Carry Gun Reliability - Observations

[HankB]

Well, I just took my TX CHL renewal class, and have to comment on the choices some people make.

I shot my qualification with my BHP - no problems, of course. (It's my usual carry gun, though I'll sometimes use a G26.)

A couple of Ruger pistols were used - now, I don't really care for them, but they worked just fine.

Some sort of compact polymer piece - I didn't take a close look at it, but it may have been a Taurus - worked OK.

A number of 1911's were present - some worked 100%, some didn't.

A Colt Defender - that little cut down 1911- broke internally. The slide came back about halfway, and bound the gun up solidly. Neither the owner nor the instructor could disassemble it.

Another 1911 - a full size Colt - bound up when the firing pin stop slid down and bound up the slide against the hammer. I'd HEARD of this happening, but this is the first time I saw it. I guess Jeff Cooper - who'd written about the necessity of a tightly-fitted firing pin stop - was right.

A Makarov (East German) only jammed once. S&B ammo.

And a stainless Beretta 92 jammed twice with the spare magazine the shooter brought along, even though it was KNOWN to be troublesome.

So the point being . . . WHY would someone qualify with, let alone CARRY, a weapon with less than sterling reliability?

(Again, remember this was a CHL RENEWAL class, so the folks have been licensed to carry for at least four years.)

 

[Moparmike]

Most people dont shoot regularly, and some people cant afford a new gun.

Right now, a $100 Hi-Point is out of my price range until I get my $$$ straightened out. My 10mm has serious nose-diving problems, even with the good mag and the ammo it likes the best, Blazer.

 

[George S.]

Sometimes I can get 300-400 rounds thru my 1911 with no problems, then for whatever reason, it will jam, not feed, or refuse to eject a case. Then it works fine again. Fine for range use, but a bit suspect for carry use.

My Ruger P89 has yet to fail me which is why it's my home defense pistol. A bit big for carry especially in the warm summer months but that's what I use. My GP100 has never failed, but with a 6" barrel, it's just a tad too big to carry The Ruber SP101 is looking awfully good......

A lot of folks may initially qualify for a CHP permit but not keep up with range sessions. The mindset may be something like: "I have the permit and the gun so that's I need to care about". If they don't regularly fire their carry weapon, they may never know for sure if it will work when it's most needed. There's probably even some who never follow a cleaning schedule. So 4 years or whenever later, they go back for re-qualifying and their carry gun doesn't seem to work.

 

[VaughnT]

I've seen this countless times, people get a gun and license and feel like they're safe. No need for more thought on the matter until the .gov tells them they have to requal.

Same can be said for cops and security people. Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you know diddly about them or shooting.

As to unreliable guns, I've seen all of them break down....even Glock Perfection. What's reliable? My used Colt 1991 never failed or faltered until I turned it over to a local smith for some addons. Then I sent it to Ted Yost to fix and it worked like a charm again.

My friends HK USP failed to lock back, but it could have been limp wristing. A bud's SIG just loved to stovepipe. Several other's didn't like to drop magazines.

What's reliable? Bottom line: guns are intricate, tuned works of metal and mind. They are not any more immune to Mr. Murphy than your car is or your hot-water heater. That's why we practice malfunction drills.

 

[wally]

Extra Extra!

Extra Extra! Read All About it!

Two Colts break, Beretta & Makarov Jam, cheap Taurus and Ruger don't!


When I shot my first CHL qualifier eight years ago, I chose my most reliable gun -- Cold Series 70 Government Model. I used to shoot IPSC with it, many, many thousands of rounds without a problem. Murphy's Law hits, extractor broke about halfway thru. I passed cause I'd shot a perfect score up to that point and managed to single load and shake out the empties to get off enough shots thru the rest of the course.

Same gun with new extractor went thru the qualifier four years ago without a bobble. I haven't decided which gun to use when I renew in a few weeks.

My wife will use my Beretta 86 and believe it or not so far Wolf seems most reliable in it. I've only tried a couple of brands of brass cased ammo but both had a few FTF, half a dozen boxes of Wolf have been flawless. Go figure.


I wouldn't try to extrapolate much of anything from your observations. I'd not be surprised if these folks bought a box of the cheapest ammo they could find and simply assumed it'd work. It does cost ~$150 for the course, photos, notery fees, and State fee so I suspect people that don't shoot a lot would scrimp on the ammo.

