I do not trust my pistol anymore

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fluff sez,

" If you are going to carry this pistol as a defensive weapon I suggest you use the correct ammunition. Military services and law enforcement officers all over the world have been using so-called "hardball" ammunition without complaint. If you don't hit an assailant in a critical place a hollow-point won't save you're bacon. What makes the critical difference is marksmanship while under stress."

With a revolver at least you can hold 5 rounds of any type hollow point, but that doesn't make any difference if they ain't on target.

Oh yea I forgot, that newer criminals are a lot tougher now day's and a 38 Special +P round will just bounce off and just make them madder :evil:
 
I have a bag full of semi auto pistols for competition use and while I depend on them for match use - I don't trust a single one for carry work. Not any. For that I use a .44 Spl. revolver.
 
Limp wristing will cause failure to feed even in a glock. After not shooting for a while it is easy to forget to hold that gun rigid and tight. Clean it again and go back to the range and squeeze that gun with death grip hold your wrist rigid like iron and shoot two boxes of ammo and you will probably have no problems and regain confidence in it and in yourself. Do that before you make any sales or purchases. If it still gives you problems then sell it.
 
The hotter caliber Glocks seem more forgiving to limp wristing. As there is more power to cycle the slide. Applies to dragging thumbs as well. 9mm and .380 don't have much room for error.

It's worth mentioning that JHP ammo is more than just a hollow point. It's sealed and gets premium components. They know you'll pay 3 times the cost for decent ammo and that they don't have to cut corners like they do with plinking ammo.

There's plenty of round nosed defensive ammo out there, if you choose. But I've had flawless reliability with Federal HST.
 
Last edited:
Those who post replies should remember that Hunter2011 who started this thread is in South Africa, not the United States.

Therefore he may not have the many varied choices in guns and ammunition that we enjoy. Proposed solutions should keep this in mind. :)
 
Me and two friends are taking trips to the range together about 3-4 times a year. Three guys, each has only a couple of handguns - we got into this hobby together a few years ago.

Between the three of us there's a G17, G26, Ruger Single Six, Beretta PX4 Storm, Springfield XD, Taurus Millennium, and a S&W 1911.

Out of the autos, both Glocks, Beretta and Springfield are 100% reliable; 1911 can have a failure to feed or to extract every now and then, but mostly reliable (but boy is it a beautiful gun !); and the Taurus is affectionately known as "the little f@cker". That's the gun we shoot for challenge - you never know if it will go off, and you can't be certain what part of the target it will hit. He did get it as a gift...

I think you just need to switch the brands.
 
Can you say R E V O L V E R ? my model 58 S&W in 41 magnum has never nose dived !
Lol, I just love this post, as it is so true:D

@Mman, I always grip this pistol with all my power, as this small light pistol kicks really hard, harder than a .38 snubby. So I do not think limp wristing is the problem here.
 
Hunter 2011, try some different mags. Both my Tauruses (Tauri?) work fine with the factory mags, but I have found in the past that 'nose diving', to use your nomenclature, is a magazine issue almost 100% of the time. I didn't catch which model you have, but if other manufacturer's mags are available for it, try some from a reputable maker.

As I said, my factory Taurus mags work fine, but I do still have a Chip Mcormick Shooting Star in my PT1911, and a Wilson 47 next in line before the factory mags.

If it is a model that no one else makes the mags for, like my PT145, buy a new factory mag and try that. If a new mag solves the problem, buy a couple more, and junk the one(s) giving you trouble.
 
I've seen more limp wrist malfunctions than mechanical problems on almost all semi's. Does the gun behave the same with a different shooter? Get a grip man, it's not gonna bite.
 
My grip is just fine.
That is why it does not happen even once with FMJ ammo.

Think man!:D

Let me just add something more. Sometimes when inserting a fresh magazine, with the slide locked back, the round will get stuck the same way when I press the slide release button. There must be some or other problem with the feed ramp or something.
Perhaps its best I take it to a local gunsmith, but when booked in I will have to wait a couple of months for it.
 
Last edited:
Hunter2011,

I make it standard practice to replace the springs in used guns and the magazines with new ones, usually extra power ones from Wolff.

If they are available I would replace all of the springs in the gun and magazines. It is inexpensive and easy swap.
 
When shooting with FMJ I have never experienched a problem so far. But I do not prefer to use FMJ for SD.

