Wolf Ammo Advisory for M&P rifles
- Thread starter WVSig
- Start date
PeglegJones
Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2016
- Messages
- 101
- Reaction score
- 21
Maybe the increase in reported OOBs is simply due to 1000s more being sold since the drastic price drop?
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
We know very little about the M&P bolts or carriers. We know that they are not full auto bolt carriers. Some are not HPT/MPI marked. I believe some of the higher end ones are HP marked but the Sport IIs are not.
S&W will tell you almost nothing about the construction or manufacturing of the BCG. I personally have not heard any real issues with the S&W BCGs. I prefer full auto BCG but semi auto carriers work.
Even a semi auto bolt carrier should function in the same way. I wonder if there is just a run of defective BCG in some S&W guns which are just starting to show themselves. It could also be that the combination of the slightly out of spec S&W BCGs and Wolf ammo is a nexus of bad. The stacking of the 2 are causing an issue not see in other brands. Really it is all speculation.
If I owned a M&P15 I personally would look to other ammos because there are so many good rounds being sold in the sub $.30 range these days that it is not worth taking the chance. The other thing to do is call S&W and see what they say.
Last edited:
A rise in the number of rifles sold would not increase the OOB firings unless the volume part has cause a slip in QC. An inspect AR15 should not be able to fire OOB. Does not matter if you have sold 1 to 1,000,000 in spec rifles the number of OOBs should be ZERO.
If they are selling guns which are out of spec.
Rastoff
US Veteran
I believe the point he was making is that if you have 1 failure with 10,000 rifles, it's not unreasonable to see 7 with 70,000 sold. So, the increased number of failures reported could indeed simply be because of an increase in sales.
However, I do agree that there should never be even the possibility of an out-of-battery discharge. I also agree that the specification of the bolt carrier and bolt (together they make the bolt carrier group or BCG) is such that it would have to be a dramatically jacked up BCG to fire out of battery.
I think this is a knee jerk reaction from Wolf. It sounds like they are simply trying to do a little CYA rather than actually investigating the situation and digging down to the root cause.
I don't have an M&P15 at the moment. Even so, I pulled the BCG out of an AR and examined the protrusion of the pin relative to the position of the bolt. There is no way on God's green earth that firing pin in my BCG could contact the primer on any round if the lugs are not locked. If the bolt has not rotated at least a little, the firing pin doesn't protrude at all from the bolt face. If it doesn't protrude from the bolt face, it can't fire.
Further, the number WVSig picked is a very interesting number. In the world of statistics, 3.4 failures per 1 million opportunities forms a failure curve that is 6 standard deviations from nominal. In other words, in the real world, it's about as close to perfect, or failure free, as any mechanical device can hope to get.
In my opinion, any gun that can actually fire out-of-battery, has a serious problem. Assuming that it's the gun's fault and not a stray piece of debris causing the failure, which is more likely than an out-of-battery ignition from a gun like the M&P15.
Arik
Member
Great movieA rise in the number of rifles sold would not increase the OOB firings unless the volume part has cause a slip in QC. An inspect AR15 should not be able to fire OOB. Does not matter if you have sold 1 to 1,000,000 in spec rifles the number of OOBs should be ZERO.
If they are selling guns which are out of spec.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
CARRIER...not bolt. Compare the carrier internal structure,
between tail of bolt and flange of firing pin.
Well, go ahead and eyeball the bolt, too...low hanging fruit, easy to compare. Might was well throw the firing pin in, too.
Semi-auto and select fire carriers are different at back end...if carrier acts to prevent firing pin protrusion on an unlocked bolt, that's a feature that would not logically be exclusive to a semi- carrier.
Don't know much about either the bolt or carrier IMHO. All we know is that they are not HPT/MPI marked and they are semi auto and for the most part have run well which would lead one to believe that the overwhelming number of them are within spec and working properly.
I don't need to inspect anything because I don't own a M&P 15. I am only bringing this to the attention of the forum because it might help others.