Wolf is cheap and it works well in most all of my guns, but I'll probably shoot a better brand for my qualifier

--wally.

 

[carpettbaggerr]

What's wrong with a nice revolver? I'm starting to feel like a caveman.

Grog like flint knife not newfangled copper blades.

 

[Ivy Mike]

there is nothing wrong with a revolver.

I carry my Makarov (and qualified with it for my CCW) daily even though I own larger caliber and higher capacity guns. My FN Forty-Nine and CZ-75B would be better, but they haven't seen the same reliability testing the Mak-Daddy has. The Mak fed everything I threw at it. WWB, reloads, JHP, lead bullets, soft points. Cheap gun-show crap. It feeds it, fires it and ejects it all. Thats why the makarov rides my belt and the others don't.
Massad Ayoob said it best when he said "reliability is a non-negotiable baseline for a defensive weapon."

The CZ and Forty-Nine may see carry duty eventually, but the makarov is handling things just fine...especially in the heat of summer (which climbs to better than 110° most years)

 

[1911Tuner]

Reliability

Whenever I hear of reliability issues with the 1911, I shake my head in wonder...because it's so easy to achieve. There's no great secret...no black magic...and usually no need to pay through the nose to get it. I have range beaters that I use heavily...and I can't remember when I last had a stoppage in any of them.

Most of the problems are due to inferior small parts, and the materials that they're cobbled from...weak magazine springs...or the notion that one
extra round is "Just what one needs"...and ammunition that isn't in spec.

1911 reliability rests on a tripod. Maintain all three legs of that tripod, and
99% of all reliability issues with the pistols would disappear. Lose one leg, and all bets are off.

The"secret" is simple....

Good magazines with good springs in them.

Good extractors that are made of the right stuff, that are correctly fitted and tuned.

Good ammunition that sticks very close to hardball specs. 230 grain bullet at 800-850 fps, that is dimensionally within allowable tolerances.

Assuming that the owner/shooter doesn't dink around with heavy recoil springs and shock buffers...light mainsprings...dangerously short hammer hooks, "tweaked" sear springs, and tiny sear primary angles and clearances in the slide to frame interface that's more akin to a bench-rest rifle than a fighting tool...that's it! If we can get the manufacturers to listen to the demands, and start using good steel for small parts again...
bring critical dimensions within specs...and stop listening to the bean counters we can buy pistols that will outlive our grandchildren. Instead, we
gladly fork over the exhorbitant cost for a custom smith to make these things so. Custom pistol smiths will always have work, and plenty of it...even on pistols that are perfectly reliable. They are so backlogged
that they'll never get caught up. If they could concentrate on what they do...adding that custom touch...that "flair" that some people want, and stop having to correct problems that never should have been...they COULD
keep up...barely.

And so, I haunt these forums and try to help the workin' stiffs to make their pistols functionally reliable. I don't do it for money. Neither do I do it
for recognition. If that were the goal, I'd post under my real name. I do
it because I remember how things used to be, and because I love the guns and the ladies and gents who shoot'em.

Cheers everyone!

Tuner

 

[sm]

New Students

In AR if a student qualifies with a Semi auto, they may CCW a Semi or Revo. If they qualify with revo, they may only CCW a revo. We always had students qualify with a Semi.

We always preferred a new student / new to firearms / new to CCW to NOT buy a gun first. We had a variety of guns. We ALWAYS had them start with a .22 revolver then transiton to a .38 spl. Then a .22 semi then transition to a center fire semi.

All Students learned about both platforms. Then the shooter was able to actually "try before they bought" their first CCW, many their handgun.

The 9mm in Glock 26, Smith 3913, and Keltec P-11 were the most popular semi's. 9mm is inexpensive to shoot, and encourages a shooter to do so. Many Men went to the BHP. These guns run, always did. Lots of folks found used 3913s as first handgun.

Revolvers, Med frame revolvers ,We had a bunch of 4" model 10's with various stocks and grips. We had the 2" version as well.

A LOT of folks , not only the ladies , but men as well bought the used police trade in K frames in 2". These were around $200 or so and allowed monies for other accessories and ammo.

A Lot of folks bought a .22 they realized the fun factor real fast, but they also noted how their shooting improved. They get into a problem, put down the centerfire, pick up the rimfire and back to basics. BIG plus is a LOT of shooting for little ammo expense.

