The dry firing myth

[Ignition Override]

On a WW2 Mauser Hsc, it reportedly could easily break the firing pin. Now all of the spare pins have been bought up, maybe as a result of damage?

But as to how a post WW2 near-mint Enfield rifle could be harmed by a single dry fire click, it baffles me.
About three years ago, after forgetting to ask about his policy, the owner of that tiny, really dirty Memphis gun shop on Summer Ave (east of Perkins) told me "Do that again and you're buying it".

I apologized, never returned, and he needed any bit of cash he could get his hands on.

 

[Sheepdog1968]

I would rather get one of those SIRT pistols. I get the heebie jeebies pulling the trigger on a real firearm even unloaded. At range, in classes, hunting, or self defense isn't a problem. Just think the odds increase for an ND by dry firing. And yes, I know there are strict rules you can follow,to avoid this. For practicing draw stroke, again SIRT or blue gun is my preference.

 

[javjacob]

Quote: theohazard
Originally Posted by javacob
Dry fire all you want though its not my gun. I also think its stupid to make a thread saying dry firing wont hurt and its a myth when you are clearly wrong.

No, he's not wrong; did you even read the first post? He never once said it was always safe to dry fire, he said it was usually safe with modern firearms. He's completely right: It's a myth that you shouldn't EVER dry fire, because with the vast majority of modern guns it's completely fine.


Quote:
Originally Posted by javacob
No rimfire should ever be dry fired no matter what anyone says. My advice to those who insist they must dry fire a gun is to use empty shell casings or snap caps. They do make snap caps for a reason.

Some rimfires have firing pin stops that protect them from damage when dry firing. Sure, those blocks can eventually wear down, but it takes a long time and they're usually easy to replace. So saying you should never dry fire any .22 is ridiculous. And the primary use for snap caps these days is for training and stoppage practice. Heck, most .22 snap caps specifically tell you on the package not to use them for dry firing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by javacob
Some guns are OK to be dry fired by the MFG but that still doesn't mean its not hard on it.

No, it's not hard on many guns. Guns like ARs and Glocks can be dry fired all you want with no damage.

Coloradokevin, I think responses like these are a perfect example of why you decided to make this thread, huh?





Nothing I said was wrong and for example Henry is just 1 modern rimfire that is NOT safe to dry fire. There are many others that say NOT to dry fire. Don't get your panties all in a wad. Glocks and ARs don't account for all modern rimfires.

 

[Theohazard]

for example Henry is just 1 modern rimfire that is NOT safe to dry fire. There are many others that say NOT to dry fire.

Nobody is saying there aren't any guns that can't be dry fired, so why do you keep listing them? :banghead: Yes we all know that it's not a good idea to dry fire some guns. But what we're saying is that some guns are perfectly fine to dry fire. How can you not understand this?

Nothing I said was wrong

Really? How about these statements:

No rimfire should ever be dry fired no matter what anyone says.

There are exceptions to the rule against dry-firing rimfires, so this statement is wrong. Some rimfire designs have firing pin stops, so dry-firing doesn't hurt the chamber edge or the firing pin.

Some guns are OK to be dry fired by the MFG but that still doesn't mean its not hard on it.

You're saying that even the guns that are supposed to be OK to dry fire still get damaged by the practice, and that's wrong. Sure, sometimes it happens, but your statement doesn't qualify that, and you make it sound like it's always the case. The truth is that some guns don't get damaged at all by dry firing.

I also think its stupid to make a thread saying dry firing wont hurt and its a myth when you are clearly wrong.

This right here is your most ridiculous statement; it shows you either didn't read the first post or you didn't understand it. He never said it's always OK to dry fire, he simply said that it's OK with most modern firearms. So he was completely correct when he said that it's a myth that it's always bad to dry fire a gun.

 

[gamestalker]

Other than my rim fire weapons, I dry fire most everything I own, some have been dry fired excessively, haven't broken one yet.

I have however seen a good number of firing pins broken by dry firing, so....?

