Poor Guy...


PDA






natlmatch
November 28, 2008, 06:07 PM
Sure glad hes ok.

http://www.surplusrifleforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=66812

If you enjoyed reading about "Poor Guy..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 28, 2008, 06:14 PM
Yowsa! :eek: :eek:

R.W.Dale
November 28, 2008, 06:14 PM
it boggles the mind that people will shoot other's reloads. I'm a handloader and I wouldn't dream of shooting someone elses handloads.

I wonder if the OP feels that the few dollars saved on ammo was a good investment

mr.trooper
November 28, 2008, 06:20 PM
Thank you for posting that link. It gave me the opportunity to do more research on the M1 Garand and its gas system. The last 15 minutes have opened my eyes. NO weapon that sensitive to reloads deserves the kind of koolaid-fueled mental orgies the M1 Garand induces. (referring to documented history of the platform, NOT this incident specifically.) i hand load as well, and I wouldn't shoot someone else's loads unless i had seen them reload them, and was sure they are competent. I KNOW for sure that i will never be buying a Garand!

Iv also got to agree with Krochus. It boggles my mind when people pay TOP dollar for a gun, and then feed it the cheapest ammunition available. You wouldn't buy a Ferrari and then fuel it up with 92 octane pump gas from BP...so why would you feed bargain basement ammo to a $1,000 rifle?

R.W.Dale
November 28, 2008, 06:23 PM
NO weapon that sensitive to reloads deserves the kind of koolaid-fueled mental orgies the M1 Garand induces.

that load would have blown apart just about any rifle the entire case head is GONE. This obviously a case of a powder being used with an entirely incompatible burn rate. I'm wagering a handgun powder

Frog48
November 28, 2008, 06:26 PM
I received it Monday at a local gun dealer. While I was at the gun dealer I also picked up a pack of 30-06 165 grain reloads.

I have since downloaded their M1 manual and read that using reloads cancels any warranty.

I am thinking about contacting a lawyer. Someone needs to buy me a new M1 and compensate me



It sucks, and I'm glad he's OK, but I dont have much sympathy.

He invalidated the warranty himself, by shooting reloads (which is an even worse idea when its somebody else's reloads). Its spelled out plain as day in the owner's manual, which he *should* have downloaded and read before using the rifle. Its a thing called due diligence.

And whats up with thinking he deserves compensation? Why should someone else be held liable for this guy's own actions (or inactions)?

mr.trooper
November 28, 2008, 06:27 PM
Read the rest of the post. I was not referring to this specific incident, but rather the long history of Garands and their problems with reloads.

Again, I specifically stated in my post that i was not referring to this specific incident with that comment. ;)

i agree on the handgun powder. That was my first though as well. The loader probably got his powders mixed up :(

R.W.Dale
November 28, 2008, 06:28 PM
any semiauto rifle is sensitive to burn rate and case condition it isn't just a Garand thing

mr.trooper
November 28, 2008, 06:32 PM
Are you saying that you shouldn't shoot reloads in any Semi-auto rifle?

I'm not attacking the legitimacy of the Garand, I'm just saying that this is why I wont own one. To be fair, the only semi-auto rifle i own, or have any ambition to own, is an AK-47. The rest of my rifles are bolt actions.

R.W.Dale
November 28, 2008, 06:35 PM
Are you saying that you shouldn't shoot reloads in any Semi-auto rifle?


No but I am saying that powder burn rate and case resizing MUST be compatible with whatever semiauto platform you're shooting.

It's no different than the need to choose the correct octane fuel for a car's engine. Use the wrong stuff and damage can result. But in this case someone used the wrong fuel entirely!

mr.trooper
November 28, 2008, 06:36 PM
well, yea...

longdayjake
November 28, 2008, 06:53 PM
And whats up with thinking he deserves compensation? Why should someone else be held liable for this guy's own actions (or inactions)?

