Have a ? ... I have noticed

[Major 2]

I have picked up a few references, to the newer Spencer's having only one ejection blade...
The comments seen to be more for the 56-50, but I 'm not sure it includes the other Calibers offered.
Also, I've read here, that some have removed the (right ? ) Blade on earier guns.
My question is, is this for speed or reliability or both ? authenticity ?
My Original 56-52 has one left blade which is correct, my 45 Sch. has the two R&L.
I have not had an ejection issue with the 45 Sch. (yet ?).
I don't use the 45 Sch as a speed gun, In fact, it seems I've deliberately acquired pieces to slow me down (mule ear SXS, a Henry, and an R&D Cylinder-ed 1860)...
Not to mention slippery leather soled & heeled boots and my few ( ) pounds over Soave & debonair.

So has Armi Sport redesigned ? or just omitting the part ? if the latter ,can one just remove the part and to what advantage ?

[Two Flints]

Hi Major 231,

Not sure if this will help with your questions, but if you go to page 3 and read the following
thread at http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,8837.0.html  click on the 56-50 parts diagram and the parts list from Armi Sport for their latest version of the Spencer 56-50 - part # 49 - one extractor blade is shown.  Tuolumne Lawman probably can better answer your questions.  My .45 Schofield Spencer as well as the earlier .44 Russian and 56-50 Spencer models had a left and right extractor.  I think for both historical correctness and improved firing the second extractor was eliminated from the newer 56-50 Spencers. Not sure about the 44-40 version. I've never had a jamming problem with my .45 Schofield Spencer.

I don't like to comment on the Spencer 56-50 because I don't own one...yet!  I'll let those SSS members who have a 56-50 correct me if I'm wrong with any of the above comments!

Two Flints

[Major 2]

Thanks...
maybe TL will chime in with my answer...


BTW , I have not forgotten your Sketches.... just need to get out to a xerox machine.

[Drydock]

The 56-50 as currently made by Armi-sport has NO extractor blades, but comes with the center mount spring loaded Lane Extractor.

I believe the original intent was to use a single Left side extractor blade with the fixed center extractor, per the original 1860, 1865 and 1868 designs, and it was so listed. The fixed and blade extractors are based on the 1868 design btw.  As I recall the Taylors gunsmith convinced Armi-sport to instead go with the M1867 Lane, thinking it would work better with modern brass.  (the original Lane Extractor in the M1867 had a bad habit of tearing thru the soft copper rimfire cases of the era, thus was discontinued after one year of production.)

The current .56-50 and .44-40 use the Lane, with the .45 S&W still using the dual blades.  I believe the shorter round needs them more as feed guides than actual extractors.  (I have both a .56-50 and a .45 S&W model)

[Major 2]

I had read about the Lane....So if I understand, from your reply Armi Sport has changed the Blade(s) to the Lane.
I know the 44/40 is relativity new offering ( the 44 Russian the first and now discontinued offering )
I assume the 45 Sch (S&W) is still offered and will continue to have the (2) Blades.

I'm satisfied with my 45 S&W for plinking and the occasional stage and it shares my Opentop's Caliber.
I used my original 56-52 VERY sparingly.
I don't reload and have to pay many paso's for few rounds I have shot.
Still it was worth it 

One day maybe, I'll buy a 56-50.

[Drydock]

Just FYI, the drawing listed above does indeed show the Lane extractor and spring (Parts 49 and 48) with no side blade.

[Loco Smith]

Well I just got back from Nigeria and pick up my 56 50. Loading and trying it out.. Had to smooth out a few things, sights are ?? The extractor is a little thing on the right side looks like a hook pointing up, is this a lane?  Not real good unless you really open it fast. is it to be used that way? If you just push it open the shell will just lay there if you tilt the rifle up it slides right out.. How do you work the leaver?  Thanks for the help  Loco

[Major 2]

The Spencer works best when levered with zest.
The Lane if I understand the discription is a spring loaded hook recessed in the breech (head space).
I now understand the 56-50 and the 44/40 have the Lane...

My 45 S&W has the twin blades, and my Original has just the one on the left.
My question is why remove the right blade on the 45 S&W or 44 Russian ?

Drydock said... " the shorter round needs them more as feed guides than actual extractors ".

[Wes Tancred]

I have found that it is easier to operate the lever smartly by handling it differently than one might operate a standard falling-block rifle, such as a Stevens or Sharps, where merely grasping the trigger guard with the finger and thumb tips is sufficient. For the Spencer, I grasp the guard with my fingers curling through it from the left, and my palm against the right side; the thumb is essentially not used. This is for the downward thrust. On the return throw, I open my hand and palm the lever up quickly. This is a very fast and easy method, with no danger of pinching if done properly, and it enables both motions to be fast and smooth, and for the second to follow the first quickly. 

[Drydock]

Major, I'll try to answer your question, base on observations of my own .45 Spencer.

It all starts with the fact that this action was designed around a 50+ caliber rimfire round.  These rounds had bullets with pointed noses, and rather sharp curves (Ogives) to the nose profile, for better feeding thru the action.

So the smaller caliber rounds need something in the sides of the action to help guide them thu this action.  THus the twin blades,  IMHO.  Howsumever, most modern ,45 bullets now designed for tubular magazines, tend to have very generous nose flats, and low radius ogives.  Think of the Lee 255 RF, or the popular Magma design used by most commercial loaders.

So as the round enters the reciever, it comes from the left at an angle.  As it does, the edge of the nose flat , or even just the ogive of the bullet, can sometimes catch on that right blade.  Now you have to force it past, and in doing so it tends to force the bulllet upwards, where that large flat/ogive can once again catch, this time on the chamber mouth.  Thus you have an increase in force levering the action, and a double hitch or jiggle to clear and chamber.

Removing the right blade is a partial fix.  It solves the nose clearance poblems, and usualy the round "Bounces" off the right side of the reciever to generaly align with the chamber.  Usualy.

A better fix, IMHO, is a bullet with a more suitable nose profile.  The one I have found that feeds particularly slick, and in fact has solved my feeding problems entirely, is the Lee 230 Truncated cone.  The nose flat is plenty large for magazine safety, while the steep angle of the cone provides the clearance and guidance needed for hitch free feeding. Crimp just below the cone in the first driving band, using a Lee FCD, it probides a smooth profile, and good case capacity beneath.

Works for me in any case.

[Major 2]

Thanks Sgt. that is a clear & concise report.... y'll make 1st Sgt. in 10 or 12 years 

I don't reload and have use Blackhills so far , I have some Ultramax I've yet to try....
So far I have not use the gun for match, so just plinking has not offered any issues.

I think I'll leave the blade as designed, thanks again