Kilibreaux

How's that screw "upgrade" working out?

A lot of times threads are cut with a decreasing radius so that whatever is screwed in will in fact tighten up. One thing you can do is drop a little oil on the threads and screw it in and out several times as this will tend to "chase" the existing aluminum threads in the front sight base. Another thing, depending on how long is the threaded section on the adapter, consider shortening it - cutting some off, until it threads down to the stop. Bear in mind that alignment is not actually created by the thread interface but by the small ledge mating surface between the FSB and adapter so if you shorten the thread column enough to get down to that then the adapter will be aligned as precisely as was cut the "seat".

Since my last post I have finally identified the real reason for GSG multiple fires. The sear housing spring is relatively weak and fails to consistently snap the sear housing up with sufficient force to engage the hammer notch. Additionally, the sear/hammer engagement angle is not ideal for inducing the sear and hammer notch to slide INTO engagement with minimal pressure. The simplest solution is to take a "click pen" spring and shorten it to just longer than the space between the sear housing and trigger housing. Insert the stock spring into it to create a "double coil" which will double the force exerted on the sear housing when the hammer impacts the disconnector and causes the sear housing to snap upward. Even without reshaping the sear and hammer notch, doubling sear housing spring pressure should solve the multiple fire problem.

GSG-5 and -522 are functionally identical - they us the same magazines. www.rrages.com has Promag 22 round magazine "rebuild kits" for the GSG-522 for $32 shipped. They work. Buy them.

If all you have, or choose to carry is a pistol chambered in .22LR, then you are WELL ARMED! Forget all the BS and hype about other calibers, the .22LR will get the job done.

Such questions as you pose are known as "counter intuitive" because they ask questions to which the answer is obvious. SIX .22LR rounds are far more deadly than a single .45 ACP or 2 rounds of 9mm. EACH round of .22LR has the potential to kill so if each is placed correctly one has the ability to kill 6 people - theoretically speaking. If you faced someone with just ONE shot...regardless of caliber versus 6 shots....that is the TRUTH of the handgun debate. ONE round of .22 CAN be lethal and often IS incapacitating, so why would anyone choose a single .45 round over 6 .22LR rounds....????

