99 won't uncock/extract

[pigslayer]

Saw another post about this which seemed similar to mine. After firing the lever won't move unless I push down hard at the rear of the bolt to get it moving down. I'm not shooting hot loads and the empty case comes out easy after the bolt is pushed down. A reply to the other post said something about "primary extraction" and "forward action screw length". I don't understand what this means and can't find the screw designation in any schematics. Can anyone help?
I noticed yesterday while trying to figure this out that when dry firing, the rear of the bolt is slightly down and jumps up level when the trigger is pulled.

[The Old Coach]

Saw another post about this which seemed similar to mine. After firing the lever won't move unless I push down hard at the rear of the bolt to get it moving down. I'm not shooting hot loads and the empty case comes out easy after the bolt is pushed down. A reply to the other post said something about "primary extraction" and "forward action screw length". I don't understand what this means and can't find the screw designation in any schematics. Can anyone help?
I noticed yesterday while trying to figure this out that when dry firing, the rear of the bolt is slightly down and jumps up level when the trigger is pulled.

Sure sounds like excessive loads. This is exactly what a 99 does when the load is too hot. Compare a fired cased with a freshly sized one. If the shoulder has pushed forward on the fired case, there's your answer. It will be hard to close the bolt on that fired case also.

If it's NOT hot loads, it has me stumped. I assuming you can open the action and extract an unfired cartridge easily?

The bolt being slightly low before firing indicates to me that the fit between the cam face on the lever and the mating surface on bolt isn't so good. Closing the lever should make the bolt rise all the way. Very hard to fix that. You'd have to add metal to either the cam face or the bolt, and neither should be welded upon. In my previous incarnation in the machine tool rebuilding business, we'd have had it hard-chromed and ground back to size, but that is a very spendy process for an old rifle.

By how much is it too low? Two thou or ten thou? If the bolt isn't being lifted all the way into battery by the lever, it may be that the bolt is trying drop/slide down off the locking shoulder on firing. That might give the binding symptom you describe. Bolt slips down and back, the case shoulder gets pushed forward by the pressure. When everything relaxes again, the bolt is wedged shut by a case that is now too long for the chamber. But I'm speculating. Not claiming to be a know-it-all on 99s - I only have a couple. However, if I'm anywhere near close to being right, that rifle needs attention. That sort of movement of the bolt on firing will damage both the bolt and the lever, and could eventually do something dramatic.

I've never heard of a "forward action screw" on a 99 either. . . .

Primary extraction it ain't. If it were that, the back end of the bolt would move freely for a few thou before resistance is felt, when trying extract your fired case.

[jonbearman]

I would google guys that work on them like turnbull restorations here in bloomfield ny. The problem sounds dangerous if it isnt just a reloading problem. The other thing I think would help is using a small base die and also using the hornady headspace measuring kit so you can set up your die for just the right amount of shoulder bump to bump that shoulder for easy loading without oversizing the shoulder and inducing a headspace problem. Alot of fellas just bottom the full length die against the shell plate and that can and will induce headspace issues in your brass causing hard extraction and the like.

[MacDR]

Sure sounds like excessive loads. This is exactly what a 99 does when the load is too hot. Compare a fired cased with a freshly sized one. If the shoulder has pushed forward on the fired case, there's your answer. It will be hard to close the bolt on that fired case also.

If it's NOT hot loads, it has me stumped. I assuming you can open the action and extract an unfired cartridge easily?

The bolt being slightly low before firing indicates to me that the fit between the cam face on the lever and the mating surface on bolt isn't so good. Closing the lever should make the bolt rise all the way. Very hard to fix that. You'd have to add metal to either the cam face or the bolt, and neither should be welded upon. In my previous incarnation in the machine tool rebuilding business, we'd have had it hard-chromed and ground back to size, but that is a very spendy process for an old rifle.

By how much is it too low? Two thou or ten thou? If the bolt isn't being lifted all the way into battery by the lever, it may be that the bolt is trying drop/slide down off the locking shoulder on firing. That might give the binding symptom you describe. Bolt slips down and back, the case shoulder gets pushed forward by the pressure. When everything relaxes again, the bolt is wedged shut by a case that is now too long for the chamber. But I'm speculating. Not claiming to be a know-it-all on 99s - I only have a couple. However, if I'm anywhere near close to being right, that rifle needs attention. That sort of movement of the bolt on firing will damage both the bolt and the lever, and could eventually do something dramatic.

I've never heard of a "forward action screw" on a 99 either. . . .

Primary extraction it ain't. If it were that, the back end of the bolt would move freely for a few thou before resistance is felt, when trying extract your fired case.

+1 on this answer. The breech bolt should lock up when the lever is up. If it isn't doing that you can have some real problems. 99's have little throat area and need careful attention to case length and OAL of cartridge. I would definately have a gunsmith check out the action and also check the chamber for roughness

[pigslayer]

Sure sounds like excessive loads. This is exactly what a 99 does when the load is too hot. Compare a fired cased with a freshly sized one. If the shoulder has pushed forward on the fired case, there's your answer. It will be hard to close the bolt on that fired case also.

If it's NOT hot loads, it has me stumped. I assuming you can open the action and extract an unfired cartridge easily?

The bolt being slightly low before firing indicates to me that the fit between the cam face on the lever and the mating surface on bolt isn't so good. Closing the lever should make the bolt rise all the way. Very hard to fix that. You'd have to add metal to either the cam face or the bolt, and neither should be welded upon. In my previous incarnation in the machine tool rebuilding business, we'd have had it hard-chromed and ground back to size, but that is a very spendy process for an old rifle.