GS

 

[Bigdog57]

No third-hand story or anecdote..... only gun I have had dry-firing problems with is my Marlin 25MN in .22WMR. I experienced peening of the chamber mouth, making extraction difficult. Kissed it lightly with the dreaded Dremel Tool (gasp!) and the problem is gone. I have avoided dry-firing it since.
I do dry-fire other guns, with no ill effects...... yet.

 

[Tirod]

It would be nice to see pics or the literal language of the owner's manuals saying "no dry fire" if such is the case.

Further - why don't we have a mark or indicator on the gun itself? I think what might happen is that a lot of makers would have their liability insurer start feeling uncomfortable with a gun that allows pulling the trigger as often as you like. It seems they just go off all by themselves often enough cleaning them.

"I thought the gun was unloaded!" = Do Not Dry Fire.

It's probably a lot less about damaging one as much as people negligently discharging them all too frequently as it is.

 

[km101]

If dry-firing a S&W center fire revolver would hurt it, my old ('62 vintage) model 19 would be dead and gone. It was my first LE carry gun and I dry fired it thousands of times. The more I dry fired it the better the trigger pull got. It is silky smooth now.
But it is still in good condition and shoots as well as ever. These days, better than I can.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Basically, the primer of a centerfire cartridge or the rim of a rimfire cartridge absorbs the force applied to the firing pin and also limits the firing pin's travel. Unless the firing pin channel has a travel limit built into it, the firing pin can strike the head of the chamber in a rimfire and cause damage to both the firing pin and the chamber head. In the case of a centerfire arrangement, a tapered firing pin can 'jam' into the sides of the firing pin port if the travel is not otherwise limited.

Without the shock absorbing effect of a primer or a rim, whatever the travel limiter is will absorb all the force imparted to the firing pin by the hammer or striker spring.

Generally, firing pin travel is limited to prevent penetrating or weakening a primer thereby (hopefully) preventing a rupture and blowback. Guns without a firing pin travel limit will have the force imparted to the firing pin set "just right" to limit the depth of the dimple. This can, though, give you misfires in the case of harder primers such as are used in military ammo.

Bottom line? Observe the manufacturer's recommendations. Lacking that, measure how far the firing pin will extend from the breech face and compare it to the room available between the breech face and what is in line with the firing pin's travel. A firing pin's travel beyond the breech face on a centerfire arm should be around .035", and around .025" on a rimfire. Bear in mind, though, those dimensions are in the ball park of what is a minimum required to have reliable ignition. If the travel is much more than that, get down to the nitty-gritty before you dry fire.

Woody

 

[oneounceload]

As often heard in the place of business.

"Why can't we change this and do it another better way"

"We can't"

"Why"

"Because we have always done it this way."

Add to that:

We've never done it that way"

and

"XYZ company does it this way"

 

[ol' scratch]

There are some firearms that it isn't a myth. The two I have had experience with are older .22 rimfires and Star pistols. I broke the firing pin on a PD with just two dry firings. I had trouble finding a pin. My grandfather would lose his mind if you dry fired one of his firearms. I accidently dry fired an Arasaka when I was trying to close the bolt with the trigger pulled to keep from dry firing it. One of his firearms WAS a Star model B.

I ALWAYS ask if I am in a gun store if I can dry fire a piece I am interested in to test the trigger BEFORE I dry fire them. My thought behind that is that the firearm doesn't belong to me and I want to treat other people's things with respect. It is a courtesy I think others should follow when handling other people's firearms. When I do dry fire, I make sure the piece is pointed in a safe direction. The store clerk does need to update his information, but I think the customer should have asked before dry firing because the piece doesn't belong to him. Personally, I have dry fired my AR rifles hundreds if not thousands of times. It is how you get a feel for the trigger. I have also dry fired my Garands, my FAL, my AK's, 1903 Springfields, modern 1911, Beretta 92, my modern Browning Hi Power, Kimber 82 government .22 (it has a bar) and even my modern Mark III target. Basically, everything I own has been dry fired with the exception of my Stars and a very old .22 single shot I own. I triple check the chamber and if practicing with magazine changes triple check the magazines I am practicing with before proceeding.