Popcorn45: Sounds like you have experiences that are worth retelling! My comments aren't intended to put a damper on other perceptions...or maybe they are. I spent 8 years in the Army and saw combat. I thought I'd "seen it all" until I became a trauma nurse. Within the first year of being a trauma nurse I realized that any handgun producing less than rifle-like ballistics was pretty much the same as ANY handgun wound. A bigger bullet makes a bigger hole...it's that simple...but maybe not. .45ACP's tend to penetrate less than 9mm's due to sectional density and so often fail to produce the sort of wound expected. On the other hand, 22's tend to tear up everything and cause amazing damage and incapacitation. The bigger (meaning more powerful) calibers are "needed" primarily for barricade penetration, but for stopping humans a puny .22LR will do the job every time. The FACT is the only REAL thing that creates an instant stop is direct interdiction of the nervous system...everything else is purely problematic. I am grieved by the fact that what the ammo makers have ordained has become what the average person believes they must carry. The fact is, a LEAD SWC bullet impacting at supersonic velocity has amazing "stopping power" (witnessed). This does not reap profits for ammo companies and they promote newer and better expanding jacketed ammo. For anyone who cares or takes the science of ballistics seriously, velocity - SPEED is everything! Rifle bullets prove this, but somehow when we enter the realm of pistol calibers everyone reverts to the nonsense of "momentum" and big bullets at slow speed get the job done. Einstein wasn't wrong...despite what laypeople think. Double velocity - quadruple energy, double mass - double energy. The terminal effects of bullet wounds are obvious...bullets impacting at high speed cause massive damage, those at low speed do not. The problem is complicated by the bullet's "style" or composition. Ammo makers want us to believe we MUST HAVE high tech jacketed designed for low speed expanion, combined with the semi-auto pistol notion that one MUST use jacketed bullets. The fact is, hard cast LEAD bullets are often "harder" than jacketed, and properly designed semi-autos will chamber SWC styles quite well. If you were in bear country would you prefer a JHP or a SWC in a given caliber--say .44 magnum. The SWC is likely to punch clean through the bear versus the JHP which might expand violently on bone and fail to reach the vitals. Look at modern TANK rounds...do they favor mass or speed? SPEED clearly...the modern tank gun fires a HyperVelocityDiscardingSabot round at over a mile per second...a depleted uranium or tungsten carbide round that relies PURELY on impact kinetic energy to bore through armor. A .223 is effective because it pushes a .22 bullet to velocities BEYOND hypervelocity which causes massive tissue destruction. A 7.62x51mm impacting a human joint such as the knee will blow the lower extremity clean off...because the "temporary" expansion cavity is larger than the entire knee! The problem with handgun ballistics has been the "reversion" to big bullet, suck-slow speed versus lighter bullet going "mighty-fast"! A .357 Magnum at 1400+ FPS with a SWC, FMJ, or JSP will punch clean through a human and create massive ancillary trauma. A 9mm TC design loaded to PROPER 9mm speeds will punch clean through a human and do massive destruction. A .45 185 gr. TC design will bust clean through human when loaded to PROPER velocities, yet the ammo makers have made the public believe they need the slow-moving 230 grain at 830 fps(if you're lucky). The .400 Corbon is an ideal conversion for t he .45ACP because it pushes much lighter bullets to supersonic speeds producing much higher kinetic energies than stock .45ACP loads. It doesn't take a genius to observe the impact of a .400 Corbon 135 gr. versus the .45 230 gr. to know which is transferring greater energy, but the ammo companies have done a masterful job of convincing the shooting public that everything they thought (know) is true...is wrong. But I wax philosophic...the .22LR PROVES that tiny, light bullets as high speed do amazing damage!

Having spent some time delving deep into the GSG-5"s inner workings I have some conclusions: First, the GSG-5 is a VERY sturdily built weapon. The aluminum outer shell is quite robust and easily on par with the 10/22's upper receiver. Additionally, the bolt is located in a modular "inner" housing which creates a very strong combination which should be quite durable. The plastic stock and foregrip tend to make the gun feel "cheap", but if those are replaced by sturdier pieces that do not flex or move, the GSG feels pretty solid. Does this mean the GSG can stand up to the "tire test" (being run over by a truck tire)? I don't know and I am not going to sacrifice mine to find out. I suspect the GSG will stand up to any test the AR-15/M-16 will and considering how long that rifle system has been in service something about it must be working right. What makes a rifle sucessful is not and never has been how effectively it holds up to deliberate destruction testing, or being utilized as a club, so for any purpose I would realistically put the GSG too...it will probably do well. The GSG has weaknesses, but thankfully they are all easily corrected. As delivered the GSG.... Bolt opens early Sear fails to engage properly Rear sight is ridiculous (GSG-522) So far I have corrected all by modifying the hammer strut to prevent early bolt opening, modified the sear and sear housing spring to improve engagement and retention, and replaced the rear sight with a proper HK style aperture drum. One last weakness of the GSG is the magazines...the base design in my opinion is VERY good and quite reliable, but the open slot allows external debris to enter and negatively impact feeding and reliability. The answer for this is to simply keep the mags in a fully closed pouch or container while carried and fabricate a sleeve enclosure to cover the magazine body when inserted, but this is probably at the ultimate end of the survival preparedness spectrum.

Be nice if someone would come out with something like the mini-sized Colt .380 "government model" or the old Star model B chambered in .22LR. The .22 is perfect for a reduced size platform and while it's fun to shoot a full size 1911 conversion unit, the P22 is far more "fun" to carry around.

Not bad....not bad at all.