By how much is it too low? Two thou or ten thou? If the bolt isn't being lifted all the way into battery by the lever, it may be that the bolt is trying drop/slide down off the locking shoulder on firing. That might give the binding symptom you describe. Bolt slips down and back, the case shoulder gets pushed forward by the pressure. When everything relaxes again, the bolt is wedged shut by a case that is now too long for the chamber. But I'm speculating. Not claiming to be a know-it-all on 99s - I only have a couple. However, if I'm anywhere near close to being right, that rifle needs attention. That sort of movement of the bolt on firing will damage both the bolt and the lever, and could eventually do something dramatic.

I've never heard of a "forward action screw" on a 99 either. . . .

Primary extraction it ain't. If it were that, the back end of the bolt would move freely for a few thou before resistance is felt, when trying extract your fired case.

The top of the bolt at the rear is about .075" below the frame before firing - after firing it has jumped up to about .045" so the delta or amount of jump is about .030". Yes, extracting an unfired cartridge is not a problem.

[The Old Coach]

The top of the bolt at the rear is about .075" below the frame before firing - after firing it has jumped up to about .045" so the delta or amount of jump is about .030". Yes, extracting an unfired cartridge is not a problem.

GULP! I wouldn't be shooting that rifle any more. . . . Maybe replacing the lever and/or the bolt will fix it, but it ain't safe the way it is.

[MacDR]

Is the lever fully closed before you fire when dry firing? The fact that your bolt moves up when you dry fire indicates perhaps an issue with the lever lock that prevents the sear from disengaging if the lever is partially open. The lock is disengaged when the lever is fully closed by the small protrusion on the face of the lever. There also may be something amiss in the trigger mechanism which is preventing full movement of the lever to the locked position. I have some pictures of the action in its various stages of movement from lever fully down to final lock-up. They would be too much to load up here but if you PM me with an e-mail addy I will send them to you. Unfortunately I can't get a clear view of the lever lock safety mechanism. Also my trigger mechanism is not as depicted in my schematics so I am not sure if it is an after market replacement. It has about a 4-5 # pull, another indicator it may not be stock.

[bczrx]

Tang or lever safety? I have no knowledge of newer 99 rifles, as both of mine are from the '50s. If this were happening on mine, I'd also check hammer/sear faces to be sure someone didn't botch the surfaces. Probably not possible to cause your probs that way, but I wondered if the wrong contour on hammer., could make it not slide up sear properly to the 'normal' spot it rests. But, after firing, these two surfaces are not in contact, so the sear is no longer preventing upward hammer motion. And, sine the hammer is in the bolt, the bolt 'pops' up into full battery position.

More knowledgeable people will chime in and confirm my idea or destroy it. I am no expert: just thinking.

I don't know if this translates to tang safety designs or million plus rifles. I am basing my ideas on a sample of 2 99s from 1954 and 1957.

Good luck!

[The Old Coach]

Tang or lever safety? I have no knowledge of newer 99 rifles, as both of mine are from the '50s. If this were happening on mine, I'd also check hammer/sear faces to be sure someone didn't botch the surfaces. Probably not possible to cause your probs that way, but I wondered if the wrong contour on hammer., could make it not slide up sear properly to the 'normal' spot it rests. But, after firing, these two surfaces are not in contact, so the sear is no longer preventing upward hammer motion. And, sine the hammer is in the bolt, the bolt 'pops' up into full battery position.

More knowledgeable people will chime in and confirm my idea or destroy it. I am no expert: just thinking.

I don't know if this translates to tang safety designs or million plus rifles. I am basing my ideas on a sample of 2 99s from 1954 and 1957.

Good luck!

A 99 with a hammer? That's a rare bird !

[bczrx]

A 99 with a hammer? That's a rare bird !

actually, despite being listed as 'hammerless', the parts listings all indicate that this IS a hammer. I would call it a 'striker'. But try Numrich and other parts lists. Hammer is what you will have to buy.

And the hammer includes a bushing, a hammer spring and a firing pin. The firing pin is the piece that is pinned [in the case of both my 99EG and 99F from the 1950s] to the front of the hammer, and keeps the hammer spring locked onto the hammer, before the bushing. The bushing keeps the hammer from impacting the actual spring when the sear releases it.

I know. It SHOULD be called a 'striker'. But, all of the parts lists and directions I've read refer to this piece as a hammer. It just isn't a pivoting external one, like on a Winchester.

Try replacing the part without calling it a hammer.

So, a 99 without a hammer would be a rarer bird: or one that is broken.

[The Old Coach]

Aawwl right, I surrender.

But I won't ever call it a hammer.

[bczrx]

Aawwl right, I surrender.

But I won't ever call it a hammer.

but seriously, the only reason to ever really call it a 'hammer' is to be able to order a replacement.

To ME, a real hammer pivots. It isn't a hammer if it slides back/front.

However, I'm guessing they called it a hammer because it seemed more 'normal' for a lever action to have a hammer than a striker back in the 1890s, when this was designed. Bolt guns had strikers [Mauser, etc], but levers had hammers.

Just guessing. probably wrong.

All I can say is it took me a LONG time to finally figure that out when I had to buy parts. I couldn't find a striker for sale anywhere and wondered why my version of a 99 was SOOO different from all the other ones that had hammers.

And don't get me started on the way Numrich identifies which 'hammer' goes with which 99 model! ARGHH!

Striker is a much more appropriate term for it: that is for sure!