Shield 40 Mishap

[jimbo883]

The .40S&W is a better choice for self defense than 9mm. A 165 grain bullet is a better round for the .40S&W cartridge. However, that article is old and has some misinformation in it.

First, the Glock no longer has the so called "unsupported" chamber. They have updated their design and now the chamber is as supported as any other gun. Second, the brass does not contain the pressure, the chamber does. So, for the author to suggest that 10mm brass is designed to handle higher pressure than .40S&W brass is a misnomer. The brass case, for any cartridge, is there to hold the components together. It's the job of the chamber to contain the pressure and direct it down the bore.

In the case of the OP, it seems that he had an out of battery discharge. If that's true, the caliber is irrelevant because the case cannot contain all that pressure.

Thanks for clearing those points up.

I was aware of the design change made by GLOCK so I assumed that the unsupported issue with them was put behind and corrected.

As for the brass comments, how silly of me to think that the brass is the only component that retains the firing pressure. I should of realized that the brass is contained in the firearms chamber and that is what contains those forces. Now if the firearm manufacture designs his chamber close to the mininum then there could be problems with over pressure ammo.

 

[Rastoff]

No, I don't think a chamber at the minimum spec will create an over pressure situation. Over pressure can only be caused by reducing the case volume. If the case fits in the chamber, it's not too small. Bullet set back is another issue altogether.

Based on the OPs description, I believe he had some defect in the gun. I believe that because he was having feeding issues. Then, the type of damage is consistent with an out of battery discharge. So, I believe something built up in the chamber which prevented the round from fully chambering. In this state, the gun shouldn't be capable of firing, but his did.

 

[jimbo883]

Based on the OPs description, I believe he had some defect in the gun. I believe that because he was having feeding issues. Then, the type of damage is consistent with an out of battery discharge. So, I believe something built up in the chamber which prevented the round from fully chambering. In this state, the gun shouldn't be capable of firing, but his did.

So if this really is the root cause to the incident then wouldn't S&W be the liable one for allowing a firearm to fire in this state?

 

[worm5932]

So if this really is the root cause to the incident then wouldn't S&W be the liable one for allowing a firearm to fire in this state?

Yes. But they now have the gun, won't give it back, and say its not their fault. How could anyone prove them wrong.

 

[Thump-boom]

Have you thought about filing a small claims action against Federal and/or S&W? It is easy and inexpensive to do and If S&W is correct, they have determined the cause to be a HOT round. You should be able to get a judgment in small claims court against Federal and get your $600+ back. Then go buy a different brand

 

[Rastoff]

So if this really is the root cause to the incident then wouldn't S&W be the liable one for allowing a firearm to fire in this state?

That's a question for the courts. There could be any number of reasons for a round to go off when out of battery.

Yes. But they now have the gun, won't give it back, and say its not their fault. How could anyone prove them wrong.

Won't? No, they just haven't yet. That doesn't mean they won't.

 

[turbo38gn]

So if this really is the root cause to the incident then wouldn't S&W be the liable one for allowing a firearm to fire in this state?

That's conjecture my friend.. not factual at this point.. S&W has already investigated and according to their investigation, it was an overcharged round. But a few here haven't read that part yet..

happy holidays,

 

[turbo38gn]

Have you thought about filing a small claims action against Federal and/or S&W? It is easy and inexpensive to do and If S&W is correct, they have determined the cause to be a HOT round. You should be able to get a judgment in small claims court against Federal and get your $600+ back. Then go buy a different brand

That makes sense... go buy another brand gun if it's the ammo makers fault... where do you guys come up with this stuff...

 

[lonejacklarry]

Have you thought about filing a small claims action against Federal and/or S&W? It is easy and inexpensive to do and ......

...... rarely accomplishes anything except cost you time and money. Yes, I know, it is cheap and easy......to file. What is not cheap and easy is the flood of paper that a large company will dump on you and each piece of paper will have to have a lawyer for the reply. And then there will be more paper and more cost.

Somehow, people have the idea that a small claims filing will bring huge companies to their knees and have them begging to fill your pockets. It does not happen. Ever.

And the 2nd point- getting a judgement from small claims court, or any other court for that matter, does not mean someone will pay the judgement. Most don't and then you have to spend more money for garnishments, skip tracers, process servers, etc., to try to get your money. Getting your judgement and getting your money are two very different things.

 

[BobsSmith]

Wow! I can't believe SW won't give you a new gun!

Just a lay mans thought, perhaps they are afraid that would be admitting a defective product?

Best

Bob

 

[Rastoff]

...... rarely accomplishes anything except cost you time and money. Yes, I know, it is cheap and easy......to file.

I agree with you.

The problem in this case is proof. Small claims is still court. The defendant, S&W here, is presumed innocent until you prove otherwise. What evidence would you bring to accomplish this? A broken gun? I ask because S&W will bring an analysis of that same gun. I could go on, but the bottom line is you'd lose unless you had an independent analysis and that will cost more than the gun.

The real take away here is reading comprehension though. The OP has said numerous times that he won't go down this path. So, suggesting more legal action is just internet chest pounding.

 

[BobsSmith]

Despite the fact that SW makes some great guns, if it happened to me, I would write a letter telling them that you will never buy another SW product again.

To be honest, they could probably care less but I would do it anyway!

Bob

 

[blujax01]

What this boils down to is QUALITY CONTROL most models are ok but some are substandard, now they are relying on an overused Costumer Service to fix their mistakes. Smith and Wesson is not the same company that made Revolvers in the 60's. I would like to see improvement, they are an American standard.

What if it turns out that the ammo is at fault as S&W says it is?

What "improvement" would you recommend?

 

[2001gmc]

Hopefully I will here from Federal within the next week. They said it would take longer than normal due to people out for the Holidays. Smith claims federal will own up to it but I guess we shall see.

 

[Boge]

It is clearly an ammo problem, whether that be with a factory round or a reload. If factory contact Federal. If a reload, suck it up and learn from your experience. This is NOT S&W's problem.

 

[2001gmc]

Yea I'm sure the gun was no contributor with 10 fail to ejects within the first 150 rounds and you couldn't hit the broad side of a bard at 7yds with it the last 50 rounds.

 

[turbo38gn]

Yea I'm sure the gun was no contributor with 10 fail to ejects within the first 150 rounds and you couldn't hit the broad side of a bard at 7yds with it the last 50 rounds.

No disrespect sir, but if you had that much trouble with it, why were you still shooting it? Seems to me, it should have been returned to S&W prior to the mishap.

 

[2001gmc]

No disrespect sir, but if you had that much trouble with it, why were you still shooting it? Seems to me, it should have been returned to S&W prior to the mishap.

I posted about it here in the forums. Was told to keep shooting it at least 300-500 rounds that the springs were stiff in such a small pistol. Also was told to keep the slide locked back all night one night to help weaken it up. Well guess what? I did. BOOOOOOM!

 

[2001gmc]

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-m-p-pistols/303301-m-p-shield-40-fte-ftf.html

Over 1200 views 11 comments just keep shooting is what I got out of it.

 

[2001gmc]

The way the gun was shooting on that last outing it was going back to Smith after that box of Federals were gone. But it just didn't make it.