Just read an interesting article about a gunfight between a cretin armed with a mini revolver in .22LR and a State Trooper armed with a .357 magnum. Unfortunately the outcome was not in favor of the Trooper but the lesson to be taken is that tiny .22's are not to be taken lightly. The Trooper basically emptied his .357 magnum loaded with 125gr. JHP's into the bad guy...bad guy survived to be tried and sentenced for the murder of the Trooper. The bad guy pumped two shots into the Trooper's vest without penetration, then a THIRD entered the Trooper's upper arm and penetrated deep enough to hit an artery. The shootout was caught on "dash cam" and the Trooper collapsed a few moments after being struck by the third bullet. Since ALL "gunfights" are iffy situations, only a very foolish person would ever assume the man who pulls a mini-revolver is an "easy win". The above case is tragic for the "good guy" but the lesson is well remembered for all.

The P22 is a great little, compact .22LR. My "CA compliant" model has proven to be reliable with absolutely EVERYTHING I have ever fed into it. With that said the plastic sights aren't up to rough handling standards but the other side of that coin is they are easily replaced. One negative comment about the P22 that must be dispelled is the notion that it uses a zinc slide for the sake of cheapness...this is not true. While I have no way to test the metallurgy of the slide, the bare portion visible (slide rails) looks like bright aluminum AND the critical breech face section is actually a steel insert (it's magnetic) so I have every confidence it will wear as well as any other .22LR. The grip frame is a very high quality polymer with crisp edges and markings. The non-Kalifornia model comes with a wrench to unscrew the barrel bushing and remove/replace the barrel with ease. I have shot about 500 rounds through mine so far with not a single malfuntion, which means that if it malfunctions on the very next shot it will still be off the scale for functional reliability even for centerfire weapons. For those who question the performance of short barrelled .22's go here: http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs27.htm I don't generally carry a firearm, and when I do I generally carry a large-caliber auto in my car, but here are times when a small, lightweight .22LR is the ideal choice to tuck into a pocket based on threat conditions and the P22 loaded with Aguila 30gr. roundnose ("solids") hypervelocity "supermax" loads can be very comforting. Non expanding .22's have quite adequate penetration to do the job if the shots are placed well...same as with larger caliber handgun rounds.

Plated should be the ONLY choice for one's "survival stash" of ammo! My GSG and Ciener 1911 conversion, and 10/22, and Walther P22 all shoot lead bullet loads just fine, but the plated ammo always seems to run cleaner. When one only shoots a few magazines the difference isn't obvious but run several hundred through and the lead loads definitely seem to leave more potentially gun-jamming crud behind.

I don't know...in this age of throw-away-everything a machined billet magazine starts to look pretty good. I have recently been eyeing the very same thing for my Ruger because I want hi-cap mags that will basically last as long as I do! the constant force spring used inside these mags is easy to replace but those plastic magazine bodies don't generally hold up well beyond the 20 year point...I have some wonderfully reliable Eagle mags for the 10/22 that have proven reliable in everything up to full auto but sadly with age their polycarbonate shells are starting to show minute cracks. To me, a machined billet, fully enclosed .22LR mag is probably the ideal "survival/combat" solution for any .22LR for which they can be had. Sure it costs a fortune to buy billet mags but once you have them they will last forever.

Okay, I FINALLY tracked down the real cause of those not-so-occasional and undesired "doubles" and "triples" from the GSG.

