encore breech plugs

[johnnywadd]

who is making the old style encore breech plugs i need some and t/c dont make them anymore

 

[sqezer]

You should be able to get one from CABELAS, I've seen them there.

 

[johnnywadd]

who is making the old style encore breech plugs i need some and t/c dont make them anymore

i want the old style that has a small dip in the end not the ones that has the deep pish

 

[johnnywadd]

who is making the old style encore breech plugs i need some and t/c dont make them anymore

i want the old style that has a small dip in the end not the ones that has the deep dish

i was told someone on this forum was makimg the old style ss breech plugs. if anybody knows about them pm me in johnnywadd

 

[SJAdventures]

Being an encore owner I am curious as to the pros and cons of deep dished vs small dip.

 

[ronlaughlin]

Being an encore owner I am curious as to the pros and cons of deep dished vs small dip.

It was told to me that the small dip breech plug will not ignite BH209. I have never seen this plug in my hands, but i was told the flash hole is very long, and maybe because of that, it will not ignite BH209. From what i gather, this search for the old style plug is being done by fellas that wish to shoot smokeless, and are nervous about using the new style plug after it has been converted to use a vent liner, because they want more steel between them and eternity.

 

[GM54-120]

Being an encore owner I am curious as to the pros and cons of deep dished vs small dip.

Ron pretty much covered it but there might be some pros if you have a desire to experiment. In a ACP conversion the old design might have some advantages as well as for T7 users. Even use with weaker 209s, its possible the lower volume could be beneficial if properly head spaced. Ive wondered if the ACP conversion's performance could be improved with a bit less internal volume.

Maybe someone with more machine skills than i and a ACP plug might want to experiment with this idea a bit....hint hint.

A long flash hole though would likely require more maintenance for good reliability with BH209 and the combination of heavier fouling from most 209 primers. As a plug for modding though with vent liners or other mods, you could experiment with different liner depths ect. Just like with the Accura V1 plug which has a similar dish instead of a deep pocket.

 

[sabotloader]

Being an encore owner I am curious as to the pros and cons of deep dished vs small dip.

A long flash hole though would likely require more maintenance for good reliability with BH209 and the combination of heavier fouling from most 209 primers. As a plug for modding though with vent liners or other mods, you could experiment with different liner depths ect. Just like with the Accura V1 plug which has a similar dish instead of a deep pocket.

I would suggest to you that I have had much better luck and durabilty with the longer flash channel - creating a channel that holds more volume of blow back and puts less pressure on the nose of the primer. For me this type channel requires way less maintenance over as many as 70 shots.

In addition the 5/32's channel allows the primer source the abilty to breath better allowing the entire volume of flash to to get into the channel before back pressure begins to snuff the flash.

Another thing that improves all of this is the 'vent liner' thought. We experimented with several different types, shapes, and even flash hole size. The inverted cone shape of the Lehigh Vent liner is another huge advantage as it forces some of the blow back away from the flash hole and against the walls of the barrel until the bullet clears the bore. This fact alone reduces build up in the fhash channel. The base primer used for ignition on my part was the Win W209A or the standard CCI. The beauty of all of this the same setup allows me to use the weakest primers to ignite BH, including a Win T7 primer and of all things a Remington 209-4. These are very old primers that Remington brought out for the 410 shot gun.

If the flash channel on any of the Omega-Encore BP were opened to 0.159" - they would all be more efficient.

Here are the four BP that could be had for the Omega-Encore. Any of these will shoot any of the subs (loose powder) very well, even the flat face that was designed for pellets. Most will work very in the stock condition for the normal shooter hunter shooting BH. In the stock condition you will need a 1/8" drill to clean out the flash channel every 10-15 shots.

This is an Omega/Encore Plug that has been drilled out to 0.159" and a Lehigh Vent liner installed in the end of the plug. For me it is 100% reliable with BH over many shots, one after another at the range.

I think we all recognize that the TC speed Breech is the longest breech plug on the market in a regular ML. Even as built the Speed Breech is very reliable with BH IF the shooter does his home work and cleans the flash channel with the hand turned drill bit, but even then for the normal hunter/shooter the TC Speed Breech is very reliable.