Well, when you put a product on a shelf or sell one to be put on the shelf, there are laws put in place to protect the people that might be buying said product. When the manufacturer creates a product that results in injury or death of a consumer simply by using the product as it was intended to be used that is something that really is the manufactures fault, and the manufacturer should be liable for any damage caused by the normal intended use of the product. The round was sold to be fired. When firing it, the OP was hurt and so was his property. If the problem is indeed caused by the ammo being too hot, then he deserves compensation. Also, it is illegal to sell reloaded ammo without a manufacturers license.

innerpiece
November 28, 2008, 07:02 PM
agreed longdayjake!
the store put a gun, and ammo on the shelf... sold them together, something blew up..... thats as bad as it gets.... well allmost!

bad, bad store! needs to be sued!!

Frog48
November 28, 2008, 07:11 PM
the manufacturer should be liable for any damage caused by the normal intended use of the product. The round was sold to be fired. When firing it, the OP was hurt and so was his property.

But thats the thing, the product (regardless if it was loaded too hot or not) should not have been used in that rifle in the first place.

Think of it this way... Should a fuel station or oil company be responsible if I am stupid enough to put diesel in my gas truck? The fact that the product may or may not have been defective is irrelevant if the product was improperly used by the consumer.

jpwilly
November 28, 2008, 09:17 PM
Don't most manufacturers have a clause that voids the warranty if reloaded ammunition is used? Surley none recommend the use of reloaded ammunition.

From what I see that ammo was way over pressure and caused this but I'm no CSI or Trial Lawyer.

He probably has a good case against the gun shop as the sale was partially assisted by the clerk. An they could have said no don't shoot this in your Garand.

longdayjake
November 28, 2008, 09:54 PM
But thats the thing, the product (regardless if it was loaded too hot or not) should not have been used in that rifle in the first place.

Think of it this way... Should a fuel station or oil company be responsible if I am stupid enough to put diesel in my gas truck? The fact that the product may or may not have been defective is irrelevant if the product was improperly used by the consumer.

The m1 garand shoots .30-06 rounds through it. The manufacturer made .30-06 rounds presumably to be shot from a .30-06. Now, had he bought .308 rounds and tried to shoot them out of his .30-06 rifle then your analogy might have worked. Regardless of what powders you use on reloading for an m1 garand, as long as they don't exceed normal .30-06 pressures then the rifle will shoot them with usually only a risk to the operating rod. The only issues I have heard of when shooting reloads from a garand are from them slamming the operating rod back too hard and bending it. Or the other problem is that it doesn't build enough pressure to operate the gas system which results in a single shot rifle. Any casing that explodes like that is not because of it being shot from the M1, but rather because it was probably charged with pistol powder.

Now, suppose my car says to use regular unleaded gasoline in my car but I put supreme in. Though my car was not designed to use supreme gas, it can do it just fine and my car will most likely be okay. However if the gas station sold me jet fuel that was labeled as supreme, would my car be okay if I tried to run it on jet fuel. NO!!! The same principle applies here. That bullet would most likely have blown up any gun that it was put into. In fact, I think that that poor guy should be greatful that he was shooting it out of a garand and not a bolt action or he might have a bolt sticking out of his face. Whoever made that bullet deserves to either lose a lot of money to help them learn their lesson or they need to be shut down. I love shooting too much to worry about my face blowing up every time I pull the trigger. Manufacturers should be responsible for their products. If all it had done was bend the operating rod then I would side with you that the guy was completely at fault. But when a bullet turns your rifle into a grenade then the blame shifts from the operator to the manufacturer.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 28, 2008, 11:04 PM
+1 to what jake said.

