EGW New Design HD 45 Extractor

[LDM]

EGW has a new design extractor, added to their catalog on 21Dec06. The features are listed as:
1 The hook is moved back closer to the bolt face to improve extractor life and accuracy
2 The hook is done with a special cutter that leaves a nice clean radius in the inside corner where most extractors fail.
3 The Hook itself is undercut a couple degrees so it bites into the case rim.
4 The back section is solid so it is stronger.
5 The back is a little long so you can blend it to YOUR slide for a perfect fit. We checked slides from 5 manufactures during development and they were all different in the back radius where the extractor blends in.
6 The cut for the firing pin stop is held to a tighter spec and works great with our O/S fp stop.
7 Vacuum heat treated 49 to 51 rc which yields great spring properties and maintains tension.
8 Made from Unobtanium, only available from EGW inc. this stuff is a century ahead of common spring steel.

Has anybody tried this yet?

[browningwgm]

I have one but haven't tried it yet.

Hey 1911Tuner, remember the heavy duty extractor I brought with me last time to see what you thought about it. I can't remember his exact words so I'll leave that to him if he sees this thread.

[LDM]

Hey that's perfect...was hoping this post might catch 1911Tuner's eye and what he'd have to say.

[RickB]

I've been bidding on those extractors, when they come up on ebay, but I just can't bear to pay $30 + s&h . . . yet. I'm in the middle of an extraction/ejection nightmare, and if that new extractor will fix it, then I'm all for it.

[Pappy]

EGW has a new design extractor, added to their catalog on 21Dec06. The features are listed as:
1 The hook is moved back closer to the bolt face to improve extractor life and accuracy
2 The hook is done with a special cutter that leaves a nice clean radius in the inside corner where most extractors fail.
3 The Hook itself is undercut a couple degrees so it bites into the case rim.
4 The back section is solid so it is stronger.
5 The back is a little long so you can blend it to YOUR slide for a perfect fit. We checked slides from 5 manufactures during development and they were all different in the back radius where the extractor blends in.
6 The cut for the firing pin stop is held to a tighter spec and works great with our O/S fp stop.
7 Vacuum heat treated 49 to 51 rc which yields great spring properties and maintains tension.
8 Made from Unobtanium, only available from EGW inc. this stuff is a century ahead of common spring steel.

Has anybody tried this yet?

Unobtanium? Typo? or un obtain ium? Might take a century to obtain. Looks like someone is playing a joke...Pappy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtanium

[Joni Lynn]

Unobtanium is made from the scrap left over from that UFO that crashed near EGW.

[wichaka]

Unobtanium is made from the scrap left over from that UFO that crashed near EGW.


That was pretty much on the QT from HQ......... :D

[Iron bottom]

I have one and had to tweak it a tiny amount. These things are truly hard to bend. And by that I am saying that one has to bend this steel a long way to get any significant adjustment. Haven't fired the pistol yet. I have high hopes for this extractor. Very well made.

[1911Tuner]

I have one but haven't tried it yet.

Hey 1911Tuner, remember the heavy duty extractor I brought with me last time to see what you thought about it. I can't remember his exact words so I'll leave that to him if he sees this thread.

I do remember. Looks like a good piece of work...but then, I'd expect no less from EGW. Due to the way I set up most extractors, the thick rearward part of the stem would tend to make it a bit difficult for me to do...so I'll wait until I can try one before makin' any judgement calls on it. Problem is, that I haven't needed an extractor or an adjustment for any of mine in years and tens of thousands of rounds...so it may be awhile before I get a chance to put one to the test.

I do like the undercut hook, though. :)

[browningwgm]

When I first received the HD extractor I contacted George at EGW to get instructions on how to tune it. I wasn't sure if I would need to bend the large section or small section near the end. He said not to try bending the large portion because if that part is bent it would not fit the hole and would be difficult to get bent back correct. The small section near the end was to be used to tune the extractor. Also, he recommended a very slight radius to the area the case rim enters the extractor, reason being for a very slight radius was if the radius were too large it would push the case down.