I agree that there is a difference between full auto and semi auto carriers but it does not really tell us anything does it. Oh well hope it amounts to nothing for those who own M&P 15s and shoot Wolf ammo.
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
Think of the countless millions of rounds of .223 Wolf sells and all the autoloading rifles (not just AR platforms) from an endless list of manufactures that are already in circulation over past decades as well as new sales. With all that... Wolf told me they typically get a couple OOB reports a year. Now in the first half of this year they get seven OOB reports from a single manufacture, S&W. M&P sales volume can't explain that.
Last edited:
Anti Psychotic
Member
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2016
- Messages
- 6
- Reaction score
- 3
Has anyone contacted Smith&Wesson to get some feedback from them? I'll send them an e-mail and see what response, if any, I get back from them.
Last edited:
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
Let us know what they say.
A somewhat related side story.... Soon after S&W introduced the M&P 15-22 this forum was flooded with OOB reports. I don't recall S&W ever making a statement on the subject other than when they returned repaired rifles that had been sent in with blown off extractors and other damage, S&W would include a repair sheet "Updated to latest Spec". IIRC, it was close to two years before OOB reports slowed down. Course a .22lr OOB is not quite as exciting as a 5.56.
Last edited:
PeglegJones
Member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2016
- Messages
- 101
- Reaction score
- 21
Yeah, non of the info on the 15-22 issue was ever very clear. Supposedly started at an Appleseed event with a participant having some issues and an official worked on the gun and then the OOB happened.
S&W never promulgated anything, as usual.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
S&W never promulgated anything, as usual.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Rastoff
US Veteran
Indeed, but without a proper statistical analysis we can't be sure there is a correlation between manufacturer and malfunction. It very well could be an anomaly, just simple chance that they've had 7 from the M&P line. It very well could have been 7 random AR15s. We just don't know.
Even so, the probability of 7 from any one manufacturer is surely low. Numbers are funny things. If not applied properly or analyzed properly, the wrong conclusions can be drawn. For example, it is possible that a significant correlation can be shown between the number of characters typed on the S&W Forum and the number of shooting fatalities in Chicago, but anyone with a brain can see that this cannot be real.
My only point in my last post was that there is a real connection between number of failures and sales volume. Does it account for this issue? Certainly not. Even so, I still believe that Wolf has done no real analysis and is just doing a knee jerk reaction. At the volume of .223/5.56 sales they do, losing the entire M&P15 market isn't going to significantly affect their bottom line. I may think their reaction is without analysis, but it's not the wrong way to go for them.
The only question left is, can there really be a flaw in the S&W design that doesn't show up in any other AR out there?
Disabled1
US Veteran
Rastoff, IMHO, I think you may have hit upon something there.
Why now, why with an M&P15? Could S&W have "cut corners" somewhere due to increased sales of the M&P15?
Things that make you go, Hmmmmmm............
cyphertext
US Veteran
The Appleseed incident is fairly recent... The 15-22 OOB incidents that Phil is referring to is from 8 or 9 years ago, when the 15-22 first appeared. S&W changed out springs to alleviate the issue.
OK, let's get a little perspective here. First and foremost, there are only a very limited number of sources for bolt carriers. Given their reputation, S&W isn't going to source their carriers from folks who produce scrap. NO AR builder makes all the parts-even Colt.
That said, manufacturing tolerance stack does exist and can cause problems.
Now let's get down to brass tacks. Prior to retirement, there was, several years ago, a number of over pressure events with a certain brand of US made new factory ammo. In the usual manner, ammo company blamed firearm manufacturer, and vice-versa, leaving the firearm owners in the lurch. When we had the problem, I talked my employers into sending ammo & firearm to HP White Laboratories. They actually wanted several firearms, close as possible in serial number. It was determined that it was an ammunition problem. Faced with this, the ammo company exchanged all our ammo, threw in extra and covered both repair costs and the HP White fee. "Bad" ammo does exist and can happen from any source.
