Bought a new Panda action.

MColeman

MColeman

Club Coordinator
I'm at the Super Shoot and went into Kelbly's shop and asked Jim Kelbly to show me the new static ejection system on the Panda. It is an absolute work of art. The fired case is held in place by the extractor and is never under any tension from the ejector. There is a projection on the bolt release that pushes agains the ejector that's built into the left locking lug when the bolt is pulled back and lays the fired case just outside the action onto a folded towel or pad used on the bench. It's a right bolt, left port with a microport. As soon as I get home I'll post some pictures. Tom (can't remember his last name) who works in the shop designed it and it's a masterpiece of engineering. Absolutely beautiful.
 
If our experience with RPA & Millennium actions which have a similar system are anything to go on, you'll need to take special care to keep it scrupulously clean so it doesn't bind. I had a friend with an RPA that suddenly wouldn't chamber rounds until he cleared a little flake of brass that got into the hole.
 
Butch, I was going to make a comment, but

Butch Lambert said:
I guess old Paul Mauser was on to something in the 1800s. You will find it on the 98 Mausers and the CFR Winchesters.
Butch
Click to expand...
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,



I'll wait to see the picture 1st.

Shoot better
Peter
 
Peter,

It is essentially the same concept as a Mauser, Sako etc style ejector with a slight variation. The piece that is part of the bolt stop assembly isn't the bit that actually contacts the case. That piece is a pin instead of a flat plate and it hits on the back of what is essentially a normal plunger ejector with no spring and the hole bored right through the locking lug. When the bolt is removed the ejector is attached to the end of it like a normal spring plunger type and the pin that pushes the ejector forward obviously stays attached to the action. There are more pieces involved than a Mauser/Sako but only a hole through part of the lug and not a complete slot cutting the lug in half.

I used one here and to be honest I fail to see the point. A well set up Panda spring ejector will flick the cases out only as far as needed and not land them all over the scenery. You can achieve the same thing with the manual ejector but the eject distance is controlled by the force the bolt is withdrawn with. If you inadvertently don't hit the ejector firmly the case will just flop into the action. Probably fine 99.9% of the time but it seems like a change for changes sake rather than any real benefit. Unless I am missing some important point ??

Bryce
 
Bryce said:
I used one here and to be honest I fail to see the point. A well set up Panda spring ejector will flick the cases out only as far as needed and not land them all over the scenery. You can achieve the same thing with the manual ejector but the eject distance is controlled by the force the bolt is withdrawn with. If you inadvertently don't hit the ejector firmly the case will just flop into the action. Probably fine 99.9% of the time but it seems like a change for changes sake rather than any real benefit. Unless I am missing some important point ??
Click to expand...
Bryce,

I wondered about its application to this use too,

With Palma guns & actions, that style of ejector allows you to leave the case with the neck just about sticking out of the port so you can pick it off after you draw the bolt back slowly. It takes a second or two, but that's not critical in that discipline. On the other hand, getting it to just toss clear can take a degree of skill & can be inconsistent, as I imagine it could be with the Panda

John
 
John,

My Panda is a right bolt, left port, non eject.

Since I am used to no ejector when I shot a friends rifle with the new manual ejector I had to pick up as many cases from the action as I actually ejected. I was so used to stopping the bolt short that I didn't always hit the stop firmly enough to throw the case clear of the action.

If a guy is used to no ejector or a manual ejector and wants to shoot a variety of actions I can see the manual ejector posing the ocassional issue with a case left sitting on the ramp. When you don't expect it and then throw another round in their as well you have lost all the speed benefit of having an ejector !!

Bryce
 
Bryce I haven't seen the pictures yet, but the more

You post, the more I agree.

Shoot better
Peter
 
Peter,

For a conventional positional type target rifle or a varminnt rifle or whatever I can see the use but for a full race benchrest competition rifle it just seems to me that it adds one small chance of a hiccup that you don't need when "machine gunning" while a condition holds.

Nicely executed like everything Kelbly's do but for benchrest ..... I am not certain. There are always the other ejection options anyway so it doesn't matter much, I guess they figured there was a market for such an option.