Here's a photo I got from EGW's site.

http://www.idratherbefishin.com/images/32_1.jpg

[John]

Darn more things to order from George!

[Lazarus]

Just a hypothetical question...using the lesson plan laid out for us...
we know that all this emphasis on extractors seems to have come about because fundamentals of proper feeding were ignored. Extractors won't break unless they are forced to snap over the case rim on a regular basis. When feeding became irregular because of new magazine design, different ammo or ramps incorrectly cut then we got 'bulletproof' and 'tufstuff' and
'hardcore'. But those extractors simply don't flex to a great extent. They may not break, but they won't snap over a rim, either. So...back to basics I guess. What problem does this extactor really solve?

-Lazarus

[leam]

using the lesson plan laid out for us...

Is there a real lesson plan besides "Read all the stickies in the gunsmithing sub-forum"? Loe to see it, if there was. :)

ciao!

leam

[John]

What problem does this extactor really solve?

Haven't seen one yet, but here are my 2 Eurocents. From what I've seen lately, too many good extractors (good as in good names on the small plastic bag) are a bit long on the claw. This is something that this one says it helps with. The other thing is that you most probably won't need too much care at the lower claw surfaces.

If these are indeed the merrits, I want to try out one.

[LDM]

Observation from an amateur- When I look closely at this part, the rear 2/3 of the extractor will not flex. This part that flexes is about the same length of an external extractor. Not sure if that's a good analog or correct observation, so maybe someone else can comment on that thought as to what it will mean about how this extractor will work.

[George Smith]

Once upon a Time I raced Motocross for 5 years on CR 500's.
The magazines talked about factory bikes that you can not buy and ended up being the next model year production bike. They coined the phrase unobtanium because you could not buy one. In this case at least for the first 3 month's you can only obtain one from EGW. Hence unobtainable anywhere else. :)

Our focus has been on Reliability and guns that see many rounds. Ipsc shooters, espically the ones at higher levels shoot many bullets. 20-30K per season is not unusual. At this pace things wear out faster than the person that shot 3 boxes through his or her gun.

Lets take the Hook first. IF the hook is hanging out there a little forward it rides up on the case relief every time the gun fires. This may lead to a loss of extractor tension and the hook gets pushed back every time the gun goes into battery and again when it fires. When the gun fires it pulls the hook the other way, but in almost all cases the hook has a square inside corner, a Stress riser. The Hook being long also Jammes the case into the chamer which is not helping in the accuracy department either.

Move the hook back, don't jam the case into the chamber, Don't push back on the hook with every cycle of the gun. Change the angle of the face of the hook so if it does ride over the case it is not as an accute angle either.

The radius in the corner is just good design, the under cut makes it more diffacult to manufacture but the contact point is moved inbound and the hook gets a better purchase on the case. The opposite like you will find using a comparator to see what most extractors look like at 20x show the hook goes away from the case 3 degrees relying entirely on tension to hold the hook on the rim.

IF your extractor is easy to bend, it will bend back just as easy. The way we gage how the extractor will hold tension in the shop is feel. IF it bends like it came from the Land O Lakes plant, after 50 rounds (for several reasons listed above) it will have no tension left.

Most Smith's I have worked (Behlert, Leckie, Carber, Deangelo, Gray, Mclearn, Milks, Barret, Alfeld) with put the bend to set tension in the front half of the extractor. I have in my extensive collection of extractors mostly snapped off hooks but some that the back on std and ser 80 guns have become the undesirable two pc design.

External extractors are a different animal, usually suffering from design issues related to the pivot point, tension / leverage, hook design, material, etc.

this is Some of the thinking that went into the HD extractor

I fully expect like the other EGW origional parts from 1991 and 1992 the O/S firing pin stop, (we here are all familiar with) O/S slide stop, XL ejector, O/S firing pins, Hard Sear, Long disconector, will be offered to you with a different color parts card from a catalog house near you.

Thank you for the interest!
best regards,
geo

www.egw-guns.com

and if you like a bargin

http://stores.ebay.com/EGW1

[auto45]

Someday a series 80...perhaps?

