Reliability and Excuses...

[Eric M.]

Sturm,
All of the above except beating it on the table.
He started as I was giving command orders as the Range Commander, by standing back at the line, flexing his shoulders like a linebacker.
He then attacked the pistol and then, instead of just pushing the magazine in, slammed it so hard, that even I could hear it, and I had my muffs on and am half deaf anyway.
He worked the slide so hard that a bullet did a back flip and ended up with the base in the chamber, with the bullet facing him.
It was hilarious. I would say that he then limp-wristed it, but he was holding on too tight for that to happen.
We all got a big laugh out of it. Even he did.
There is an old guy that still shoots Bullseye that told me Police have a different way of shooting. He said this with a big smile on his face.
I told the Officer, that he scared my poor pistol so badly, that all of its tolerances were thrown off.
Like I said, I have never seen anything like it.
While I'm shooting the 10 ring out at 25yds., he was putting in a 10" group at 15yds, with the same gun and loads.
I did tell him to go back to his CZ 75 because they like rough handling.
My EAA Witness sure does.
I have put around 500 rounds with the same load in it the past week with no problems.--4.0gr of Clays-200gr LSWC bullets with a Lee Taper Crimp--1.260 OAL-- I weigh all of my loads.


Eric

 

[SIGSHR]

Nothing is 100% reliable, all you can do is hope and pray that you achieve
99.9999999.....% reliability and jams and break downs occur on the range
and not in combat (or during the Hunt of a Lifetime). My Colt MK IV locked back on me a few years ago, after none of the Usual resolved the problem, I
disassembled the reciever almost to a bare frame, determined that accumulated powder and residue from 27 years of ownership and modest shooting had accumulated around the trigger bar, a thorough cleaning with
Hoppe's and a little Break Free and now it's good as new.
My 4" S&W M-19 locked up on me at the range years ago, my then gunsmith told me a small sliver of metal broke off a large part, that was enough to keep it from functioning. These are good examples of why one should carry a back up gun, and in the case of the Mark IV
I was capable of dealing with the problem w/o professional help. Firearms, handguns, can seem very complicated and mysterious, but they
are finite things, the human mind CAN know them completely.

 

[jhgreasemonkey]

Eric M. No offense but that sounds like one for the "reliability and excuses" department.

 

[PeterGunn]

I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment of the OP, but the expectations that must be met to attain consistent 100% percent reliability is difficult if not improbable.

Guns by nature are going to get dirty... even in the cleanest range environments... as soon as you fire a round, you just made it dirty. You accumulate enough of that stuff and even the loosest fitting gun that rattles around in your hand is going to be affected.

Even if the weapon continues to fire, accuracy can and probably will be impacted to a degree. So I guess my question would be, "What defines failure?" Mechanically any gun is only as good as its design and there are lots of good designs available, but all of us have at one point or another run into designs that have mechanical weaknesses and others that seem to be related to the Energizer Bunny.

I think the bottom line is to start with a gun that is manufactured by a maker of good reputaion that produces a product that has proven itself over a period of time. Buy an example of that gun and make sure that your particular example is up to par. If you are using that gun for defence purposes or if you want to keep the warranty valid... don't shoot reloads, only high quality factory made rounds.

Blessings,

 

[BigJimP]

I agree with you - I have very little tolerance for weapons that won't perform on demand. But I'm also real fussy about cleaning my guns every time I come home from the range. Maintenance is not something I take too casually. Maybe I've been lucky, but I have some guns that have never had a FTF or any other kind of problem ( SIG 226 stainless, Wilson combat, etc ).

But I do think a lot of the problems I see at the range with malfunctions - often comes down to maintenance. I can't imagine carrying a gun, that I depended on for self defense, that was dirty. The concept makes no sense to me ....... If guns were intended to perform better dirty ....... wouldn't the mfg's ship them to us dirty ? But I hear it at the range all the time - "how many weeks can you go before you have to clean it" ... like it's some kind of a chore for some reason. I don't get it.

In general, I think often you get what you pay for - guns, tools, etc but this issue of reliabilty is one of the reasons I'm dissapointed in gun mfg's that insist you run 500 rounds thru a new gun before it will stop having FTF issues, etc. With all of my better guns, except Les Baer, they've been very good right out of the box - and personally, while Baer's are very accurate, I think Baer makes his guns way too tight ( and a lot tighter than necessary).

But I agree - if it won't perform - time to fix it or sell it and move on.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Same as above ^... When I said ‘as long as there’s enough powder in the case’ I meant any load with any powder with any bullet type and OAL will work, again as long as it’s with in the specs for that calibre.

Geez, IM, just how many excuses are you going to make?

Yes, a properly made gun (and associated parts) that is properly maintained should work 100% of the time with properly made ammo, so long as the shooter does everything right as well. Personally, I think a reliable gun as one being capable of handling a variety of ammo and not just everything perfectly in spec. After all, it is only a matter of time before the gun itself is no longer perfectly in spec either.

