Is your ccw picky?

GEM said:

It functions every time until it doesn't. The best you can say is that it worked pretty well in the past. Now I found that most ammo ran in my Glocks except for some Pakistani stuff and Speer Lawman years back. But every once in awhile, everything would jam. I did note that most jams in matches came from the guys who loaded their own (FLAME WAR!!).

Click to expand...

I think that’s the goal we look for. A gun that runs (except when it doesn’t), with occasional failures because nothing is perfect.

I’ve had some guns that ran that way as long as you fed them one type of ammo, and by one type I mean, “Federal Premium Defense 165gr Hydra-shok .45ACP.” You could shoot hundreds of rounds without a glitch with the ammo it liked, and could barely get through a magazine with something it didn’t like - and that’s every other kind of ammo I ever tried. I only bought the 165gr .45 ammo to see if it worked in that gun because it didn’t seem to like anything I normally used. That’s what I call picky.

Expanding on why I like scrupulously reliable things, is much as a few said above. If it doesn't run with some ammo, then that's cutting things close. What if it's cold, or dry, or dusty, or dirty? What if something breaks?

My (years ago) previous carry piece was a 5946 (S&W 3rd gen, steel, DAO) and it ran 100%. So much so I didn't clean it that much, as it would go 500 rounds feeling slow without having stoppages.

One range day it had a stoppage. Then before end of day, two more. Easy to clear, but it wasn't that dirty so what's up? Get home, take it all down and... a broken extractor. Almost no claw left. And it still went around 40-50 rounds without a failure in this condition.

That extra reliability tolerance is good. That failure, once the extractor was replaced (and this was after like 10 years, so the part breakage didn't bug me... it reminded me to replace some other parts while I was at it!) I was MORE confident in the reliability then. Even if something else were to go wrong. It would do its level best.


ETA: Most things I own are perfectly reliable. I mean, carbines with thousands and thousands of rounds of random crap of all weights, of blanks (!) in freezing rain, blowing dust etc. and the only time I have cleared a stoppage is when one is set up at a class or I do it for practice. It sometimes took a while to get here, finding a gun was bad, or some part was bad, but I do try to get "perfect" reliability within my ability to observe.

(Yes, I just wrote a chapter for my next book on tolerances and probability and stuff. I know there's no such thing as infinity MTBF).

I6turbo said:

I wouldn't be comfortable with a gun that wouldn't function reliably with pretty much any good quality ammo that I stuffed in it. If, for example, a 9mm semi-automatic needs 124 grain to work perfectly, but does not work perfectly with 115 grain, that's waaay too thin of a line separating function and malfunction for me. If I did own such a gun, I would not carry it unless it was my only option, and I'd be trying to figure out what the gun needed to make it more broadly reliable.

Click to expand...

shoobe01 said:

Expanding on why I like scrupulously reliable things, is much as a few said above. If it doesn't run with some ammo, then that's cutting things close. What if it's cold, or dry, or dusty, or dirty? What if something breaks?

My (years ago) previous carry piece was a 5946 (S&W 3rd gen, steel, DAO) and it ran 100%. So much so I didn't clean it that much, as it would go 500 rounds feeling slow without having stoppages.

One range day it had a stoppage. Then before end of day, two more. Easy to clear, but it wasn't that dirty so what's up? Get home, take it all down and... a broken extractor. Almost no claw left. And it still went around 40-50 rounds without a failure in this condition.

That extra reliability tolerance is good. That failure, once the extractor was replaced (and this was after like 10 years, so the part breakage didn't bug me... it reminded me to replace some other parts while I was at it!) I was MORE confident in the reliability then. Even if something else were to go wrong. It would do its level best.


ETA: Most things I own are perfectly reliable. I mean, carbines with thousands and thousands of rounds of random crap of all weights, of blanks (!) in freezing rain, blowing dust etc. and the only time I have cleared a stoppage is when one is set up at a class or I do it for practice. It sometimes took a while to get here, finding a gun was bad, or some part was bad, but I do try to get "perfect" reliability within my ability to observe.

(Yes, I just wrote a chapter for my next book on tolerances and probability and stuff. I know there's no such thing as infinity MTBF).

Click to expand...

I appreciate that perspective. But what if you have a magazine that isn't reliable? Do you just not use it, or is that too thin of a line as well?

Long thread, short answer.

If it’s picky, it’s not a carry or home defense gun.

I will work through issues like break-in-period and troubleshooting (polishing surfaces, replacing springs, etc). After that, if it’s picky it is either a range gun if I like it or it’s sold.

