'63 Gas Check Removing Tool

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 9:36 pm

I have the 1999 Pedersoli catalogue in which are listed the accessories they market. A lot of beautifully made, functional looking items, I might add.
Among them is:

"Estrattore Camerina Flottante. Utillisimo per facilitare la parziale della camerina flottante nei modelli Sharps......"

Oh, permit me to translate:

"Gas Check Moving Tool. Very useful tool to move the gas check of the Sharps 1859/1863 paper cartridges models. To perform such work, put the tool inside the gas check, screwing it the conical screw enlarges the end self-blocking inside.
This enables to move slightly the gas check easing the cleaning.
We remind that the gas check cannot be removed completely."

Getting past the quaint phraseology, you get the idea of how it functions.
I'd sure like to see it in action. "Form follows function" and all that, and it is easily to see that it is an expanding device operating on a simple screw principle.

There, a mystery solved and a new goody to buy.......if we need it.

Be kind to your enemies. It drives them nuts!

Todd

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Fri Apr 23, 2004 7:55 pm

Todd,
But what needs cleaned? This would assume that fouling might accumulate between the sleeve and the chamber. Is this not an impossibility with the Shiloh system? I realize you belive that some leading has occured past your possible sleeve. How might a tool to remove the sleeve aid you? Might not it even mess up a proper headspace?
Ugh!, this is getting complicated. This catalog however I'd like to preuse.
Gregg

terry · Post by **terry** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 12:13 pm

The Shiloh rifles do not have a sliding chamber and can not be adjusted. The original Sharps design ( which Pedersoli uses) had the sliding chamber. The adjusting tool would allow the chamber to be pushed back against the closed breachblock, thus insuring minimal headspace. The tool was used with a cleaning rod and then the cleaning rod was tapped pushing the chamber against the breachblock. The adjustable chamber cannot be removed without unscrewing the barrel from the frame. The gun did not foul the chamber as quickly because the next cartridge pushed the chamber crud into the open space at the front of the sliding chamber. I have never seen an original gun where the chamber would still slide, they froze in place very quickly if not cleaned correctly.

hope this helps,

Terry Behm

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 2:11 pm

Terry,
Good stuff. But is it the original or the Pedersoli that must have its barrel unscrewed to reveal entirely the sliding sleeve? Actually I can envision problems with an adjustible sleeve. I do not seem to hear this mentioned in historical battle accounts, or as soldiers discuss thier firearms at fireside.
Got yard work to do do FYI, but QUIGLY DOWN UNDER, just on TV., got me weepy and back here.
Best, Gregg

terry · Post by **terry** » Sat Apr 24, 2004 9:19 pm

Hi Gregg All original Sharps and the Pedersoli guns have an adjustable bouching (original terminology). Think of the barrel being drilled with an oversize chamber, then a short piece of tubing is slid into this oversize chamber before the barrel is screwed into the frame. Once the barrel is screwed into the frame, the piece of tubing can't be removed because it is longer than the breachblock is thick. If slid as far as it would go it would hit the back of the frame (with breachblock down). In reality the adjustable bouching was a pretty tight fit when new and soon froze in place. The advantage of the Shiloh design is simpler/less costly construction with the disadvantage of quicker chamber fouling.

Terry

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 10:36 am

Terry,
Bouching, I'll try to use it from now on. I get it and I'm NOT a technical person. De Hass believed as well that the gas seal in actuality locked in place with fouling. I would disagree due to the wear evident on my seal.
Thanks, Gregg (QuiglEy, I made a mistake unacceptable)

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 2:49 pm

Gregg

The only "unacceptable mistake" a man can make is not to be willing to admit it when he's made one.

On the other hand, why is it always easier to get forgiveness than it is permission?

Male Logic 101. Totally beyond female comprehension.

Todd

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 5:27 pm

Ok., but to make a mistake with map coordinates for heavy weapon support, does few people good, even if you own up to it.
Gregg

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 6:11 pm

I think what you're referring to is known euphemistically as "friendly fire", a misnomer if ever there was one.

The Princess Patricia Canadian Light Infantry (PPCLI) found that out the hard way in Afghanistan.

We'd best not go there.....

Todd

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:05 pm

Todd,
Don't forget, I trained with and had friends in the PPCLI while in Alaska.
It hurts me also. Gregg

VAshooter · Post by **VAshooter** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 2:30 pm

Terry,
For a short time I had an Italian replica Sharps 1863 carbine which had the chamber bushing. It was a fairly good fit but could be removed by lowering the breach block without removing the barrel or using a tool. I live in an area which is a hotbed of NSSA shooting and they usually shorten the bushing and install an O-ring at each end. The rear O-ring seals the breach when firing.
I talked to Kirk at the NRA Convention and described the NSSA method for sealing the breach. He said that the Shiloh Sharps did not have a bushing and didn't need one because Shiloh maintained much closer tolerences in their machine work. The Italian replicas do not maintain close tolerences when assembling the receiver and breach block.
My guess is that in the original Sharps you could replace the chamber bushing when it wore out and started leaking. Cheaper than sending it back to Sharps for a new barrel.

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:23 pm

Fellas,
Now I'm really confused. I can see and feel the bouching in my Farmingdale carbine, and I dinged it up as I've written here. The barrel is indented a mil. bit and the bouching protrudes another tiny bit from there. Now the carbine is being repaired at Shiloh thus. Todd Birch was told I believe as well there was none. It seems the '63 action Must have both the bouching and a proper gas seal.
Boy oh boy, Gregg

Todd Birch · Post by **Todd Birch** » Mon Apr 26, 2004 6:40 pm

Gregg

Lest you forget....

Your '63 action, like mine, is a Farmingdale.

Perhaps the current Shiloh 63s are made without the "bouching" or chamber bushing.

Todd

gmartin · Post by **gmartin** » Tue Apr 27, 2004 2:04 pm

Rght Todd,
What I would like to know then, if the repica '63's have no bouching now, then what would the gas seal move against to create to create a gas tight seal? Is there possibly a machined part of the barrel proper that protrudes for the seal to move forward against? Locally I know of no place or person with a newer Montana '63 to look
at and handle. I hope to own a 3 bander and if I find no Farmingdale at a gun show (highly unlikely despite recent news) a new rifle is of course as acceptable.
Gregg

terry · Post by **terry** » Wed Apr 28, 2004 12:55 pm

Gregg, you are exactly right, the barrel proper has a slight machined lip instead of a separate sleeve. This make it very difficult to tell if an adjustable bouching exists or not. It really doesn't matter that much, except that I personally prefer my reproduction guns to be historically accurate. That said, I have three Shiloh percussion guns (Robinson carbine, 3 banded, and sporter) and only one Pedersoli sporter. plus a couple of sile's (if anyone cares) as shooters.

Terry Behm

Shiloh Rifle Forums

'63 Gas Check Removing Tool

'63 Gas Check Removing Tool

"...unacceptable mistake....?

unacceptable mistake

"Friendly Fire"

PPCLI

"Bouching" in 63s