing since 2" diameter Lilja tight bore .2150" X .2200 barrel came so went to work making that barrel using the dimension from the first barrel.
 So all that was changed was bore size and chamber in the gun that previously worked great, group size was never determined since I figured the tight bore barrel would shoot better.
 Since the Bentz chamber is bigger and longer all's not lost, simply have to re-cut chamber with Bentz reamer! However I would like to see if Lilja chamber has a good group size since I have another barrel made to Nelson dimensions for Adam's conversion and yet another barrel for my friends AA conversion that are not chambered yet. Maybe I shout try a JGS .22 match reamer, dam near Bentz dimensions. Think I will call them today!

Frank,
FYI, most .22 reamers that are listed as "match" are meant for bolt action rifles and are tighter diameters. Those that are made to cut a recess for the rim will also force the bullets into the rifling. This comes from 1st hand experience.
The Bentz reamer was meant for semi-autos (10/22). It works well for that, but I don't have 1st hand experience with it.
In target, bolt action .22s, there are dual extractor to handle the need for more extraction which is done with no/ zero chamber pressure. Of note, early (pre '67 or so)Anschutz Model 54 action rifles only had 1 extractor. Extraction was often a problem. They changed and never looked back. Winchester 52's always had dual extractor.
I think you are asking a lot from a single extractor pistol.
maybe your hone is a path forward a couple tenths at a time?

Greetings Froneck,

Would you kindly post a link to a Lilja Match reamer with dimensions?

Cheers,

Dave

r_zerr wrote:Frank,
FYI, most .22 reamers that are listed as "match" are meant for bolt action rifles and are tighter diameters. Those that are made to cut a recess for the rim will also force the bullets into the rifling. This comes from 1st hand experience.
The Bentz reamer was meant for semi-autos (10/22). It works well for that, but I don't have 1st hand experience with it.
In target, bolt action .22s, there are dual extractor to handle the need for more extraction which is done with no/ zero chamber pressure. Of note, early (pre '67 or so)Anschutz Model 54 action rifles only had 1 extractor. Extraction was often a problem. They changed and never looked back. Winchester 52's always had dual extractor.
I think you are asking a lot from a single extractor pistol.
maybe your hone is a path forward a couple tenths at a time?

Unlike in a bolt action rifle, the extractor in a semi-auto doesn't pull the case out of the chamber.  The case pushes the slide back, and the extractor comes along for the ride.  The extractor is required in order to get repeatable & reliable ejection.  It has to hang onto the case securely enough that the case hits the ejector firmly & consistently.  In larger caliber pistols, cases often have enough mass/inertia that they will eject OK with no extractor at all.  Of course, you are screwed if you ever have to unload a round...

You are correct, and too tight of a chamber prevents the case from moving freely enough to make that occur. I should have been clearer in stating that.

I know the extractor does nothing, it's blow back! I don't have an extractor in the gun yet! I did buy a few different ones including a couple from Nelson but didn't like them because some modification to the slide I made. Did have one in the slide but didn't cut the Bentz chambered barrel and all rounds extracted, worked great without the extractor. Granted I probably will get better extraction with the extractor installed, brass would probably flick out further. In test firing the gun and getting the spring so that I got lock-back all rounds ejected without problem, traveled further than I expected.
 As I mentioned the rounds passed the plunk test in the Lilja barrel chambered with Lilja macth reamer, I could easily remove the round with my fingernail, round is not tight at all!
 I called and talked to the guy that designs reamers for JSG. Yes they have the typical chambering reamers but custom make them, guys will send a loaded round less powder and primer plus brass and bullet, he then make a reamer for it. He said the JSG .22LR match reamer will work in my semi-auto pistol, ordered it but will not be shipped until Dec 31
  Reamer dimensions https://4drentals.com/product/reamer-rentals/rimfire/22-lr-bentz/
 I do have another chart sent to me by JSG, it has the JSG .22 match reamer and the Bentz but not he Lilja.
 I also have a drawing of the Lilja reamer from Manson, it's not the same, dimensions are slightly larger than those in the 4D site. I did see in the Ultimate Reloader site when he had a guest from 4D reamers describe chambering reamer use, he claimed Manson made his reamers, Interesting that the dimensions are different!

r_zerr wrote:You are correct, and too tight of a chamber prevents the case from moving freely enough to make that occur. I should have been clearer in stating that.

 I checked the chamber with .226" pin gauge, went in about .470, made a pin from 4140 tool steel .2263" X .560 long and lapped chamber to depth of .560" using 1000 non embedding compound. Checked with bore scope, chamber is very smoooth! .226" pin gauge goes in .560"! Chamber is dam near Bentz dimensions!  Round passes plunk test and brass easily removed out of the chamber after firing!  Didn't help!!! Barrel bore is .2200" X .215" that should increase the pressure over a .2215" X .217 barrel.
 Granted the bullet is touching the rifling but that shouldn't make any difference! I'll check the chamber again but my guess is the chamber is under .001" difference from Bentz chamber! See 4D site listed in my previous post.