[1911Tuner]

Good description, George. Thanks for the explanation. Any time reilability, long-term durability, and 1911 is mentioned in the same sentence...my ears go up.

Let me give a brief description on how I've been tuning extractors for the last several years. I sorta stumbled on it by accident, during a fit of exasperation.

I reduce the ourboard center pad by about .015 inch and put a fairly heavy bend in the stem...noticeably heavier than what is normally done.

The reduced pad allows this bend without making the extractor difficult to install, but the two mods work together. The heavy bend works like a longer spring...going on the mindset that a longer lighter spring is preferable to a shorter, stiffer spring. Although the extractor is overtensioned, the reduced pad allows it to flex more readily before contacting the channel wall...and makes contact with the wall just as the extractor opens the last few thousandths of an inch, placing maximum tension on the rim just as the round is well into the chamber, where it can't adversely affect reliable return to battery. Of course, that is dependent on case rim diameter, and some case rims are much smaller than SAAMI spec tolerance, like the Russian Wolf ammo...with it's .465-.468 average diameter...but rims that fall within specs seems to work fine.

Tension is increased without the feed/RTB issues often brought on by such overtensioning. The time/round count that the extractor holds tension seems to be markedly increased due to less stress on the area forward of the stem.
I have run standard extractors...including modified USGI extractors...for as long as 70-80,000 rounds without a failure and without the need to retension.

The extra amount of bend takes advantage of the steel's tendency to "remember" to return to the bent state when the gun is idle for a few days.

Looking at your new design, I have to say that the subtle modifications are
going to work as intended...and I *think* I see a way to improvise my idea concerning the reduction at the area of the center pad, by using a bevel at the front of the thickened stem. I think I'll be ordering one ofyour extractors to study and experiment with pretty soon. My curiosity has been piqued, and I won't be able to rest until I can try one.

Luck! Hope ya sell'em like propane heaters at the Arctic Circle. ;)

[ambidextrous1]

To paraphrase Tuner, I am not comfortable with second-guessing JMB. Extractors made to Browning's original specs seem to function well; but few are, and that's the rub.

I'm not dumping on the EGW extractor - it looks very well made, and coming from EGW, it can be expected to perform very well. I have five 1911s, and $150 is a lot to spend on something that isn't a problem on the pistols I have; just think of how many martinis $150 will buy! ;)

[RickB]

Why did the old "trick" of removing the center lumps go away? That was apparently pretty popular, and would create a longer spring, bending along its entire length. I can "see" your explanation of how you have modified the stock extractor, bending over nearly its entire length early in the cycle, so it won't inhibit feeding, but then stiffening at the end, as the outer lug contacts the tunnel, ensuring it has a good grip on the rim; almost a two-stage process.

[wichaka]

Quite a few aftermarket extractors I come across are too long, in that they tend to ride up on the case, which makes the hook come away from the case rim. Until it's extraction time...............then as the slide comes back, the extractor hook falls back into place.
Can't tell ya how many hooks I've shortened a bit, trying to get them off the case and onto the rim.

Am calling George now........want to try one out as well.

[niemi24s]

Last Fall I happened to notice the extractor in my 1911 made contact with the case bevel, forcing the base of the case about 0.014 inch away from the breech face when in battery. Two of my shooting buddy's three 1911's showed about the same case-breech gap due to "long extractors".

After some discussion we concluded that because 75% of our 1911's had this gap, maybe the extractor was supposed to push the round all the way in against the chamber shoulder. Then the firing pin would strike a fully forward round and give more consistent ignition, there being no tendency for the round to move forward due to firing pin impact.

However, several of the posts in this thread mention the extractor nose is NOT supposed to bear against the case bevel (and therefore move the cartridge forward). I gather from this that our conclusion may have been incorrect.

Were we wrong?

[John]

Well, this is certainly not part of the extractor's ... job description.

[1911Tuner]

Quite a few aftermarket extractors I come across are too long, in that they tend to ride up on the case, which makes the hook come away from the case rim.

