TargetTalk

Just acquired a used one in like-new condition. The manual describes field stripping but makes no mention of removing the barrel from the barrel housing. Does the barrel come out for cleaning or does one clean it like a revolver, that is, from the muzzle end?

Leave the barrel in, and carefully push patches thru. My wife has a 22 and a 32. I just took my wifes 32 apart for the first time after four years of light shooting. Its amazing how reliable and alibi free these pistols are, but once you notice a feeding problem, thats when they need to be taken apart and cleaned. Generally she just cleans what she can with a toothpick and a Q-tip. My wife talked to some of the girls while doing the selection match series years ago, and some of them never took the gun apart from new. I just figured to take it apart once a year as preventive maintaince. Your milage may vary. But yes, they have to be carefully cleaned from the front. I just wanted to make the point that if you have a dedicated 22 or 32, I dont think stripping the gun down is necessary that often.

If your 280 is the later version (screw at the front), you can remove the rings that hold barrel in the upper shroud. Take off the upper part, pull out barrel, clean. The rings have no other function, and when assembled the barrel is stabilized through the screw in the mag well.

FWIW, I feel the best way to do routine cleaning of a 280, without removing the barrel, is to use a pull-through type device, such as a Patch Worm. Or, make your own from fishing line or weedwacker cord. This avoids cleaning from the muzzle end. In contrast to a revolver, with the 280 in .22 or .32 you are unlikely to have leading to remove, so a rigid rod is not really necessary.

HTH,
FredB

Tycho wrote:
"If your 280 is the later version (screw at the front), .... "
Is that "screw at the front" in addition to the one in the magazine well? My 280 has only the screw in the mag well, so is it the "earlier" version?

Yes. I think I've heard that there are 4 different versions of the 280 around. The earlier two have the snap-in bolts at the front, which worked alright with the .22 but gave everybody a headache with the .32. Many of the early .32s won't put the first shot of a series into the same group as the 4 others. Because of this, they changed the design, so from the 3rd version onwards the gun is assembled via 2 screws, one in the mag well and one at the front. The differences between 1st and 2nd series / 3tr and 4th series concern the trigger, as far as I know.

Mike T,

If you are like me, when you read something like the above message indicating a generic problem with a gun you have just bought, you have regrets. I would encourage you to talk with Larry Carter about this issue, because he has told me that he has not seen this problem, and as the Hammerli importer he has dealt with a lot of 280s in .32. Until you have documented it in your particular gun, I wouldn't worry. On the other hand, maybe you're not a worrier like I am.....

HTH,
FredB

Unfortunately, the concern is quite real. I own one of the earlier production 280s, and it does, in fact, reliably shoot the first .32 round about 4 inches high. Dig through the Target Talk archives - this problem has been around for a long time. If you have one of the later guns, you are in good shape. With an early gun? Either hold off for that first shot, or use it as a .22.

Interesting...
The test target that came with my early model 280 has a cloverleaf group measuring approximately 0.25 inches centre-to-centre. Using a magnifier, I believe I can discern five shots in that group. So, has Hammerli "fudged" the test by shooting six shots and ignoring the first one? Since the first shot might be four inches higher than the subsequent shots (by Mike McD's observation), that would be easy to do - the test "target" is a disk only two inches in diameter.
I've always felt that my SIG/Hammerli P240 delivers the first shot higher than the rest, so I deliberately hold low for that first shot. However, I have never done a test with a Ransom Rest to confirm my "observation". Now I may have another such gun? Bummer! Anyway, tomorrow night I'll try the 280 at our indoor 20-yard range to see how it performs.
Mike T.

Mike McDaniel wrote:I own one of the earlier production 280s, and it does, in fact, reliably shoot the first .32 round about 4 inches high.

As you say, this was a well known "undocumented feature" of the early gun.

I was under the impression that one of the early retro-fit modifications was an attempt to stop it. I thought that either surrounding the barrel with lead (a factory fit) or the under-barrel aluminium rib was intended to fix the problem.

The problem of the early series is that the barrel is not mounted fix in the upper receiver, but basically spring loaded. Otherwise, the gun couldn't be put together. The problem is a) that the first shot of a series normally has a different extracting resistance because of oxidized powder residues in the chamber (quite a common problem with many .32s) and b) that the spring loaded barrel will settle in a different position from the second shot onwards, as it gets hit by the full powered slide. Now both of these factors are alleviated under lab conditions, when the gun is brand new, the chamber clean and the whole thing fixated in a vice, so the test target would be expected to be good.

The problem was solved by fixating the barrel in the receiver and putting the whole thing together with 2 screws. The added weight (it's bismuth, btw, not lead) is an afterthought, because concentrating the weight around the barrel axis is better for shot recovery than mounting it far away from it. This is also the reason why early model 280s can't be modified with the bismuth blocks, but later ones can. My father has a .22 280 with a fully bismuth filled receiver. The alu rail was added to eliminate torsion of the lower frame with the .32.

The screw idea wasn't new, either. We have a Hammerli 2500, one of the first prototypes of the 280 concept, and it already had a screw in front. So they must have decided to use the snap-tite idea later- bad idea.

Well, I took my recent acquisition, the "early model" H280 in .32, to our indoor 20-yard range tonight.
I fired the Precision stage of the ISSF Centre Fire course (six series of five shots).
First series: The first shot was the highest in the group by about seven millimeters centre-to-centre.
Second series: The first shot was about 11 mm higher than the next highest, but I called the shot high (I "pushed" it).
Third and fourth series: The first shots were not the highest shots in the group.
Fifth and sixth series: The extreme vertical spread was 33 mm and neither of those was the first shot of a series.
So, in my hand, I did not find that the first shot of a series consistently printed higher on the target than subsequent shots. All shots were made "off-hand" - per the rules. Perhaps shots fired from a machine rest would show a different result, but for now, at my current level of accomplishment, the gun shows no conclusive tendency to throw the first shot high - which, I might add, is a relief :-)
Mike T.