Here in the People's Republik Assault Rifle "look-a-likes" in .22LR are classified differently...which is why you can go down to the store and buy a Colt/Umarex which is about as close to the original as you can get, yet it comes with a fully detachable 10 round magazine. If you shotgun the receiver on the Colt/Umarex you will instantly see the LOWER is substantially different that that of a conventional AR-15 and it is for this reason it is classified as a .22LR...the lower is the serial numbered part which means it IS the gun per se. Same for all the other branded tactical .22's...we hear a lot of comments about how differently they work inside than their big-caliber brothers yet that is PRECISELY why they can be purchased OTC here in the PRK classified as ".22's". If for example the GSG-5 were functionally identical internally to the MP-5, and capable within reason of being converted to fire the 9mm, it too would fail the "dedicated .22" test. The short answer to your question is: If you buy an AR-15 serial numbered lower receiver from an FFL dealer it IS considered an AR-15 regardless of what sort of top parts you put on it, and is therefore subject to all the laws regulating the AR-15 within Kalifornia. If you buy an AR-15 and decide to remove and throw away the entire upper and replace it with a dedicated .22LR upper you are still holding an AR-15. Does all this mean you cannot mount a dedicated .22 upper on an existing AR-15 lower? No of course not, you can but you CANNOT "re-register" that AR-15 to ever be anything but what it was the day it was born into the logbooks.

I didn't realize anyone was purchasing BP revolvers OTC because they are such a specialty item and most stores simply won't carry them. With that said, Federal law says you can order one through the mail, and Wyoming State law places no restriction above that...as you know since you turned around an ordered one through the mail. What probably happened is the fool at the store incorrectly and improperly entered the BP revolver into his normal "books" and when it became an issue did what such idiots usually do...bowed up and tried to pretend he had knowledge no one else does. What can you do? Unfortunately stores can exercise the right to refuse to sell and that is precisely the excuse and dodge this joint would use if challenged. Also, gun transactions are not reviewed by anyone outside the seller's location unless a check is being made for a specific reason and because of this sellers can quite easily be ignorant of their options. MY advice - for what it's worth, is to buy all your BP revolvers online. In fact, make it a point to go to this shop and "handle" every BP revolver, then close by saying, "Yeah, I think I'll go home and order this one online" just to make the point.