I've found that ammo is the number one cause of feed problems. Not "bad" ammo or "cheap" ammo, but ammo that just doesn't seem to work well with a certain gun. Part of the reliability in a semi-auto is making sure your ammo works well with your gun. There is a lot more criteria for ammo than FMJ or JHP. That your FMJ ammo, whatever it is, works well tells me its probably not the magazine. If you buy another brand of FMJ ammo, it may give different results. What I would do first is simply try a different JHP ammo, preferably one with a different nosed bullet than what you have. Anything with a "fuller" metal jacket such as an XTP type bullet will probably solve your problem.
 
Been a few years since I posted this. Nothing's really changed. Saves retyping it!

I started out shooting revolvers many years ago. Revolvers were quite reliable to work with and then along came the autos with new improved designs, better ammunition performance and greater capacity. In truth, I felt that the reliability of the auto finally came up to a level of what I felt was the tactical equivalency of well maintained revolvers and so I began to carry an auto.

Here are some random observations I have discovered about the two weapon systems. Revolvers will occasionally malfunction and so will autos. I accept the fact that a high quality auto is just as likely, or unlikely, to break a part that stops the gun from functioning, just as any high quality revolver would should it experience catastrophic failure of a particular part. I have actually broken more parts in autos than revolvers, but I can attribute that to sheer luck. Slide stops have broken, firing pins have broken, but statistically, I would argue that neither one is likely to just "break" when you need it.

On the few occasions that I have had a revolver stop working, it was a cumulative effect of shooting. It started to get dirty, crap under the extractor star, the barrel cylinder gap got lead and powder residue, the chambers got sticky from lots of .38's and then having to force a .357 into the chamber. In other words, most of the problems came on slowly. I knew eventually the gun was going to stop working because of the indicators it gave; such as the trigger pull beginning to feel heavy or the bind I felt when attempting to close the cylinder.

However, there were times that for no apparent reason, a clean, well-lubed auto, would sometimes just not feed, fire, or eject a round. The bullet nose would catch on the feed-ramp, an empty round would fail to get out of the way of the next round, or there would be some other type of failure that seemed to occur randomly, and without warning.

Standing on the line, at the range, neither gun failed very often. Nice firm grip, dry hands, locked wrists, all is well in the world of hand-gunning. But, in the neat world of tactical hand-gunning when a deadly force confrontation erupts, we know that it is anything but a static situation or under perfect conditions!

Recently, I have watched a few episodes of "Under Fire" on Court TV. Autos, good quality (and, hopefully) well maintained autos, sometimes crap out in the middle of a gunfight. These incidents can be attributed to such things as: a weak one-handed grip, or perhaps coming out of battery when rolling around on the ground, or when the weapon is shoved against the bad guy, or whatever else that can impact a weapon system in a serious close quarter fight. The auto needs a solid platform to work off of. In the real world of close quarter fighting you must remember this should your weapon malfunction!

At distances where the Officer could maneuver, even though it was still in close proximity to the suspect, the auto rarely seemed to jam. But, if the fight closed all the way down to contact distance, then there is the chance that the auto could turn into a single shot weapon.

As an example of this, there is one particular episode that comes to mind involving an Officer fighting with an experienced, no-nonsense boxer, that was about to beat the Officer to death. Finally, the Officer drew his pistol and got off one shot into the BG's midsection with little effect, and, the gun jammed on the first shot! The BG then grabbed the gun and beat the Officer with it and tossed it. The Officer was able to pick it back up later in the fight. (Interesting video if you ever get a chance to see it.)

On duty, I have to carry a Glock 35. And, I'm not sure I am ready to give up the general reliability, magazine capacity, and ease of shooting of a good auto for the vast majority of shooting situations. But, as a backup, I carry a 642. And, it seems a lot of others are big fans of the little revolvers as backup guns as well.

Off duty, I find myself carrying a 3" S&W M65 more and more. I envision an off duty encounter being a very fast fight that turns into a gunfight. Bad guy rushing you with a knife, BG jumping you, knocking you down and attacking you, two guys pinning you into a corner and the fight is on. Capacity becomes secondary to utter reliability for me at that point. I can still get good hits with a revolver out to 25 yards or so, if I have to, but it's not really something I see happening. Truth be known, the odds of needing a gun at all are pretty remote, but if we are the kind of individual with the right tactical mindset, then we should plan for those unexpected events and be ready for it.

