Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Anyone see a problem?

Here is a picture of a 9mm in a chamber for a semi auto.
Does anything look wrong?

so I guess it would be good to shoot?

Go for it.


Just kidding. I guess you're referring to the exposed walls of the cartridge case, i.e., not supported by the chamber.

yea, that seems to be my concern
looks like too much is exposed

what do you think?

Assuming it passes the plunk test



I don't see a problem.

Many pistols leave a portion of the case unsuported in the chamber.

that's a hornady factory round in the "plunk" test, the whole box sat up that high.

so you guys would shoot it?

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/full/52133.jpg

testing the pic process

the fail of course....

well this sucks



back to springfield

didn't even finish the first mag of ammo in the gun.

third shot took it apart.

this is a NEW gun, a never been fired new gun.

I'm glad I had eye protection on.

Question now is back to Springfield for what? Obviously that barrel will have to be redesigned to support the case head, and that depends on whether or not the frame has to be modified to fit with it. How many rounds do you think they fired in testing and development of that gun? Based on your experience with it, I would guess at zero. I have spent the last week fixing a POS Sig, so I feel your pain.

or,
i am sure someone will correct me if i am wrong, but doesn't 9mm headspace on the case mouth, bullet might be sticking out to far and pushing the case out the back, or the brass could be too long which i doubt.

this is a Gen 4 G27 with Hornady factory 180's.

Springfield always has a plethora of accoutrements to entice buyers in their direction, then they had a deal at my LGS where they were giving some rewards to the sales people for every gun sold, naturally every customer was pushed towards an xd. I would get it fixed and sell it to some other nimrod at a loss and buy an MP or a G19 or a VP9 or a PPQ or a P-07 or a P320.

Might be useful to drop some of that ammo into another barrel for comparison's sake.

I wouldn't shoot it.........

tested the ammo in another barrel of another 9mm, a baretta 92fs, and a 9mm glock, both looked good as far as how it sat in the barrel, shot some of the ammo in each gun it worked fine.



jimmyp thanks for the picture of a 40 cal, got one of a 9mm? may be more relevant to me

fc363, what do you mean back to springfield for what?

so they can fix my gun and or get me another one that works, is what.

first mag of ammo and gun is toast. I don't buy guns to admire them, I buy them to shoot.

Wow!

What I meant by that was I would only be sending it back for a refund. What are they possibly going to be able to do to fix a firearm that is so poorly designed that it rips the rim off the first 3 shells fired in it? Are you even going to want it back after they fix it? There's no excuse they can make for foisting a firearm like that on the market. Your due a full refund, and shouldn't accept anything less.

Fit, function and safety...

Those are the reasons for the plunk test. As a competitor I would plunk every single round I fired in competition. A jam takes you out of the running at the very least.

And safety is paramount.

The rule on every range I have ever been on is that if you see a problem...stop.

If the point of the plunk test is to find a problem before it can occur, what is the point of firing rounds when you know that a problem exists?

But I'm glad you're ok...

Springfield makes a good product but some issues will slip through... but nothing has been determined here as to whether it is an issue with the gun or the ammo.

Guessing doesn't count.