Reasons to NOT design firearms with a plunger style ejector?

[NeoWeird]

I've been thinking about it lately and I can't seem towrap my head around why more and more companies don't design firearms with plunger style ejectors, like seen on the M-16 family of rifles, but instead still use blade type ejectors like on the AK family, Ruger 10/22, pretty much ALL semi-auto handguns, etc.

I can understand not using them on rimfires for fear of case detonation, and possibly not using them in bolt action rifles to maintain a consistant face to allow for better, theoretical, accuracy and MAYBE not using them on REALLY magnum calibers for fear of case ruptures, but for 99% of the gun that fall into the very VERY large middle demographic, why not use a plunger style ejector?

They seem to be simplier, easier to manufacture, fit, and replace, and would provide better consistant ejection and be less prone to breaking overall. So why not use them?

...or am I missing something?

[Pulsar]

Cause they are more complicated. It's another moving part ot add to the gun that can get dirty. A fixed ejector works fine, especially in auto's where the bolt is moving quickly. To me really the only application where I see plunger styles as useful is in bolt rifles (the 700 uses one) where a slow bolt pull would result in the case not ejection properly if a fixed style was used.

Think about it this way, how far does that ejector launch the case in a gun like an SKS (fixed ejector) compaired to the ejector in an AR (plunger). A nice healthy launch from the ejector is a good thing (well not for the guy standing beside the gun).

The other reason I like fixed ejectors is that I can tune em. Depending on how you shape the ejector you can determine where and how far that shell will be launched. With the plunger style your only option is playing with different springs.

[Fjold]

Fixed ejectors are almost bullet proof. You don't have to worry about springs failing/getting weak, plungers denting or jamming in the holes due to grit, etc getting in the holes.

[ar15barrels]

Plungers belong on semi-auto guns.
Fixed ejectors are better on manually operated actions.

I prefer a fixed ejector so I can operate the bolt slowly if I want the brass to fall on the bench next to my rifle, or swiftly when I want the brass to fall on the ground.

Plungers don't give me that option.

[NeoWeird]

Interesting. Three different opinions from three respectable posters and none of you can agree on an answer.

It seems the general concensus is preference vs. functionality and reliability.

I personally like the idea of a plunger ejector but it's so rarely seen that I've always been curious as to why it wasn't used more often.

[ar15barrels]

As an example...

I just bought a basketcase Savage 7mm mag.
Previous owner blew some primers.
The front half of the ejector plunger is either broken off, or just shoved way down into the bolt face.
In either case, it does not eject.

I detail stripped the bolt head and it looks to have been shoved deeply into the bolt because I see a small crack where the ejector plunger expanded the hole from the inside towards the outside.

So I go to order a replacement bolt head for the savage as they are so "easily" replaceable.
Did you know that Brownells will NOT sell you a Savage bolt head without an FFL?
Seems that it's Savage's policy to not sell bolt heads to anyone but legitimate FFL holders.

[M. Sage]

I agree with the above, but would add that it's a hell of a lot easier (and quicker, therefore cheaper) to manufacture a fixed extractor.

[bohoki]

Plungers belong on semi-auto guns.
Fixed ejectors are better on manually operated actions.

I prefer a fixed ejector so I can operate the bolt slowly if I want the brass to fall on the bench next to my rifle, or swiftly when I want the brass to fall on the ground.

Plungers don't give me that option.

yep the fixed one on my ruger mini 30 is pretty beat up after 1000 rounds of wolf it has a flat area that is mushrooming

but the one in my mak-90 looks brand new

i prefer a bolt action to have a fixed ejector so i can control where the brass goes it allows me to unload without having to dust off the one i remove from the chamber because it flys free as the bullet tip clears the breech

[ar15barrels]

extractor

Who said anything about extractors?

[M. Sage]

Oops. Ejector.

[NeoWeird]

I originally got to thinking in depth about it while looking at my Galil variant. Galil's are known for getting beat up ejectors but they are intergal to the receiver and can NOT be replaced. Add in that, while absolutely minor, a fixed ejector puts extra strain on receivers and frames. I was also thinking about sub machine guns, especially those that go suppressed, and was pondering how much tweaking must go into something as simple as a fixed ejector when a conversion like that is made. Probably not much, if an, on most guns but still a problem is there with a fixed ejector (just like there are problems with the plunger).

Still, in my head, the plunger seems like such a better design except those few exceptions I mentioned in my first post (which it seems like several people are agreeing that plunger type ejectors on magnum bolt guns is probably not the best idea). Maybe it's me over thinking it, but it seems like 90% of the "problem" with a plunger type is dirt, which can be fixed with tighter tolerances and cleaning on a "regular" basis and a new spring every umpteenthousand rounds. I mean, how often do AR ejectors fail in comparison to other parts on an AR? And that is as high wear as any other part in the rifle.

It just seems odd, that's all, that so few people make guns that use them.

[M. Sage]

It just seems odd, that's all, that so few people make guns that use them.

It all comes down to $$$: what's easier to design and manufacture.

[NeoWeird]

It all comes down to $$$: what's easier to design and manufacture.

You average plunger ejector can be made with a counter-bored hole, a spring, and a retaining pin. The ejector requires a stamping, welding or riveting, and quite a bit of fitting. Plunger, to me and my resources and know how, is cheaper by a long shot.

[Fjold]

Randall,

Call or email Lisa or Fred at Sharp Shoooter Supply. They have complete boltheads for sale with no FFL required. I just bought a .473 plunger type head to replace the CRF magnum bolthead on my 11G to switch it from 300WSM to 22.250

[M. Sage]

You average plunger ejector can be made with a counter-bored hole, a spring, and a retaining pin. The ejector requires a stamping, welding or riveting, and quite a bit of fitting. Plunger, to me and my resources and know how, is cheaper by a long shot.

Look at it on a line, though: Once you've got the fixed ejectors set up, you just run with 'em. No added assembly or anything. Just look at the AK ejector: it's stamped into the receiver rail. Simple and quick to produce, and really cheap. Less tooling required, fewer machine operations, and less assembly required.