Like many I've seen photos of GSG-5's with blown out chambers and cracked bolts, and read a lot of stories about damaged chambers. When I first got my GSG I took note of how thin the steel is around the chamber and worried that a chamber blow out was just a matter of time...and maybe it is in an unmodified GSG. I have carefully analyzed both how the GSG operates as well as observed the ejection port of mine being fired and videos of others and observed fire flashes that indicate high pressure is still present during ejection. The problem is that there is very little closing force on the bolt even with the hammer down (which is where the hammer is on firing). For a comparison take a Ruger 10/22, drop the hammer and note how much effort is required to cock the action from full closure. Once cocked, note again how LITTLE resistance there is to the bolt opening...because with the hammer cocked the only force opposing bolt opening is the single, relatively weak recoil spring. Clearly what keeps the bolt momentarily closed on firing with the 10/22 is the hammer spring. In order to “blowback†the cartridge must overcome primarily that hammer spring force and leverage combined with the bolt’s resting inertia. Now grab your GSG…drop the hammer on an empty chamber (this can be safely done by holding the bolt open about 1/8†and pulling the trigger so the firing pin does not contact the soft aluminum barrel trunion). Now, with the hammer down, start easing the bolt open using the cocking handle and note how far open the bolt is before you feel the hammer’s resistance…about ¼â€. Also take notice of how LITTLE resistance you feel to the bolt being withdrawn from full closure to that point where hammer spring resistance is felt. Remember the twin recoil springs exert minimal pressure on the bolt at full closure. This means that during firing the bolt has barely more than its resting inertia to resist opening during the cartridge’s ignition and maximum pressure phase, and so results in “early opening†with the cartridge rim and case having no external support because it is already half-way out of the chamber! Even a low pressure cartridge can blow out a chamber or crack a bolt if high pressure is allowed to vent reward, and in the case of the .22LR, with the case coming out of the chamber too early, the stage is always set for a potential cartridge rim/case failure. Combine this basic engineering oversight with other factors such as the overall “stiffer†nature of the GSG’s recoil springs once past that first ¼†which demands the use of hotter, higher pressure loads in order to function reliably, plus the softening of recoil and hammer springs that occurs within the first few hundred rounds fired and the early opening problem starts to magnify, hence my previous statement that maybe a chamber failure/bolt crack IS inevitable in an unmodified GSG. Initially I thought the GSG needed a thicker chamber wall for better support but then I look around at all the other .22’s that have equally thin chamber walls with zero reports of chamber failure so that is not where the problem lies nor needs to be addressed. Various issues put me onto the “trail†of what might be the cause of so many reports of chamber failures and cracked bolts, but the final convincing came when I watched quality video of the GSG chamber during firing and noted the amount of fire flash…I have seen this before on other .22’s (usually modified in ways that increased “back pressureâ€), and realized the bolt is simply opening TOO EARLY! So then I considered just WHY the designers of the GSG felt the need to include a rebounding hammer in a simple .22LR system…something not found in other .22’s notably the very successful Ruger 10/22…quite possibly the “Gold Standard†of .22LR longevity and reliability. Now that the problem was identified I knew the right answer was a modified hammer strut so the hammer ends up resting against, or very much more closely behind the bolt than as issued. If one examines the GSG’s hammer strut they notice it has two notches, one to drive the hammer forward and the other to “index†against the hammer pin thus acting to limit hammer strut movement. During firing the hammer is released and driven forward by the hammer spring, and during the last portion of the hammer’s throw spring pressure stops and hammer inertia alone carries the hammer to strike the firing pin, after which a small hammer return spring pulls the hammer back. One might presume that at the instant of firing the hammer’s mass/inertia adds enough resistance to overcome the early opening situation so easily observed in a non-dynamic mode, and this is true…the hammer’s relatively tiny mass does “help†delay bolt opening but the effect is minuscule…as evidenced by the fact that the GSG has a known reputation for damaged chambers and cracked bolts. So I proceeded to modify the hammer strut to allow it to remain in contact with the hammer’s driving pin during the full stroke and thereby add the hammer’s considerable spring resistance to the hammer’s leverage and thus create a proper delay for the bolt during the highest pressure time of the cartridge’s firing. After being modified, now when I begin to cock my GSG with the hammer down, just as with the 10/22, the hammer/spring resistance is present immediately…all of that former ¼†of “slack†is gone. I now have confidence that the cartridge is being held in chamber longer and the potential for a case rupture eliminated or greatly reduced. Shooting with the modified hammer strut the GSG functions with 100% reliability, however no fire flash is ever seen at the ejection port. Another side benefit is the interior of the receiver is CLEANER because less powder debris is being blown back into the action during firing! While most “mods†to the GSG and any weapon are generally cosmetic an have no real impact on making the base platform more reliable or durable, modifying the hammer strut DOES make the weapon safer, and will enhance reliability, durability. Just yesterday I fired a full 110 round drum non-stop with the modified hammer strut without a single problem. Modifying the hammer strut is actually amazingly simple and takes very little time. The hardest part for most would be tearing down their gun to the the strut out and then getting it all back together again.

