Old 16 gauge 2 9/16 chamber and RST SHELLS

Anyone shoot RST shells in old 16 gauge? Shot some 2 1/2 RST shells in the A5 and had lots of issues with empty shell getting stuck, or staying in the chamber and not extracting, causing double feed. Did a close inspection and can see where extractor hits the rim of the shell, but then looks like it is slipping off. Don’t have any other 2 1/2 shells so I compared it it Remington loads and found a huge difference in the angle and depth of rim on shell. Gonna try these shells in another A5(60 years newer) tomorrow. I’m guessing I will have same issue. Any ideas?

Still doing some measurements, but I’m right there with you. I shot them in 1969 sweet 16 and they done just fine. Really seems like the extractor is slipping off rim of shell. Leaves some noticeable damage that I’m not seeing on them when fired in sweet sixteen. Maybe extractor is worn or original and then I can see where the problem would be. Will be removing them this week. Hopefully I will be able to see something. If I don’t find something before with chamber and shell measurements.

Yes sir just measured two fired shells out of 1909 and two out of 1969. They are within .1 mm of each other. I think I need to remove extractor and compare with a new one.

Yes sir. If I’m gonna replace one I would do both with springs. I have both. I will tear down tomorrow night after work for a close inspection. Who knows what I will find.

Pulled both extractors out tonight. Right extractor very dull compared to several others that I have. Couldn’t find my new springs, so replaced extractor and put old spring back in. Figured it would be quicker then putting a file on the old one. I have several new ones. I’m gonna shoot tomorrow and see what happens.

Shot 16 today and out of a box of shells, 3 stuck in chamber. Back to square one. Shells fired today have strange dent on the brass below rim of shell. So of course the rest of the afternoon I was running it through my head..... WTF.... then when I got home I compared the 69 to 1909(69 fires and ejects fine), looks like barrel on 1909 is farther to the rear of gun. So I swapped forearm from 69 to 1909 and barrel looks to be positioned correctly. The forearm that’s on the 1909 came from art, when I had issues with other barrels fitting correctly. The barrel lug on original barrel is not at wide as the lug on current barrel. I know that the forearm locates the barrel correctly. I guess my thought is that this forearm is positioning the barrel to far to the rear allowing extractor to be to far in front of shell causing wired dent. With this problem it’s allowing extractor to slip off rim of shell.
Someone give me your thoughts?

I’m gonna try a post some pics. Yea I need to send it to art. I just wanted to make sure this barrel is gonna work before I send it to him. I just had chokes put in it. And wanted to get a rib put on then send to art to be re done completely. Give me a few and I will take some pics

This is original barrel on gun with forearm from art for 2 9/16 chamber gun

Notice difference in lug width. Bottom barrel is original. Top barrel is the one I just bought from numrich. They stated that it was 2 9/16 chamber. Note following pics of this barrel

Numrich barrel

Numrich barrel

Barrel from numrich with 2 9/16 forearm from art. Bolt handle does not hit front of ejection port, but barrel seems to be sticking out of receiver correct amount

1909 with numrich barrel and 1969 sweet 16 forearm. Notice how far barrel sticks out of receiver and bolt handle is against front of ejection port