Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shotgun part repair....was it a bad idea?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shotgun part repair....was it a bad idea?

    Someone brought in a broken part from a shotgun. I'm not sure what it's called, but it is a trigger-shaped piece that pivots to unlock the barrel(s) in a break-action gun. The piece was broken between the pivot and the hook on the upper end. He said it was an old cheap gun, and parts were no longer available. He said the gunsmith he took it to first told him he couldn't fix it.

    I beveled the edges around the break, clamped the parts with shims to get the correct alignment, brazed them together, and filed off the excess brass. The repair looked pretty good, the owner was happy, and he reported back that the gun worked fine again. I don't know if he actually fired it, though.

    Now I'm wondering if repairing that part was such a good idea. Seems like it would take a fair amount of load when the gun is fired, and things could get ugly if the barrel(s) unlocked when it was fired.

    I know next to nothing about guns and how they're put together, so please tell me if the repair was ill-advised?
    Last edited by winchman; 03-24-2011, 02:22 PM.
    Any products mentioned in my posts have been endorsed by their manufacturer.

  • #2
    Only if you have a conscience or assets.

    Hopefully the repair will suffice.

    Comment


    • #3
      Well... If the break had been on the thumb-side of the pivot I would say brazing is fine. On the hook side, perhaps a weld would have been better. I don't think the load on that part is extreme though, and a proper braze job is really quite strong.

      I'd like to hear the gunsmiths on here opine. The lawyers not so much. If we listened to them we'd never do anything for anybody.
      Southwest Utah

      Comment


      • #4
        You mean the top lever?

        Seen loads break and not worth making unless customer willing to pay.
        Braze wont hold its weaker than steel and the steel has broke, times i have seen that done. More laughable is when they braze the sears and tumblers up, even seen them glued.

        Most are engraved but if customer is happy with possibly losing a bit, tig weld them. Silver solder should hold but will see a thin gold line after reblack.

        On the other hand do you mean on the barrels?
        Dont want to braze or silver solder there either, lucky the barrels havent come apart!
        If its an english they are put together with soft lead solder which wont withstand hot blacking at 145 degrees up.

        Comment


        • #5
          That piece your talking latches into the barrel lug and locks the barrel down. I had a barrel lug come off once. It is silver soldered to the under side of the barrel. I resilver soldered it and did a better job and it lasted. If you used some good metal like 4140 or 4150 it will probably be fine. Bad news is you could go to prison for making gun parts without a manufactures license. Just hope ATF does not find out those people are a bunch of jerks they would arrest their own grandmother if they could catch her doing something illegal.
          Last edited by gary350; 03-24-2011, 09:54 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hello,

            I suppose the ATF could give you a hard time as calling them "jerks" is really being nice. However, as long as you didn't work on the receiver or have the receiver in your possession you were just working on a part. Yes, it was a part to a gun; however, it was not a gun.

            (This is only for the U.S. In other countries this varies.)

            The "gun" is actually the receiver, frame, upper receiver, or lower receiver...depending upon what the ATF defines as the main part of that particular firearm. In fact, the main part is not even defined as being a gun unless it is at least 80% complete. So, I could build a 70% complete receiver and sell you all of the other parts with it legally, and without a license, as long as you finish the last 30% on your own.

            Also, consider this: You can buy all parts of a firearm except the part that is classified as the "gun" with no questions asked.

            Now, having liability if something breaks and somebody gets hurt. That is something else.

            Regards,

            Brian

            P.S. This is not legal advise and I would advise you to look it up yourself. However, all of the legal garbage is available online. Take a look here http://www.homegunsmith.com for more information.

            Originally posted by gary350
            That piece your talking latches into the barrel lug and locks the barrel down. I had a barrel lug come off once. It is silver soldered to the under side of the barrel. I resilver soldered it and did a better job and it lasted. If you used some good metal like 4140 or 4150 it will probably be fine. Bad news is you could go to prison for making gun parts without a manufactures license. Just hope ATF does not find out those people are a bunch of jerks they would arrest their own grandmother if they could catch her doing something illegal.
            There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

            Comment


            • #7
              Yea, Theres a few things I just refuse to make or repair due to lawyers... And lack of total certification in making them meaning I should likey just leave it to the experts:

              Lifting equipment when there is ANY chance of any human being on or under it. (Except made for myself, And then i'll be the only person who uses it and the only person that gets near or under it) (Allready been asked and refused)

              Medical equipment. Nuff said.

              Gun parts. Just too easy to be illegal, or something really bad to happen if it fails.