The .22LR is THE round that outperforms its "paper" ballistics. Virtually every other handgun round is less effective in the real world than projected to be. I just read about an officer shootout where the officer fired and hit a 300lb perp six times with 125gr. JHP .357 magnum loads and failed to "put him down". During the altercation the perp fired at and hit the officer twice in his vest with a .22LR MINI revolver--those two the vest stopped. A third round from what is basically the tiniest .22LR in production passed through the officer's upper arm, through the arm hole of his vest and struck the brachial artery; the officer collapsed moments later and subsequently died. The .357 magnum 125gr JHP load was once the "gold standard" in defensive loads, outrageously over-rated at 97% one-shot stop...yet SIX failed to stop in this case. The mini revolver is generally looked down upon as useless, pointless, worthless, and only carried by fools who fail to take self-defense seriously. In this case it proved to be more than a match, effectively putting the officer down with ONE shot...yeah, maybe lucky, but by the same token, the other guy soaked up six heavy-caliber slugs, survived and went on to be tried and sentenced to life for murder of a police officer. When John Hinkley ambushed President Reagan and his entire security team he did so with a pair of SHORT-barreled .22LR revolvers. Within seconds he took down a D.C. police chief, a secret service agent (who can be seen reacting violently to an abdominal hit), put a bullet into James Brady's head (thank you very much for that one Hinkley - since that started the blood feud between Sarah Brady and gun owners), AND managed to pump one into Reagan that we later discovered was almost lethal. The Mafia really DOES choose the ubiquitous .22LR for close range assassination and so too the Israelis use the .22LR for close-in counter hi-jacking duty...and they aren't known for losing or being foolish about their choice of weapons. In my 20 year career as a trauma nurse I've seen an entire spectrum of gun-shot wounds including 9mm, .45 ACP, .22LR, and others and from the standpoint of how the person shot presented, the damage they presented with based on caliber and times hit, I realized many years ago the tiny .22LR is not only lethal, but also every bit as good at fight-stopping as any of the currently popular semiauto handgun rounds that deliver payloads in the subsonic-transonic speed range. I have NO doubt many will choose to argue the point based on something someone said, they heard, or read, but I've SEEN--not one, not two, but more than I can count and if I had to choose to take a hit from a 9mm JHP, versus a hypervelocity .22LR "solid" fired from a long barreled pistol or rifle, I'd choose the 9mm. The two accounts I detailed above involved SHORT barrel .22's and the outcome was still profound, but I have also personally seen and worked on persons shot with .22LR's fired from rifles and room distances and the person shot dropped fast, dropped hard--so much so in once case he was incapable of reaching out with his arms to brace on impact and landed smack on his face smashing out all his teeth...THAT my friends speaks to the presence of "shock effect", because anyone not completely incapacitated will always seek to brace or move so as to protect their face. As for the "myths" surrounding instant incapacitation with slow-to-medium speed handgun bullets, unless the hit interdicts the central nervous system there is no such thing as "instant" exclusive of a variety of external factors related to how the person shot reacts. FACE shots with any handgun round are problematic at best due to the convoluted structure of the human skull. For example, who doesn't remember the movie and book "Serpico" where Al Pacino to a 9mm to the cheek point blank and survived...a true account. I once had a patient arrive shot directly through the bridge of his nose at close range - non-contact. He presented with an exit would-- small slit just to the right side of the cervical vertebrae and below the occipital lobe of the skull...very little bleeding, easily stopped. Xray and CT showed no internal damage, neurologically the man was tip-top other than still being intoxicated and was discharged home the very next morning with