I've noticed that...and in almost every case, after measuring the extractor's dimensions and found them within spec...I usually find that the slide is actually at the root of the problem.

[John]

You sure are up early today! LoRL :) :D

[1911Tuner]

You sure are up early today! LoRL :) :D


0400 every day...Old habits die hard, m'fren. ;)

[LDM]

I have read & re-read George Smith & 1911 Tuner's posts, trying to wrap my simpleton's mind around these concepts. Not sure if I admire or resent the Smiths, Tuners, and wichatas of this world for how much more they know than I. In any event, it ain't hard to be humble when you don't know much AND know you don't know.
But...here's my take, so someone correct me if I'm wrong:
Tuners classic approach: tried & true spring steel with longest possible radius to combat fatigue and optimize dependability with the given material, vs.
EGW modern approach: modern fabricating & improved metals with shorter radius to acheive stiffness & dependability, relying on the modern metals to combat fatigue and tweaked geometry.
Two paths to nirvanna.
Am I getting this right?

[niemi24s]

1. In Post #22 of this thread, I'd mentioned 3 of the 4 1911's recently seen had contact between the extractor nose and case bevel resulting in the case base being held away from the breech face. Subsequent responses indicated the extractor nose was NOT supposed to contact the case bevel.

2. Did a bunch of calculations using specifications in Army Ordnance Dept. and SAAMI blueprints and found that a mid-spec gun WILL have significant contact between the extractor nose and case bevel, as shown below. The drawing depicts the case base against the breech face with the case rim held against the left breech face guide block by the extractor. The extractor and case bevel overlap (conflict) in the little dimensioned triangular area.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/P1310003a.jpg

3. As this conflicting overlap cannot physically exist, it must be eliminated in one of these ways:

A. the extractor moves out another 0.006 inch, the case base remains in contact with the breech face, or

B. the case (cartridge) moves forward 0.012 inch away from the breech face, or

C. some combination of A and B, each to a lesser amount.

4. Methinks the inertia of the cartridge during chambering would favor 3.B, at least as much as headspace and chamber crud allow. Went over the math twice and am led to the conclusion that (whether JMB intended it to be this way or not) a mid spec 1911's extractor will attempt to shove the round against the chamber shoulder. This apparent design feature would reduce or eliminate forward movement of the round due to firing pin impact and (perhaps) give better ignition.

5. Just trying to learn how this thing works, and (with apologies to Will Rogers) "All I know is what I read in the blueprints" - and what I learn in this forum too.

[1911Tuner]

Went over the math twice and am led to the conclusion that (whether JMB intended it to be this way or not) a mid spec 1911's extractor will attempt to shove the round against the chamber shoulder.

Either the print is incorrect, or there was an error in the copying/reprinting. Having the extractor nose impinge on the case bevel is a sure-fire recipe for a broken extractor...and it has broken a few when the condition is present. Jammer Six can attest to it. Extractors in his Springfield were snapping like popcorn about every 500 rounds or so, IIRC. He sent his top-end to me, and after cutting the correct relief, the problem stopped.

Think about what happens to the case when the pressures slam into it...driving it rearward against the breechface under some 20,000 pounds psi.

If the nose of the extractor does in fact press on the case bevel, it should be relieved so that it doesn't touch when the case is pushed firmly backward against the breechface.

[RickB]

Is the rim centered on the hook, in the drawing? That is, the rim contacts the hook where the rim is largest in diameter?

[1911Tuner]

Is the rim centered on the hook, in the drawing? That is, the rim contacts the hook where the rim is largest in diameter?

On closer examination, the drawing's representation of the extractor is flawed.
niemi24s omitted one feature of the extractor's nose. It's not a gentle radius as shown, but has a rearward rake that provides the clearance necessary...or at least it's supposed to. I've seen a few Springfield slide/extractor assemblies that allowed the extractor to bear against the case angle, and other identical pistols that had enough of the required clearance. It's all in the specs, and the tolerance stacking that varies from gun to gun.