If anyone really wants a definitive answer for YOUR event, there's your method. BTW, you're talking $1200-$1500.
I'll also note that over 40 years, I've personally seen about 6 OOB events. I do know that about half were Colts, so those who claim it's impossible with any particular brand aren't entirely correct.
That said, manufacturing tolerance stack does exist and can cause problems.
Now let's get down to brass tacks. Prior to retirement, there was, several years ago, a number of over pressure events with a certain brand of US made new factory ammo. In the usual manner, ammo company blamed firearm manufacturer, and vice-versa, leaving the firearm owners in the lurch. When we had the problem, I talked my employers into sending ammo & firearm to HP White Laboratories. They actually wanted several firearms, close as possible in serial number. It was determined that it was an ammunition problem. Faced with this, the ammo company exchanged all our ammo, threw in extra and covered both repair costs and the HP White fee. "Bad" ammo does exist and can happen from any source.
If anyone really wants a definitive answer for YOUR event, there's your method. BTW, you're talking $1200-$1500.
I'll also note that over 40 years, I've personally seen about 6 OOB events. I do know that about half were Colts, so those who claim it's impossible with any particular brand aren't entirely correct.
Last edited:
rtquig
Member
If it were the M&P with the problem, wouldn't other ammunition companies also be issuing the same warning. Why just Wolf?
Does the M&P 15 different models come with the same BCG? Wolf is not saying problems with the Sport or OR , etc.... model, but all M&P 15's.
We on the forum are thinking the problem is possibly the BCG, but for Wolf to make a blanket statement without documentation for all to see is speculation and innuendo.
Does the M&P 15 different models come with the same BCG? Wolf is not saying problems with the Sport or OR , etc.... model, but all M&P 15's.
We on the forum are thinking the problem is possibly the BCG, but for Wolf to make a blanket statement without documentation for all to see is speculation and innuendo.
Arik
Member
Possibly but I don't think they're in business to scare away customers. Obviously they have some kind of documentation. Since they're not talking about another company but their own they don't need to show or provide anything. Many gun manufacturers list ammo they advise against with no problems. People just take their word for it.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
rtquig
Member
I think they are CYA for something specific that happened. I agree many manufacturers warn about certain ammunition (S&W M&P22 for example), but I also think as already been stated that the number of increased M&P sales correlates with any type of defect.
I would be more comfortable if Wolf had stated the other manufacturers firearms that experienced this problem even though according to them the number of problems are lower.
Anyone that deals with statistics knows they can be made to read in favor of what outcome you want.
There could very well be a problem, I myself doubt it is an M&P issue, but the statement from Wolf is too vague to point a finger.
I would be more comfortable if Wolf had stated the other manufacturers firearms that experienced this problem even though according to them the number of problems are lower.
Anyone that deals with statistics knows they can be made to read in favor of what outcome you want.
There could very well be a problem, I myself doubt it is an M&P issue, but the statement from Wolf is too vague to point a finger.
Rastoff
US Veteran
In the OOB events you saw, what was the damage to the gun? Wolf is stating that there was no damage to the chamber or lugs. They're claiming that that means it was not locked. I can't say I disagree with that, but the only way any of my ARs could fire that way would be for the cam pin to shear off or not be installed. I could see a user forgetting to put the cam pin in, but I can't see a scenario where the cam pin shears off.
This is an excellent question. If it were a S&W M&P problem, it would be all over the web and with every type of ammo. With the thousands of M&P15s sold there must be millions of rounds fired. Yet, we've never heard of this issue here prior to this alert.
People say this, but it's mostly said from those that don't know statistics. Unless the statistician is being dishonest, the numbers don't lie. Like I said earlier, you have to start with things that make sense to begin with, but if you're honest with the numbers, statistics works. I've seen it too many times. It's unfortunate that people disregard statistics just because they don't understand it.
Similar threads