Bryce
 
The advantage maybe in that in other system, the ejector being on the outside of the base ( eccentric ) will tend to cant the brass pivoting on the extractor, more prominent in those who resize the whole brass vs. neck sizing only.
It will also tend to push the base of the brass away from the bolt....tending to make bullet jumping less consistent. That's why one doesn't do headspacing with the plunger in place. My two cents.

Shoot well.
Ed
 
Sound in concept Ed but a lot of very fine shooting has been done with pluger ejectors.

This being predominantly a benchrest action it is likely most brass will be full length resized and bullets will tend to be jammed rather than jumped.

Perhaps it is simply a case of offering an ejector system to those that feel a spring plunger will do what you said, regardless whether it actually will or not. That is as good a reason as any .....
 
They've been offering this kind of ejector for a couple of years. I've been considering adding it to one of my actions for almost as long as it has been available. My concern is that I might be launching carefully prepped PPC cases onto the concrete. I'm still enthusiastic about it...............I've been waiting for someone who has actually used one to comment on it. The advantage, as I see it, is that I can check cases (sizing) without having to take a spring-loaded ejector in and out every time.

-Dave-:)
 
Dave,

" .......... who has actually used one to comment .........."

I have used one.

You can launch cases clear into next week if you bang the bolt hard on the stop.

If you are a bit limp wristed with the bolt you can also leave the cases laying right there in the action where you didn't expect it to be. Great way to get a time consuming tangle up if you throw another round in there as well, especially if you are looking forward and not watching the loading like we are told we should do !!

Bryce
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bryce,

I don't use any ejector at all...........and probably shouldn't start now. I'm particular about case fit, and my rifles cycle very smoothly as-is. I not only don't look down, when I'm "on" I don't even remember having worked the action when I've finished my target. I don't think I even touch the bolt stop, except for the last shot on what I know is a "good one" before I even look...then I tend to hit it pretty hard just as I sit up straight........sounds like that piece of brass would go into orbit.

-Dave-:)
 
I have a benchrest rifle built on an RPA quadlite action and really like the floating ejector. Now that there is a two lug action with the same design I may have to buy one.
 
No pictures yet, but

If I was to shoot a competitive Benchrest, I would have no ejector.

If I would have to have one, it would be a simple spring/plunger.

If I would have to have any other, it would be a leaf type through a slot in the bolts head and not effecting the locking lug(s). ZKK/Pre64. type.

A partially flattened plunger replacing the leaf for a manufacturing cost and simplicity, similar to that what's is found in a military Carcano would be just fine.

Shoot better
Peter
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here are the pictures:
dsc00998.jpg


dsc00995.jpg


As to preferring a spring loaded ejector there are many who feel the spring may exert pressure on the case and perhaps cock it a smidgin to one side. The way I shoot I doubt that I could tell any difference. With this system there is no chance of that. I believe that you would have to pull the bolt back fairly briskly to eject a fired case with such force and to throw it completely off the bench. I don't shoot with that exuberance so the possibility of that happening is very remote, indeed. This will not turn a mediocre shooter into a champion, obviously. It is one solution to what is perceived to be a problem by some shooters. It is not compulsory that any shooter use this system.
 
Question for the need,,,,,,,,,,,,,

MColeman said:
Here are the pictures:


As to preferring a spring loaded ejector there are many who feel the spring may exert pressure on the case and perhaps cock it a smidgin to one side. The way I shoot I doubt that I could tell any difference. With this system there is no chance of that. I believe that you would have to pull the bolt back fairly briskly to eject a fired case with such force and to throw it completely off the bench. I don't shoot with that exuberance so the possibility of that happening is very remote, indeed. This will not turn a mediocre shooter into a champion, obviously. It is one solution to what is perceived to be a problem by some shooters. It is not compulsory that any shooter use this system.
Click to expand...
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Mike, thanks for the pics

It looks well executed, but I'll still question the need and the "push to one side theory" of the spring loaded plunger type ejector.

When you guys are using neck sized fired cases and working with 0.001" headspace, I can't see the possibility or any other practical disadvantage of the case "being pushed to the side" by the spring loaded plunger ejector.

Shoot better
Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top