[niemi24s]

Hi Tuner: I only have one blueprint for the 1911 extractor and it's the one available from CNC Gunsmithing. It appears to be a digital scan and is of a 1964 Rock Island Arsenal update of a 1928 blueprint (probably by Springfield Armory). It could be in error, but I don't have access to the original 1928 drawing. The only decent thing I have to compare against this blueprint is a new, never-used Colt extractor. This extractor falls within the dimensional limits of the RIA blueprint. Neither the blueprint nor the new Colt extractor show any raking at the nose - just the curve (".135R" in the blueprint) with a vertically oriented axis. Regards.

[1911Tuner]

The only decent thing I have to compare against this blueprint is a new, never-used Colt extractor. This extractor falls within the dimensional limits of the RIA blueprint. Neither the blueprint nor the new Colt extractor show any raking at the nose - just the curve (".135R" in the

Hmmm..Both the USGI extractors I'm lookin' at have a radius, but a definite line of departure and a rearward rake is evident on both. The corner is almost radius-like...but still a corner. As long as the dimensions are such that they allow a clearance between the nose of the hook and the angle of the extractor groove, I don't reckon it matters how it's accomplished...but it does need to be there.

[1911Tuner]

I see where the confusion comes from.

Went and checked two prints...one in Kuhnhausen Volume 2, page 141 that clearly shows the rake, but doesn't give a clear dimension other than a .030 inch wide bevel/no angular dimension. The radiused portion is from the rear wall of the hook that aligns with the tensioning wall on what would be a hidden(dotted) line. The rake comes from the implied line to the tip of the claw. As shown in K/2, the angle is more narrow than on the part, and is representative instead of exact.

[niemi24s]

Hi RickB: The drawing depicts two horizontal planes (because I didn't know how else to do it). The slide (breech face and extractor bore) are depicted at the centerline of the extractor bore. The extractor and case are depicted at the centerline of the case. According to the Rock Island Arsenal blueprint at CNC Gunsmithing's site, these two planes have a vertical separation of 0.028+/- 0.008 inch with the extractor's the lower one. The upper half of the extractor's "notch" is, however, 0.075+/- 0.0025 inches high so if the case is centered on the firing pin bore, the extractor does indeed contact the case rim at it's widest point, as drawn.

Hope this answers your question, but as a picture's worth a thousand words, I'll try to churn up a drawing of this in a day or two - with dimensions. Regards.

[1911Tuner]

the extractor does indeed contact the case rim at it's widest point, as drawn.

*sigh*

Regardless...If, after installing an extractor and pressing a case hard against the breechface, the nose does indeed ride up the angle at the forward section of the case extractor groove...it should be relieved to provide clearance. Not all guns with all extractors do it...but some do...and when they do, de-tensioned and/or broken extractors are virtually assured if not correctly relieved.

That's why we who wrench on the pistol so often warn that there is no such thing as a drop in part. It may do it...and it may not. This is the essence of hand-fitting and tuning.

Cheers

[niemi24s]

Hi RickB & Tuner: Here's the crude drawing I promised in a previous post. The dimensions are from the Rock Island Arsenal blueprint and the dimensions derived from them are circled.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/P2010004a.jpg

Don't have any of Kuenhausen's books as I prefer to initially learn as much as I can from scans of the available Army Ordnance Dept blueprints, plus I don't know what the source of Kuenhausen's data is. I have a deep distrust of second-party reformatted technical data - too much room for transposition errors and omissions (especially tolerances). Once I graduate from Kindergarten on the 1911 then maybe I can handle blueprints with conflicting information. But not now - it's nap time! Best regards from the solidly frozen Northern USA. It's colder'n a well digger's brass monkey up here!!

[Black_Talon]

Hi RickB & Tuner: Here's the crude drawing I promised in a previous post. The dimensions are from the Rock Island Arsenal blueprint and the dimensions derived from them are circled.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/P2010004a.jpg


niemi24s-

What does the .2685 ± .0025" from the C/L of the cartridge case to the (some part) of the extractor represent?

[Pappy]

niemi24s-

What does the .2685 ± .0025" from the C/L of the cartridge case to the (some part) of the extractor represent?