Repetition becomes habit - habit beomes faith the .22lr is a great way to aquire this.

Interesting how many Ladies chose the 1911 as first gun, those that could afford it , the ammo and the accessories.

I don't recall anyone choosing a .40 , the sharp recoil turned many off. [ and perhaps a *certain* person made his point about sorting the .40 brass from 9mm and .45 ACP with the students helping with sorting ]

So most folks qualified with our guns. Those that bought or had bought for them a gun before taking a class....not a good experience for many. Exceptions were those that had HEEDED advice when they called to schedule a class , and tried a bunch of daddy's, guns...someone's and did in fact try before they bought.

On re-qual for myself , I used a Keltec P-11. My 1911s were there, just some ladies wanted to use them and well having too much fun and shooting really well. I just couldn't / didn't want to intrude.

My 1911's , and My P-11 had run well over 500 rds that week w/o cleaning and no malf's. Plus I may have been wanting to be tacky and prove a point to a couple of folks that had badmouthed certain guns. Granted their guns wouldn't run,but they were Iwannacoolgunvirus...sure looked "purty" sitting in their fancy gun cases....

 

[HankB]

What's wrong with a nice revolver?

Absolutely NOTHING is wring with a nice revolver. But due to a peculiarity in Texas' CHL law, if you qualify with a revolver, you MAY NOT carry a semi-auto pistol. If you qualify with a semi-auto pistol, you have the option to carry either. So most people choose to qualify with a semi-auto.

FWIW my "house" guns are revolvers . . .

 

[boogalou]

Question for Tuner

Not to get off subject here, but just for curiositys sake, what does the esteemed Tuner think of .45 ACP rounds that are not 230 grain Ball? There is a lot of variety out there.....

185 grain Hollow Base
185 SWC
200 SWC
200 Flat Point

Me & the Old Man have shot these through our 1911's with nary a hiccup.....

Well, maybe a couple.

 

[mercedesrules]

(George S.) So the point being . . . WHY would someone qualify with, let alone CARRY, a weapon with less than sterling reliability?

Haha! My recent class was the same. You should have seen all of the stoppages. Practically after every 5 shots, or so.

One lady hurt herself with the left hand behind the slide. Many jams, etc. I was lucky this time. My only problem was cutting my thumb while rushing to open the ammo box. It bled the whole time.

For complete disclosure, the previous time I took the class (2000) the new custom barrel on my pistol wasn't broken in enough and after a stoppage they gave me a rental to shoot with.

MR

 

[1911Tuner]

Screamers (Medium-Long)

boogaloo asked about ammo:

There is a lot of variety out there.....

185 grain Hollow Base
185 SWC
200 SWC
200 Flat Point


And it can be pretty reliable if we bear a few things in mind...
One being that the original .45 ACP loading was a 200-grain bullet at some 900 fps. Army Ordnance specified a heavier bullet for reasons that are a mystery...and the rest is history. Incidentally, the second loading used a 234-grain bullet...so technically, the 230 isn't exactly to spec either.

The lightweight, +P ammo causes problems in some guns for two reasons.
One is cartridge overall length...or OAL. There are certain limits on the OAL
past which feed reliability gets iffy. The lighter bullet loadings seem to be shorter on average. Due to dimensional tolerances in some guns...some won't know the difference, while others will go into spasms. I've seen as little as .010 inch make the difference between dead reliable and a crapshoot.

The other comes right back to the same old same...Timing and slide velocity.
There's a trend on the advice to go up on the spring rates for +P ammo
that uses lightweight bullets...and this is exactly backward. The recoil spring has not one thing to do with containing pressure and very little,
if anything to do with the timing of the barrel unlocking and linkdown. By
the time the spring comes into play, the chamber pressures have fallen off to nearly zero. Otherwise, the brass case would be pressure-nailed to the chamber, and the pistol wouldn't extract. Since the unlocking and linkdown is accomplished in the first quarter-inch of slide travel, we see that the difference between an 18 pound spring and a 20-pound spring would be nearly impossible to determine.

