🚀 go-pugleaf

"R. LaCasse" <acp-mk2@guns.info> wrote in message 
news:8e3m57h50hq3vp7ro5ici9bgulnns7sh5c@4ax.com...
>
> Does anybody know if a 1911a1 model70 .38 Super semi-rimmed "ACP"
> have a different shaped chamber than a standard "ball" ammo chamber. I 
> think
> not, since they can feed directly into a .380 ACP chamber.....right?

Actually a .38 super is an entirely different round (and chamber) than a 
.380 ACP.

Neck, base and rim diameters are all different. Case length is drastically 
different, as is overall length.

If that's not what you mean, I'm not sure what you do mean, unless its 
whether the ammo is ball, HP, or something else should have a difference on 
the chamber.

The answer to that is generally, no, though the earlier 1911 models which 
were designed with ball ammo in mind rather than HP or the others can have 
problems with anything other than ball. Things can be done to help overcome 
this, but not totally eliminate it.

> The idea of a straight cased rimless cartridge has never impressed
> me since they rely on freebore and forcing cone for depth alignment and 
> just
> cost a lot in new barrels.

Actually they rely on the case mouth for depth alignment. Which is pretty 
much standard for any rimless case that isn't bottlenecked or belted whether 
straight sided or tapered.

If you shoot it enough to need a new barrel from that ridge being worn then 
the cost of the barrel is certainly justified.

However, that aside you do have some minor ability to adjust for depth 
during reloading by adjusting case length and/or seating depth within the 
limits of overall length and what will feed in a particular gun.

So I'm not sure why you feel that is a problem.

If this is past the 'no go' stage, then barrel replacement is highly 
advised, if not mandated if you're smart.

> My .45ACP chamber is getting "loose", and I have considered using
> .455 Webley (tfl) bullets, which may require a chamber hood cut for the
> Rimmed bullet. It may rupture at the case rim like some .45ACPs prior to
> 1940.

I think that if you need to ask here, then the answer is that you shouldn't 
do it. Having a knowledgeable gun smith do it may be possible, but IMO a 
replacement barrel is considerably cheaper to get than trying to have 
someone else do what you suggest simply because you need to correct for 
"looseness". Plus even ignoring the one issue you mention, you open up a 
whole can of worms with other issues. The mere presence of a rim is going to 
alter so much. From magazines, feed issues, chambering, extractors, 
extraction, and even ejection. For a semi-auto, I can't believe it's worth 
the effort just because you're too cheap to buy a replacement barrel.

> Maybe slightly swage/crimp the chamber as a last resort..since the
> barrel is almost a goner, a bit of experimenting can't be too costly >:(
> ....I guess.

Depends on whether you wish to risk turning your gun into scrap metal, never 
mind risking parts of your anatomy on this experiment. For someone 
complaining about the cost of a replacement barrel, I doubt you can afford a 
replacement gun....or the possible medical bills.

Sorry, but unless you have a burning desire to have a .455 Webley 1911 and 
are willing to work with a gun smith for quite awhile (and cost) trying to 
rework the whole design to accommodate it........then I would pass and just 
get another barrel for gun.
 

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:09:43 -0400, "Scout"
<me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

|>
|>
|>"R. LaCasse" <acp-mk2@guns.info> wrote in message 
|>news:8e3m57h50hq3vp7ro5ici9bgulnns7sh5c@4ax.com...
|>>
|>> Does anybody know if a 1911a1 model70 .38 Super semi-rimmed "ACP"
|>> have a different shaped chamber than a standard "ball" ammo chamber. I 
|>> think
|>> not, since they can feed directly into a .380 ACP chamber.....right?
|>
|>Actually a .38 super is an entirely different round (and chamber) than a 
|>.380 ACP.   
|>Neck, base and rim diameters are all different. Case length is drastically 
|>different, as is overall length.
|>
|>If that's not what you mean, I'm not sure what you do mean, unless its 
|>whether the ammo is ball, HP, or something else should have a difference on 
|>the chamber.
|>
	Typoed the .380<-->.38 as in
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38_Super)

|>The answer to that is generally, no, though the earlier 1911 models which 
|>were designed with ball ammo in mind rather than HP or the others can have 
|>problems with anything other than ball. Things can be done to help overcome 
|>this, but not totally eliminate it.
|>
	Mine works with "ball"....the neck is slightly larger with FMJs.

|>> The idea of a straight cased rimless cartridge has never impressed
|>> me since they rely on freebore and forcing cone for depth alignment and 
|>> just
|>> cost a lot in new barrels.
|>
|>Actually they rely on the case mouth for depth alignment. Which is pretty 
|>much standard for any rimless case that isn't bottlenecked or belted whether 
|>straight sided or tapered.
|>
|>If you shoot it enough to need a new barrel from that ridge being worn then 
|>the cost of the barrel is certainly justified.
|>
	Yep that might just wrap it up....

|>However, that aside you do have some minor ability to adjust for depth 
|>during reloading by adjusting case length and/or seating depth within the 
|>limits of overall length and what will feed in a particular gun.
|>
|>So I'm not sure why you feel that is a problem.
|>
	I don't bench load....yet, I keep cases for some commercial reloads,
I modify my guns and that's as far as my gun interest goes. 

