Shield is UNSAFE

[Bkreutz]

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

And how many gun owners would pay the extra cost? Priced an airplane lately?

 

[cb4017]

Thought I would mention that major ammunition manufactures have their own problems. Over the years I have personally observed the the following from new ammunition from the major makers.
-squib loads
-dud, (no mixture in primer)
-primer backwards
-crushed case from bullet seating
-bullet seated too deep
-bullet seated backwards
-deformed bullets
-dented or deformed cases
-split cases after firing

Just saying.

 

[alleycat7002]

And how many gun owners would pay the extra cost? Priced an airplane lately?

Yep got one

 

[billspencer1956]

One possibility that has not been discussed about this KB is it could have been caused by a long case and a short chamber. This would also require a over crimp. This could result in the case holding the bullet and allowing pressure to reach dangerous levels due to failure to chamber on the case, crimping the case to the bullet even tighter.

 

[Rastoff]

One possibility that has not been discussed about this KB is it could have been caused by a long case and a short chamber.

Good point, but very unlikely.

I've run into the long case problem before and in my case, the round wouldn't allow the slide to go into battery. For this type of error, the chamber would have to be grossly out of tolerance. If that is the case, it's still S&W's fault.

Here is a pic of two 9mm rounds:

Note that these two have the same OAL, but the left one has a longer case. It would not allow the gun to go fully into battery.

Therefore, while it was a good thought, I don't think it's possible without having had some other problem as well.

 

[billspencer1956]

Good point, but very unlikely.

I've run into the long case problem before and in my case, the round wouldn't allow the slide to go into battery. For this type of error, the chamber would have to be grossly out of tolerance. If that is the case, it's still S&W's fault.

Here is a pic of two 9mm rounds:

Note that these two have the same OAL, but the left one has a longer case. It would not allow the gun to go fully into battery.

Therefore, while it was a good thought, I don't think it's possible without having had some other problem as well.

The only way it could happen is a over crimp. Brass that is reloaded may vary at the case opening. It would of had to be between 10 or 20 thousands undersized. I have seen 9 mm crimped so hard it cut copper jackets.

 

[tipoc]

Below are some pics of a blown up M29-2. The destruction of the revolver was the result of an overloaded charge in a reloaded round. How much of an overload we don't know. We don't know because if my friend had known he had overloaded the charge he never would have put it in the gun.

Note the damage done and the type.

In the pics offered by the op of the Shield the culprit is an overload. There was no squib round fired followed by a normal round, the damage is too great for that.









tipoc

 

[Ed Fowler]

Were you able to find the bullet?

I agree with your thoughts of a massive overload.

The grain structure of that model 29 sure is clean.

The safety features in the design of that revolver are amazing, I have seen blowups like this one and never has the shooter been seriously injured.

 

[tipoc]

My friends hand stung but was not injured.

This was some years back, I don't recall finding any of the bullet. We found pieces of warm brass from the case. We did find pieces of the cylinder and the topstrap. We also found the two rounds adjacent to the round that blew. They were damaged and unfireable (we wouldn't have wanted to anyway for cautions sake) but otherwise intact.

As soon as the primer was struck by the hammer and it went off the round blew. The bullet did not enter the barrel, at least not enough to stay put. Well in honesty it could have fired clear through the barrel, I don't know. In this case the powder burned so fast and powerfully that neither the brass case nor the cylinder walls could contain the rapid expansion of the gases produced and the gases blew them apart in a rush to get out. The barrel was intact. It was removed and kept.

Note that the steel is bent by the force of the round going off. Steel bends before it breaks and shears.

A squib round is a round not powerful enough to clear the barrel and so is stuck in the barrel. When the next normal round is fired it hits the squib. This usually bends the barrel in the area just behind where the squib stuck. It can also burst the barrel and possible bend the slide outward. The main force of the blow is in the area of the squib,usually in the barrel. But it usually does not have the pressure behind it to blow the gun apart in the area of the chamber or cylinder, often not even to blow the slide apart. That's because it's a normal charge, not an overload, and guns, barrels included, are usually proof rated to twice the SAAMI recommended max pressures for a given round.

In the ops case I suspect an overloaded round rather than a squib. Too much force is involved for the damage usually done by a squib in my experience.

tipoc

 

[GTS Dean]

I've read this thread all the way through. There are some very well reasoned posts herein and each one makes a strong case. I would postulate that this was a combination of a double-charged round and a rare barrel flaw.