One thing I have noticed about excuses, I have heard a lot of people diagnosing ammo as out of spec AFTER it was shot...like they could tell how much powder was used and what the OAL was before it was shot.

 

[IM_Lugger]

^

Sounds like you don’t reload

Of course you can tell the OAL of a cartridge before you shoot it, I can see if the OAL is too short or too long as I load the ammo in the magazine.

And if the recoil is lighter than it should be it’s likely because there wasn't enough powder in the case, so if you get a stovepipe it's not too hard to put the two together (but with factory ammo that will almost never happen)


Also I don’t think you understand what “with in the specs” ammo means; Any factory ammo WILL be with in the specs(unless they mess up)! Each powder (HS-6, Herco, SR4756 etc.) has a minimum and max charge for each bullet weight and type. Min OAL also varies depending on bullet type, weigt and of course powder. Anything between the min and max powder load, OAL is with in the specs.

 

[SNOWED IN]

Early in my reloading career, I on occasion produced 9mm loads that were outsized. My Glock 17 would choke on them constantly. I would pick up the FTFs and run them through my buddies Beretta 92 which would promptly gobble them all down. On the other hand, my Glock was far more accurate with all but a narrow range of lead reloads.

The Glock had a tighter chamber from the factory.

The "must feed all without fail" devotees would consider the Beretta a better iron and swear off Glock. I do not. The Glock functions great as long as loads are closer to optimal spec.

In 95 I fitted my Colt Commander (45) with a heavier than stock recoil spring. This was done to prevent the possibility of frame battering as advised by a prominent custom 1911 builder. Several pals in the distant past got repeated stovepipes by not gripping it firmly. I would come get the Colt, immediately finish the remainder of the mag-same loads-without a failure. Ever. It never happened to me and has not happened in quite a few years presumably because the spring has relaxed with time and use.

Some would say "your making excuses".

I have all the confidence in the world. I load it right, shoot it often and the few failures, as noted, had an easily traceable cause.

I wouldn't expect a custom built target pistol to eat dirty or outsized reloads or run perfectly after I drop it in the sand on a camping trip because it is built as tight as possible and still run. I wouldn't expect a counter bought defense arm to shoot with the race guns in race gun match. It is a trade off.

I do not own a firearm that has malfunctioned more than 5 times. I don't believe in "break in periods". If a gun can't work right out of the box, I don't trust the quality of manufacture. If my 2007 car stuttered and stalled during the first 500 miles, I would get rid of it too. I don't care about "breaking in" the motor or any other part. We expect highly complex machines like V-8's to work properly the moment we drive them off the lot but some folks think it's ok for a relatively simple machine like a gun to malfunction during the first 500 rounds of its life?

Just my opinion, but the variance in modern gasoline is less than the equivalent varience of fuel/pressure in the various handgun loads-IE targetloads - +P hollowpoints etc. etc.
Repects to all. Fun topic.

 

[OBIWAN]

I got no use for weapons that are not reliable....but..........

Most people are very bad at determining cause/effect

they throw all kinds of variables into a "test" and then try to pin the "problem" on one thing

There is plenty that the shooter can do to screw up a perfectly good pistol or revolver

Bad mags, bad ammo, modifications, improper maint, incomplete maint, how you hold the weapon....I could go on and on

I have seen pistols and rifles destroyed by factory ammo...too many to trust any ammo

I have never been able to induce a "limp-wrist" failure even by trying....but there are plenty of ways to screw with the operation of the slide with your grip, etc.

I think one of the reasons some MFGS have break in periods is to give some joker a chance to figure out what he/she is doing wrong

I hav had plenty of people hand me a gun that "won't work" and it magically works for me

 

[CarbineCaleb]

Reliability... well that can mean things like
- low incidence of failures to feed
- low incidence of failures to fire
- low incidence of failures to eject
- low maintenance
- long life with minimal maintenance
- long life with periodic replacement of parts designed as service-replaceable
...these things don't necessarily all go together, and also have different implications.

I think that I do differ from some people in that I
- Don't much care if a gun will last for 100,000 rounds, as long as it'll last for 25,000
- Don't love maintenance, but don't mind if a gun needs cleaning and light oiling now and then
- Don't want FTF/FTF/FTE frequently, but if they occur once in 100 rounds or less, make my decision on other factors

The last item may be most controversial, but my thinking is that if the risk of such a failure is less than 1%, then wouldn't I be better off buying a gun that minimizes risks that are much higher - like missing the person completely (roughly 75% risk according to stats)? To me, the gun that will point well, allow rapid use of sights, and be controlled well during firing is preferred to one with slow acquisition/short radius sights, poor grip angle and high muzzle flip, even if that gun has a zero % failure rate in operating.