I really do not shoot my Triumph that much, I have other rifles that I prefer to shoot, but just for drill I did decide to test my theories on this plug. So out to the shop went the Speed Breech and to the drill press.

This shows what happend to it.

The flash channel was opened and the vent liner was installed on the nose of the breech plug. With this long of a breech plug the design of the Lehigh works exceptionally well. If you look at a Lehigh on the input side look how it is shape to collect and directs the flash, even speeding it up, to be sent to the flash hole. And then on the other end the inverted cone even work a bit batter as it can deflect blow back pressure into a larger cavity - the bore, in stead of a limited area down inside the breech plug.

Again in my testing, warm or cold, all primers worked very well with BH shot after shot.

I am at the point that I do not even make a point of bringing a twist bit with me to the range.

I do have a vent liner installed in an Omega 25 ACP plug also but have not shot it enough to speculate. I also made one for one of the forum members and have not heard anything from him, so I am assuming it is working. For mr it works and works well with T7, but with BH it is more reliable with small rifle mag primer. I would surely going hunting with it. I do believe the 25 acp is more reliable over a longer period of time with the 0.159" flash channel.

 

[ronlaughlin]

sabotloader

If i understand correctly your suggestion here, what one could do is use the Encore/Omega plug without a concavity, and drill the flame channel larger, and deeper. The flame channel would then be 0.159" diameter, and it would be longer than the factory flame channel. The flash hole would be shorter than factory, but the same diameter. This would accomplish making what i think you feel is a good breech plug. I must agree.

Installing a vent liner is actually a detriment, because it shortens the length of the flame channel, and steals from the volume, because of the length of the screw robbing from the flame channel length.

For short plugs like the Omega, i believe the 0.159" flame channel is a definite advantage. For long plugs like the speed breech and the QRBP, i am not so sure. For the long plugs, the 1/8" flame channel works good for me in the real world. Bernouli' principal leads me to believe more heat will reach the powder with the 1/8" flame channel, than with the 5/32" flame channel when one is using the longer plugs. Reason being, the flame will travel faster in the 1/8" flame channel than the 5/32" flame channel, plus there is less surface area to absorb the heat of the flame.

I see no advantage to installing a vent liner in a plug that works good as is. In my mind, one installs a vent liner in a plug that has a worn flash hole, or because one wants to be able to restore a worn vent liner with a new one, or because one can improve the design of a breech plug by installing a vent liner. I see no advantage toward ignition by installing a vent liner. The flame sees a flash hole as a flash hole whether or not it is in the end of the breech plug, or in a vent liner.

In the real world flash holes do not last for thousands of shots without eroding. Having a breech plug with a vent liner is an advantage, because one can heal the breech plug by simply installing a new vent liner. However, it can happen that the primer pocket suffers flame cutting as the flash hole erodes, and one need to replace both the flash hole, and the primer pocket. This may entail replacing the breech plug. One can heal both ends of a breech plug with some work, which may or may not be worth it to the individual owner.

sabotloader, your instruction, and guidance has helped me greatly toward making the CVA plugs work. The CVA plug in my rifles work perfectly igniting BH. Installing vent liner in those plug is what makes them successful. I believe installing a vent liner in the speed breech of my Triumph has made it a better breech plug also, but more time and shooting is needed. The Omega plug benefits when the flame channel is enlarged. All the flash holes in all the breech plugs in my rifles grow, and grow faster than i would have imagined. It seems i shoot too much; perhaps not too much, just a lot. Being able to replace a worn flash hole, by replacing the vent liner is a good thing.

 

[sabotloader]

ronlaughlin

Installing a vent liner is actually a detriment, because it shortens the length of the flame channel, and steals from the volume, because of the length of the screw robbing from the flame channel length.

No and yes... but you are missing the advantage of the inverted cone on the Lehigh plug. With a flat faced liner I might be able to agree on your points but I have never used one in an Omega plug. Right after I got one of the inverted cone Lehigh the possible advantages that it offered far outweighed the flat face Savage type vent liner. What the Lehigh vent liner adds to the ignition and the clealiness of the operation of the BP is well worth the loss of volume in the Omega/Encore breech plug.

