Ske1etor
Member
Too bad it isn't a Kimber. If it was we could tell him how to fix it. Unlike you bunch of "Hey, I just point and click and it works... I don't know how it works, I just know that it does because the internet told me so!" guys...
My Brand new Glock 19 jammed 3 times in 150 rounds.
- Thread starter High Planes Drifter
- Start date
- Status
Too bad it isn't a Kimber. If it was we could tell him how to fix it. Unlike you bunch of "Hey, I just point and click and it works... I don't know how it works, I just know that it does because the internet told me so!" guys...
pbearperry
Member
I have owned many semi autos through the years and never had malfunction problems.However that was before gun makers added all kinds of bells and whistles and high prices on their guns.Wait a minute,I may have stumbled onto something?
another okie
Member
In looking at those "limp wrist test" videos I notice that the 1911 has a grip safety, which means the shooter has to be holding it tight enough to take the grip safety off, so I doubt he's holding it as lightly as he holds the Glock. But maybe they addressed that somewhere and I missed it.
A gun is a machine, and every one is different. Maybe yours just doesn't like Monarch, and you should accept it and move on. Does it work with the new magazine?
A gun is a machine, and every one is different. Maybe yours just doesn't like Monarch, and you should accept it and move on. Does it work with the new magazine?
Confederate
Member
I must say I'm very impressed by the videos posted by sturmgewehr. As I see it, even people who don't "limp wrist" their guns while firing may do it under stress (such as a close-in physical attack where one's arm may be pushed back by a knife weilding bad guy). The 1911 certainly held its own in this case, as did the Beretta and the Sig.
I like revolvers better overall than autos, but I can't deny firepower is certainly a powerful advantage, as shooting that Beretta showed. The idea of buying an auto for nearly a grand, like many 1911s nowadays, then having to shoot 200-500 rounds through it to "break it in" — it just doesn't sit well with me.
I'm amazed that I can find so many good deals on decent used autos like the S&W 59/39-series. All the ones I've either shot or seen shot right out of the box performed flawlessly. The only exception is when the ammuntion was handloaded, and 9mm is notoriously difficult to load perfectly by many people.
Until now I thought Glocks were that kind of gun: flawless out of the box, but these videos certainly seem to belie that. On the other hand, I've seen very few 1911s out of the box that have shot flawlessly and without a malfunction.
The most perfect auto I've shot is the Beretta 92 and the S&W 645, 659 and 5906. Oh, and my father has a Sig Saur .45 that has performed very well. (I just don't like the gun.)
I like revolvers better overall than autos, but I can't deny firepower is certainly a powerful advantage, as shooting that Beretta showed. The idea of buying an auto for nearly a grand, like many 1911s nowadays, then having to shoot 200-500 rounds through it to "break it in" — it just doesn't sit well with me.
I'm amazed that I can find so many good deals on decent used autos like the S&W 59/39-series. All the ones I've either shot or seen shot right out of the box performed flawlessly. The only exception is when the ammuntion was handloaded, and 9mm is notoriously difficult to load perfectly by many people.
Until now I thought Glocks were that kind of gun: flawless out of the box, but these videos certainly seem to belie that. On the other hand, I've seen very few 1911s out of the box that have shot flawlessly and without a malfunction.
The most perfect auto I've shot is the Beretta 92 and the S&W 645, 659 and 5906. Oh, and my father has a Sig Saur .45 that has performed very well. (I just don't like the gun.)
The 1911 is unreliable as a rule only when you start to deviate from JMB's base design. Since most custom guns, or even high-end production guns, are set up to be very tight (read: extremely accurate) it is unsurprising that they require a little time to break in, or a trip or two to the smith to get running right. Take a box stock milspec 1911 that is made right and it should run like a top. It just won't seem as tight as a Johannes Q. Publique Custom Wonderblaster, and probably won't group as nicely, either. TANSTAAFL.
That said, in an ideal world, no mechanical device should ever require break in. I, however, do not live in an ideal world, I live in Ohio. As such, I have come to accept that my car should be driven differently for the first few hundred miles, my Windows Operating System requires at least one service pack to be running right (probably two, this is Microsoft, after all), my scope mount should be checked for tightness regularly, and my handgun should probably get at least 500 rounds through it before I consider it to be operating as it should.