a band-aid on his nose and neck. The bullet basically entered the ethmoid sinus, glanced along the base of the cranial vault, deflected downward and laterally to exit the neck. The slit-like exit wound points to the bullet having been a round nose which it turns out was a .38 caliber. Sure in these cases the single shot ended the fight, but a .22LR would very likely have done so as well, but neither delivered the damage or mortal insult I'm sure the shooter's intended and expected. I just remembered one man who WALKED into the ER one morning with a fresh GSW to the hip. On xray one could clearly see a .45ACP FMJ slug inside the bladder. The bullet impact had absolutely no affect on the man other than he KNEW he's just be shot at. There was very little external bleeding, the man was hemodynamically stable, conscious, alert, and not even experiencing pain. Remember another young man who came in by ambulance shot 7 times with 9mm hollow points (you can tell by the exit wounds). He had a total of 14 holes...all bullets passed completely through the chest cavity and neck. he had a pneumothorax (collapsed lung) which was easily expanded with the insertion of a chest tube. Bleeding was minimal, he was completely conscious, alert, and eager to go home...and did within a few days. The man took SEVEN 9mm JHP"s through and through and was minimally impaired. Unlike another perp who kicked down someone's front door only to receive 3 quick .22LR shots to the stomach from a rifle and dropped like a stone....required major surgery, and a lengthy recovery. The problem with ballistic gelatin testing is it simply isn't the same as passing a bullet into a human body. Skin is amazingly elastic and tough and will stretch quite a bit before being pierced by a bullet. Internal organs are really quite "floppy' and have virtually no resistance to being moved aside...hence the reason one cannot place too much reliance on temporary expansion cavities, because at handgun bullet speeds temporary expansion causes no permanent damage. Arteries are tough and elastic, and just as willing to move aside as a bullet passes...hence the current theory that only the permanent crush cavity "counts" hence the shift toward the large bore .45 ACP over the 9mm because the former creates a larger channel of tissue damage--all things being equal. The move AWAY from light-weight, violently expanding hollowpoints such as the aforementioned .357 load is because they fail the consistent depth of penetration test when used on what is essentially "large game animals". The current "gold standard" is the biggest bullet that will consistently penetrate to a depth of 12 " or more. Guess what....even from handgun barrels, using calibrated gelatin, even garden variety bulk pack .22LR will penetrate to depths over 10"....remember this is the SAME gelatin (by calibration) that shows 9mm, .40S&W, 10mm "FBI", and .45ACP generally achieving similar penetration, so by extrapolation whatever general penetration the larger calibers will achieve in real tissue, to too will the .22LR. Fired from rifle barrels...or long handgun barrels, modern hypervelocity .22's are astoundingly effective and destructive. Having said all this does it mean I've tossed out all my big caliber pistols and gone strictly .22LR? No because like most who are "into" guns I enjoy owning a variety, and I also appreciate that whereas the .22LR is probably every bit as effective in a street encounter as my Taurus PT-111 9mm, or my 1911 .45ACP, or my 1911 .400 Corbon (well, maybe not that one), I FEEL better armed with the bigger calibers, plus they provide the additional ability to defeat barricade material if needed, but there are times I'll carry my little Walther P22 stoked with Aguila 30 grain supermax round nose ammo and feel quite "adequately armed" for any close up encounter should such ever happen. All of the peripheral debate about circumstances and situations have no bearing on terminal effectiveness of bullets. Back before I entered a career field that brought me into such intimate contact with an endless variety of gunshot wounds I would have believed as so many others clearly do, but I don't need to conjecture about that which I have personally experienced....a .22LR ain't no joke...it's lethal and it WILL put someone down.