It looks like center of hook (1/2 height x 1/2 width) to center of barrel bore/chamber...Pappy

[emobley]

I'm going to give the EGW Extractor a whirl. I purchased an Ed Brown "Hardcore" and while it was very well made it rides up on the case bevel big time. As others surmised in this thread, I thought it was by design so as to push the cartridge forward for more consistent ignition. I would lose almost all the tension after 50 rounds.

After modifying it to avoid that problem I'm left wondering if my extractor is that robust. I'll be contacting George at EGW.

Ed

[1911Tuner]

After modifying it to avoid that problem I'm left wondering if my extractor is that robust.

The Wilson that I modified to clear in one of my beaters has been fine for about a year now...at the rate of roughly 500 rounds a month.

[Ericthenorse]

My oldest Gold Cup has over 5000 since I have owned it, and many more before that, and the extractor works just fine. If it ever breaks, you can bet I will throw an EGW one in to replace it....

Just to mix things up a bit, here is some info from scans of the extractor measurements...

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c132/ericthenorse/extractor2.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c132/ericthenorse/extractor1.jpg

[niemi24s]

Hi Black Talon & Pappy: The 0.2685 +/- 0.0025 inch is the horizontal separation between the centerlines of the firing pin and extractor tunnels (bores or holes).

FWIW, the drawing posted by Ericthenorse is the same one I used to get the exctractor data. It's available at CNC Gunsmithing's website (along with 50+ pages of other 1911 part blueprints - all scans of U.S. Army Arsenal/Armory blueprints).

[emobley]

It is interesting to see the proscribed radius cut in "Detail E" inside the extractor groove. The Ed Brown extractor that I purchased had no such radius in the cut.

Ed

[RickB]

I have pored over the Kuhnhausen manual for an hour, trying to extrapolate the hook depth measurement - .03" + .004" - because it's not there!
And, I also have never seen a radius inside the hook of a commercial extractor.

[niemi24s]

The purpose of the 0.010 inch radius (and the other 0.020 inch radius) is, I suspect, to prevent a crack from developing at an otherwise sharp corner which could lead to the hook breaking off. This in spite of the fact that the forward radius will tend to cause the hook to cam out slightly from the case rim during extraction, reducing its grip somewhat.

Each of the two extractors I've got have both inside corner radiused. One is manufactured by Colt; no idea who made the other one.

There's a good chance, IMHO, that a lot of extractor hook break-offs can be traced to poorly done extractor notch filing (or manufacture) which eliminated one or both of these radii. These stress-relieving curves are specified for many corners of various parts of the gun.

[1911Tuner]

*sigh*

Before I give up...I'll try one more time.

Note that a good many 1911 pistols will function remarkably well without an extractor even being there...often not failing to eject until the last round...and sometimes not even on every last round. Seen it many times over the years.

A correctly fitted and tensioned extractor should last the life of the gun...or beyond...but correctly fitted is the operative phrase. The nose must not bear against the forward angle of the case extractor groove. I have an extractor in service that was used when I pulled it out of a damaged USGI slide...made in 1918. It's worked in its new home without failure through many years and many tens of thousands of rounds. The pistol has been shot loose and the extractor didn't even need to be retensioned at the time of the rebuild. I don't know how many rounds it had handled before I got it...but closest estimates since would place it at about 70,000 give or take.

My main claim to fame is reliability, and that's comprised about 95% of all that I've done to the 1911 platform. I don't mess with the customizing end
of the practice, and my accuracy efforts wouldn't take 10th place in any NM Bullseye cometition...but I can make'em run and I can make'em live long and prosper. That's practically all I've done...for approaching a half-century.

Extractors are a very big part of functional issues in the 1911 pistol...and one that I've focused on...and while I make no claims of perfection or secret magic...I have learned a few about extractor tuning things over the years.
One of those things is that, if you want your extractor to work well and last a long time...you have to see that there is clearance between the nose and the extractor groove's forward angle. If it's not there, you're gonna have trouble sooner instead of later. This is the single biggest reason that Wolf ammunition breaks extractors on a good many pistols. Compare the extractor groove's geometry with a Winchester or PMC cartridge to see why.