What DOES matter greatly is the TIME that the bullet is in the barrel. A 185-grain bullet isn't going to provide the same recoil impetus to drive the
slide as a 230 unless it's driven faster than the 1150 fps level. Since the
slide recoils in response to the bullet's impetus...the sooner the bullet
leaves the muzzle, the less time it has to act against the slide. The slide's
momentum is established within the first 1/10th of an inch of travel, and that momentum carries it through its cycle. If the bullet exits the muzzle
BEFORE that momentum is established...the impetus doesn't have enough time to produce the necessary momentum...which is probably the case...and if the recoil spring is too heavy, the resistance to that reduced momentum stops the slide at some point short of full travel. If your high-speed screamer ammo produces short-cycle malfunctions...drop the spring rate a little and try again before assuming that the pistol is defective or that it "Just won't run with this ammo". The spring that came in the gun
will PROBABLY work fine...but it may not. Likewise, whenever the spring is
replaced, you can run into trouble, especially if you heed the advice of the
uninformed to step up the rate so the gun will "Handle the higher pressures".

Hope this helps...Luck!

Tuner

 

[boogalou]

Tuner - Very good information. Seriously, you should write a book, or at least a manual, on your experiences with the 1911.

Concerning the SWC's, thats what makes reloading so interesting, since I can adjust OAL's and powder types to tune in a good load for a particular pistol. And yes, most of the problems with the 185 grain stuff has been short-cycling.

Thanks for the quick response.

 

[cerberus]

My CCW Shoot

The day I took my CCW class I was in the second group to shoot. While watching the first group shoot.. I noticed this guy with the new Springer he had bought from the range. It was having FTFs and FTEs almost every round fired. They just kept stopping the shooting and cleared this problem gun. I had a brand new never fired Glock23 I gave it a shot of Breakfree CLP and it never missed a shot. I am sure all the Springer needed was a good lub and a breakin I really don't know.

 

[Treylis]

In AR if a student qualifies with a Semi auto, they may CCW a Semi or Revo. If they qualify with revo, they may only CCW a revo. We always had students qualify with a Semi.

What on earth is the reasoning behind such laws?

 

[albanian]

I have two groups of handguns in my collection, those that I would use for CCW, home defense, car gun etc and those that are more for fun at the range. I wouldn't say that a gun that was not reliable enough to CCW was worthless as almost ALL .22lr handguns fall into that catagory based simply on the fact that .22lr rimfire ammo will jam more often than other type of ammo and there is the rare dud. Depending on brand of .22lr, I think one dud per 1000 rounds seems to be a very rough average. Sometimes the primer just doesn't go off. Some ammo is MUCH better than others but I am averaging here.

Of the group that I would rely on for self defense, are included: S&W 642, S&W 586, S&W 19, Ruger Speed Six, Ruger GP-100, Beretta 92fs. As you can see, there is only one auto in the group. That is in part because I have been on a revolver kick recently and in part because I have a lot of autos that have had reliabilty problems in the past or have an issue now and then enough to make me not trust them with my life. Many of these are probably as reliable as most autos but since I can choose from other guns, I can choose ones that are 100% instead of just 99%. I am lucky. many people only have a few guns and if it is not reliable, they have to deal with it or get a new one.

I have not found a small auto that I would trust yet. About the smallest autos that are generally reliable are PPK sized guns. When you start getting into ultra small autos, it is a crap shoot.

 

[Dienekes]

Someone once observed that the average cop should be considered to be a "casual user" as regards firearms. With exceptions, that is pretty accurate.

CCW is the same only more so.

Disregarding "human reliability" for the moment (a touchy topic) I think that we are too damn tolerant of unreliable weapons. A casual glance at the posts in this or any other forums shows that a lot of stuff doesn't work right a lot of the time. A good gun should be boring in its consistency.

Personally I think that any Ruger or S&W DA revolver will suffice.

 

[sm]

What on earth is the reasoning behind such laws?

Don't ask me, for a change we ( AR) are not alone. HankB posted that Texas has the same rules. IIRC so do some other states. Something about the person having the physical means and education to operate the firearm. I know we had one student with only one arm. He carries revos only, but he did qual with a semi, if the instructors deem the student able to safely use the platform - they may. He may never use a semi...option is nice tho for him.

He used a 1911 full size of mine, and did the mags changes safely. Heck he even wedged a mag to hold it while he inserted rounds when he finished...he wanted to...we let him. Let him demonstrate for others , a real demonstration of disabled but not defenseless.

 

[HankB]

What on earth is the reasoning behind such laws?