MutinousDoug
November 28, 2008, 11:34 PM
The case looks to me from the pics, like it was 1/8th" out of battery when the gun fired and the case ruptured. Bolt lugs appear to be largely undamaged in the pics.
I may be mistaken of course, and I hope analysis of the remaining rounds shows something conclusive but I'm not convinced of the "bad powder" conclusion.
That said, I wouldn't shoot anyone else's reloads in any of my Garands (though I have run almost 1K round of various vintage HXP through them, and have more on order).

paintballdude902
November 28, 2008, 11:52 PM
ouch

thats why i reload for a friend of mine he wanted to buy some reloads off the internet i told him i could do it cheaper and reload to the specs safe for the m1

and since i weigh each charge i knew they would be safe

Ignition Override
November 29, 2008, 02:48 AM
A guy retired from my company knows a pilot with Fedex who was bitten by a cottonmouth snake which was in a traveling plant nursery from FL.

Anyway, when he got settled into his hospital room, he simply told the nursery company words to the effect: "When I get out in three days, I expect to see a new Mercedes *** parked at the hospital's curb". He looked every day, disappointed and on the third day there was his brand-new Mercedes convertible, gleaming.

The point?
Maybe the plaintiff was a bit selfish, maybe not, but the nursery was very fortunate in a financial sense. They would have had only a limited defense in court after having a poisonous, potentially deadly viper under the floor which held tropical plants etc.
This same thing happened to a lady in Kansas City in the 70's.

The OP might have a good case for a new gun and the company which sold it (for example) might be extremely fortunate to only pay for another rifle.
He might do very well if they settled outside of court. They might settle for a really small sum or the equivalent, without a lawsuit, if they are smart.
I would demand 10,000 rounds of free Remington ammo to go with the gun to close the deal with no feelings of guilt.
What, just $3-5,000 for long-term ammo which is safe?
This would still be a tremendous financial bargain for the seller's or manufacturer's insurance company. There is no doubt that they can afford the very modest sum.
Don't want to be too graphic, but they are also very lucky that it didn't slice off fingers, an eye, part of a jawbone, or skull.
Picture the squirming of the defense lawyers in court for that scenario...
I've read about bankruptcy lawyers retained by a corporation squirming when their lies are uncovered in the Manhattan District...

Brian Dale
November 30, 2008, 06:17 PM
Longdayjake, I like your analogy at Post #16. If I may, I'd like to suggest one change--jet fuel isn't as volatile as gasoline, so my suggestion is this (in boldface):Now, suppose my car says to use regular unleaded gasoline in my car but I put supreme in. Though my car was not designed to use supreme gas, it can do it just fine and my car will most likely be okay. However if the gas station sold me diethyl ether that was labeled as supreme, would my car be okay if I tried to run it on ether? NO!!! The same principle applies here. That cartridge would most likely have blown up any gun that it was put into. In fact, I think that that poor guy should be grateful that he was shooting it out of a Garand and not a bolt action or he might have a bolt sticking out of his face.Most folks have seen diethyl ether sold in spray cans for starting cars in cold weather. It's very flammable. Putting it in your gas tank would be like like shooting a .30-'06 cartridge loaded with pistol powder.

WardenWolf
November 30, 2008, 06:23 PM
That makes me positively sick. I'd sue, all right, but the guy was stupid in using a reload.

MilsurpShooter
November 30, 2008, 11:54 PM
Holy... Guys lucky that all he's missing is some money. I reload myself and still after doing so many rounds find myself double and triple checking just so what happened to him doesn't happen to me.

paintballdude902
December 1, 2008, 02:34 AM
jay yep me too

when your doing something that after a time gets to be repetative you find your self not always paying the attention you should i accidentally loaded some .45colt with the wrong powder (i think unique when i wanted green dot) and i was lucky i pulled 1 appart and checked and it was the wrong powder but then i looked up load for the powder i used and it was safe

turned out to be a darn good load lol

1858
December 1, 2008, 04:18 AM
In fact, I think that that poor guy should be greatful that he was shooting it out of a garand and not a bolt action or he might have a bolt sticking out of his face.

