Bryco 38 380ACP

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Alan0354

New member
I just took a Bryco 38 380ACP home from my stepson to help him fix his gun. The gun just all frozen up. I finally took it apart, everything is gummed up, must not been fired for decades!!!. At the process, I notice the firing pin always stuck out as long as it's not cocked. On closer examination, the gun doesn't have an ejector!!! I conclude that the firing pin IS the ejector. It only retract when it is cocked, so after it fired, the pin serves to push the casing out!!! Here is the picture showing the firing pin sticking out normally.


attachment.php





Anyone familiar with this gun? It's the same maker of my former Jennings 22LR that was a piece of junk. I wonder anyone can confirm that the firing pin is the ejector. I need to give advice to my stepson whether he should even try shooting the gun.

I watched a few youtube, seems like this gun actually is more reliable than my Jennings 22LR, a few actually shot 10+ rounds without a jam. I cannot say about my Jennings.

The gun doesn't look like it's been shot a lot. More just sitting around. I am planning to polish the feedramp and the chamber for him to improve the feeding, beyond that, I am just going to leave it alone.

It missed the orange loaded indicator, I wonder whether that's important.
 

Attachments

  • Bryco firing pin.jpg
    Bryco firing pin.jpg
    59 KB · Views: 347
Last edited:
I did not know that, my Walther PPK has an ejector even though it's a blow back.

I call this cheap. It cannot be as reliable as a real ejector that is placed on the side and at a better angle for ejection.
 
Look on you tube. Only heard good anout the
22s. 9mm and 380s tend to come apart. I demilled a 380 thatypu could see completely thru the gun under the slide.
 
Browning .25s, .32s, and .380s used the firing pin as the ejector.
Bauer, Bernardelli, Galesi, early Colt .25s- almost all striker-fired automatics used the firing pin as the ejector. I'm pretty sure John Browning knew a little more about gun design than you.

Brykos are cheap guns. Most of the guns I mentioned are very fine guns.

Your Walther is hammer fired, and requires a separate ejector.
 
Bill DeShivs said:
Browning .25s, .32s, and .380s used the firing pin as the ejector.
Bauer, Bernardelli, Galesi, early Colt .25s- almost all striker-fired automatics used the firing pin as the ejector. I'm pretty sure John Browning knew a little more about gun design than you.

Brykos are cheap guns. Most of the guns I mentioned are very fine guns.

Your Walther is hammer fired, and requires a separate ejector.
Click to expand...

How old are those guns? When did Browning die?

You design guns? Which one? I am eager to learn.

I have a bright idea, why don't Glock and Sig start using firing pin as ejector? Good idea is good idea whether it's blowback or lock breech.
 
Last edited:
Alan0354 said:
So you consider it's a good design? Wonder why none of the good guns don't follow this.
Click to expand...
By comparing the bryco to "good guns" you are implying the Bryco is no a good gun. Why, other than the multipl pot metal comments....

Also, look at if from a different perspective. It think of it as a smart way to reduce the number of parts needed. it saves on cost and simplifies manufacture and the design possibly making it more reliable, if done properly.
 
Last edited:
Shadow9mm said:
By comparing the bryco to "good guns" you are implying the Bryco is no a good gun. Why, other than the multipl pot metal comments....

Also, look at if from a different perspective. It think of it as a smart way to reduce the number of parts needed. it saves on cost and simplifies manufacture and the design possibly making it more reliable, if done properly.
Click to expand...

I don't imply it's not a good gun, I already said it's not a good gun. I own a Jennings 22LR, I know.

I know the whole point is to save one part, I worked on enough guns to know the ejector is very important in the reliability of the gun, using the firing pin as ejector limit the ejector to be in a very specific position (center of the casing) rather than placing in the optimal position to eject the casing to clear the ejector port.
 
You design guns? Which one? I am eager to learn.
Click to expand...
This is what is called an "ad hominem" argument. It is an irrelevant attack on a person, rather than an attack on the person's argument. And, in my mind, it usually signals weakness of the person's position making the argument. John Browning is recognized as a genius in firearms design. Among the many guns he designed that are still in production are the 1911A1 pistols and variants, the Browning Superposed shotgun (Browning Citori is a variant of it), , Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless (U.S. Armament), Ithaca Model 37 shotgun, Winchester Model 94 lever action rifle, and M2 machine gun still in use by the U.S. military.