Really, it's not that huge of a deal. I would want to put a couple hundred rounds through something that I may call upon to save my life before I actually call upon it to do so anyway. This is just a part of that shakedown cruise. Any malfunctions early in the roundcount that do not reappear are of no concern to me. Stuff that keeps showing up, however, is.
Mike
In defense of GLOCK
I certainly believe that limp wristing is a real phenomenon. In the case of the GLOCK, it's because the frame is light. No, not light. Really frikkin' light! Anyone who owns a GLOCK will recall the surprise they had the first time they field stripped it. When the slide comes off the frame, you end up looking at the thing to make sure the insides didn't accidentally fall out. The other part of the equation is the GLOCK has a pretty beefy slide. This means it moves slower under recoil (and the lighter recoil spring works for a longer duration of time, spreading out the felt recoil before the slide finally hits the frame rails).
For a gun to work, there has to be a big enough combination of mass and reciprocal force to keep the frame from being pushed by the recoil spring, causing it to follow along with the slide. The "Limp Wrist" videos posted on page 1 of this thread demonstrate how the 1911 design very thoughtfully incorporates enough dead weight in the frame so that their pistol might cycle even if held improperly. Afterall, you never know when you might need to take a shot with just your trigger finger, as the grip safety rests precipitously against a twig. Or perhaps, your hand is completely paralyzed except for your trigger finger. It's comforting to know that as long as your 1911 pattern gun is "one of the good ones" and has been recently cleaned and oiled, it'll be ready for a quick followup in the above scenarios (if the gun doesn't fly out of your hand on the first shot), particularly considering that you may find it difficult to hit your intended target in this fashion within the first several shots. This calls for a lot of practice in SD drills in preparation of SPH - spontaneous hand paralysis.
The GLOCK designer very rashly took this essential weight out of the frame, expecting a semi-functional hand to always be there, at least somewhat wrapped around the frame, when fired. Thanks to this video, we all see the clear deficiency in this line of thinking.
If there proves to be enough admiration of the 1911 design based on the merits of this video demonstration, I will start plans to develop a BUG with the ultimate in concealability. It will feature a zero finger grip. It will be held only with the trigger finger, and you fire it by pushing the gun violently at the target, then quickly pulling back. Of course, it will be chambered in .44 magnum and can be had with optional laser sight and Hogue trigger-sock.
I certainly believe that limp wristing is a real phenomenon. In the case of the GLOCK, it's because the frame is light. No, not light. Really frikkin' light! Anyone who owns a GLOCK will recall the surprise they had the first time they field stripped it. When the slide comes off the frame, you end up looking at the thing to make sure the insides didn't accidentally fall out. The other part of the equation is the GLOCK has a pretty beefy slide. This means it moves slower under recoil (and the lighter recoil spring works for a longer duration of time, spreading out the felt recoil before the slide finally hits the frame rails).
For a gun to work, there has to be a big enough combination of mass and reciprocal force to keep the frame from being pushed by the recoil spring, causing it to follow along with the slide. The "Limp Wrist" videos posted on page 1 of this thread demonstrate how the 1911 design very thoughtfully incorporates enough dead weight in the frame so that their pistol might cycle even if held improperly. Afterall, you never know when you might need to take a shot with just your trigger finger, as the grip safety rests precipitously against a twig. Or perhaps, your hand is completely paralyzed except for your trigger finger. It's comforting to know that as long as your 1911 pattern gun is "one of the good ones" and has been recently cleaned and oiled, it'll be ready for a quick followup in the above scenarios (if the gun doesn't fly out of your hand on the first shot), particularly considering that you may find it difficult to hit your intended target in this fashion within the first several shots. This calls for a lot of practice in SD drills in preparation of SPH - spontaneous hand paralysis.
The GLOCK designer very rashly took this essential weight out of the frame, expecting a semi-functional hand to always be there, at least somewhat wrapped around the frame, when fired. Thanks to this video, we all see the clear deficiency in this line of thinking.