Are you sure about that? The guys from Guns and Ammo have done numerous "catastrophic failure" tests with bolt actions and nothing has ever come back at the shooter. Modern rifles at least are designed to fail "away" from the shooter so other folks at the range are probably going to eat it rather than the shooter. Comforting thought isn't it? I saw one episode where they loaded a .300 Win Mag case with 70 grains of Bullseye and upon firing in the test rifle, the whole receiver flew apart but nothing came back at the cardboard cutout sitting behind the rifle.

:)

Gunnerpalace
December 1, 2008, 04:24 AM
Clearly looks like a case of "if 70gr of powder is so good I'll double it!"

More does not always=better. or safer. :eek:

david_the_greek
December 1, 2008, 07:39 AM
oh my.... thats truly awful. Glad he's ok, not glad the rifles hurt. For his sake, its a good thing the FIL didn't take the first shot! I'm going to second the suing of the reload company. On a side note, when younger, I definitely shot some gunshow reloads out of my Garand and 03A3. Concerning....

Hostile Amish
December 1, 2008, 08:48 AM
I like how the case says "Match" on it.

Wedge
December 1, 2008, 09:04 AM
It boggles my mind that anyone would spend good money on a rifle and then shoot someone elses reloads.

Unfortunately the guy didn't know any better. Most people don't realize how much attention to detail is required when reloading, and the gun shop owner sold him the ammunition.

welldoya
December 1, 2008, 09:16 AM
The gunshop owner and cartridge company would be fools not to buy the guy a new rifle and throw in a LOT of factory ammo in exchange for a release of liability. It will save them a ton of money in the long run.

wcwhitey
December 1, 2008, 05:21 PM
That round would have done much worse damage in a weaker gun. I have never seen a manufacturer that was ok with using reloads in their guns. The store owner and manufacturer of the ammo does have liability here, a commercial transaction ending in a destroyed rifle. Damn lucky he was not hurt badly.

jaholder1971
December 1, 2008, 08:03 PM
Okay, the rifle was used, so the warranty was void anyway.
Secondly, the shop sold the guy a rifle in .30/06 and .30/06 ammo. Neither a rifle in good condition nor ammo properly loaded would cause the damage done to this rifle.

I've owned and shot M1's and I cannot imagine of any single or multiple mechanical failure that could have caused this KB. Even the "Light Magnum" and the stuff loaded with heavy bullets and slow powders wouldn't do this. A bent op rod after a couple hundred rounds, but not a catastrophic disassembly.

Third: If this is a reputable shop, they should stand behind the products they sell, used included. Used or not, rifles and ammo should not explode on the first shot. Besides, most states have basic consumer protection laws that should cover this.

The Deer Hunter
December 1, 2008, 08:28 PM
Wow!

I'm glad the guy is alright.

longdayjake
December 1, 2008, 09:31 PM
I saw one episode where they loaded a .300 Win Mag case with 70 grains of Bullseye and upon firing in the test rifle, the whole receiver flew apart but nothing came back at the cardboard cutout sitting behind the rifle.


I am glad to hear that this is true. I have heard however of it happening to people that pull the trigger and nothing happens so they automatically think the round was a dud so they unlock the bolt to strip it and the round goes off. I almost did it once with an old 1903 springfield. I had my hand on the bolt ready to pull upward when it went off and the stock smacked me in the face. Needless to say when I have a dud I always set the rifle down for a while before I strip it now.

1858
December 2, 2008, 07:03 PM
longdayjake, I think that was my point ... in order for the bolt to come back at you, the bolt lugs would need to be disengaged. This is one of the potential concerns with slamfires in bolt action rifles. I read an article a few years ago describing how a bolt from a .50 cal went through a shooter's right hip and buried itself in a pickup truck behind the firing line. The shooter was shooting the rifle off the bench and as he was stripping a round off the magazine, he had a slamfire due to an incorrectly (proud) seated primer. He was standing at the bench (behind the rifle) as he was closing the bolt which probably saved his life.

:)

bobotech
December 2, 2008, 08:37 PM
I didn't read the whole thread at surplusrifle, but did he ever mention if he was using FACTORY reloads or home hand loads?