Frank,
From what you are saying that the case is coming out of the chamber during firing, but you are not using an extractor, correct?
Is the slide locking back from a single round? If so, you are imparting enough energy to the slide or close to it.
If both of these questions are true, 2 things are likely in part or combination and they point to the need of the extractor. The case can be coming away from the slide face and not reliably hitting the ejector. The other thing is that the case may be hitting the ejector, but not being kicked sideways. The extractor makes sure that the case has a pivot point to spin it sideways as well as providing a little grip to keep it against the boltface until it does get hit.

As mentioned earlier the other barrel I made using a sleeve from Brownells and Bentz reamer worked great! I copied the dimensions on the Lilja barrel so the barrel is exactly the same. Only difference is barrel bore diameter and use of Lilja style reamer.
 Last test, brass was trapped between breech face and slide, parallel with bore  not stove piped. Hammer was not cocked, slide did not go back far enough so brass could hit the extractor. Of course next round was not stripped from magazine.
 Brass is in excellent condition, so will return into chamber as it does sometimes. Fired round is easily removed with fingernail, would probably fall out if gun shook. Brass is free to move! Tried without magazine, same thing! Gun loads by stripping round from magazine and is completely closed, sames results if slide is push to insure closing, slide does not move indicating slide is a far forward as possible no breech-face to slide gap viable
 Again gun with previous barrel worked flawless without extractor, fired five round from magazine and slide locked back after last shot fired! New barrel dimensions are exactly the same as previous barrel! Magic markered all areas of barrel that might contact the slide, no rubbing! Recoil spring is 5Lb Wolf 1911 variable rate spring (only 5Lb 1911 spring available) Preload is slightly more than 1911 so a few coils were trimmed from spring so lock-back would occur with previous barrel. Slide is recessed for rim, fired brass rim is still in recess when brass is trapped, as I mention sometime fire brass is returned into chamber

As the only change is the new barrel/chamber....and given the chamber dimensions and quality of surfaces are appropriate as you've described
and assuming the  extractor relationship to cartridge rim is optimal

assembling with a slightly weaker recoil spring (as well as a slightly heavier recoil spring) would be an inexpensive and rather easy next step i would imagine.

I agree but hate to lower closing pressure! Accuracy is when slide is closed. I think I purchased more than one 5Lb spring, tried to call Wolf today to order a few more, was too late they closed.. But this barrel has tight bore .215", groove diameter is .2200". That should  have increased pressure quite a bit. A .224" bullet being pushed thru a .2200 barrel with rifling that is .215" has to greatly increase pressure! I expected the reverse, I though I would need to increase recoil spring weight! Nothing makes sense!
 To add to the problem the first time I tried the barrel in the gun if failed to chamber the first 2 rounds yet the next 3 worked great! I seen the problem, the increased magazine spring pressure with 5 and 4 rounds stopped the round from pivoting up. Rounds were hitting the bottom of the ramp so I filed the radius lower, rounds loaded OK Fired one or 2 then round failed to eject but hammer was cocked. Seems like the more I tested the worse the issue became until now the slide will not return enough to cock the hammer! I'm beginning to think it's a hammer or main spring issue! But thumbing the hammer seems normal! Maybe speed? I might replace main spring housing, one being used is a welded together grip safety and main spring housing! Tomorrow I'll put in a grip safety and typical main spring housing!

This is a very interesting project. I know the conventional wisdom is to use a 19# main but my Nelson runs great with a 16#, SK pistol match, and the Ultra Match hammer set from C&S (thinned and chamfered hammer). I polished the inside of the MS housing and OD of the plunger. A very light internal coating of moly grease. The Nelson has a small low-mass FP which I think helps. Not sure what FP you are using. Anything that moves: low mass, low friction, high acceleration. It sounds like your chamber dimensions are more than adequate. A 1911 recoil spring setup will have higher "nuisance" friction because they are larger in diameter causing IMHO more friction than the Nelson spring/rod setup, which has two squared and ground spring ends. The ends must be free to rotate as the spring compresses (the unfinished spring plug end can bind). I think you can also open up a larger array of springs by going outside the 1911 spring sources. For example, I've bought springs to increase the upward force on the follower in the Nelson plastic mags (by about +20%). I did a quick search there. Input: OD (0.3 to 0.5"), Free Length (5.5 to 7"), wire diameter (0.02 to 0.05"), total coils 20 to 40), rate (1 to 6 lbs/in). The closure force would be the rate times the distance the spring compresses from free to lockup.  