 

[javjacob]

And yet again Theohazard you keep chopping up my post to pick out parts of what I said to bash on me. Yes there are MFG's who say it is ok and have designed the guns to be able to handle it like say Glock's and the AR's but most of the others are just able to withstand the abuse better but its still hard on them. People break firing fins, wear out transfer bars ect ect. The MFG's are just trying to be competitive with eachother and if Glock says its ok to dry fire then the others are going to try to compete with that.

You also keep ignoring certain MFG's I mentioned like Henry... Ill say it again since you keep ignoring it... Henry... which says DO NOT dry fire. They are a modern gun that started production in 1999 or 2000? Henry isn't the only one either.

If you want to dry fire a rimfire at least put a empty shell casing in the chamber.

Far more rimfires are NOT designed to be dry fired than ones that are. Glock's and AR's are a very very small percentage of rimfires out there. There are more 50+ Y/O rimfires out there than there are Glock rimfires out there.

 

[javjacob]

I should also add since I said "no rimfire should ever be dry fired" that Glocks and AR's aren't real guns to me. Real rifles have wood stocks for starters. But that's just my preference. Tacticool isn't cool.

 

[Theohazard]

And yet again Theohazard you keep chopping up my post to pick out parts of what I said to bash on me.

Because those parts of your posts contained incorrect information.

You also keep ignoring certain MFG's I mentioned like Henry... Ill say it again since you keep ignoring it... Henry... which says DO NOT dry fire. They are a modern gun that started production in 1999 or 2000? Henry isn't the only one either.

Wow. Are you trolling me here? How many times do we have to say this: Nobody is saying that all guns are safe to dry fire. So what's the point in listing those manufacturers over and over? Nobody disagrees that you shouldn't dry fire those guns, including me. I'll say it yet again: Nobody here disagrees with the fact that some guns aren't good to dry fire, including the OP.

Too many people are showing an alarming lack of reading comprehension in this thread. The OP never once said that all guns are safe to dry fire. He also never said that it's a myth that dry firing is bad for guns. He said that it's a myth that dry firing is ALWAYS bad. So when people come on this thread and list the various guns that shouldn't be dry fired, they're not disproving the OP's point; he himself agreed with you in his original post.


EDIT: Somehow I missed this part of your post:

Far more rimfires are NOT designed to be dry fired than ones that are. Glock's and AR's are a very very small percentage of rimfires out there. There are more 50+ Y/O rimfires out there than there are Glock rimfires out there.

Glock and AR rimfires? There aren't any Glock rimfires, period. And many people don't consider ARs chambered in .22 to be real ARs; regardless, the ARs being referred to in this thread aren't rimfires.

 

[UpperAtmosphere]

If somebody would make a .22lr laser bullet, I'd be a happy man. I'd love to dry fire my Model 41 and get some aiming feedback.

Not fond of the kind you stick in the end of the barrel, but it's all there is. I assume the major holdup is miniaturizing he components to something that small, but a guy can dream.

 

[CraigC]

Well, if you are running a retail establishment, and say 90% of firearms can be dryfired safely and 10% cannot, what is the easiest, safest, lowest-cost way to train your employees? Try and teach them every variation and hope they don't screw it up? Or just tell them "No dryfiring period"?

Exactly! Best to be 100% safe than 10% sorry.

You're saying that even the guns that are supposed to be OK to dry fire still get damaged by the practice, and that's wrong.

Wrong. Some guns are reputedly okay to dryfire, yet have been well proven to break parts if dry fired enough.

Dry firing won't hurt most modern firearms.

Wow, if there ever was an ambiguous statement, there it is. "Modern firearm" is way too vague to even be useful in conversation.


Bottom line is, it's absolutely not a myth. There are plenty of firearms on the market, both used and new, that should never be dry-fired. Plenty more that should be dry-fired sparingly. It is a better rule of thumb for a gun shop to NEVER dryfire than for every person working there to have to learn whether or not every firearm that comes through their door is safe to dryfire. No sir, it is up to YOU to determine whether or not YOUR guns are safe to dryfire. Sorry guys but it seems to me that many here think that the only guns that exist are Glocks and AR's.

 

[Theohazard]

You're saying that even the guns that are supposed to be OK to dry fire still get damaged by the practice, and that's wrong.