I have no problem shooting factory reloads such as HSM reloads since they are held to the same type of quality control as factory new loads.

DeathByCactus
December 2, 2008, 09:06 PM
could be worse, he could be blind, dead, deaf, or have no hair.

LAWSUIT!!!

triggerman770
December 4, 2008, 02:15 PM
well the OP said he bought 165Gr reloads. Bet they were loaded for a bolt action(there is a difference:what:most load manuals have a section for M-1's)
Then the question were the cases full length sized?(to the absolute bottom)
And I agree with the poster who thinks it was a1/8 th out of battery firing, because the round looked as if it was unsupported. and finnaly we don't know the quanity or the I.D. of the powder. so the OP does indeed bear some resonsibility in this.

R.W.Dale
December 4, 2008, 02:20 PM
well the OP said he bought 165Gr reloads. Bet they were loaded for a bolt action(there is a differencemost load manuals have a section for M-1's)
Then the question were the cases full length sized?(to the absolute bottom)
And I agree with the poster who thinks it was a1/8 th out of battery firing, because the round looked as if it was unsupported. and finnaly we don't know the quanity or the I.D. of the powder. so the OP does indeed bear some resonsibility in this.

No, to me this doesn't look a case of IMR4831 instead of IMR4895

this is clearly a case of Unique or other fast handgun powder instead of a suitable rifle powder. A slightly incorrect burn rate will bend and break some parts. But violent self disassembles such as this you only get from accidently using pistol powders in quantity in a rifle case

NCsmitty
December 4, 2008, 02:51 PM
As one seemingly knowledgeable poster noted, he had never seen an M1 destroyed as bad as that one. I agree with krochus, no overload of standard rifle powder could cause that much damage. SA M1's are well made, and to tear it up like that, it had to be a case full of fast burning powder. If the barrel was plugged, you would see the bulge. The guy is lucky to have gotten away with the little physical damage he did. I just don't know about the firing out of battery, I suppose it's a possibility and 50,000 psi being misdirected is nothing to mess with.

NCsmitty

esmith
December 4, 2008, 09:59 PM
I am thinking about contacting a lawyer. Someone needs to buy me a new M1 and compensate me for my hand, which is still stiff and hurting, I just don't know who yet. I am guessing the reloading company.

It sucks that this happened to this guy but it is his fault.

Most people should know that they are taking a gamble when buying someone elses handloads. No one knows what someone else loaded the pressures to in their handloads.

It would be like me drinking water from a pond. I don't know what is in the water, could be nothing, yet on the other hand there could be some weird virus that gives me a stomach flu. After getting sick, it would be like me blaming someone else for it. Instead of taking personal responsibility this man seems to think its someone else's fault that he bought high pressure loads that blew up his gun.

Now he will hire Johnny Ambulance-Chaser and sue someone who had nothing to do with the incident.

lionking
December 4, 2008, 10:01 PM
Quote mr trooper

"koolaid-fueled mental orgies the M1 Garand induces. (referring to documented history of the platform, NOT this incident specifically.) I KNOW for sure that i will never be buying a Garand!

It boggles my mind when people pay TOP dollar for a gun, and then feed it the cheapest ammunition available. You wouldn't buy a Ferrari and then fuel it up with 92 octane pump gas from BP...so why would you feed bargain basement ammo to a $1,000 rifle?"


http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/garand%20springfield%204-2%20million%20serial%20range/th_002.jpg (http://s198.photobucket.com/albums/aa45/lionking_rocks/garand%20springfield%204-2%20million%20serial%20range/?action=view&current=002.jpg)

mgregg85
December 4, 2008, 10:26 PM
NO weapon that sensitive to reloads deserves the kind of koolaid-fueled mental orgies the M1 Garand induces. (referring to documented history of the platform, NOT this incident specifically.)

