Extractor issues

[wobblinwheel]

Does anybody other than me have trouble with the Colt/Umarex/Walther(and whomever else) M4 rifle's extractor? I've had my rifle for several years now, and it's extractor has always worked about 50% of the time. I tried increasing the spring tension a long time ago, which helped a little, but still when I have to manually extract a misfire, or just unload the chamber, many times I have to try several times to get the bullet out. Sometimes I've actually had to push it out with a cleaning rod. Rather inconvenient. I was beginning to get over it UNTIL I bought my girlfriend a SMITH & WESSON M&P 15-22 rifle! It will manually extract any bullet anytime without fail! The extractor design, spring tension, bolt-face recess seem nearly IDENTICAL. The Colt will pull the bullet nearly HALF-WAY OUT and then just turn it loose! No chance of successfully extracting a bullet with the magazine still in the gun! The S&W will manually extract & eject the entire magazine without a hitch. The folks at Umarex say they can "modify" the extractor to make it work, IF I send the rifle to them. I ain't gonna do that (they did say REPLACING the extractor wouldn't work, they're all the same). Have any of you had this "modification", or have done something yourselves that made the extractor work consistently? I was thinking this was just a "characteristic" of a .22 semi-auto, until I got my hands on this damn Smith&Wesson.......

[Microgunner]

I used to own a Colt/Umarex M4 OPS but it didn't exhibit this problem.

It's biggest problem was failure to cycle. Had problems keeping the recoil spring properly adjusted.

[techmike]

WW, I still own my Colt, it's my favorite rifle. Have not had your issue at all. I only use high velocity ammo, like Federal bulk, Win Super X, ect. Also CCI "AR Tactical", Win Dyna Point, and BVAC are also winners. I have read that shooting hyper velocity ammo can damage the rifle, or can throw off the timing of the action. There are quite a few threads in other forums regarding hyper velocity ammo and semi-autos, and the problems that can ensue.  If it was mine, I would detail strip the rifle, and inspect all of the action's parts under a magnifying glass for cracks & distortion, make sure the extractor claw is sharp & intact, and that the pin is not worn or the hole in the extractor is not worn. I would also replace all of the springs with new OEM springs, and then re-evaluate the rifle's function.

TM

[wobblinwheel]

TM, the extractor actually does not have a "hole" where it pivots. It sets in a slot and just "rocks" back-and-forth under spring tension on one side. I have disassembled and cleaned the bolt, and checked the extractor and spring tension. Plenty of tension, made sure of that. Now I wonder if the extractor is TOO pointed. It has the proper "hook" where it catches the rim, but it's also made to a POINT (thickness wise) on the end. Because of this, very little is actually holding the rim. The one on the S & W is the same thickness as the rest of it at the end, allowing a wider contact area. Maybe this is the modification Umarex is talking about. He was talking "filing" something, but not specific. They did not have a new extractor or spring in stock. I like to have a "back-up", when I go to "filing" stuff! Is your extractor POINTED on the end? As in SHARP? It seems to me it needs to be WIDER on the end. I don't shoot "Hyper-velocity" ammo in my rifle, mostly standard velocity CCI, which is quieter as it doesn't break the sound barrier. (Wal-Mart gets it here) and it's more accurate than anything else I've shot. Winchester 555 and 333 shoot good too, but not as accurate. My rifle also has a new barrel, which has a larger chamber diameter, which allows it to cycle EVERYTHING without issue. Much better than the original barrel! ($100.00)

[techmike]

My bad - forgot what the Colt's extractor looked like. Mine has very little spring tension - I can easily move it with my finger.  It has a good hook, and has a uniform thickness, except on the bottom of the hook it is beveled. I am wondering if you might have too much spring tension on the extractor?  As you can see from the attached pic, mine is quite sharp. The picture is taken from the magwell, the blue is just a piece of plastic to hold the bolt open, and provide contrast for the extractor. I measured just under .040" between the extractor and breachface.

TM

[wobblinwheel]

Mine looks just like yours. I increased the spring tension a long time ago, since it was working so poorly before. When my rifle was new, I was getting a lot of misfires. That's when I had such an issue with the extractor not pulling out the unfired bullets. I increased the spring tension, and it worked better, but not great. I can manually eject about half a 20 round mag, hit and miss. The S&W's extractor has a LOT of spring tension, and has no bevel on the end. I can "shuck" the entire 25 round magazine as fast as I can work the bolt. Really pisses me off that it works so good! Damn plastic toy rifle.........anyway, maybe I'll try a lighter spring, just for giggles. Why it turns loose a little ways out of the chamber is beyond me, AND the pin holding the bolt halves together is starting to get loose, and back-out. Gonna have to stake it in next time. I can't quite figure why a looser spring would work better, but worth a try. I would like a new extractor to work with. The guy at Umarex didn't seem surprised that I was having trouble.........?

[techmike]

Over in the GSG section of the forum, Kilibreaux has some good words of wisdom regarding extraction.

"When the bolt is manually withdrawn the round is dragged across the one in the magazine which tends to make it hang up and not eject cleanly unless one cycles the action briskly.

During firing things are very different.  The .22LR's "primary" ejection is by thrust directly to the bolt face with the claw extractor acting as a secondary extraction assist.  This is why the gun may extract sluggishly when manually cycled but operate flawlessly when fired.

A good example of a .22LR's primary method of extraction is the Beretta (and Taurus clone) Mod 21 in .22LR caliber...the one with the tip-up barrel.  Examine it closely and you will find it has no extractor but relies solely on breech thrust (blow-back) to get the empty shell out of the chamber and into contact with the ejector.  This is the reason it uses a tip-up barrel because once chambered there is no way to extract the round by manual cycling, so the barrel is designed to pivot up so the shell can be manually removed by fingernail."

So, keeping this in mind, extraction issues on the Colt can be caused by several things. One Colt owner was missing his ejector - but it looked like an extraction problem - fire, action would cycle, but without the ejector the action would close with the fired brass back in the chamber or a stovepipe. If the bolt spring tension is too high, it will short cycle, especially on standard velocity or CB ammo. I seem to remember that you thought you had a chamber issue at one point, so a "plonk" test might be in order. Remove the barrel and hold it vertically with the muzzle down, and drop a round in the chamber. It should drop in with a "plonking" sound. If it doesn't, there is a burr in the chamber or it is carboned up. (Do not do a plonk test in an assembled firearm)

TM

[wobblinwheel]

TM, mine "plonks" just fine, since I got a new barrel. The chamber diameter is larger in the new ones. That is why they were so "ammo finicky" in the beginning. They told me the first-run Colts had a "European match barrel and chamber", which was more suited (technically) for a bolt-action rifle. Many bullets had to be "shoved" into the chamber! While the bore diameter and twist is the same, the chamber is larger. Didn't affect accuracy, but now it will shoot and cycle just about anything, Remington Golden Nightmares included! Hence the new barrel. A Golden Bullet stuck in the chamber going in, out-of-battery "explosion", and a round stuck in the middle of the barrel. Next shot....oooops! Although they clearly don't "stick" now, no more Remington for me! I think the whole problem with manual extraction is the fact the Smith works so good......and mine don't!