Wrong. Some guns are reputedly okay to dryfire, yet have been well proven to break parts if dry fired enough.

This thread is bringing out the worst in peoples' logical reasoning abilities. No, I was not wrong: He made a blanket statement without acknowledging that there are exceptions, and therefore his statement was wrong. My point was that there are plenty of guns that aren't damaged at all by dry firing.

Dry firing won't hurt most modern firearms.

Wow, if there ever was an ambiguous statement, there it is. "Modern firearm" is way too vague to even be useful in conversation.

I made a generalization; did you want me to spend an entire page listing the exact guns instead?

Bottom line is, it's absolutely not a myth. There are plenty of firearms on the market, both used and new, that should never be dry-fired.

Here's yet another person who either didn't read the OP or didn't understand it. Yes, there are guns that shouldn't be dry fired, but they're in the minority.

It's probably time this thread was shut down. I've never seen a thread where so many people show they didn't understand the OP, and we keeps seeing people use terrible logic to "disprove" the OP's point: Listing guns that can't be dry fired doesn't disprove the OP; he acknowledged in his first post that they exist.

 

[pintler]

Just to throw gas on the fire, from the Kimber factory manual:

"Pull the trigger allowing the hammer to free fall
forward on the empty chamber. Do not "ease"
the hammer down by holding or blocking it.
Doing so can mar the sear tip which will result
in a substandard trigger pull"

http://www.kimberamerica.com/media/wysiwyg/manual-download/1911Fullsize45.pdf (the page marked '22' at the bottom, in the 'unloading' section)

I'll be the 4000th person to say:

1)dry fire bad in some guns: dry fire my S&W 41 w/o one of the Hammerli plastic inserts and I will be unhappy with you.
2)dry fire fine in some guns: Ruger MkII/III for example (as long as that cross pin is in place). I know bullseye types who have dry fired theirs tens of thousands of times (and, even better than anecdotal evidence, the manual says it's OK).
3)dry fire other people's guns, regardless of design: ask first. It's their gun, and if they don't want it dry fired, that's their prerogative.
4)when you dry fire, for bleep's sake make sure it's unloaded and pointed in a safe direction. You can even get inert plastic barrels for popular semiauto handguns, and inert plastic bolts for AR's. Some guns can be dry fired w/ chamber flags in, and that's not a bad idea either.

 

[CraigC]

This thread is bringing out the worst in peoples' logical reasoning abilities.

If I don't agree with you, my logic is flawed??? That's convenient. It's either myth or it is not. There are no grades of myth. If the rule holds true for ANY guns, then it is not a myth. Whether it's 1% or 98% is irrelevant. Fact is, there are a lot of guns that shouldn't be dry fired and that includes ALL guns that do not belong to you.

I made a generalization; did you want me to spend an entire page listing the exact guns instead?

Sorry but like I said, "modern firearms", otherwise completely unquantified, is FAR too vague to be useful.

Here's yet another person who either didn't read the OP or didn't understand it. Yes, there are guns that shouldn't be dry fired, but they're in the minority.

You may 'think' they're in the minority because you either don't know or because they don't interest you but you clearly have a narrow frame of reference. I'm not going to compile a comprehensive list but just glancing through the list of 150 or so guns that I've bought, sold and traded, there are A LOT that shouldn't be dry fired. Whether not at all or sparingly, perhaps as many as half. I have seen guns damaged by dry firing. I have damaged them myself. Enough so that I would NEVER do any sort of dry fire practice without snap caps. IMHO, NO rimfire should ever be dry fired any more than is necessary. Even those supposedly safe for doing so can have tolerances stacked against it enough for the firing pin to contact the breech face and peen it over. I had to return a Bearcat to Ruger because the dummies in the shop had dry fired it to the point that all six chambers were peened and no cartridges could be chambered. Knowing that there are more rimfires on the market right now than at any other time in history, I have a real problem with the notion that the warning against dry firing is somehow a "myth".

Read post #40 again and let it sink in.