=0.3&cs_od[to]=0.5&cs_fl[from]=5.5&cs_fl[to]=7&cs_wd[from]=0.02&cs_wd[to]=0.05&cs_tc[from]=20&cs_tc[to]=40&material_type=0&cs_rt[from]=1&cs_rt[to]=6&form_key=Dy60QYsttXqkCqJk]https://www.thespringstore.com/catalogsearch/advanced/result/?unit_measure=en&category=cs&cs_od%5Bfrom%5D=0.3&cs_od%5Bto%5D=0.5&cs_fl%5Bfrom%5D=5.5&cs_fl%5Bto%5D=7&cs_wd%5Bfrom%5D=0.02&cs_wd%5Bto%5D=0.05&cs_tc%5Bfrom%5D=20&cs_tc%5Bto%5D=40&material_type=0&cs_rt%5Bfrom%5D=1&cs_rt%5Bto%5D=6&form_key=Dy60QYsttXqkCqJk

I understand all, However all worked well with the other barrel, no problems detected. Not to say that after many firings some might have developed but as of now all worked great! Made barrel from Lilja tight bore 2" diameter blank, all dimensions exactly the same. Only difference is barrel and chamber! Yes chamber might be too tight but round drops in to rim when plunk tested, honed the chamber so .216" pin gauge goes in .655" using 1000 grit non-embedding compound. Bore scope shows chamber very smooooth!
 To be sure I magic marked all the locations on the barrel that might contact the slide, no rubbing detected
 Looking at the chart when www.Varmintal.com was entered and pull down menu in Firfox has .22 chamber-pressure png is clicked a chart comes up, .22 velocities are plotted, 1035fps and 1075fps, curve is dam near the same. I don't understand the end, pressure goes to 0 in no time but lower velocity 1035fps/lower pressure takes longer??
 I tried to get the link but no matter what I try I get error page. Maybe someone with better computer knowledge than I can post the link.

Greetings,

I wonder if the "tighter" chamber is not allowing the case to collapse after firing?

You say the larger Bentz chamber functions well?

I have used the Bentz reamer on a variety of barrels with small groove diameter, four, six, eight, twelve, and sixteen groove and all functioned well.

Cheers,

Dave

Maybe this will help...

Back around 1985 or so, a shooting buddy bought a Clark barrel with a rib for his S&W Model 41 so he could mount a red dot on it.  It wouldn't cycle reliably at all.  I got the S&W chamber spec someplace (see attached), and discovered that the Clark chamber was measurably tighter.  

I carefully lapped the chamber so that it was much closer to the S&W spec.  It worked fine for many years, and after the owner passed away, a guy on my Greater Boston Pistol League team bought it, and is happily shooting it to this day.

Yes like I said the Barrel with the Bentz reamer worked great, no issues! I then put a Lilja style reamer in a tight bore Lillja barrel, nothing else was changed. Round passed the plunk test. .226" pin gauge was put in the barrel, went in about .56" made a plug from 4140 tool steel and lapped the depth to .655" as suggested buy the guy at JSG reamer company. Now I have a very smooth chamber .655" in depth but still have the same problem, nothing changed! Yeah I could just put the Bentz reamer in the barrel but there is no guarantee it will work. Plus I have another 2 barrels to chamber one of them is for Adam. The reason for the tight bore expensive barrel was to get high accuracy. My barrel is the experimental one but I don't want to ruin it with changes that will not work! As  mentioned earlier I did order a JSG .22Lr match reamer they claim will work in semi-auto pistol. However it's out of stock and mine will be shipped Dec.31. Dimensions are about in the middle between the Bentz and Lilja reamers.Bore taper on the Bentz 1.35°, Lilja 2° Bentz reamer tapers from .2278" to 2264" in ,6787" Lilja .226" to .225 in .655" (taken from Manson reamer drawing) After reaming my guess the rim side of the chamber is about .2265"

gwhite wrote:Greater Boston Pistol League

Now those words take me back a few years.

I was on the Woburn Sportsman's Association team once upon a time.

Some GBPL members got mad that WSA had someone on their Sharpshooter team who routinely shot above GBPL's artificial handicap of 290, thus our team scores were routinely above 1160. Nobody could touch us.

Not my fault. I showed up and said, "I'd like to shoot your league." The WSA SS team was the only team that would take me. They were nice people. I liked that league.

But oh my do you get the opportunity to shoot in some weird, musty basement ranges.

The GBPL has changed a lot over the years.  When I was in college in the early 1970's, they had 6 divisions, with teams separated (roughly) by skill level.   Each Division had four or five teams.  The "A" Division had the WSA team in a tight rivalry with the MIT Varsity team.

Lots of clubs have shut down, and it's harder & harder to recruit bullseye shooters.  The League is down to two divisions, A & B.  It's handicapped, with A Division shooting a 60 shot match, and B Division shooting a 30 shot match.  Since the pandemic, teams CAN shoot shoulder to shoulder, but people can also shoot postal.   After years of slowly losing shooters, the combination of the handicap system and being able to shoot postal has actually helped us grow a bit.

I shoot with the WSA A Division Team, and my wife is the team Captain.  A Division has 5 teams, and B Division has 6.