Ed Fowler
Member
Heyman: The big outfits make mistakes also. Not all will face up to their responsability as MBIA ammo has.
Shield is UNSAFE
- Thread starter JW4286
- Start date
Of course. I don't think any ammo manufacturer can ever say they've never had a screw up. No powder, or too much powder in a round is one thing, but when a company ships ammo where a case is literally cracked in half, or when they ship ammo with a bullet that is seated way too deep is another. Of course, all four instances can result in some major damage, but I can see how little or no powder, or too much powder can pass QC. But I can no longer trust a companies QC when they overlook something so obvious as a cracked or split case, or improperly seated bullet. BTW, this is with Freedom, and has nothing to do with the issue the OP is having. Just thought I'd post the pic as a reminder it can and does happen with other well known companies as well.
ggibson511960
Member
How Does One "QC" Ammo Manufacture?
I have a hard time believing that any sizable ammunition re-manufacturer has production QC. Real QC means some inspection process that examines or tests each round or a meaningful sample. We all reload and know how we do it on a small basis, examining cases, looking in charged cases, etc., eyeballs on every round. To do this in a high speed, for-profit enterprise would be daunting and likely not cost effective. They have to undercut the big boys to make a living, and they are doing it with once-fired brass, a beginning disadvantage. I would hope that they have QC that applies to their loading equipment. That means checking set-ups and condition. A prudent business person would also have QA (quality assurance) processes that mind things like employee background verification (drug testing), documented manufacturing processes, audits, etc. Insurance companies like all this stuff and so do consumers, but we usually balk at paying for what we can't see. On the other hand, trial lawyers thrive in environments like this, even among a group of consumers that historically eschew jackpot justice. You can't print enough disclaimers on a box of re-man ammo to escape liability.
I know a couple of the re-manufacturers are watching this thread and would welcome insight, denial, or correction on this issue. For me, I recognize that this hobby, like most, is an enterprise in managed risk. Few or none of these kabooms, no matter how gruesome, has resulted in loss of life or limb. FWIW, I don't buy remanufactured ammunition. I like my fate in my own shaky hands.
I have a hard time believing that any sizable ammunition re-manufacturer has production QC. Real QC means some inspection process that examines or tests each round or a meaningful sample. We all reload and know how we do it on a small basis, examining cases, looking in charged cases, etc., eyeballs on every round. To do this in a high speed, for-profit enterprise would be daunting and likely not cost effective. They have to undercut the big boys to make a living, and they are doing it with once-fired brass, a beginning disadvantage. I would hope that they have QC that applies to their loading equipment. That means checking set-ups and condition. A prudent business person would also have QA (quality assurance) processes that mind things like employee background verification (drug testing), documented manufacturing processes, audits, etc. Insurance companies like all this stuff and so do consumers, but we usually balk at paying for what we can't see. On the other hand, trial lawyers thrive in environments like this, even among a group of consumers that historically eschew jackpot justice. You can't print enough disclaimers on a box of re-man ammo to escape liability.
I know a couple of the re-manufacturers are watching this thread and would welcome insight, denial, or correction on this issue. For me, I recognize that this hobby, like most, is an enterprise in managed risk. Few or none of these kabooms, no matter how gruesome, has resulted in loss of life or limb. FWIW, I don't buy remanufactured ammunition. I like my fate in my own shaky hands.
Thanks, MBI. I will be in touch with the info you requested. Greatly appreciate your attention to this matter.
To all on the forum - Thank you for your input, it was incredibly helpful. I will keep you updated on what I hear from MBI and S&W.
To all on the forum - Thank you for your input, it was incredibly helpful. I will keep you updated on what I hear from MBI and S&W.
WGSNewnan19
Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 132
- Reaction score
- 64
to the OP JW - could you describe the injuries he sustained? obviously the gun was destroyed but what exactly happened to him?
Post #1 said metal chunks in his hand from the destruction! He didn't mention if anything else was hurt! But his brother was very lucky
Smitty357
Member
I've shot thousands of re-manufactured rounds from Freedom, but after finding a round with a bullet obviously seated too deep, I think I'm going to stick with new ammo from other manufacturers from now on. If this get past QC, what else are they letting through. My buddy also had a round where the case was completely split in two, and powder was all over the inside of his box of ammo. No picture of that one, but here's a pic of the bullet seated way too deep.
This has also happened to me in the past. Along with problems feeding rounds through several different rifles. Long story short, i dont plan to do business with them again. Maybe i got a bad batch, a few times. But im no longer willing to take that risk.
I don't have a picture, but I once found a Winchester .40 S&W law enforcement round in a previously unopened box from a previously unopened case which had the jacketed hollowpoint bullet loaded backwards . . .
Last edited:
ggibson511960
Member
Tough to See on a PC Monitor
Signs like this are the sort of thing that a real forensic analysis would turn up, but it would take a good microscope to make anything out of the surface of the fracture plane. Postulating that if the barrel had a defect and was progressively fracturing under repeated firings, it might show different levels of powder residue across the fracture as it progressively opened up. On the other hand, if the fracture was a clean tensile failure on the first overload, residue deposition would be more uniform. This would be tough to discern across the short span of the break and impossible if the pieces had been wiped down or oiled for preservation.