 

[Theohazard]

If I don't agree with you, my logic is flawed??? That's convenient. It's either myth or it is not. There are no grades of myth. If the rule holds true for ANY guns, then it is not a myth. Whether it's 1% or 98% is irrelevant. Fact is, there are a lot of guns that shouldn't be dry fired

Wow. How else do I explain this? No, your logic is flawed because you're using terrible logic. The OP said that some guns are fine to dry fire, and you somehow think you're proving him wrong by saying that some guns aren't fine to dry fire? That's absurd logic.

Let me try to explain this yet again:

I don't disagree with the fact that many guns shouldn't be dry fired, and neither does the OP; we all agree that there are plenty of guns that shouldn't be dry fired.

He never once said that it's a myth that it's bad to dry fire guns, he said that it's a myth that it's ALWAYS bad to dry fire guns. How can you not understand this?

You may 'think' they're in the minority because you either don't know or because they don't interest you but you clearly have a narrow frame of reference. I'm not going to compile a comprehensive list but just glancing through the list of 150 or so guns that I've bought, sold and traded, there are A LOT that shouldn't be dry fired.

My primary frame of reference is from working at three different high-volume gun shops, two of which had busy ranges. I've seen thousands of guns come through those shops and ranges. Your frame of reference is from 150 guns? So which one of us has a narrow frame of reference?

Read post #40 again and let it sink in.

Post #40 makes sense and I don't disagree with it at all, and nothing I've posted indicates that I disagree with it. But you might want to read post #1 again, because clearly you don't understand what the point of this thread is.

 

[lysanderxiii]

...one case the employee gave the customer a butt-chewing about how he might have "ruined the firearm" after he tested the trigger...

While dry firing won't hurt most stuff (in the Army we spent a week just dry-firing, before actually shooting), when you are handling someone's property (ie in a store), you need to abide by their rules. If the store owner doesn't want you snapping the rifles, don't.


Oh, and there are some firearms that shouldn't be dry-fired.

Be a polite customer, and ask first.

(Of course, I would pay much for a firearm that I didn't have an idea about the trigger pull...)

 

[coloradokevin]

I definitely sense some reading comprehension issues when it comes to my opening post. I never said all guns are safe to dry fire, nor did I say that Glocks and AR-15s are the only guns people own. But, in the context of my opening post, these guns were very relevant to the discussion (since I saw someone get his butt chewed for dry firing an AR-15).

People seem to take an all-or-nothing approach to this subject, and often act as if any dry fire to any gun is a sin against firearms anywhere. That is the myth I was trying to discuss.

Regardless, a few of you made good points about gun store policies being written for the sake of simplicity, rather than expecting each employee or customer to know which guns can be safely dry fired. With that said, I laugh when I hear gun store employees admonishing a customer with a "you'll have to buy that" statement after someone dry fires a gun that can safely be dry fired all day, every day, virtually forever.

 

[CraigC]

My primary frame of reference is from working at three different high-volume gun shops, two of which had busy ranges. I've seen thousands of guns come through those shops and ranges. Your frame of reference is from 150 guns? So which one of us has a narrow frame of reference?

Yeah, you think you're the only one? Having worked in a gun shop and going into countless gun shops, I know first hand that working in a gun shop does not make one an expert. Besides, who has more experience, the guy standing in a room full of guns or the guy who has actually used them???

Take a step back and relax. You're arguing points I never made. I never said or implied that the OP said "ALL guns are okay to dryfire" and I never said that "NO guns are okay to dryfire". I simply exception to the declaration that "most modern firearms are okay to dryfire" and I take exception to referring to this whole issue as a myth. Because it isn't.

People seem to take an all-or-nothing approach to this subject...

In a retail environment, that's exactly how it should be. So the gun shop employee who says "never dryfire" is doing his job and exactly what I would tell him to do were he my employee.

 

[CraigC]

That one is NOT a myth: It can be extremely dangerous to fire lead bullets in a Glock. And the problem is that it's not consistant; some people get away with it and other experience kabooms rather quickly.

So you can get away with cast bullets in some Glocks but not all, therefore it's not a myth.

You can dryfire some firearms but not all, but that is a myth.

Alrighty then.

 

[Justin]

I suspect this myth gets repeated by gun store employees who simply don't want to have to deal with the cosmetic wear that might show up from repeated dry-firing.