I'm betting that reloaded round that destroyed it was double charged or full of pistol powder, there aren't many rifles that will survive that. Use the right ammo for the right weapon, don't blame the weapon for someone else's foolish mistakes.

Brian Dale
December 4, 2008, 10:56 PM
I think that he's following a different line of thought, mgregg: that comment could well be directed at the M1's narrow band of acceptable port pressures. Lots of M1 owners worry about bending our op rods.

I've got a little voice crying, "pistol powder," too; the KB was just catastrophic.

My reaction to mr.trooper's comment is this: That kool-aid sure tastes good, though, and I'm personally willing to keep feeding just the right ammo, using the best grease I can find and giving lots of TLC -- because I enjoy it. :)

2RCO
December 4, 2008, 11:16 PM
Think of it this way... Should a fuel station or oil company be responsible if I am stupid enough to put diesel in my gas truck? The fact that the product may or may not have been defective is irrelevant if the product was improperly used by the consumer.

If the dealership filled your gas truck with diesel thin this would be a similar situation.

The wingnuts sold this guy the M1 and the reloaded ammo to be used together.=Store owner guilty--It is as simple as that. If I owned the store he'd have a shiney new SA M1 and a case of factory ammo he could pick up at his leisure all on my nickel--I think I might throw in an extra gun just to keep him quiet and thank God nobody died.

Paladin_Hammer
December 4, 2008, 11:40 PM
That's why I always dissemble and inspect every last part of every gun I've ever bought. If the shop owner allows, I do it before I buy. Only when I absolutely have to have it (and I know I can buy replacement parts) will I buy then inspect it.

jaholder1971
December 4, 2008, 11:48 PM
It sucks that this happened to this guy but it is his fault.

Most people should know that they are taking a gamble when buying someone elses handloads. No one knows what someone else loaded the pressures to in their handloads.

I see it a little differently.

The rifle was used, so there's no factory warranty. However, in many states there is still some level of basic warranty protection that should apply.

If the store owner was selling reloads, then those reloads are being loaded commercially not unlike Ultramax, HSM and a number of other names. If the store's making it and selling it commercially then there is still a basic form of liability when it fails to perform fundamentally.

Example: You go to the bread store and pick up some day old bread. Yeah, it's yesterday's leftovers but it doesn't excuse the shop owner if it's made from sawdust instead of flour.

Or - You buy a loaf of day old bread from the store and the store owner gives you a jar of homemade "berry jam" to try on your bread. The berries are actually holly berries, which are poisonous.

The rifle was bought believing it would go "bang" instead of "kaboom". Same with the ammo. Both failed on the first shot. Store owner's got some 'splaining to do.

Dean Williams
December 5, 2008, 12:56 AM
It's a heck of a mess, and I'm glad the guy lived to tell about it.
I don't see how this can be a failure on the part of the weapon. The owner said the bolt was still closed after the shot, and he had to beat it open with a rawhide hammer.

cat9x
December 5, 2008, 09:11 AM
I'm glad he's ok, that's unfortunate.

Pulling the facts together, his negligence was at as much fault as the reloader. You should always read your manual first and this explains why. I personally would not shoot someone else's reloads trying to save a few bucks after buying a $1k rifle. Use common sense, know what you're putting in your rifle, and read your manual.

Really glad he's ok to tell his tale.

SSN Vet
December 5, 2008, 11:19 AM
I just read pretty much that entire thread over there!

Major Bummer! Very lucky to be alive....

I'm not a mil. surp. guy or a Garand guy, and even I know that it's not safe to shoot much of the modern factory loads and reloads with the modern powders in Garands.

I see Mr. Trooper's point and have to say I pretty much agree with him about owning a Garand.

I think the Garand is an awesome rifle and respect it greatly, I just don't want to own one personally.

If I had a "garand" (aka $1K), I'd by me and M1A long before I bought an M1.

Donning flame suit.