And my thought to answer the prior post question:
magazines are a consumable; mag disassembly/cleaning/springs/replacement is part of troubleshooting.

I bought a Glock G22, in 2002, that was quite the drama queen, until a local Glock armorer sold me some stronger Wolf magazine springs. These malfunctions occurred even without any WML, or other device, on the accessory rail. (Glock never publicly admitted imperfection, but quietly started installing stronger mag springs, a least in the G22 mags.) Another of my three G22 pistols ran fine with 165-grain ammo, but 180-grain ammo would tend to cause the slide to lock-back, with live rounds still in the mag. I could diagnose that, tight away; the slide stop was out-or-spec, reaching too far, so that It tended to touch the noses of the bullets. A new slide stop was the cure. I believe that these were my most-recently-made handguns to give me notable reliability problems.

In the Eighties and Nineties, it seemed that it was still “normal” for many auto-loading pistols to have function issues. In the new century, most auto-pistol manufacturers have seemed to really clean up their acts, regarding product reliability.

I carry a Kahr of one form or another, in 9mm. Kahrs have a required 'break-in' procedure you are supposed to follow, I think it's 200 rounds. I've never done that specifically, I just take it to the range and start blasting away. Out of about 6 different Kahr 9mm's, I've never had problems with reliability... ever. I had one that shot left, it's gone. They have all digested any HP ammos I run through them without problems, too. Now... my Kahr .45's? No way. I think it's just the nature of the beast, and I acknowledge it.

I don't know that I've ever really had any Jammomatic pistols, even when I carried a crappy AMT .380 DAO; now, the slide cracked in half on that pistol... it's gone, now, too. Even my old Jennings .22LR pistol was reliable... and, yes, I carried it for a short time, too.

I think both handgun and ammunition manufacturing has gotten to the point that htey are producing very, very reliable products... but there is always an exception, and this is also where maintenance comes into play. I am a religious... almost fanatical... recoil spring changer, and if I get a magazine that starts to act wonky... it's gone, too.

Yes, finicky with some hollow points. However I found a SD cartridge that it has run 100% with, so problem solved.

Primary CCW is an SP101/6 Shot .327 FM....no jams and not finicky. EVER!

The only carry gun I’m ok with being picky is a tiny little BUG. You might find a super reliable micro gun but I don’t expect it.

I have 4 options for my main carry gun and all have 1200+ rounds through them with zero failures. I’m not going to buy several micro guns trying to find one as reliable as my 4 Glocks.

The only handgun I have had that was ammo picky at all was a little Kel-Tec P-11. It wouldn't eject the fired case if I used aluminum ammunition. I guess I probably could have polished the chamber but I just didn't shoot aluminum in that gun. I never had an issue with brass cased ammunition & I didn't carry aluminum for carry ammo so it didn't bother me that much.

Frulk said:

Primary CCW is an SP101/6 Shot .327 FM....no jams and not finicky. EVER!

Click to expand...

Ditto with my S&W Model 27. I can mix brands and types of ammo all day long without issue.

Pudge said:

I appreciate that perspective. But what if you have a magazine that isn't reliable? Do you just not use it, or is that too thin of a line as well?

Click to expand...

Any gun can fail to function correctly due to a problem with the magazine, so I don't hold that against the gun per se, UNLESS it's a make/model of gun that just isn't reliable due to an inherent issue with the magazine design. (I don't even know if there is such a gun, but if so, in that case I'd throw the baby out with the bathwater.) So, if I have a bad magazine I just discard it. I have fixed/adjusted several magazines before, but I wouldn't use one of those for carry or HD until I'd ran hundreds of trouble-free rounds thorough it.

Agree on magazine. I tend to try to fix, to downgrade to training (and clearly mark as such!) so is identical in mindset now you ask, to the guns. I do have a few meh reliability handguns, which I never carry. Same for iffy mags for good guns. They are range items, not serious work items. I do know several who are much harder to guns-work-or-else and simply throw away bad magazines, pretty much no matter the cost of individuals. A few shoot holes in them first!

Magazines are a wear item, so mindset is not that the gun is bad but that it's a part that must be serviced/replaced (same reason you ALWAYS carry a spare). Most of all the springs (and to a lesser degree, the followers and floorplates) are wear items. Replace mag springs somewhat regularly. Take apart and clean magazines regularly and inspect spring length to a known good baseline (since you replace them, you have new ones to compare to. More than about 10% shorter than unused is starting to become worn, depending on the design of the gun.)

