Indians For Guns

What you find on the net indicates that there is a problem with these rifles and that the receiver can crack.

According to some,it is because it is over hardened to the point of being brittle.So much so that it would crack even if you drop it and it hits something hard.

According to others,it is an issue only in those rifle in which the barrel has been removed at some point of time.This is because the barrel has been screwed in with hydraulic rams.The force required to unscrew the barrel along with the large bearing surface can lead to micro cracks in the receiver.

Any feedback would be welcome on whether this is really the case or it's just one of those,"I have heard it so it is so."??

penpusher";p="46790 wrote:What you find on the net indicates that there is a problem with these rifles and that the receiver can crack.

According to some,it is because it is over hardened to the point of being brittle.So much so that it would crack even if you drop it and it hits something hard.

According to others,it is an issue only in those rifle in which the barrel has been removed at some point of time.This is because the barrel has been screwed in with hydraulic rams.The force required to unscrew the barrel along with the large bearing surface can lead to micro cracks in the receiver.

Any feedback would be welcome on whether this is really the case or it's just one of those,"I have heard it so it is so."??

Hi penpusher,

I too read something like that...not too different from what you have said.

Seems to be limited to a particular batch or batches.... and not all Eddystone 1917's....after all many shooters swear by their Eddystones...the debate continues to this day.

The similar quality control glitches seems to have occurred with Springfield and RIA 1903's of specific serial number ranges(below 800,000 for Springfield and below 285506 for RIA) , in which the receivers were case-hardened twice resulting in dangerous brittleness.

cc

These rifles may or may not have a brittle receiver; but there is really no way of knowing, except with destructive testing. Basically the problem is similar to the problem with the "low number" 1906 Springfield rifles, the steel was heated too hot for the forging process, "burning" it and making it brittle. In those days no pyrometers were used and the proper heat was judged by eye, on sunny days there was a chance of the steel being heated to too high a temperature. I have heard of ERA 1917 receivers cracking during barrel removal; I have never had it happen myself, nor have I ever heard of one failing with factory cartridges. If you don't use the proper tools, you can crack or bend most any receiver during barrel removal. I would not hesitate to fire a properly headspaced ERA rifle with factory rounds, and there are plenty around that have been barrelled to the belted H&H-based magnums. Hope this answers your question. Cheers.

CC: Partially right. Springfields were never casehardened. The intermedieate "double heat treated" ones, before the switch to nickel steel was made, were actually the strongest of the lot. Though you may hear otherwise from people who are guessing; I'll go with Col. Hatcher who was in charge of Springfield Armory. Cheers.

TwoRivers/Cottage Cheese thanks for the response.

CC,
Any idea about which of the ERA lots have the 'brittle' receivers?


Was thinking of buying one and considering the amount of investment these rifles demand in India,did not want to have the entire amount going down the drain.

TwoRivers,

Are these safe to fire with de-linked machine gun ammo.?

penpusher";p="46800 wrote:TwoRivers/Cottage Cheese thanks for the response.

CC,
Any idea about which of the ERA lots have the 'brittle' receivers?


Was thinking of buying one and considering the amount of investment these rifles demand in India,did not want to have the entire amount going down the drain.

TwoRivers,

Are these safe to fire with de-linked machine gun ammo.?

Hi penpusher,

I honestly have no idea other than what I've already mentioned...all came from casual or incidental reading. I don't suppose the 'defective' lots were pinned down...maybe thats why it's a major source of debate.

Thanks tworivers for the clarification.

As Tworivers mentions, Hatchers note book is a treasure trove of deep technical info. I recall there were at least two or more chapters that dwelt on the science, process and technology behind Springfield/RIA
rifles of the era. Superb reading for the very technical minded.

regards,
cc


I don't

Thanks CC

penpusher: Unfortunately, no. There are no known lots of serial numbers that are known to be brittle. As to de-linked MG ammo, there is no difference in "MG" or "regular" ball ammo, except possibly case temper, which wasn't always perfectly controlled during wartime. Producing cases that functioned properly in both bolt rifles and MGs could be a delicate balancing act, as most MGs require a bit softer brass case than ideal for bolt actions, i.e. MGs have a narrower range of case temper they will function with reliably. Cheers.

Thanks TwoRivers

penpusher";p="46800 wrote:
Are these safe to fire with de-linked machine gun ammo.?

Found a stash of KF 30-06?....

in general any a linked ammo can be used with the same cal of weapon for example the Brits used GPMG in 7.62

which is the same for the SLR used by them.

so the only difference would be the link which joins the ammo together for the MG. the Brits used to link rifle ammo of cal 7.62 for the GPMG and de-link the GPMG ammo for use with the SLR.

cottage cheese";p="46812 wrote: Found a stash of KF 30-06?....

Yes but not KF