But it's a safe queen. I only carry Glocks. Normally a 17, but today I'm at a family funeral so a 19 or a I want the rounds. I appreciate all the replies. If I don't feel comfortable with a , then a polymer pistol is the way to go. Guys either love them or hate them I'm in the middle of that and respect the Glock's history, reliability, etc However, they do NOT fit my hand and I do not shoot them as well as other brands.
I have yet to shoot either one of these handguns, but they fit and feel good in my hand. I Carried a springfield "compact" for 11 years with out an issue untill I started playing with the drop in parts. I would put springfield above colt. How many rounds before trusting the gun?
It sort of depends on your protocol for testing or breaking in a new or suspect gun. Here's how one semi-custom shop used to do it, this was a part of their testfire procedure. Their guns got a minimum of eighty rounds per gun before final inspection and shipping. With a loaded ten-round single stack mag and slide locked back, chamber a round by releasing the slide stop. Shoot the round.
Drop the magazine and unload chambered round. Refill the mag to capacity. Do this ten times, each time with a full rounder, and each time strip the top round using the slide stop. Slingshotting the slide to load, may give a better chance for sucess, but you're looking for failure. Load two rounds in a mag, low-power rounds preferred. Load the gun, shoot the rounds with a weak one-hand grip. At the end of each two-round string, check visually and manually for full slide stop engagement.
Do this five times. Chamber one round, then remove the magazine. Do this ten times. Observe the ejecting brass. The brass should fly in the same general way as it does when shooting with a loaded mag in the gun. Having a magazine in the gun while shooting it, can mask this problem. Another test, which you only do one time, is to see if the gun is capable of push feeding. With no magazine, lock back the slide.
Insert a dummy round into the chamber. Slowly, let the slide ease forward until it comes to rest. Then, with both thumbs at the rear of the slide, push the slide forward. The slide should go into battery as the extractor gets moved aside to go over the case rim.
Again, do this one time only. There are a couple of other visual tests that don't require live fire, but point to frequently encountered problems. One is clocking of the extractor. If the firing pin stop does not prevent rotation of the extractor, its hook may rotate CCW and make it harder for a case rim to slide under the hook.
This fail-to-feed problem may show up in an inconsistent way, depending on the orientation of the hook at any given time. You want an extractor that can't rotate, that means a good fit of it to the firing pin stop.
Another test is done with the slide removed from the frame, and the barrel removed from the slide. Holding the slide with muzzle pointed toward you, and the slide upside down, reach through the ejection port with a couple of fingers, and use those fingertips and that hand's thumb to manipulate either a newer dummy round or a machined slug with a.
This is sort of a touch-feely thing. You're looking for a too-tight breech face, an extractor than cannot move outwards due to there being too much material on its outside shaft pad, and for a rough firing pin hole. There are other tests you can do, these are just guidelines. The shooting tests above, give the gun a good chance to fail with minimum rounds shot. Any shooting test done with a weak one-hand grip will help show a gun problem.
Some people like to load empty cases in a mag and see how they feed when the live round above them is shot. That can give a good indication of extractor function and of the softness of the transition between the barrel's throat and its chamber. A differing opinion has it, that this test means only that the gun is capable of feeding empty cases, take your choice.
There are some guns which take an absolute ungodly number of rounds through them before being thought to be trustworthy. Probably because they are built a bit too tight. One brand is sort of known for its tight guns. Too tight, I think. Second question, anyone carry a M for CCW? I used to, now carry Glocks due to round capacity. Reliability between full-size and compact? Small guns, to maybe 3.
Some of those can be traced to too-long intervals between spring replacements. Shorter guns also seem to be more prone to problems if not held firmly, that's probably not the gun's fault. I'd avoid any gun shorter than 3. However, I had rounds through the Kimber in a high round count class prior to ever carrying it.
The compact models are generally acknowledged to be less reliable than the full size. The Commander length slide is about the shortest I'd trust in a carry weapon. The simply requires more attention to preventative maintenance, cleaning, and detail than other options.
The will also usually require a more significant financial investment. And to answer your initial question, I want at least malfunction free rounds before I trust a pistol for CCW. I own full size as well as a lightweight commander. When I carried a 45 it was the LWC due to weight. The LWC is as reliable as the full size provided you use modern stiff spring magazines like Wilson in it. They don't push the round up quick enough. This is exactly where I am at with the fit issue. I love my 45's and have no problem trusting them.