So, when someone points out a gun-design genius used the firing pin as an ejector, I think we can start with the presumption that it is probably a pretty decent design.

I have a bright idea, why don't Glock and Sig start using firing pin as ejector? Good idea is good idea whether it's blowback or lock breech.
Click to expand...
Of course, Glocks don't have traditional firing pins. They use a striker with a spring under tension. And most Sigs are also now striker-fired. Also, though I am not a firearms engineer, I don't think we can assume that a firing pin/ejector would work the same in a locked breech design as in a blowback design.

To be clear, I am not saying a 1908 Hammerless is functionally superior to a Glock. I am saying Browning's designs have withstood the passage of time and you should not assume that any ejection problem in the Bryco is simply because the firing pin is used as the ejector. In fact, you said you got the gun running, which proves the firing pin/ejector was not the problem.
 
Ironically, it's usually the sign of a good designer if they can save parts and still achieve proper function and a superfluity of parts is often considered to be evidence of a poor design.

For an argument that using the firing pin as the ejector to be taken seriously, there should be some evidence provided to indicate that proper ejection can not be attained, or is unlikely to be attained in such designs.

So far, not only is that evidence lacking, evidence to the contrary seems to be available in the form of a number of good/reliable designs that have that particular feature.
 
KyJim said:
This is what is called an "ad hominem" argument. It is an irrelevant attack on a person, rather than an attack on the person's argument. And, in my mind, it usually signals weakness of the person's position making the argument. John Browning is recognized as a genius in firearms design. Among the many guns he designed that are still in production are the 1911A1 pistols and variants, the Browning Superposed shotgun (Browning Citori is a variant of it), , Colt 1903 Pocket Hammerless (U.S. Armament), Ithaca Model 37 shotgun, Winchester Model 94 lever action rifle, and M2 machine gun still in use by the U.S. military.

So, when someone points out a gun-design genius used the firing pin as an ejector, I think we can start with the presumption that it is probably a pretty decent design.


Of course, Glocks don't have traditional firing pins. They use a striker with a spring under tension. And most Sigs are also now striker-fired. Also, though I am not a firearms engineer, I don't think we can assume that a firing pin/ejector would work the same in a locked breech design as in a blowback design.

To be clear, I am not saying a 1908 Hammerless is functionally superior to a Glock. I am saying Browning's designs have withstood the passage of time and you should not assume that any ejection problem in the Bryco is simply because the firing pin is used as the ejector. In fact, you said you got the gun running, which proves the firing pin/ejector was not the problem.
Click to expand...

Engineering comes a long way with CAD design from even 30 years ago. I own a Colt Gold Cup, I don't think I would call that an ingenious design in engineering point of view and my experience is it's not reliable until I put in a lot of work. I do my own gun smithing.

You want me to to go into engineering discussion, I can do that. The new generation guns like Glock and others have a MUCH bigger ejection port compare to the older design to make it easier for the casing to clear the port. You don't see that in guns before the 80s. The old Browning design have small ejector port, the 1911A1 has small ejector port, I have to spend a lot of effort to shape the extractor to make the casing clear the ejector port without hitting the port. ( casing fly straight out of the port at least 3+ft away from the gun).

There are a lot of talks on the ejector of Glock, difference between gen 3, 4 and 5. They have different angle at the tip and it will effect the reliability. These are critical parts. These are ALL engineering.


BTW, the firing pin of GLock is very much similar to this one, They are both using a firing pin(rod) pushed by a spring to hit the primer when trigger is pulled. If you saw one of my old post, I showed firing pin of Glock hangs out after it fires, just like this one.
 
Last edited:
I design knives. They are in production.
I was a custom gunsmith/engraver until I gave up my FFL. I still do my own gunsmithing. I also still engrave. I make firing pins for pistols and leaf springs for guns.
I make custom knives, and am an authorized repairman for Schrade, Colonial, Hubertus, Kuno Ritter, Grafrath, Lepre, AKC/Falcon, and Latama knife companies.

What are your mechanical qualifications?
 
I just don't understand it.

How could there possibly be any disagreement on what constitutes good/bad design of a firearm on a gun forum? Isn't this the internet where everyone agrees all the time?

I'm going to close this thread while I contemplate this unfathomable conundrum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top