High Standard Sentinel Ejector
I have a High Standard Sentinel 103 and just bought the earlier Sentinel 101 model. Main difference is that the 101 ejector doesn't use a return spring, you manually pull back the ejector before closing the cylinder. Which is why so many of the 101s have scarred frames. I'm sure the 103 cylinders will fit the 101, but with an eye toward economy I was wondering if anyone knows whether switching out the 101 ejector rod and replacing it with a 103 @ spring will work. I'm hoping that being economy minded and with a limited line HS kept parts variations to a minimum. $12.00 for the ejector and spring beats +$80.00 for a cylinder.
0
-
Perhaps it would work, you have the parts necessary to try it. I'm thinking that the hole for the rod/spring will be larger than the one for the rod only.
added I would take both cylinders apart and carefully measure/compare. It might possible to convert the spring less unit with some simple machining to accept the return rod/spring.0 -
I can't say, as I only had one of Sentinel's. For a short time years ago.
If none of our folks know for sure. Post to John Stimpsons H-S forum. He is the nets H-S guru, very likely he would know.0 -
you have both cylinders so it should be easy enough to try and swap them out to see for yourself, that's what I would do, to me from my diagrams it may work but would require changing everything but the cylinder and crane. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by rufe-snow
I can't say, as I only had one of Sentinel's. For a short time years ago.
If none of our folks know for sure. Post to John Stimpsons H-S forum. He is the nets H-S guru, very likely he would know.
Thanks, I posted there and John was nice enough to answer. Seems the cylinder's internals are different and it won't work. I have the 103 and a later all steel version, I'll see if the whole cylinder assembly fit as a full switch out.0 -
One issue present in swapping parts between guns is the manufacturing tolerance stack. On the sentinel revolvers High Standard used the hand to deal with how those tolerances affected the final assembly and more importantly the timing. While it is a probability that most cylinder assemblies may interchange, it is not true that all will.
With respect to interchanging the core parts of the cylinder between different design series, it is only likely when the cylinder itself is the same in each series. But the ejector is a different story.
A wrinkle you may not have considered the the fact that the ejector is a part that was not sold separately. The reason for this is that the cylinder and the ejector were match machined. The ejector was timed to the cylinder by a small dowel and then the chambers and counter bore for the rim were match machined with the cylinder and ejector sub sub-assembled. While it is possible that an ejector from one sub assembly might fit a non mated cylinder, the odds are not particularly good. That is the reason that the ejector was not sold separately.0 -
quote:Originally posted by JohnStimson
One issue present in swapping parts between guns is the manufacturing tolerance stack. On the sentinel revolvers High Standard used the hand to deal with how those tolerances affected the final assembly and more importantly the timing. While it is a probability that most cylinder assemblies may interchange, it is not true that all will.
With respect to interchanging the core parts of the cylinder between different design series, it is only likely when the cylinder itself is the same in each series. But the ejector is a different story.
A wrinkle you may not have considered the the fact that the ejector is a part that was not sold separately. The reason for this is that the cylinder and the ejector were match machined. The ejector was timed to the cylinder by a small dowel and then the chambers and counter bore for the rim were match machined with the cylinder and ejector sub sub-assembled. While it is possible that an ejector from one sub assembly might fit a non mated cylinder, the odds are not particularly good. That is the reason that the ejector was not sold separately.
Thank you John. I had my fingers crossed the only difference was in the ejector rod - hoping perhaps a thinner section inside the cylinder with a ledge to accommodate and hold a return spring. That would sidestep the extractor/ejector plate and hand issues. Not to be I suppose.
Are later model cylinders compatible with the 101? That is, if I find a 103, 107, etc complete cylinder assembly will that fit? I understand the hand issue and timing, however I can fit and time the old Colts and am inclined to think the High Standard is within my capabilities.0 -
High Standard had five different lengths of hand. This is expressed on the assembly drawing but not on the parts list drawings. You can probably deal with it if the extant hand is longer than what you need.
Note the R-100 through the R-102 used a ratchet using a drilled pocket to receive the tip of the hand. The R-103 and later aluminum frame series used a different hand and a different more conventional milled slot for the cylinder ratchet.
I suspect the R-102 cylinder assembly would be your best choice for this conversion since it used the same hand design and incorporates the spring returned ejector.0 -
Understood - thank you. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
8 comments