Brian Dale
December 5, 2008, 01:14 PM
Donning flame suit.No need, my friend. That's one more M1 still on the market for us to buy. :)

RP88
December 5, 2008, 01:32 PM
well, it definitely was not the gun's fault, but unless the ammo maker has some kind of clause like 'WARNING: this may **** up your gun and blow your face off.', then I'd say that the ammo maker is responsible for at least giving him the money for a new gun. Hopefully the guy learns that reloads are a 'gotta-do-it-yourself-to-do-it-right' kind of thing.

But, sheesh... That is really scary. I know that gunpowder is very potent, powerful stuff, especially when put to pressure, but dear god...

MTMilitiaman
December 5, 2008, 03:48 PM
I'll proudly drink my M1 Kool Aid. It's the best around.

All gas operated rifles are going to require port pressures, burn rates, and such to be within specific operating parameters.

We all know for example, what happened when the wrong type of powder was used in the M16 rifle.

The delayed roller lock system used by the HK G3 also depends on recoil impulses falling within certain parameters.

And the Kalashnikov, as much as I love it, isn't accurate enough to warrant reloading.

Now if that means never reloading for an M1/M14 or an AR, fine. But of course, those are the only semi-autos consistently accurate enough to deserve the attention.

Millions of reloaded rounds are fired through these platforms annually without incident. But precautions must be taken. This is true of everything you reload for, but more so with semi-autos--all of which are going to be more susceptible to slight differences in peak and port pressures, burn rates, and cleanliness, as well as external dimensions, than the average manually operated rifle. If these are measures you are unwilling or unable to take, the most certainly you shouldn't reload for your semi-auto. Being an amateur reloader myself, I have already accepted that I need much more practice loading before I am willing to try my hand loading for my M1A. I love that rifle too much, to say nothing of my hands and face, so the associated risks aren't worth it for me. Keeping the rifle in one piece is worth a couple extra cents a round in my case.

esmith
December 5, 2008, 11:54 PM
If the dealer was selling handloads out of some plastic bag labeled, "30-06" lets say, under the table or not at his place of business than im going to blame the Garand owner.

However, just because it is on a store shelf doesn't mean you don't have an element of risk involved. One should know better.

On this box of Mountaineer Custom Cartridge Reloads .45 ACP i have in front of me it has a warning right on the front that reads; "Mountaineer loads are to be used in modern firearms for calibers on box. Loads are within SAAMI specs. Buyer assumes all risk, liability, and responsibility for safe handling."

If i use these loads in a pistol not designed to handle these pressures, should the company be liable?

jaholder1971
December 11, 2008, 01:41 AM
On this box of Mountaineer Custom Cartridge Reloads .45 ACP i have in front of me it has a warning right on the front that reads; "Mountaineer loads are to be used in modern firearms for calibers on box. Loads are within SAAMI specs. Buyer assumes all risk, liability, and responsibility for safe handling."

If i use these loads in a pistol not designed to handle these pressures, should the company be liable?

No, but that's not the issue here.

A malfunctioning rifle would not have done what his rifle did. even if it was an out of battery firing this kind of damage wouldn't have been seen. This is the kind of damage you see when pistol powder gets loaded in a .30/06 case instead of rifle powder.

Ammo loaded to SAAMI spec wouldn't have done this,either.

If it's ammo sold by a dealer then it's commercially made ammo. If the dealer can't tell you who made the stuff then he's on the hook.

Jamyatunes
December 11, 2008, 05:59 AM
Wow. I didn't know this was even possible, but now I'm really glad I passed on that "great deal" I was offered a while back . . .

When I bought my Barrett Model 99, I asked the gun store owner if he had any boxes of ammo. He said he could sell me a box of 100 rounds for $300, but they were reloads and he didn't know how I'd fell about that. I thought about it for a minute, and decided that if I could pay 4k for a rifle, I'd be better off just paying $4.25-$5.00 per round for something new than paying $3 per round for something I couldn't be sure of.

If you enjoyed reading about "Poor Guy..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!