In receipt of a "defective" factory cartridge

[lrrifleman]

Greetings! This is a first for me, and I'm a little miffed.

On Saturday, I received a mail order shipment of ammo (200 rounds of Federal 380s and 250 rounds of European 9mm). Out of habit, I tend to inspect all purchased ammo in order to ensure that all rounds are present and no obvious damage. Low and behold, I found what I would consider a "defective" round.

One Federal 380 had significant bullet setback. The average for 199 rounds of 95gr FMJ was 0.966" (COL). The one obvious round was 0.902", which I feel would be unsafe, due to anticipated excessive pressure. Because 449 other rounds appeared to be "within specification", I presumed I had a round that slipped through QC. Yesterday morning, I contacted Vista Outdoors CS and gave them the catalog number and lot number for the bad round, and was advised "that a team member would be in touch".
I realize that potentially 1 round out of millions could be classed as a "needle in a haystack". However, don't you think that a company producing ammunition potentially dangerous to the user would be over such a report, like white on rice? (a.k.a. Remington)

I am not looking to get something in exchange for the bad round, I just want to see a MAJOR manufacturer of ammunition and components from becoming the victim of a wrongful ____________ lawsuit!

Has anyone here experienced a comparable relaxed reaction?

As always, thanks in advance for your help!

 

[djohns6]

So you want them to freak out over one bad round ? I'm sure they created a report on that lot number and will watch to see if there are any more reports of bad rounds in that run but that's probably as far as it will go .

 

[noro]

Its pretty much an exercise in futility. I fired a box of ww45acp at a local range in my m1917
(their ammo). Two of the rounds split and
sounded odd.

I contacted Winchester, explained what happened, and they requested the fired cases, as
well as the lot no. codes from the box. After 3
months, they sent a check for $20.00 for a
replacement box of ammo. They never disclosed their findings.

Their customer service and QC was a private
company hired by Winchester to deal with
Quality problems - no connection with Winchester or Winchester employees.

I was trying to make them aware of a problem
with that particular lot, but it didn't seem like
they really cared. They blew me off with a
refund, and considered the matter closed.

 

[tndrfttom]

Don't hold your breath waiting for the manufacturer to do much except give a refund.

At Winchester's request I returned defective cartridges to Winchester Ammunition two separate times – many years apart. The ammo was bunch of .22 duds and some rounds of 357 Magnum with deformed JHP bullets. Winchester sent me 2 boxes (100 rounds) of replacement .22s, and the next time, a coupon for a box of replacement .357 ammunition. When I wrote back and asked about the .357 ammo their reply was: "Test results are held internally for quality control purposes and are not released."

They felt the matter was resolved and moved on.

 

[Nevada Ed]

Any well educated business has been told not to say or put into writing.....

any wrong doing, to an outside source.

Just send $$ and sweep it under the rug.

 

[JJEH]

I would let them know but it's no reason to freak out. Mass production and rough handling from the factory to the door will sometimes damage the merchandise.

 

[djohns6]

If you think they are going to release the details of any investigation , you are sadly mistaken . There are probably many good reasons not to . First of all it will be shared on forums like this and the story will change every time it's repeated . I don't blame them one bit for keeping things confidential . Everything is not a conspiracy .

 

[ken158]

You think 0.064 OAL difference in a mass produced handgun round is unsafe? They may make a report on the lot number and review if other complaints surface but I would believe that 0.064 would fall into an acceptable margin of error.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

You think 0.064 OAL difference in a mass produced handgun round is unsafe? They may make a report on the lot number and review if other complaints surface but I would believe that 0.064 would fall into an acceptable margin of error.

I was wondering about that very same concept myself... Is 0.064" a critical deviation in production ammunition? Would the average shooter even notice it optically or when the round was fired?

 

[Imissedagain]

This is a 380 case.
Bad math student here, no cowculator, so what's the useable case area/length with that bullet seated properly?
How much change does the .064" setback cause?

Loading ammo is the last chance to check it, kinda important, and that setback would be very noticeable to many.

 

[peyton]

My friend had a failure to fire issue with a box of Hornady ammo. Several of the rounds and bad primers. When your shooting bullets at more that $2.00 a bullet it is frustrating. They told him to send the whole box back, but he already shot all the good ones.

 

[Paul in Nevada]

Your complaint goes into a database, cross referenced by lot number. They aren't interested in outliers, they are looking for patterns. They have this stuff figured down to the gnat's *** and they know a few defects will slip past QC per X number of rounds produced.