Springfield XDs, firing pin hitting off center?

[Josh45]

This was the first time ever that this has happened with my rifle loads.
I had been using primers that I always use in them. Either Federal or Wolf. At the time, I believe I was using Wolf primers in them.

I will have more pics up a bit later for making some new rounds. Looking for the right OAL to do the plunk test, It comes out around 1.170-1.175 with these FP Plated bullets.
Obviously, Gonna have to start at the bottom of the load data and go up from there with such a short OAL.

Also, I will get a few pics up with the primers being shown from how far in they are seated using the hand priming tool. If anyone sees anything that looks like a high primer, Please let me know. Will update as soon as I can.

 

[918v]

You can make a dummy round at the previous OAL. That will tell you right away if the OAL is too long.

 

[Josh45]

918v,

Some did chamber and some did not at the previous OAL of 1.190 which I know is the minimum for .45 ACP or at least it says in the books. When I made the 1.170-1.175, They plunked in and out with no issue what so ever and chamber just fine. Of course I used a dummy round ( no primer or powder ) to check this out. There also flush with the hood of the barrel at this OAL.

 

[Josh45]

The first pic is of the OAL of the round hat fit into the barrel and passed the plunk test with no assistance from me. The next three pics are of the primers I seated with the hand priming tool. If anyone sees any indication of a high primer or something, Please say so.

I made sure to bottom out when using the hand primer just like I usually do but as Walkalong said, No matter the method, It can happen. Or something like that anyways was mentioned in the thread earlier.

 

[Josh45]

Two more primer pics at different angles. Hoping this helps to find out if anything looks like a high primer. The next two are to show that it sits in the magazine pretty well. Although, Don't know how much that one helped.

The next one of the firearm from the rear is with the dummy round chambered which is the one shown in the magazine. Some of the earlier rounds at 1.190 looked like this while some did leave a gap and was noticeable. This dummy round has been chambered about 2-3 times and the firearm always looks like this from the rear. Feeds with no issues and ejects very easily when racked by hand.

 

[Josh45]

The first pic is to show the front of the firearm to see if there is any gap at all with the dummy round chambered. I don't see it but maybe to some of you more experienced shooter and reloaders can tell me if you see anything out of the ordinary.

The second pic is to show the dummy round is flush with the hood of the barrel.
Is it to deep at this rate or is there anything I might be missing from this pic?
Sorry if there are any blurry pics, The camera focused at times and others it didn't do so well on that part.

Let me know what you guys think.

 

[918v]

Do you have any dummy rounds loaded to 1.190" OAL? You need those to eliminate OAL as a variable. Make some, test them in your barrel? Take the ones that don't sit flush with the barrel hood and cycle then through the gun. Look at how the barrel locks up into battery. Compare that to how the gun looks when unloaded. This is going to be a very subtle difference that won't be apparent in pics.

 

[Josh45]

No I don't but I can make one right quick.
I will give it a go and see how that works out. Pics to follow up.

 

[Josh45]

OKay, Made the round at 1.190. It does chamber with no issues, but you can feel it catch when trying to eject the round. Also, It plunks in but does not plunk out doing the barrel test.

The second picture is to show how it sits in the magazine compared to the other one at 1.172 shown earlier. These other two pictures are to show what the fire arm looks like unloaded. I know its practically impossible to see that but you have my word it is unloaded. The fourth picture is also shown unloaded and just to show how it looks before chambering a round.

 

[Josh45]

One more pic with the firearm shown unchambered. From the rear to show complete lock up. The next three pictures show the firearm with a dummy round chambered with a OAL of 1.190.

You can see the chamber indicator in the first pic to show that it has been loaded with the dummy round. The other two pictures are for comparison of the other two that show no round chambered.

 

[Josh45]

These last two show how they fit across the hood of the barrel. Looks good but still would not plunk out and like I said, While this round did eject, It had way more resistance than the one at 1.172 which had no resistance to speak of.

The round did not change OAL in either the 1.172 or the 1.190.
These were the only differences noticed in these two dummy rounds.

And in case anyone is curious, My niece leaves her toys everywhere. Including the bear that is looking into your soul in these pics.

 

[918v]

I'm thinking it's a barrel lockup issue. At 1.190" your case is preventing your barrel from tilting up all the way. See, when you close the slide on an empty chamber and push down on the barrel you'll see the barrel is able to move down a little. When you have a round that is interference fit in the chamber, the barrel may not tilt all the way up due to all the friction between the back of the case and the breechface. If the barrel cannot tilt all the way up, then your firing pin won't be in line with the primer, or more out of line than normal.

 

[Josh45]

918v,

If that is the case, What would be my best route?
Do I send it in or keep testing my hand loads with different brand of primers and bullets?

 

[918v]

I would go with the shorter OAL. If they feed well, just rework the load.

 

[918v]

Oh, and one last thing:

Don't be afraid to go shorter than 1.190" OAL. Federal Gold Medal 185gr ammo is loaded to 1.165". Some bullets need to be seated that short. They still feed and shoot fine.

 

[Josh45]

I was somewhat concerned about it but I will give it a go and see how it works out for me.