Magazines, being a wear item, need to be owned in quantity. Only a very few range-only fun guns of mine have 2-4 mags (none have ONE). Working guns, that I will take out for training, for exercises, to carry, etc have at least 10, on up to 40-ish. And many of the folks I hang with think that's low, many have over 100 AR mags, over 50 handgun mags. Now you see why they simply toss the bad ones!

Note which was used when they fail. You DO number magazines, don't you? If no memory or logbook, just put a target paster on the side. If you are about to put TWO on one mag, then set it aside for further test and service.

If my ccw was ammo picky, it wouldn't be a ccw. If I am on a trip away from my preferred ammo, and I run out, I want to be able to grab anything of the right caliber to load into it.

Practical example, the last time I visited VT I brought my ccw with me and 3 full magazines of my carry ammo. My brother visited from PA and wanted to shoot my new firearm. I bought some WWB HP to finish my trip and fly back home with.

Nope. I mean obviously I haven't run EVERY type of ammo through a particular gun but anything I rely on runs most of the common defensive ammo, as well as most normally available target ammo. I tend to run them all early on one handed, non dominant hand, limp wristed, odd angles etc. as well and they all seem to work fine.

That said YOU WILL have a malfunction. Its not an IF its a WHEN. When you consider that there are so many things working together, various springs in various components, small mechanical parts that need very specific tolerances, ammunition that can vary from lot to lot or simply have a bad QC day etc. etc. If every one of your guns is 100% reliable, you don't shoot enough. Its the systematic issues that you need to worry about.

Depends what you mean by "picky". I have a gun that, because of its unusual action, is known to need ammo of a specific design. The manufacturer maintains a list of "known good" and "known bad" ammunition and makes it clear that care must be taken when selecting ammo for the gun. The only malfunctions I've ever had with it have been when testing "unknown" brands of ammo, and I found out pretty quickly that a particular brand didn't meet the requirement. With "known good" ammo (which, by the way, includes almost every "defense" load and about half of the FMJ "target" loads out there) it's never stopped.

Does that make it "picky"? I don't think so; it functions exactly as described by the manufacturer every time. To me, that's perfectly consistent and I have no problem carrying it (with tested ammo).

Contrast that with the R51 that was mentioned earlier (I have one of those too). Now, with that one I've found a solution: if I don't load the magazine to full capacity, it's very reliable. Load it to full capacity and you won't make it through a magazine over half the time.

Now that gun I consider picky. Even though it's consistent, Remington's never acknowledged that the guns don't work if you load them all the way; that's something that you have to figure out by trial and error and discussing with other frustrated owners. So because it doesn't work the way the manufacturer says it does, I consider that unreliable. I wouldn't carry it unless I had literally no other option (which disappointed me because I got it intending to carry it).

I have not had reliability issues with autoloaders, including an R51 with fully loaded magazines and cheapo ammo. That said, I find it interesting that a firearm that functioned with one type of self-defense ammo, but not another would be considered picky and not for SD use, but another firearm which worked fine with factory magazines, but not aftermarket magazines, would be reliable, just don't use aftermarket mags and carry factory mags.

That said, I think you should absolutely stay consistent with a system which works for you and you have confidence in, and I am not suggesting I have a better way to do things. The thread just got to me to question what being picky meant (on a theoretical level) and what I would or wouldn't consider reasonable reliability. Thanks for the responses.

Bfh_auto said:

The thread about self defense ammo got me wondering if any of you have a ccw that's is finicky about ammo?
My wife and I carry a S&W shield and a compact.
None of these have every malfunctioned with any ammo I've run through them.
I can't see carrying a gun that doesn't feed flawlessly.

Click to expand...

I also have a shield and in 10 different types of SD ammo and 5 FMJ ammo not a single malfunction. The only malfunction I’ve ever had with my shield was an instructor dummy round that got paint chips in my firing pin channel.

Both of these were designed to use FMJ. I was conditioned to think they also needed hard cast to run without leading. Turns out, get the correct diameter bullet and things work nicely. They even feed 235 grain full wadcutter bullets at 900 fps.

Kevin

I own about 100 firearms. The few that have not ever malfunctioned for any reason are part of my SD collection. The rest are range toys or for plinking or hunting small game. Most of my SD handguns are revolvers. My double-barreled 12-gauge stays next to my bed.

bdickens said:

Nope. I have a Glock.

Click to expand...

Had a Ruger LC-9S..was gonna get the class and CCWP it but it was malfunction city..so nope..My 2 CCW handguns and my Home Defense handgun MUST be 100% reliable and so far, they have been.

G-17, G26, G42...