Lightweight and minimal investment. Here in AZ there are places I cannot carry for whatever reason. I must leave the gun in my vehicle. If the G19 was stolen I would not be heartbroken as they are easily replaceable at low cost compared to my 45's. Good hunting, Bowhunter57 Maddog6 :cool:ut! I'll simply answer your question, and leave the Glock vs 'BS' to others. A , - brand new out of the box? Then: of your chosen defense load to check for reliability. Accept the odd failure during the begining of the first due to the pistol being tight and new.
It doesn't all have to be fired on the same day btw! I am yet to see a that will feed empty cases choke on JHP's. I have no problem trusting my life to a If someone is having problems with a quality , It is a myth that the is difficult to maintain and run. The only things I do to mine are a cleaninging every thousand rounds detail , change the recoil springs ever 3K rounds, and I use good magazines.
I have multiple guns with well over 50k rounds through them without a single malfunction. As far as the original question goes, I don't carry any gun until it has rounds through them. And, smaller s are just as reliable as full size guns as long as you change the recoil springs out as required.
This is the test I would use. The only thing that I would add is that you need to use the same set of magazines for the test as you do for carry. If you want to carry a and it passes this test I would do so with confidence. What's your ass worth! Have you considered Cope Reynold's grip reduction on a Glock? Just buy a gen4 Glock if the older models don't fit your hand.
Figure out which backstrap fits, problem solved. Carry what you shoot best. I have a Dan Wesson Pointman 7 and it is very reliable. Wouldnt feel underarmed carring it. After a incident at my local gunrange I decided to stay will. The Glock Model 21 is just to big. The 1 pistol that I have seen go down for the count in a class was a Glock model Jakolb was at that class, I'm sure he remembers it.
There may be much more in fitting a Glock to a M'ers hand than a simple grip reduction. For a fair amount of people, there needs to be much material removed from the pin areas on a Glock, and contouring this material removal towards the mag well area.
And for some, there is the need to hog out the inside of the trigger guard to keep the trigger finger off of the inside of the TG. Back to the OP's question, I'd stick with earlier opinion of less than a hundred rounds being necessary if thoughtfully done, in ways designed to bring out a failure.
No particular need for an excessive round count, such as of this or of that. Know what the poison for the gun is, then work the gun to get around that particular poison. That work, only if needed. A M prone to problems will probably show itself inside the house, no TF needed to show what that fault is. The firing tests that I put out earlier, will weed out bad guns with minimal round count.
And the inside-the-house tests posted earlier will save range time and ammo. They may help to avoid the bad spiral of listening to talk of how many rounds it takes to prove a gun. Once I was told to shoot a gun that had gone from my test fire and paper targeting, through final inspection, and had been shipped for a military evaluation. It had one failure to feed for their testers as they worked it out during a weekend.
When the gun came back to the shop, I was told to put 1k rounds through it. The gun was built to that shop's standards, so was on the tight side, but no hard-fit parts. Shooting it for that 1k goal, it started to run sluggish at around hundred rounds. With just squirts of oil at that point of the testfire, and no cleaning on a gun that was made right and tight in the first place, it did make it to 1k rounds for me with no malfs.
Little Lebowski's input is pretty close to what I think about how a M should run. But my mind is wrapped around tight, properly fit guns, not either junk or those from semi-custom shops who fit the guns hard, rather than tight.
I think that a well-built M will not run without failure, from new-to-1k without some lube being applied at some point when the gun starts to slow down. To define "junk" in a backhand way: The best value for customer guns coming into that shop five years or so ago, was the WW2 Springfield.
The end product would not be quite as good as the new guns being built on the other side of that shop, but it served peoples' wants real well.
The "hard fit" company, had a few guns that came into the shop where I was at, either for sights, or for for a paint job that the builder did not offer. Some of those guns were real tight in slide-to-frame fit. I did take one of those around the other side of our shop, to see if any of our guys would want to challenge that fit. No offers, it was a real nice fit.
Another of that company's guns, needed a plastic hammer to get the slide racked back, this on a newly-shipped gun. Most would agree that this is not a good thing, and that this gun's problem is going to take an ungodly amount of rounds to break it in. My opinion: It's not so much the round count that makes a M good to go as a defense weapon. It's more about knowing the build, and of learning what particular types of test fire, will bring out the bad aspects of a build.