Cheers!

[niemi24s]

Hi Tuner: My apologies if I got you exasperated - again. Got no qualms whatsoever about your saying the extractor nose is not supposed to touch the case bevel. You're the teacher here and I'm still struggling with my A-B-C's.

All I was saying was it would touch the case bevel in a U.S. Army mid-spec gun - whether or not it was supposed to. The stuff about holding the cartridge forward for (perhaps) better ignition was just speculation about maybe why the blueprint specifies it be made that way.

FWIW, the complete calculated overlap/conflict between the extractor nose and case bevel in the fore-aft direction works out to 0.012" +/- 0.014", or 0.026" to -0.002". There's no contact from zero to -0.002", but this is only about 7% of the total range of 0.028". As a result, methinks it'd be very unusual for a 1911 assembled from a random assortment of in-spec parts NOT to need an extractor nose job.

Temp here's shot up to 2F from -20F this a.m.. Hope yours is warmer. R-r-r-r-egards. Niemi24s.

[texbaz]

EGW has a new design extractor, added to their catalog on 21Dec06. The features are listed as:
1 The hook is moved back closer to the bolt face to improve extractor life and accuracy
2 The hook is done with a special cutter that leaves a nice clean radius in the inside corner where most extractors fail.
3 The Hook itself is undercut a couple degrees so it bites into the case rim.
4 The back section is solid so it is stronger.
5 The back is a little long so you can blend it to YOUR slide for a perfect fit. We checked slides from 5 manufactures during development and they were all different in the back radius where the extractor blends in.
6 The cut for the firing pin stop is held to a tighter spec and works great with our O/S fp stop.
7 Vacuum heat treated 49 to 51 rc which yields great spring properties and maintains tension.
8 Made from Unobtanium, only available from EGW inc. this stuff is a century ahead of common spring steel.

Has anybody tried this yet?

I'd like to know if anyone has had a chance to try one, Anybody? :D

[Lubaloy]

I see some degree of contact in virtually every 1911 that comes across my bench. And I'm fussy about extractor length.
I believe I have rejected as too long, most of the extractors I have bought.
What do I consider to be too long? An inside measurement, from the rear of the firing pin stop slot, to the front of the hook slot exceeding 2.362" is grounds for return.
I've tried and measured Browns, Caspians, Brownells, Nowlins and Wilsons.
My current favorite (subject to the manufacturer messing up a good thing) is the Wilson #101. Nope, not the 'bulletproof', the cheaper one!
The bulletproof's are difficult to properly set tension on. I can bend them tighter using a fair amount of force, only to find a very small amount of force will unbend them to original configuration. When working them, I'll overbend considerably, then unbend to proper tension.
The 101's will tension more predictably and with less 'memory' for return to where they were.
The 101's seem to average just a bit shorter at 3.358" than the bulletproofs as well.
If you try to configure the nose to not contact the case, you'll wind up with a thin and weak nose forward of the hook.
A little flex from contact with the case groove hurts nothing, near as I can tell.
Ned Christiansen set up an extractor in a motorized jig and subjected it to many thousands of flexes. He then remeasured the tension. No difference.
As with many things, there is no black and white right or wrong. Two different techs can have two differing opinions and both can experience satisfying results.
I see we have a new master gunsmith here, the '1911-Mastersmith'!
:o
Perhaps he will give us the benefit of his expertise.

[1911Tuner]

If you try to configure the nose to not contact the case, you'll wind up with a thin and weak nose forward of the hook.

Depends on what the shape is, Lub. Approachin' 30,000 rounds on one that was reshaped to miss the groove angle...and it's a WBP.

Tip for the BP extractor. Overbend slightly with a 4-ounce hammer (bump) across vise jaws to shock the steel...when they come in... and store'em for a while. About a week or ten days seems to do it.
Then set the tension. It doesn't overstress the elastic limit so much that way.