Sorry I forgot to address the "cold" factor...yes cold weather does negatively impact semi-auto weapons function because the lubricants tend to be slightly more viscous, and the ammo produces lower pressures and velocity, and therefore bolt opening thrust. BTW the Federal bulk pack is pretty decent for normal cycling, but combine it with cold weather, pistol barrel, a modicum of internal debris build-up and the GSG starts to bog down. Also, the twin recoil springs are somewhat weak at rest (bolt closed) yet by mid-stroke are providing substantial resistance....result, bolt opens early, decelerates early unless a greater recoil impulse is present.

Yes I do. Your gun is short-cycling. Let's take each stated issue in turn: It fires but you end up with the bolt closed on an empty case...the round fired with insufficient energy to fully cycle the bolt, but still the bolt opened "early" (we're talking nano-seconds). The bolt kicked back from breech face pressure, but the round lacked enough energy to kick the bolt far enough back to cause the case rim to strike the ejector, or in fact, the case mouth may not have cleared the chamber at all before being shoved back in. Due to the "early" opening tendency, the almost ejecting case expanded excessively so when slammed BACK into the chamber it becomes quite "stuck" requiring the use of a thin blade to lever it out. Of course you are wondering why the EXTRACTOR didn't/can't simply snatch the empty case out, and the answer is because the extractor claw is actually pushed aside by the extractor groove, and depending on tolerance variation, some GSG's will routinely fail to extract a dud, or non-fired round during a manual cocking stroke because the extractor claw fails to obtain adequate purchase on the rounded cartridge rim. Bear in mind that during FIRING the case itself provides all "primary" extraction as it "blows back" the bolt with the extractor basically along for the ride, and coming into play secondarily to trap the case rim on the ejection port side as the interior side is snapped against the ejector thus kicking the case out. The case AND bullet lodged in the chamber is also a product of short cycling, yet not as short as the situation above. In this situation the bolt kicks back with enough force to eject the empty and chamber a new round, HOWEVER it fails to move back far enough to actuate the disconnector, and in fact moves just barely far enough to snag the next round in the magazine and push it into the barrel. You did not state this, but since you were moved to cycle the action to discover the "cartridge" in the chamber, this means the hammer was already down and when you pulled the trigger you got nothing...so you cycled the action only to find a "live round" in there...the un-disconnected hammer followed the bolt forward in this instance. There is actually a point where the bolt goes almost far enough to disconnect but fails and the hammer carries sufficient inertia to cause a slam fire on closing which the shooter perceives as "doubling" or "tripling". The bottom line for you is that the ammo is not providing enough power to fully cycle the action via that simple reason, or by virtue of low powered ammo combined with a build-up of firing residue within the action that increases cycling friction. Additionally, you stated you have the GSG-5P and this is significant because the short barreled version is far more sensitive to low powered ammo and internal grit which reduce free cycling energy. The carbine and pistol versions share the same springs yet the pistol barrel is over 7" shorter meaning less bore time and less back pressure to cycle. If you want 100% cycling you can go with higher powered ammo, keep the "innards" scrupulously clean, or mount a suppressor, or a muzzle mounted "booster", or longer barrel.

GSG-522 to GSG-5 "conversion kit" includes the lower housing...just like the one from ICS minus the read "bullet icons" to denote fire mode.

Well it's finally HERE! Woo HOO! As I type this I am looking at my new 110 round "rotary magazine" just arrived from Cope's Distributing! Order quickly my friends...

Having a carbine with 16" barrel none of the adapters will mount, so I made my own. I turned a section of 4130 steel tube down to .625" (16mm nominal), then threaded to match the FSB - 1mm. I made it long enough so when screwed in it extends out and around the barrel, with an aluminum locking ring. Inside diameter was turned to a zero tolerance fit .475" so when inserted it holds the barrel with zero axial movement. The purpose is because I can now use this as a mount for alternative barrel shroud configurations.

Well I must confess "tear down" of the GSG is a daunting task not for the faint of heart! I have identified another weakness...that is the rebounding hammer. I have seen many videos showing the action during firing and fire spouting from the ejection port is evident. This is an indication that the case is ejecting while chamber pressure is still elevated. Being a .22LR the breech is generally strong enough to handle early opening, however the complaints of ruptured barrel breeches and cracked bolt housings shows that damage can happen. The problem is that the hammer rebounds thus creating about 3/8" rearward bolt movement against the twin recoil springs alone before the hammer spring adds its resistance. As it happens that first 3/8" of travel is also where the recoil springs are weakest--or more specifically providing minimal bolt closing force. Compare this to the Ruger 10/22 which has a fairly puny recoil spring with super-strong hammer spring and does not have a rebounding hammer. When the bolt is closed with hammer down, initial opening forces are highest--as they should be, and examination of shooting vids will generally be absent any obvious appearance of a flash of fire during shooting. Interestingly the simplest way to limit early breech opening is the shorten the barrel...a pistol length barrel reduces breech pressure yet retains reliability and durability since the bolt and breech are under less strain. I don't think stiffer bolt springs are in order--the stock ones are already plenty strong and that is not the problem. The problem is the bolt gets a running start before it must deal with the leverage of the hammer spring...what is needed is for the hammer strut to be redesigned, or perhaps rework the hammer rebound spring to work the other way....just some thoughts.