I've handloaded my .44 mag Redhawk for over 30 years, fired thousands of rounds through it, and I don't think I've bought a box of new ammo for it in at least 15. However, I've never seriously considered handloading for my 9 or .380. I just don't shoot them enough to not consider feeding them new ammo. My peace of mind is worth the extra cost in those calibers.

 

[Travis380]

Subscribed

 

[bedbugbilly]

Sorry that this happened but I'm a little bit confused when I hear that no single part failure could use this much damage?

I'm not defending S & W nor whoever the ammow was reloaded by . . I have no dog in this fight. But over the 50+ years I have been shooting, I have seen handguns that have exploded.

First . . . what failed on this handgun? The barrel obviously. The trigger guard, slide, etc. didn't "fail" . . . they were collateral damage caused by the barrel. Regardless of how well or how poorly a Shield is built - it's a tupperware handgun not forged steel as far as frame, slide and components of. If the barrel explodes - you are certainly going to get damage to adjacent parts.

I fully understand the OP being upset and am not knocking him in anyway. From all appearances though, the barrel failed from A. the barrel being defective, B. A squib followed by another round but usually with a squib, you may see a bulge or C. a defective round - either incorrect powder or a double charge. Say all you want, but a double charge is enough to do it.

Until all the factors are looked at, I think it's pretty premature to lay the blame on S & W. "Factory Reloads" were evidently used . . well what "factory" and what were the loadings "supposed" to be? In any loading or reloading, a double charged can occur as can a empty casing with no charge.

I have had one squib - which was my fault. A 38 special in a Smith Model 36 snub. A small CCI pistol primer was enough to force a 148 gr. roll crimped lead bullet a distance of about 3/8 to 1/2 inch beyond the forcing cone. Luckily I caught it. A 9mm or a 40 that is taper crimped could easily be pushed a distance of an inch in a Shield barrel on a squib load if conditions were right.

I have also seen photos where a double charge of a fast pistol powder in a Colt SAA not only blew the top off of the chamber but took portions of the chambers off on each side of it plus the steel top strap. And that is a steel handgun not a tupperware model.

Again, it's too bad that this had to happen and I hope that some constructive investigation into the cause can be done to determine EXACTLY what was at fault - the pistol or the ammo. . . . and let the blame fall where it may and to the cause that deserves it.

 

[BC38]

..."Factory Reloads" were evidently used . . well what "factory" and what were the loadings "supposed" to be? In any loading or reloading, a double charged can occur as can a empty casing with no charge....

Having read the whole thread from the beginning I can tell you that question has already been asked, answered, and thoroughly discussed a couple of pages back.

The reloads were by Military Ballistic Industries Ammunition - and they were .40S&W 180gr. FMJ.

MBI has already chimed in (also a couple of pages back) and are working with the owner of the destroyed gun to try to figure out what happened.

Jest sayin'...

 

[ejjeff]

op, has there been any contact or resolution from either s&w or ammo mfg?

 

[Travis380]

Being that we have not heard from the OP in a month or so, I would imagine that there has been a confidential agreement of some type.
I do disagree with the OP's first post where he is firing a shotgun point blank at S&W rather than quietly asking for opinions before pointing blame. Shame on you.

 

[67tempest]

My brother had a 1911 completely destroyed by an overloaded round from a "Commercial" reloader. It happens. I NEVER shoot anyone's reloads but my own and I have never had a Kaboom in the over 30+ years I've been reloading.

 

[Alk8944]

Being that we have not heard from the OP in a month or so, I would imagine that there has been a confidential agreement of some type.

I suspect several things are at work. First, MBI stood up as they should have done and replaced the gun without argument since it was an obvious gross over-pressure event. Whether it was an over-charge or a case of bullet set-back as a result of insufficient neck tension makes no difference. It would be worth thousands of dollars in goodwill and advertising if OP had come back and posted what a wonderful job MBI did in making everything right!

Second, OPs prime interest appears to have been bashing S&W and once MBI made good he ran out of steam. Or,

Third, after doing everything he could to place the onus on S&W being at fault that he was too embarrassed once MBI stepped up and handled the situation!

This is conjecture based on timing! MBI joins in wanting to get the facts of the situation and the whole thread, at least from OP, simply dries up and goes away! Whatever other conclusion would you infer from this?