So, what are some other's thoughts? Have you taken your favorite defense auto out to the range, held it with your left hand, bent your wrist and elbow and tried getting off as many shots as you could? Have you held it upside down, or covered your hands in soapy water and then tried to shoot through an entire magazine? Have you tried shoving it into the target to see if it gets pushed out of battery? The question then is - did it jam after the first shot? I have personally done all those things and found that the reliability of a quality auto weapon went downhill.

It seems that most autos jam during the feeding and ejecting cycle. That's the one part that you do manually before and after the festivities with a revolver. During a gunfight, a revolver cannot have a feeding malfunction or an ejection malfunction. I realize that clearing an auto jam is a lot faster than clearing a revolver jam. But, that really cool "Tap-rack-bang" that you practice on the range really needs that off hand to work. If that off hand is keeping a box cutter off your throat, things go downhill in a hurry.

This is not to say if you are carrying a revolver that you couldn't experience a malfunction with it as well. As an example, I am talking about something like a high primer, making it difficult to pull through on the trigger. To combat this effect - pull the trigger REALLY hard, it just may go bang again! There are pros and cons to both of these weapon systems.

If these thoughts get a few people to thinking, and helps you to become more aware of your own abilities as well as your weapon's capabilities and limitations, then great. If it just makes you train harder, for what YOU consider a real world gunfight, even better. Remember: practice hard, practice often and be safe. Best regard to you all.
 
Hunter, it does sound like a magazine problem. Maybe the feed lip or the angle but it does sound like the mag. Maybe try one new factory magazine and see if that works?
 
Been a few years since I posted this. Nothing's really changed. Saves retyping it!

I started out shooting revolvers many years ago. Revolvers were quite reliable to work with and then along came the autos with new improved designs, better ammunition performance and greater capacity. In truth, I felt that the reliability of the auto finally came up to a level of what I felt was the tactical equivalency of well maintained revolvers and so I began to carry an auto.

Here are some random observations I have discovered about the two weapon systems. Revolvers will occasionally malfunction and so will autos. I accept the fact that a high quality auto is just as likely, or unlikely, to break a part that stops the gun from functioning, just as any high quality revolver would should it experience catastrophic failure of a particular part. I have actually broken more parts in autos than revolvers, but I can attribute that to sheer luck. Slide stops have broken, firing pins have broken, but statistically, I would argue that neither one is likely to just "break" when you need it.

On the few occasions that I have had a revolver stop working, it was a cumulative effect of shooting. It started to get dirty, crap under the extractor star, the barrel cylinder gap got lead and powder residue, the chambers got sticky from lots of .38's and then having to force a .357 into the chamber. In other words, most of the problems came on slowly. I knew eventually the gun was going to stop working because of the indicators it gave; such as the trigger pull beginning to feel heavy or the bind I felt when attempting to close the cylinder.

However, there were times that for no apparent reason, a clean, well-lubed auto, would sometimes just not feed, fire, or eject a round. The bullet nose would catch on the feed-ramp, an empty round would fail to get out of the way of the next round, or there would be some other type of failure that seemed to occur randomly, and without warning.

Standing on the line, at the range, neither gun failed very often. Nice firm grip, dry hands, locked wrists, all is well in the world of hand-gunning. But, in the neat world of tactical hand-gunning when a deadly force confrontation erupts, we know that it is anything but a static situation or under perfect conditions!

Recently, I have watched a few episodes of "Under Fire" on Court TV. Autos, good quality (and, hopefully) well maintained autos, sometimes crap out in the middle of a gunfight. These incidents can be attributed to such things as: a weak one-handed grip, or perhaps coming out of battery when rolling around on the ground, or when the weapon is shoved against the bad guy, or whatever else that can impact a weapon system in a serious close quarter fight. The auto needs a solid platform to work off of. In the real world of close quarter fighting you must remember this should your weapon malfunction!

At distances where the Officer could maneuver, even though it was still in close proximity to the suspect, the auto rarely seemed to jam. But, if the fight closed all the way down to contact distance, then there is the chance that the auto could turn into a single shot weapon.

As an example of this, there is one particular episode that comes to mind involving an Officer fighting with an experienced, no-nonsense boxer, that was about to beat the Officer to death. Finally, the Officer drew his pistol and got off one shot into the BG's midsection with little effect, and, the gun jammed on the first shot! The BG then grabbed the gun and beat the Officer with it and tossed it. The Officer was able to pick it back up later in the fight. (Interesting video if you ever get a chance to see it.)

