The extractor pad and deflection

The diamond files I use came from Harbor freight, they are just for gross removal of metal. You can use a nice grobet file as well but since it is just mass removal.

These are the decent grobet files I got. https://www.amazon.com/Swiss-Patter...4?keywords=grobet+files&qid=1679260062&sr=8-4

These are the cheap diamond files Needle File Set, 10 Piece

You will like the Grobet files Raptor listed above.

theraptur said:

I just did the locating pad sides on this extractor in about 10 minutes with a small diamond file and some 600 grit. It's not polished artwork like Keefers (and never will be) but it works damn well.

View attachment 673909 View attachment 673910

Click to expand...

Theraptur,
Have a different question.
What are dimensions of the unfinished mountain top landing strip? Length and width only.

Patrick0525 said:

Theraptur,
Have a different question.
What are dimensions of the unfinished mountain top landing strip? Length and width only.

Click to expand...

I don't have it here with me, but it would be the same vertical dimension as the particular stock extractor - until you start filing down the pad. I imagine different brands of extractors are going to vary in that dimension. I have a stock EGW GI Classic extractor here with me right now....?

Patrick0525 said:

I am more concerned about the width of the mountain top.

Click to expand...

The fitting pad is not subject to a lot of stress. There are no shear forces to speak of acting upon it. As @theraptur points out, you could put a needle point on the top of the fitting pad while prepping it and by the time you got the deflection set correctly there would be plenty of meat left on top of the mountain to allay your fears.

theraptur said:

That width is pretty much whatever it ends up. If you use an approximate 45 degree angle on the side cut, by the time you remove enough material to allow room in the tunnel...the width takes care of itself. I understand what you are asking though, I never worried about it, it is probably ~1/16" or a bit more. I can indeed see where it ended up when I am home this evening.

As long as you leave the original height there to work from, it could dang near be a point. The narrower the better, to a point anyway, so a tiny bit of filing will reduce the height without making too wide of a pad.

View attachment 674068

Click to expand...

A very nice detailed drawing and thank u for sharing u knowledge since I would have made it too wide.

I have been simply lowering the fitting pad while maintaining the original shape. Is there a disadvantage to lowering it that way?

-

megafiddle said:

I have been simply lowering the fitting pad while maintaining the original shape. Is there a disadvantage to lowering it that way?

-

Click to expand...

Steve says it is difficult to maintain the shape and could cause erratic ejection behavior. He strongly suggested a mountain top with 45degree cut sides.

Patrick0525 said:

A very nice detailed drawing and thank u for sharing u knowledge since I would have made it too wide.

Click to expand...

Appreciate the thanks. I learned EVERYTHING about extractors from Steve's article and his willingness to guide a n00b while I butchered the first one

megafiddle said:

I have been simply lowering the fitting pad while maintaining the original shape. Is there a disadvantage to lowering it that way?

-

Click to expand...

Hard to keep the "roundness". And more to file. IMO I find it easier to prep the sides if I am going to need to increase deflection. If it's in spec, I leave the pad alone. Which is rare.

megafiddle said:

I have been simply lowering the fitting pad while maintaining the original shape. Is there a disadvantage to lowering it that way?

Click to expand...

No disadvantage. I'm just not good enough with a file to reduce the fitting pad evenly all the way around its 180°. So, I had to figure out a different way to make up for my lack of skill.

Patrick0525 said:

Steve says it is difficult to maintain the shape . . .

Click to expand...

It is for me but not for others.

. . . and could cause erratic ejection behavior.

Click to expand...

Did I really say that?

He strongly suggested a mountain top with 45degree cut sides.

Click to expand...

The 45° cut worked okay but I don't like it nearly as much as hogging out the sides of the fitting pad.

Steve in Allentown said:

It is for me but not for others.

Did I really say that?

The 45° cut worked okay but I don't like it nearly as much as hogging out the sides of the fitting pad.

Click to expand...

The emphasis on perfect roundness to achieve the idea level of .010 deflection suggested that it doesn’t take much to suffer poor ejections.

Steve in Allentown said:

No disadvantage. I'm just not good enough with a file to reduce the fitting pad evenly all the way around its 180°. So, I had to figure out a different way to make up for my lack of skill.

Click to expand...

Thanks

The extractors I used were not oversized very much, so I did not have to remove very much either. With a generous sized fitting pad, I can see the difficulty in keeping it even.

-

The most important effect of correct deflection from my perspective is feeding. Clean ejection is more an effect of claw geometry (as well as the geometry of the ejector).

Steve in Allentown said:

The 45° cut worked okay but I don't like it nearly as much as hogging out the sides of the fitting pad.

Click to expand...

Me, too. Simple with a stone or sanding drum in the dreaded Dremel. Gives an almost fluted effect. Works great.

Steve in Allentown said:

The most important effect of correct deflection from my perspective is feeding. Clean ejection is more an effect of claw geometry (as well as the geometry of the ejector).

Click to expand...

Don’t forget the lack of clocking. That ensures control of the case till it exits the building.
Joe

Patrick0525 said:

The emphasis on perfect roundness to achieve the idea level of .010 deflection suggested that it doesn’t take much to suffer poor ejections.

Click to expand...

As long as the deflection is correct and the tensioning wall is perpendicular to the horizontal axis of the pistol, the shape of the locating pad has nothing to do with ejecting. Once the case rim engages the tension wall and moves the locating pad away from the tunnel wall, the case is then under control until the hook engages the case rim as the extractor pulls the case backwards until it strikes the ejector and is launched out the ejection port. The FPS and extractor maintain the perpendicular relationship which is why we strive to fit the two together so neatly. Aka no "clocking" which is what Steve was referring to about erratic ejection, I believe.