If there proves to be enough admiration of the 1911 design based on the merits of this video demonstration, I will start plans to develop a BUG with the ultimate in concealability. It will feature a zero finger grip. It will be held only with the trigger finger, and you fire it by pushing the gun violently at the target, then quickly pulling back. Of course, it will be chambered in .44 magnum and can be had with optional laser sight and Hogue trigger-sock.
Last edited:
I've never been a believer in the break-in period, but maybe my experience is just limited. You're getting the thing brand new in 100% condition from the factory - it should function 100% then, no?
And for the record, I had a brand new Glock. It did have malfunctions but only due to a mag spring issue caused by a Pearce grip extender. I recommend completely switching out your mags and seeing if the problem continues.
And for the record, I had a brand new Glock. It did have malfunctions but only due to a mag spring issue caused by a Pearce grip extender. I recommend completely switching out your mags and seeing if the problem continues.
Ske1etor
Member
Meh, what you have to realize is that these firearms aren't being built by hand here. They are being machined from stock and sometimes the smallest little imperfection gets through. Firing the gun will normally resolve these little imperfections and that is the "Break In Period".
OK, for instance... I see by reading your signature that you own a Mossberg 500. If you have put any serious amount of rounds through it you have no doubt noticed that the pump action has smoothed out since you have purchased it. That is all the break in period is. It doesn't necessarily mean that the firearm won't work from the beginning but it needs to be used to smooth out.
No. The world is full of mechanical devices that need to wear a little to work smoothly. If you want something to work utterly smoothly from the start, you need to:
A. buy an item that is designed with enough clearance between moving parts to be reliable without hand fitting
or
B. pay for skilled labor and hand fitting.
The problem with A is that it looks/feels/acts clunky or sloppy, and is sometimes a less efficient design, and the problem with B is that craftsmen cost $$$$$$$.
As a society we want to buy things that look like they're hand-fitted by skilled artisans and cost like they were stamped out by the million and tossed together by daylabor.
TANSTAAFL.
Mike
chieftain
Member
I don't consider any fighting weapon to be deemed reliable until at least 1,000/one thousand rounds have run reliably through it.
Until then it is suspect. That is my job, testing my tools, when ever possible and practical.
No professional would ever go to a firefight with a weapon he hasn't tested, and run through his own "run in" regime.
It ain't rocket science. It is being practical and responsible.
Apparently in some folks lives, stuff doesn't happen. In my life stuff still happens, and most often when I least expect it.
I have extensive military combat experience from Vietnam. One thing I learned was, that in Combat, even more stuff happens than in ordinary life. One thing you can control and to get to as low a negative potential as possible is the reliability of your weapons. Test them, tweak them where the weapon and you need them to be tweaked. Don't get carried away with the tweaking though.
Believe me, when I tell you, folks who fight with weapons regularly will do what they can to reduce the Darwin factor when ever possible.
And it don't matter who's name is on the slide. Don't go out of your way to be fatally stupid.
As a civilian CCW and Home defense situations, may actually make the testing even more of a necessity. Why? Because if your weapon goes down, there ain't no squad to cover your six, while you desperately fight off Darwin and try to get your "Sierra" together.
Go figure.
Fred
Until then it is suspect. That is my job, testing my tools, when ever possible and practical.
No professional would ever go to a firefight with a weapon he hasn't tested, and run through his own "run in" regime.
It ain't rocket science. It is being practical and responsible.
Apparently in some folks lives, stuff doesn't happen. In my life stuff still happens, and most often when I least expect it.
I have extensive military combat experience from Vietnam. One thing I learned was, that in Combat, even more stuff happens than in ordinary life. One thing you can control and to get to as low a negative potential as possible is the reliability of your weapons. Test them, tweak them where the weapon and you need them to be tweaked. Don't get carried away with the tweaking though.
Believe me, when I tell you, folks who fight with weapons regularly will do what they can to reduce the Darwin factor when ever possible.
And it don't matter who's name is on the slide. Don't go out of your way to be fatally stupid.
As a civilian CCW and Home defense situations, may actually make the testing even more of a necessity. Why? Because if your weapon goes down, there ain't no squad to cover your six, while you desperately fight off Darwin and try to get your "Sierra" together.
Go figure.
Fred
- Status