They can be done with minimal round count out of the gun. There's no particular round threshold in my mind, since some faults are lurking and will survive a testfire round count, only to come up later. I'd be willing to bet I could name that hard fit company. I'm not even for tight fit. I'm in the proper fit camp. Properly fit the gun only needs be that snug and smooth. It cycles easily, feeds smoothly, shoots to at least mid-bullseye level, and flat works if you keep it halfway lubed.
I see these folks checking fit for the tightest gun they can find. They believe a gun that doesn't need a bushing wrench can possibly be good. Finally, we have Derringer style pistols, which are sometimes referred to as pocket pistols. While not completely accurate, pocket pistols have become synonymous with the true Derringer pistol.
Similar to revolvers, Derringers have a fixed number of chambers that each house a single round. However, there is no wheel that rotates. Instead, rounds are fired in a specific sequence if the pistol has more than one chamber.
There are several variations of pocket pistols. If the pocket pistol is an automatic, or a revolver then the number of rounds is dictated by the overarching pistol type.
Generally, larger firearms are made to accommodate a larger caliber round, more ammunition, or both. While not always true, full size firearms can hold more ammunition than their smaller counterparts.
Given two firearms that fire identical caliber bullets, made by the same manufacturer, with similar magazine configurations single stack vs. All of this assumes the firearm is an automatic and not a revolver or pocket pistol. Full size firearms which are the largest can hold the most ammunition. Compact models will have a slightly smaller magazine well, and therefore hold fewer rounds.
The smallest size is a subcompact handgun and will have even less space for a magazine. If handgun size can affect the number of rounds the pistol can hold, then ammunition size plays a similar role. Pistols that fire a smaller round can potentially carry more ammunition. However, the other factors on our list also impact the number of rounds a pistol can hold. If there are two firearms with all the same characteristics except ammunition caliber, the handgun which uses a smaller caliber will be able to hold more ammunition.
Because the magazine setup is the same, a smaller round will take up less space and therefore allow more rounds to be loaded. Again, this does not apply to revolvers or pocket pistols with a fixed number of chambers. Automatic pistols are unique from the other types because they use a magazine rather than fixed chambers. Therefore, this section does not apply to revolvers and Derringer style pistols. With that said, magazines come in two different layouts, single stack and double stack.
Single stack magazines vertically align rounds into a column format. This type of magazine is usually more slender, which is great for concealed carry.
However, this style of magazine is not the most efficient for increasing the number of rounds the handgun can hold. Double stack magazines also align the rounds vertically, but the rounds are staggered essentially creating two columns instead of one. This method does make the magazine thicker, but allows more rounds to be loaded into a magazine of similar height.
Picture above is a single stack magazine from a , a double stack magazine from a Sig 9mm, and a double stack mag from a Glock. The has a single stack magazine that can hold 8 rounds. Both the Glock and Sig have double stack magazines that can hold over 10 rounds.
The Sig Sauer handgun can hold 15 rounds, while the Glock. Even though the magazine for the Glock is from a full size pistol it holds less rounds than the magazine from the compact Sig. This demonstrates how caliber, pistol size, and handgun model can impact the number of rounds a handgun can hold.
Due to the nature of their setup, increasing the number of rounds is a matter of creating a larger magazine. Aftermarket magazines are plentiful, and you can usually find larger magazines online or at your local gun show. Above is an extended magazine for the model. Unfortunately, if you have a revolver, there is not much you can do to increase the number of rounds your handgun can hold.
The same can be said about Derringer style pistols or any pistol with a fixed number of chambers. Above is a picture of an older revolver, the fixed chambers do not allow you to easily add more rounds. Both are chambered for 9mm and are subcompact models. Contrarily, the Sig only offers 10 round and 12 round magazines. Automatic reloading handguns hold a number of rounds equivalent to the size and setup of the magazine.
Smaller single stack magazines will hold a minimum of 6 rounds. Larger double stack magazines can hold in excess of 19 rounds. Some manufacturers will provide a choice of magazines that have different capacities. Additionally, the aftermarket magazine industry offers and abundance of choices for higher capacity magazines. For example, there are round Glock drum magazines that you can likely find at your local gun show. While these are not ideal for concealed carry, they are available to gun enthusiasts.
Before purchasing, make sure these magazines are legal in your state. The number of rounds that a revolver can hold is determined by the number of chambers bored out of the wheel. A revolver can generally hold either 5 or 6 rounds.
Revolvers that have 6 chambers are more commonly known as six-shooters.
0コメント