I have not worn a Lehigh out yet and I know of no-one that has. I THINK even the Savage people are finding the hardened Lehigh's are out lasting their expectations, you would have to go over there and ask them that one.

I see no advantage to installing a vent liner in a plug that works good as is.

You are correct the TC Speed Breech is a very good factory plug, but once again the Inverted cone does adds some advantages to the whole breech plug. Any time you can shed blow back material away from the the center (flash hole) of the BP by defecting it to the side you increase life of the plug and liner. When you reduce blow back pressure on the nose of the primer - you reduce the amount of fouling occuring in the flash channel.

But you know what... this world is big enough we do not all have to use the same thoughts to have success.

 

[ronlaughlin]

............................. but you are missing the advantage of the inverted cone on the Lehigh plug..............................................

To my knowledge there is no evidence, the shape of the Lehigh vent liner is an advantage. You are the only person that has ever written it has an advantage. A disadvantage of the Lehigh is the 0.032" flash hole. It seems to me, such a large hole will increase the pressure on the primer, so i guess it is a good thing that it has that dome shape, if it really does do what you write.

The vent liner i make for my use have 0.028" flash hole, and are made from Holo-Krome screws which are made in USA. According to Bernouli' Principle this smaller flash hole forces the flame to accelerate, and get hotter as it passes through the flash hole, and first hits the powder. This should provide a hotter faster flame to the powder than the Lehigh vent liner.

One thing i can write; the Lehigh vent liner are very very hard. The hardening process used by Lehigh works good. I don't much read the smokeless forums, but i have stumbled across a few threads about vent liners. Some rookie is always asking which vent liner is the best. There doesn't seem to be a consensus. My guess would be the Lehigh vent liner would last longer than RW, PR, and Savage vent liner, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

It seems to me all available commercial vent liner are made for smokeless powder, and they all have a flash hole that is too large to be optimum for black powder.

 

[GM54-120]

My guess would be the Lehigh vent liner would last longer than RW, PR, and Savage vent liner, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

The largest problem with drawing an accurate conclusion about which one last longer is powder selection. Some powders erode plugs MUCH faster than others. Only carbide inserts have shown a large enough difference but they also carry a large cost difference. Usually more expensive than a breach plug and common liner combined.

Another variable is primer fit. Some of "those" guys are head spacing the primer. On a Savage its fairly easy to adjust head space but not often done unless other mods are made. Properly head spaced primers and/or fitted primer pockets can greatly reduce backward pressures and therefore less erosion. The primer combustion itself has little effect on a hardened liner.

That application simply has too many variables to draw a proven conclusion without a long term controlled study. I do feel though the Lehigh liner is better than other options for that application. Mainly because of its hardness and quality control. Im not sold (yet) on the dome shape making a big difference due to its slightly larger surface area.

Im trying not to stray into an area that is better answered in another section but this is what i have learned. My NULA has no liner and is quite different in design than most plugs yet last for over 10,000 shots.

Why?...because of the extremely tight tolerances and excellent quality steel. These tolerances would be hard to achieve on a production line gun without greatly increasing the costs and limiting primer selection. Therefore vent liners are a band-aide to increase the useful life of the breach plug in a affordable manner with a wider variety of primers.

This theory first became a bit obvious to me when i compared the performance on the GenI and GenII Lehigh conversions too. The GenII had less carbon build up in the channel and primer pocket due to better primer fit/support IMO.

Hopefully i will get a chance to add more data and personal observations to this theory when i try out some BH209 in the NULA and a long range session. I wonder how long it will take before carbon causes a hang fire or FTF.

My apologies if this strayed too much but i feel the info is useful for a breach plug discussion and greater BH209 reliability.

 

[Walkingeagle]

This thread, almost 12 years old now, feels as though over that time period more updated and better information may be available. Any updated thoughts/tip/etc?
Walk

 

[10gaugemag]

Does this guy have anything that interests you. Page I shared is for his ignition system but he has other items.


https://hanksprecisiongunparts.com/c/hankins-ignition-systems