Signs like this are the sort of thing that a real forensic analysis would turn up, but it would take a good microscope to make anything out of the surface of the fracture plane. Postulating that if the barrel had a defect and was progressively fracturing under repeated firings, it might show different levels of powder residue across the fracture as it progressively opened up. On the other hand, if the fracture was a clean tensile failure on the first overload, residue deposition would be more uniform. This would be tough to discern across the short span of the break and impossible if the pieces had been wiped down or oiled for preservation.
alleycat7002
Member
Guess i trade my sheild for a hi point dont hear too much about them blowing up..
WA101
Member
Check out the linked article below for explanation of how over-pressure can occur in 180gr load for 40 SW...
CALIBERS -- Why the 180gr Bullet is a Bad Choice for .40 S&W
I've shot thousands of re-manufactured rounds from Freedom, but after finding a round with a bullet obviously seated too deep, I think I'm going to stick with new ammo from other manufacturers from now on. If this get past QC, what else are they letting through. My buddy also had a round where the case was completely split in two, and powder was all over the inside of his box of ammo. No picture of that one, but here's a pic of the bullet seated way too deep.
I had some .45acp Blazer that arrived with a round like that. In my case, I'm pretty sure it was shipping damage (box was crushed in that corner).
We all have to be the final QC on ammo and not load it into the mag or cylinder if it's obviously "not right".
scooter123
Member
That "article" is a joke that isn't at all amusing. First mistake, the 10mm FBI light load featured a 180 grain bullet at 1050 fps., significantly faster than what was cited by this "author". This was in response to issues with the recoil of some of the original 10mm loadings that produced 1250 fps. with a 180 grain bullet.
Second issue is the pressure statements, the 40 S&W is and was originally intended to be a high pressure caliber. In fact it operates at the exact same pressure as the 9mm Parabellum and 357 Magnum. It's the 9mm +P and the 10mm that operate at pressures above the 35,000 psi threshold of the 40 S&W.
Now, I will admit that setback is an issue with the 40 S&W. It's also an issue with the 9mm, 10mm, 380 ACP, or even 45 ACP. Modern semi autos feature a rather compact case designed to use the higher energy provided by smokeless powders that allowed the use of smaller case volumes.
While the provided table is interesting it's also been manipulated to make things appear more extreme. Take a look at the increments of the changes in length. The increment starts at 0.01 inch, then jumps by 0.025 inch for a bit, then goes back to 0.01 inch. IMO to a degree that is "cooking the books". I am quite certain you could do a similar manipulation with any semi auto caliber and produce tables with similar results. Because small case volumes will respond faster to a change in volume than the "roomier" volumes of typical revolver cases originally designed for black powder.
Finally, gun powders, whether black or smokeless, are typically intended to actually burn when used to drive a bullet. Unfortunately like any burning fuel there is a Pressure-Temperature relationship involved and when the Pressure or Temperature exceeds a certain point that burning process can go into what can be described as a Runaway Ignition. We call that Runaway Ignition DETONATION and when it happens in a closed volume you get an extremely rapid rise in pressure. I believe that is what happened here and it's why that barrel was pretty much turned into a grenade. As for the pressure required to do that, I have no idea at all but would not be at all surprised if it exceeded 120,000 psi.
Will be looking for the updates . Thanks for checking in
The problem I have with commercial reloading isn't quality control. It's how many times a particular casing has been used. We just don't know. Just because there are no visible bulges or cracks does not mean a casing is safe. Metals, with repeated stress, can develop microscopic cracks. Airplane wings and propellers are inspected regularly for these. Unless, they put their brass under the equipment to see such microscopic cracks, I won't trust brass that I myself didn't collect. I won't reuse brass more than once. After that, it's probably best to send it to be recycled and made into ingots to be reused. An insane amount of pressure is put on those cases when they're fires. While the chamber provides necessary support, it's not an exact fit, and there is some play. There are a few spots, in most guns, where there isn't much support (around the feeder ramp). Metals can only take so much of repetitive stress before the tensile strength, even microscopically, is surpassed. That's another reason I don't use aluminum casings. Aluminum is very brittle and will fail very quickly if stressed. Unlike steel, it doesn't handle bending well. It just tends to break.
I want to start by saying, I'm not trying to be insulting, but....
I don't think you're going to make many converts to this viewpoint. At least not with actual brass cases. Aluminum, sure, but not brass. I personally know people who have loaded the same set of 9mm cases over 25 times before any of them failed. And even then the failures were just split case mouths. Admittedly the 9mm isn't exactly the same as 10mm/40 cal, but the pressure ratings and case construction are very similar.
Even if a case were to completely blow out, it's just a thin piece of mild brass. It isn't doing much to contain the pressure anyway - the barrel is doing that. So it isn't going to cause a catastrophic failure of a barrel that is made of hardened steel that is 10-20 times thicker than the case wall.
As others have already related in this thread, even a catastrophic failure of a case - like a case head separation - doesn't usually do anything more than forcibly eject a magazine and maybe damage it. At least I've not heard anyone say that a case failure did catastrophic damage to their gun.
Feel free to reload your brass only once if that makes you feel safer. But also feel free to send me all of your twice-fired brass. I'll make sure it gets properly "taken care of" for you
alleycat7002
Member
Aircraft parts are xrayed..had to work at factory where they tried to sabotage it..ever part is xrayed..maybe gun makers ammo makers do same
alleycat7002
Member
This needs to end...it is nonsense to say shield is unsafe glocks have their share kabooms its the 40 cartridge that has a problem...ever the old steel smiths cracked their frames..
Similar threads
- Locked
