|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
0 members (),
567
guests, and
8
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,780
Posts565,537
Members14,618
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 629 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 629 Likes: 1 |
Should the weld be built up at the back of the hook or slightly towards the lower part of the hook, so that the barrels are pulled down and into the action face? I have a couple of guns that have been worked on with this method and looking at the hooks I see more weld build up at the lower part of the back as if the hook opens up in time.
What kind of rod/steel would you use for the TIG welding the hook?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,521 Likes: 302
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,521 Likes: 302 |
Hook, loop, where are you suggesting the extra metal to be applied? I am confused. Where is this "back of the hook" located?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 15
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 15 |
Here is quick and dirty sketch of welding the back of the hook. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 629 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 629 Likes: 1 |
Rocketman,
Your picture saves my thousand words.
The couple of guns I had put on face show that the welding was built more towards where the word "weld" is in your picture (4-5 o'clock)and not necessarily at 3 o'clock. I have not checked and see if there is full contact between the pin and hook after welding. Maybe the lower weld produced two raised area into the hook, like 1 and 5 o'clock thus putting the barrels on the face, but without full pin to hook contact at 3 o'clock. I am going to have to check that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
Should the weld be built up at the back of the hook or slightly towards the lower part of the hook, so that the barrels are pulled down and into the action face? Silvers, I haven't welded, but I have soldered in shim stock and refit. I've covered the entire surface uniformly (recently .008 feeler guage), then removed material to have decreasing thickness toward the bottom of the hook. Having excess metal at the bottom of the hook initially "sets" the barrels down too far and the initial contact with the breech is at the bottom. As you remove metal preferentially from the bottom of the hook radius, barrel contact is broken with the bottom half of the breech and moves toward the top. The goal with a Fox is to set the barrels "up and back" so they contact the breechface only across the upper half, having zero contact with about the bottom quarter of the breech and the watertable. It only requires about 1 - 1.5 thou between flats and table. As the hook/pin mating wears, the bolt pulls the barrels "back and down;" the lever moves left and eventually the flats hit the watertable and the barrels go off face. I've also soldered shim stock in the bolting slot, but it blew out after a few thousand rounds. I paid a shop to add weld there. The last thing in the sequence, after maximum mating of hook/pin to effect good contact across the upper chamber area and flush barrel/breech ball mating is honing in the bolt bite/lever position. I'll probably get flamed, but hey, I'm a wood guy. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,521 Likes: 302
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,521 Likes: 302 |
Post deleted by eightbore
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
Cool pic.
In my limited experience, the major thickness is more like Noon-3 with a pretty constant taper to near nothing at 6.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,227 |
I can't understand why we would add metal to the hook (or pin) which is so hard to access with a file when we can add metal or shim the loop which is fully accessible. Can someone explain the reason for this? Thanks. By "loop," do you mean the bolting slot on the rib extension? If so, that was my first attempt, but it put too much stress on the bolting, eventually blowing out my shim. Increasing the bolting bite does "pull" the barrels back more snuggly in contact with the breech face. But then you're relying entirely on the bolt to keep the barrels on face....better to "push" them on face by adding metal between the pin and face.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 15
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,954 Likes: 15 |
8b, I could be wrong, but I think the hinge pin mates to the barrel "hook" and the forearm mates to the barrel "loop." It is easy to get at the weld material inside the hook semicircular recess with a radiused file. Smoke-file-smoke-file-smoke-file ad nausium or until it shows lots of contact.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 629 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 629 Likes: 1 |
Mike Campbell,
Thank you for your elaborate description. I think though that if you build the hook towards 1-2 o'clock, you end up raising the barrels off the watertable.
I am just an amateur, but from what I understand, the barrels should not touch the watertable. As you say, there should be 1-3 thou space inbetween. I also understand that the barrels should be in touch with the face 100%. When a gun is shot, the barrels are pushed forward and the face backward. THis movement will wear the hook/pin at 3 o'clock. But because of the round pin there is a tendency of the barrels/action to open up therefore wearing the hook/pin towards 5 o'clcok. THerefore, wouldn't it be logical to weld between 3-5 o'clock?
I don't know the particulars of the Fox, just talking in general.
I also do not want to hijack the topic, please forgive me.
|
|
|
|
|