|>If this is past the 'no go' stage, then barrel replacement is highly 
|>advised, if not mandated if you're smart.
|>
|>> Maybe slightly swage/crimp the chamber as a last resort..since the
|>> barrel is almost a goner, a bit of experimenting can't be too costly >:(
|>> ....I guess.
|>
|>Depends on whether you wish to risk turning your gun into scrap metal, never 
|>mind risking parts of your anatomy on this experiment. For someone 
|>complaining about the cost of a replacement barrel, I doubt you can afford a 
|>replacement gun....or the possible medical bills.
|>
	Well, that's a complaining<--->experimenting perspective.
  
|>Sorry, but unless you have a burning desire to have a .455 Webley 1911 and 
|>are willing to work with a gun smith for quite awhile (and cost) trying to 
|>rework the whole design to accommodate it........then I would pass and just 
|>get another barrel for gun.
|> 
	I heard from a gunsmith it wasn't too much work, and would solve the
problem, but he might have been high or annoyed for my discrediting a
Norinco  1991a1 Commander barrel he marketed.

	My 1911a1 C was a near total rebuild, with compensator, nu
fandangled extractor, hone/tune, etc. 
	These Norks are more of a project gun, to waste a lot of time on,
just like any cheap gun is.
 
Thanx for you advice.....

Bob

"R. LaCasse" <acp-mk2@guns.info> wrote in message 
news:1tmm5711a3rn90ojeu71eu04h9egev2bka@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 02:09:43 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
> |>
> |>
> |>"R. LaCasse" <acp-mk2@guns.info> wrote in message
> |>news:8e3m57h50hq3vp7ro5ici9bgulnns7sh5c@4ax.com...
> |>>
> |>> Does anybody know if a 1911a1 model70 .38 Super semi-rimmed "ACP"
> |>> have a different shaped chamber than a standard "ball" ammo chamber. I
> |>> think
> |>> not, since they can feed directly into a .380 ACP chamber.....right?
> |>
> |>Actually a .38 super is an entirely different round (and chamber) than a
> |>.380 ACP.
> |>Neck, base and rim diameters are all different. Case length is 
> drastically
> |>different, as is overall length.
> |>
> |>If that's not what you mean, I'm not sure what you do mean, unless its
> |>whether the ammo is ball, HP, or something else should have a difference 
> on
> |>the chamber.
> |>
> Typoed the .380<-->.38 as in
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.38_Super)
>
> |>The answer to that is generally, no, though the earlier 1911 models 
> which
> |>were designed with ball ammo in mind rather than HP or the others can 
> have
> |>problems with anything other than ball. Things can be done to help 
> overcome
> |>this, but not totally eliminate it.
> |>
> Mine works with "ball"....the neck is slightly larger with FMJs.

A FMJ is "ball".

If you mean military ball ammo, then the difference you are mentioning may 
be the fact that military brass typically has thicker brass than does 
civilian commerical brass. Thus the neck will be slightly larger than 
similar commercial ammo.

If that small a difference is enough to cause issues....then it's absolutely 
time for a new barrel.

> |>> The idea of a straight cased rimless cartridge has never impressed
> |>> me since they rely on freebore and forcing cone for depth alignment 
> and
> |>> just
> |>> cost a lot in new barrels.
> |>
> |>Actually they rely on the case mouth for depth alignment. Which is 
> pretty
> |>much standard for any rimless case that isn't bottlenecked or belted 
> whether
> |>straight sided or tapered.
> |>
> |>If you shoot it enough to need a new barrel from that ridge being worn 
> then
> |>the cost of the barrel is certainly justified.
> |>
> Yep that might just wrap it up....
>
> |>However, that aside you do have some minor ability to adjust for depth
> |>during reloading by adjusting case length and/or seating depth within 
> the
> |>limits of overall length and what will feed in a particular gun.
> |>
> |>So I'm not sure why you feel that is a problem.
> |>
> I don't bench load....yet, I keep cases for some commercial reloads,
> I modify my guns and that's as far as my gun interest goes.

Then in that case, you chamber has to meet the go/no go standards, and given 
the remarks above, a replacement barrel is probably your best option.

> |>If this is past the 'no go' stage, then barrel replacement is highly
> |>advised, if not mandated if you're smart.
> |>
> |>> Maybe slightly swage/crimp the chamber as a last resort..since the
> |>> barrel is almost a goner, a bit of experimenting can't be too costly 
>  >:(
> |>> ....I guess.
> |>
> |>Depends on whether you wish to risk turning your gun into scrap metal, 
> never
> |>mind risking parts of your anatomy on this experiment. For someone
> |>complaining about the cost of a replacement barrel, I doubt you can 
> afford a
> |>replacement gun....or the possible medical bills.
> |>
> Well, that's a complaining<--->experimenting perspective.

Just commenting that such experimentation comes at a risk.

> |>Sorry, but unless you have a burning desire to have a .455 Webley 1911 
> and
> |>are willing to work with a gun smith for quite awhile (and cost) trying 
> to
> |>rework the whole design to accommodate it........then I would pass and 
> just
> |>get another barrel for gun.
> |>
> I heard from a gunsmith it wasn't too much work, and would solve the
> problem, but he might have been high or annoyed for my discrediting a
> Norinco  1991a1 Commander barrel he marketed.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Seems like a lot of work that may not pan out.

Have you tried Gun Parts?


> My 1911a1 C was a near total rebuild, with compensator, nu
> fandangled extractor, hone/tune, etc.
> These Norks are more of a project gun, to waste a lot of time on,
> just like any cheap gun is.
>
> Thanx for you advice.....

No problem. If you decide to go ahead I would be interested in hearing your 
results.