              Critical car/trailer parts: Basicly anything that if it came apart could cause the car to lose control. And by 'lose control' I don't so much mean spin out/crash, but just *any* negative effect on the controlability of the vehical. (Allready been asked to repair a trailer frame.. but the frame was not road worthy and I doubt I could of ever made it road worthy.. And I just don't wanna do critical car work. So its legaly safer for me to send the guy on his way with the trailer frame that I basicly KNOW will fall epicly, But at least will fail without me having touched it. As a bonus it will likey harm someone OTHER then the driver when it fails, And the driver did not care one bit when I tryed to point this fact out to him, saying just "Well thats not my problem is it?")

              Implimentation of liability law is.. weird. If anything, I think I should be charged with not reporting that guy to the police for driving an unsafely modifyed trailer (It came to me modifyed in a very unsafe way and the job was to reverse the modifications), But insted I have to refuse work because of the possability it might legaly land on me if my work fails, Dispite my work vastly improving the structural nature of the trailer compaired to how it came to me.
              Play Brutal Nature, Black Moons free to play highly realistic voxel sandbox game.

              Comment


              • #8
                I wouldn't worry about the part failing during firing as the force when fired is straight back against receiver and not on the part you repaired.

                JL................

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm with JL on this. I don't think the part will break during firing. I can't tell from the original post if the part is the lever on the top of the shotgun that you push with your thumb or the part that holds the barrels closed.
                  It's only ink and paper

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Making or working on parts other than the serial numbered receiver is not covered by BATF as long as the parts themselves are legal to make or own where you live. For instance, threaded muzzles in the Peace Loving Socialist Democratic Republic of California are pretty much forbidden...same with pistol/rifle magazines with more than ten round capacity in that and in a few other states. A locking block for a shotgun, or a top lever for one, should be no problem, especially since you tell us that you just put the broken parts back together and didn't fit them back into the gun yourself.

                    David
                    David Kaiser
                    “You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.”
                    ― Robert A. Heinlein

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by 38_Cal
                      Making or working on parts other than the serial numbered receiver is not covered by BATF as long as the parts themselves are legal to make or own where you live. For instance, threaded muzzles in the Peace Loving Socialist Democratic Republic of California are pretty much forbidden...same with pistol/rifle magazines with more than ten round capacity in that and in a few other states. A locking block for a shotgun, or a top lever for one, should be no problem, especially since you tell us that you just put the broken parts back together and didn't fit them back into the gun yourself.

                      David
                      Even if he had fitted it, as long as the owner was present and never left the premises, it's not a big deal as no FFL is required.

                      Really, he brought you a part and asked you to braze it. If he didn't ask for engineering services, you have no concerns. This carries no liability. Once you start offering engineering services, is when you start to carry liability.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Snowman, that is what a lawyer told me too. Someone asked me to make parts for a landing gear strut for an airplane from his drawings. I asked a local lawyer about it and he said as long as I used someone's drawings and didn't change the drawing or make changes to the part different from the drawing I was not liable.

                        I was also told making or repairing a part for a gun does not require an FFL as long as it is just a part and not the whole gun.
                        It's only ink and paper

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Carld
                          Snowman, that is what a lawyer told me too. Someone asked me to make parts for a landing gear strut for an airplane from his drawings. I asked a local lawyer about it and he said as long as I used someone's drawings and didn't change the drawing or make changes to the part different from the drawing I was not liable.

                          I was also told making or repairing a part for a gun does not require an FFL as long as it is just a part and not the whole gun.
                          You forgot to mention as long as you use the specified material for the part you are not liable!!! That is just as important.

                          JL...................

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I make critical vehicle parts quite often. It is not an easy feeling, every little part has to be thought over, inspected, and tested. The welding of the parts is the most nervous operation of the whole deal.
                            Andy

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes, Joe, that was part of his reply. I forgot to add that. Thanks.

                              I had an FFL in the middle 1960's and the only reason was so I could legally do machine work to our clubs fast draw guns. When the 1968 gun laws were passed I finally gave up my FFL in 1970 because they were starting to harass people like me without a real business location. They didn't want shops at peoples homes. They told me I could work on guns for free without an FFL so I did. That probably has changed.

                              Isn't it interesting that a bureaucracy can make and change law that the Senate and Congress are the only ones that are supposed to be able to do. The bureaucracy's and the Supreme Court can and do change laws that the constitution does not give them the right to do. But I guess this is a discussion for a different thread or forum
                              It's only ink and paper

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X