An argument I heard is that a revolver is easy to use - you open the cylinder, drop the cartridges in the holes, close the cylinder, and you're ready to go.

A semi-auto, on the other hand, requires you to drop the magazine, load the magazine, re-insert the magazine, work the slide, and know how to operate the manual safety (if there is one.) And maintaining it requires the knowledge and ability to field-strip the pistol.

So the "manual of arms" for a semi-auto is ever SO much more complex.

Having learned how to field strip various semi-autos as a youngster in elementary school, when I first heard this line of reasoning I thought it was preposterous. But in my first CHL class, when the instructor told us to clear our weapons and place them on the table (and had to be specific about ejecting the magazine and locking the slide back, as half the class didn't know what he meant) there was a woman with a 9mm Taurus who didn't know how. And she'd shown up with the pistol fully loaded!

Personally, I think the law is more a matter of perception in the eyes of some legislators - you hold people who carry a SEMI-AUTOMATIC WEAPON - you know, a first cousin to an ASSAULT RIFLE - to a higher standard than those who use a traditional revolver.

 

[sm]

HankB,
Good points.
Silly me forgot a lot of folks are not raised with guns in the household, as once were. I also forgot about legislature types.

Insulate the kids - don't educate and it won't be needed. Why make it simple when you can make it difficult. Media for the former, Legalese for the later.

 

[1911Tuner]

re: Wheelies vs Self Shuckers

The law is likely a way for the state and /or certified training center to cover its ol' skinny in the event that a prospective CCW licensee unintentionally shoots self in foot and figures a way to blame somebody else.

In the courtroom:

Civil Litigation Lawyer makes his case:

"Do you mean to tell the court that you qualified my client to carry
a sidearm that he/she wasn't even familiar with???"

(Horrified/confused expression, followed by exaggerated hand gesture of hoplessness and surrender)

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury...I REST MY CASE!"

Probably has at least a little somethin' to do with it.

Cheers!

Tuner

 

[BigG]

Most Colt 45 Govt Models and Gold Cups work fine until somebody "fixes" em up with add-ons.

Any S&W revo ought to get thru a CCW qualification firing.

 

[Rickstir]

I carry two guns and two guns only. Primary is Beretta 92FS I have had since 1994. Full-size pre-ban. This sweetheart has never, never failed. Must be 5000 rounds by now. It fills my hand and I can shoot it pretty darn good.
The backup is a Taurus 650 CIA snubby. Goes bang every time.
In MO when I qualified (and was probably among the first 100 to take a class) the instructor (John Ross) supplied the guns and ammo. .22lr in both revolver and semi. Our law stipulates you can shoot to qualify (15 hits out of 20 rounds at 7 yards) with either, but must in the cousre shoot 70 additional rounds using both the wheel gun and the semi.
Luckily I can walk out my back door and shoot. I shoot at least every two weeks, at least two mags and two or three reloads for the Taurus. I am confident these weapons will perform when and if I need them.

 

[Dienekes]

If the topic IS human reliability, then even issuing Model 10 Smiths may not solve the problem. Within an administrative structure (LEOs, military) there are some standards and the instructor has a certain amount of leverage. So the average "student" is usually minimally competent and motivated. The results can vary from Barney Fife to the SAS.

In a civilian CCW setting all bets are off. I still hold all my NRA instructors ratings, but after some years of classes quit teaching them. Essentially it came down to character. People who will not stop for stop signs (endemic here) cannot and will not keep their fingers off the trigger, watch the muzzle, or clear the weapon properly either. Most CCW applicants I have seen think they have gone above and beyond the call by appearing at all, and feel that it's generally a matter of entitlement. Very, very few have had any sort of formal training (who goes in the service today, or does "hard" things?) , and even fewer think they ever needed any. After too few hours of training and a sketchy grasp of safe gun handling, they go back out into the community with their gun and a piece of paper with your name on it. If and when something happens out there, it makes sure that the lawsuit naming you will at least spell your name correctly.

The NRA has recognized this somewhat in that they make available a substantial liability insurance policy (at a substantial premium).

I am not entirely happy to do this, but nowadays I either teach someone one-on-one or just tell them to go off to Gunsite if they are at all serious. Oddly enough, once in a while they do.

Truth is, like in so much, if people don't learn certain things properly in childhood--or in basic training-- they probably won't.