 

[shawn mccarver]

I am life long shooter who has never seen anything like this. Just looking for answers or I would be in a lawyers office, not in a forum. I'm not that guy.

Thank you for your help.

Here are the possibilities:

Bad steel
Bad ammo
Operator error

Bad steel can be discovered by a metallurgist.

Bad ammo may escape detection unless the remainder of the rounds in the lot that remain unfired are tested and have a problem.

Operator error could happen, and has, with many different brands of pistols. One example is that a 9mm cartridge is accidentally loaded into the chamber, and it drops right in and lodges in the barrel. A .40 caliber round is chambered behind the 9mm and fired. Another example is repeated chambering of a round causing bullet set-back, combined with failure to inspect the ammo before firing. In either case, the results are - well - catastrophic.

To me, this does not look like an out of battery firing of a non-defective round of ammo, as the damage is too severe compared to other photos I have seen of Glocks, S&Ws, and others that have fired a non-defective round while slightly out of battery. But, that is just a guess.

I hope you will come back and let us know what you find out.

 

[DartonJager]

Hmm... I completely overlooked asking this in my earlier reply...
What do you mean when you write that they know about this, but continue selling them?
While there are Hundreds of reposts/retellings of the dreaded Shield40 kabooms, they all traced back to a handful (less than a Dozen) actual occurrences and out of that handful, 2 or 3 never reported back on what caused them and the rest ended up being .40 cal Ammo related (1 by MagTech, which they wrote a check for replacement... and a couple by Buffalo Bore).

So with all due respect, I ask the O.P. this question, have you been able to find any examples, I'm talking legitimate documented examples and not internet hearsay, documented examples of IDENTICLE or NEARLY identicle catastrophic failures in the same M&P model firearm? If you have please make that information available here out of respect to S&W and to lend credibility to your otherwise unfounded claims S&W is KNOWINGLY producing firearms with this potentially disastrous manufacture's defect.

So again... What validates your statement that S&W Knows they have a defective pistol, but continues to sell them?
[/COLOR][/COLOR][/I]

Has the O.P. produce any additional documented as factual, examples of identical or near identical catastrophic failures of M&P firearms?, in all honesty unless he has, how can he possibly know for certain this is a manufacturers defect? I'm sorry but a single unprecedented failure such as this among 10s of thousands of this particular model firearm produced could not by the weight of itself give rise or cause to suspect the problem is anything more than an at this point at worst, a EXTREMELY rare anomaly the cause of which is still must be determined and not as the O.P. claims a common enough occurrence that S&W actually has become aware of it but continues to mass produce a firearm with such a huge defective liability?

I'm no lawyer but S&W Im sure has several on retainer to advise them in just such matters, and I doubt they would knowingly continue to produce what are basically expensive high capacity grenades.

Just my .2c worth.

 

[DartonJager]

Has the O.P. produce any additional documented as factual, examples of identical or near identical catastrophic failures of M&P firearms?, in all honesty unless he has, how can he possibly know for certain this is a manufacturers defect? I'm sorry but a single unprecedented failure such as this among 10s of thousands of this particular model firearm produced could not by the weight of itself give rise or cause to suspect the problem is anything more than an at this point at worst, a EXTREMELY rare anomaly the cause of which is still must be determined and not as the O.P. claims a common enough occurrence that S&W actually has become aware of it but continues to mass produce a firearm with such a huge defective liability?

I just wished to make clear I am not accusing the OP of anything, but if your going to make the type of statements openly accusing S&W of KNOWINGLY continuing to produce a potentially dangerous firearm, you should out of respect for said defendant (S&W) produce more facts to back up your accusations than simply one single incident, no insult intended but to make such damagingly egregious claims and offer up as evidence a single as far as we know isolated incident the cause of which has not been determined at this point as S&W's or anyone or anything's fault, is nothing more than wild speculation and quite frankly irresponsible on the part of the OP, that is UNLESS the OP can produce enough factual documented evidence that supports his claims. Bottom line here is one incident in of itself proves nothing more than something caused this particular firearm to suffer a catastrophic failure, and any and all placements of fault and accusations should be obstained from until the cause of it can be conclusively be determined, and fault be placed accordingly.

I'm no lawyer but S&W Im sure has several on retainer to advise them in just such matters, and I doubt they would knowingly continue to produce what are basically expensive high capacity grenade