On duty, I have to carry a Glock 35. And, I'm not sure I am ready to give up the general reliability, magazine capacity, and ease of shooting of a good auto for the vast majority of shooting situations. But, as a backup, I carry a 642. And, it seems a lot of others are big fans of the little revolvers as backup guns as well.

Off duty, I find myself carrying a 3" S&W M65 more and more. I envision an off duty encounter being a very fast fight that turns into a gunfight. Bad guy rushing you with a knife, BG jumping you, knocking you down and attacking you, two guys pinning you into a corner and the fight is on. Capacity becomes secondary to utter reliability for me at that point. I can still get good hits with a revolver out to 25 yards or so, if I have to, but it's not really something I see happening. Truth be known, the odds of needing a gun at all are pretty remote, but if we are the kind of individual with the right tactical mindset, then we should plan for those unexpected events and be ready for it.

So, what are some other's thoughts? Have you taken your favorite defense auto out to the range, held it with your left hand, bent your wrist and elbow and tried getting off as many shots as you could? Have you held it upside down, or covered your hands in soapy water and then tried to shoot through an entire magazine? Have you tried shoving it into the target to see if it gets pushed out of battery? The question then is - did it jam after the first shot? I have personally done all those things and found that the reliability of a quality auto weapon went downhill.

It seems that most autos jam during the feeding and ejecting cycle. That's the one part that you do manually before and after the festivities with a revolver. During a gunfight, a revolver cannot have a feeding malfunction or an ejection malfunction. I realize that clearing an auto jam is a lot faster than clearing a revolver jam. But, that really cool "Tap-rack-bang" that you practice on the range really needs that off hand to work. If that off hand is keeping a box cutter off your throat, things go downhill in a hurry.

This is not to say if you are carrying a revolver that you couldn't experience a malfunction with it as well. As an example, I am talking about something like a high primer, making it difficult to pull through on the trigger. To combat this effect - pull the trigger REALLY hard, it just may go bang again! There are pros and cons to both of these weapon systems.

If these thoughts get a few people to thinking, and helps you to become more aware of your own abilities as well as your weapon's capabilities and limitations, then great. If it just makes you train harder, for what YOU consider a real world gunfight, even better. Remember: practice hard, practice often and be safe. Best regard to you all.
Great post.
 
I think I must trade my pistol for a revolver to EDC. Despite the huge drop in capacity and firing power. But I do need something I can trust 110%
A more reliable pistol would also be a viable choice. My EDC is a Smith & Wesson (3913LS), that I have thousands of rounds through and exactly one failure---and that one was a bad round of Walmart white-box plinking ammo that apparently had no priming. With quality ammo, it has never had a failure.

If I owned a defensive gun that jammed in 60 rounds, I wouldn't trust it either. But don't judge all semiautos by that one.
 
Very good post sgt127. Interesting to note the differences in need you have cited between on duty and off duty, as I have expressed similar opinions to the dismay of some of the forum experts who seem to feel that every private citizen should use law enforcement or FBI standards in determining what to carry, how much ammo, and how to carry it, when the objectives are entirely different.

The OP is mostly about having confidence or a lack of it with your particular choice of carry weapon. Confidence is an emotion developed through experience. If you lack confidence in any weapon, whether real or imagined, the bottom line is to get a weapon in which you do have confidence in both its ability to function, and your ability to operate it under extreme duress. I carry a revolver, not because of the statistical reliability of the weapon, but because of the confidence I have in myself to operate it by instinct when the brain is in near panic mode.
 
I propose a possible compromise. :)

If one is available, send your Taurus pistol (along with all of your magazines) to a qualified gunsmith who can make necessary modifications to it to insure it will function reliably with whatever particular ammunition you chose. Understand that this does not mean it will work with anything else you load it with.

Then in the meantime carry the revolver, provided you feel competent with it. Ammunition shouldn't be an issue, but marksmanship under stress would be. Every shot must count.
 
It seems to me that all this business about magazines and ammo is irrelevant to the issue. If the OP has lost confidence in his gun it is pointless to discuss ways the gun problems can be fixed. Every time he fires that gun he is going to be wondering if it will work or if it will malfunction.

