View Full Version : Wilson Bullet Proof Not Right?
Beck1911
15th March 2009, 14:33
Does it bug any one else that Wilson Bullet Proof extractors are not radius"ed" or relieved / ramped on the bottom of the hook as per convention. I just modify mine. But I was wondering if any on else cares...
log man
15th March 2009, 14:38
Does it bug any one else that Wilson Bullet Proof extractors are not radius"ed" or relieved / ramped on the bottom of the hook as per convention. I just modify mine. But I was wondering if any on else cares...
Yes, of course we care, and is the meaning of "fitting required", doesn't matter whose parts they are.
LOG
niemi24s
15th March 2009, 15:37
I think the reason they're not is simply because there is more than one convention for whacking on the extractor's nose.
While I've never laid eyes on a Wilson Bullet Proof extractor, I would guess their nose profiles pretty much match the Ordnance Dept. specs, as shown here:http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/P078290001e.jpg
How far off is my guess?
Beck1911
15th March 2009, 16:08
Yes that is the spec that makes sense... Wilson needs some rounding to get there from stock. I wish I had taken a picture of it stock... But the hook has sharp points and the radius "E" that the round lip ramps up is a tiny debur. "G" is a point. All sharp pints and cuts. I know they do this for $$$ manufacturing reasons and it does work as is.
niemi24s
15th March 2009, 17:03
Well, looks like my guess was way off. From your description it is not made to Ordnance specs. At least the one I got from Colt last year had the Groove Feed Radius (E) done correctly.
Maybe that's why the Colt one costs about $15 more, huh?
Regards
Beck1911
15th March 2009, 19:57
Yes, of course we care, and is the meaning of "fitting required", doesn't matter whose parts they are.
LOG
A smart answer for sure, but I see no evidence of fitting required in this Wilson description."If you're looking for a Bullet Proof® Extractor, this is it. This is a drop-in part for many guns and may require minor tension adjustment in others."
Have a nice day.
log man
15th March 2009, 20:08
A smart answer for sure, but I see no evidence of fitting required in this Wilson description."If you're looking for a Bullet Proof® Extractor, this is it. This is a drop-in part for many guns and may require minor tension adjustment in others."
Have a nice day.
Well, LOL ,Thank you! The Wilson description is called marketing. And don't forget "Buyer beware".
LOG
egumpher
15th March 2009, 20:38
Does it bug any one else that Wilson Bullet Proof extractors are not radius"ed" or relieved / ramped on the bottom of the hook as per convention. I just modify mine. But I was wondering if any on else cares...
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/P078290001e.jpg[/url]
How far off is my guess?
Hello,
I installed a Wilson Bullet Proof extractor in my LWT Commander. I really like a lot. I did have to remove about .006" from area-f of the previously shown graphic to get the proper tension/engagement on the case rim. This graphic shows this area as the "depth of engagement" on the picture from: http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/tech/reliability_secrets.htm
http://www.sightm1911.com/images/extractor.gif
I though this was a normal fit for a new part. Mine was relieved / ramped on the bottom of the hook and very smooth too.
Rgds
Eric
niemi24s
15th March 2009, 21:03
I installed a Wilson Bullet Proof extractor in my LWT Commander. I really like a lot. I did have to remove about .006" from area-f of the previously shown graphic to get the proper tension/engagement on the case rim.I suppose it's better to have too much material there (F) and have to file it off - as opposed to not enough material there and have to remove material from the tensioning wall (D) and claw tip (B).
Sort of a lesser of two evils deal, I guess.
Regards
texagun
16th March 2009, 10:35
I have used their Bullet Proof extractors in a few guns with good success, with only slight tensioning adjustments made to them. I haven't bought any of the new ones in quite a while so quality may have slipped a bit.
10851Man
2nd August 2009, 03:49
Much wider hook than a factory extractor, but I must agree, needed some finish and detail work, not to mention the end had to be trimmed almost .060" to get it flush with the slide...Robert
wichaka
2nd August 2009, 06:04
They make them a tad oversize in some areas so will fit a wide range of slide specs.
10851Man
2nd August 2009, 07:42
Nice piece..but what a wide hook!!!
vBulletin v3.0.13, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.