And that, in a tight situation, can be damaging to self confidence and possibly fatal if concern about the gun distracts from the business at hand.

I never carried a gun and ammo in which I did not have total confidence; I put such things as dealing with malfunctions at the bottom of my practice list. As I see it, the problem is not whether the OP's gun can be fixed, but whether the OP's mindset can be fixed to believe that gun is worth his trust. If that can't be done, he should buy another gun in which he can have confidence.

Jim
 
It seems to me that all this business about magazines and ammo is irrelevant to the issue. If the OP has lost confidence in his gun it is pointless to discuss ways the gun problems can be fixed. Every time he fires that gun he is going to be wondering if it will work or if it will malfunction.

And that, in a tight situation, can be damaging to self confidence and possibly fatal if concern about the gun distracts from the business at hand.

I never carried a gun and ammo in which I did not have total confidence; I put such things as dealing with malfunctions at the bottom of my practice list. As I see it, the problem is not whether the OP's gun can be fixed, but whether the OP's mindset can be fixed to believe that gun is worth his trust. If that can't be done, he should buy another gun in which he can have confidence.

Jim
It is true what you say. But if it can be fixed and the next 300 rounds are trouble free, I will trust it again, as I have trusted this pistol before.

On the Taurus forum there is an excellent thread about fixing the unreliable TCP738. But that got me thinking. Is it not the job of Taurus to do all these things? Why must you fiddle with something to make it reliable? It is not like its a TV, its a firearm meant to protect your life with. I am sure one of these unreliable out of the factory brand new pistols are responsible for at least one or more owners death. They are selling these unreliable guns that can and will get you killed when it fails. I feel they should do more to fix them before they sell them, and not leave it up to the owners to fix. I feel its a disgrace and just because of this, I will never buy a Taurus pistol ever again in my life, unless they pull up their socks.
They are selling pistols they know are not reliable, and wait for people to send them back to be fixed....
Sorry if I offend any Taurus owners, but that is how I feel now.
 
Didn't read the whole thread, just got to where the OP mentioned it was a Taurus 709.

I have one, and while I've had zero reliability issues with it, my experience is not all encompassing.

The 709 has a two piece feed ramp, and that's gotten a lot of scrutiny in a lot of reviews. Likely, the barrel incorporated portion of the feed ramp doesn't sit flush with the frame incorporated portion of the feed ramp. Short hollow points will hang up on the lip between the feed ramp sections. It's not a magazine issue, rather an ammunition issue. Round nosed FMJ's don't get caught because there isn't anything to get stuck on the lip. Short face hollow points will choke up on that gun, as the OP has explained. I tend to use 115 grain JHP in my 709 or 124 gr cast lead, rather than the typical 124 JHP I've been shooting in my other guns. I may convert all my factory ammo back to 115 gr JHP and stick with that and 124 cast. They all perform in all my pistols.
 
Didn't read the whole thread, just got to where the OP mentioned it was a Taurus 709.

I have one, and while I've had zero reliability issues with it, my experience is not all encompassing.

The 709 has a two piece feed ramp, and that's gotten a lot of scrutiny in a lot of reviews. Likely, the barrel incorporated portion of the feed ramp doesn't sit flush with the frame incorporated portion of the feed ramp. Short hollow points will hang up on the lip between the feed ramp sections. It's not a magazine issue, rather an ammunition issue. Round nosed FMJ's don't get caught because there isn't anything to get stuck on the lip. Short face hollow points will choke up on that gun, as the OP has explained. I tend to use 115 grain JHP in my 709 or 124 gr cast lead, rather than the typical 124 JHP I've been shooting in my other guns. I may convert all my factory ammo back to 115 gr JHP and stick with that and 124 cast. They all perform in all my pistols.
Thank you for this post. This is exactly as you described. I thought all pistols have a two piece feeding ramp.... No wonder this is happening. The bullet gets stuck exactly where you are describing. What hollow points have you found to be 100% reliable in yours?
So basically there is nothing I can do?
 
I can also add, that when the slide is locked back, the barrel has a very loose fit. So it is possible that during the firing/loading cycle that the bottom of the feeding ramp my lift up a mm or so, creating a gap between it and the bottom half of the guns built in feeding ramp, thereby catching the bottom of a HP bullet. Is this not a design flaw? Can it be fixed or must a pistol have these kind of tolerances to operate properly?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top