Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Un-supported Chambers?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Ok I know Glocks have un-supported chambers, as seen here:



    But do Springfield XD's also have un-supported chambers?

    I've heard thatun-supported chambersmight have a hand in causing KaBooms, is this true? Particularly the .40S&W models.


  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    It's fully supported.

    I just broke mine down to take a photo for you, but then I realized that I don't currently have a camera suitable for the task :quirky

    The ramp does not intrude into the chamber at all.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    It's fully supported.

    I just broke mine down to take a photo for you, but then I realized that I don't currently have a camera suitable for the task :quirky

    The ramp does not intrude into the chamber at all.
    Well that's good news, thanks for checking for me marshaul!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    The only manufacturer I know ofthat has made a barrel that does not fully support the cartridge at the 6-o'clock position was Glock, and they changed that in the latest generations of the gun.
    There have been several catastrohic failures (Kaboom's) stated about glocks, but a great perecntage of them were caused from reloaded ammo that were hotter than SAAMI specs. The .40 is a high pressure round to begin with, bumping it up is not a good idea IMO.
    Ihave more of a concern with a pistol firing out of battery than an unsupported chamber. if a pistol fires out of battery, there is nothing there to contain the beast and it gets real ugly, real quick.

    I got to see a 1911 that had all it internals destroyed from a factory round, and when it happned we thought it was a dud round, we heard nothing when the trigger was pulled. But the slide could not be budged, it was locked tight.
    What happened is the cartridge did not have a flash hole for the primer, so all that energy from the primer was contained and it broke steel components in the gun because of it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    694

    Post imported post

    Here is my XD40 barrel with a chambered cartridge showing the fully supported chamber.
    sorry about the background, I didn't realize my computer screen was that dirty.

    Perhaps if you would use a real computer you wouldn't have to apologize for not being able to do so many things on the internet!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    How common is a firearm going off when not in bettery? What causes something like this to happen?

    And thatnks for the pic Jeeper.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    The two major causes of firing out of battery are hammer follow or a malfunctioning disconnector.

    On external hammer guns like the 1911, if the hammer follows the slide it may strike the firing pin at just the right time so as to permit the pin to strike the live round, but the gun is not yet fully in battery (i.e. the slide is still partway back).

    If the disconnector fails on any gun, the sear is effectively disabled during the recoil cycle, the lock no longer functions, meaning the hammer may follow (as above), or, on striker fired guns, the striker goes right forward as soon as at is done being pushed back. Same result.

    This should never happen on any properly functioning handgun. Whereas, there are accounts of Glocks KBing even with factory ammo. :P Many Glock fans deny this, but why then did they suddenly change the design, after seemingly being content for years telling owners not to reload for their Glocks? Either way, buy a new Glock and it shouldn't be susceptible to KBs with its new fully-supported chamber.

    Also, some long guns, like later SKSs, have a "free floating" (i.e. half-assed engineering) firing pins which lack a firing pin return spring, which, in combination with "soft" non-mil-surp primers and some crud in the firing pin channel causing the pin to get stuck, leads to frequent out of battery discharges, or at least slam-fires.

    Opinion: any gun with a firing pin which "normally" strikes the primer during feeding, and relies wholly on the hardness of the primer to avoid discharge from this, is of incomplete mechanical design.

    Edit: with that said, it's a very good idea to keep your firing pin channels clean, as this can cause out of battery firing, or "full-auto" firing, on just about any gun. However, on most guns that represents an extreme case, and is rather rare.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the explanation Marshaul.

    I'm getting a new handgun this week and was really considering Glock. I'm on alot of forums, including Glock Talk. I do alot of reading about alot of guns because I like to educate myself and it helps me make a decision. But honestly, I'm getting more and more nervous about Glock everyday. I really don't think I want one anymore, it just kind of seems like a toss of a coin when you buy one.

    From what I hear you either get a Glock that run perfectly or you get a $500 hunk of garbage that jams, malfunctions, or blows up. I don't think I'm even going to give one a chance as of now

    That being said, would a XD be a better choice? I'm considering an XD, 1911 (RIA, Para, SA), or even a revolver. I just can't decide, but I was leaning towards Glock until I started to research them. Got any advice for me?

    P.S. I've shot a 1911, and a revolver along with quite a few other semi autos, but never a "safe action" polymer pistol.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Personally, I would get the XD, or a 1911.

    XD has a better trigger (single-action and it can be tuned to feel like it is, too), better grip angle, a better (but much shorter) track record (some people care more about decades in service than specific anecdotes), and a tougher slide. The XD makes up for its use of a fully-single-action trigger by including a grip safety.

    However, many people argue that the Glock provides a more naturally-assumed grip angle when used with an aggressive, forward-leaning stance. Also, the Glock has a better finish on the slide. The Glock trades other external safeties for its semi-double-action trigger, which some far prefer to a grip safety (but which I don't). The Glock also has a decent rep for working well in and around water.

    It's more a matter of preference than one being "better". Personally, I think the XD is an improvement over the "Glock era" of polymer pistols. Many think it's a cheap knock-off.

    My first pistol was a RIA 1911, $400. Their Tactical model is a steal, best bargain around IMO.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lake Charles Area, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,723

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Personally, I would get the XD, or a 1911.

    XD has a better trigger (single-action and it can be tuned to feel like it is, too), better grip angle, a better (but much shorter) track record (some people care more about decades in service than specific anecdotes), and a tougher slide. The XD makes up for its use of a fully-single-action trigger by including a grip safety.


  11. #11
    Regular Member gsx1138's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    884

    Post imported post

    I think they're both great guns. I just prefer the XD. However, I may be investing in a G26 pretty soon. My friend let me handle his off duty weapon, G27 and it was pretty nice.

    Otherwise my advice to anyone is, "Try it out!"

    Everyone has personal preferences and pistol makers today have met or exceeded everything Glock has to it's name. So it's a wide open market.
    "Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world." ~ Musashi

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:

    Opinion: any gun with a firing pin which "normally" strikes the primer during feeding, and relies wholly on the hardness of the primer to avoid discharge from this, is of incomplete mechanical design.


    Marshaul

    M1As, M14s and Garands, just to name a few, all have free floating firing pins. I do not believe any of them suffer from incomplete mechanical design. If you are reloading for any of the above rifles one would be advised to use the harder primers. You cant blame a screwdriver for not being a good hammer.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Orphan wrote:
    marshaul wrote:

    Opinion: any gun with a firing pin which "normally" strikes the primer during feeding, and relies wholly on the hardness of the primer to avoid discharge from this, is of incomplete mechanical design.


    Marshaul

    M1As, M14s and Garands, just to name a few, all have free floating firing pins. I do not believe any of them suffer from incomplete mechanical design. If you are reloading for any of the above rifles one would be advised to use the harder primers. You cant blame a screwdriver for not being a good hammer.
    Yeah, I figured someone would bring that up. I was really referring to SKSs, where people run them without return springs because that's how they were built after commie cost-cutting measures, and then claim the gun "shouldn't have" a return spring. Still, I question the good sense in building a gun which is unsafe with civilian "soft" primers. Personally, I would never treat a gun without a firing pin return spring as anything other than a display/safe/range queen.

    Edit: No, I don't blame it, but when all I find use for are hammers, what the hell good does a screwdriver do me? :P

    If I were being issued free ammo, all according to mil-spec, then it wouldn't be an issue. Back in the real world, where the ability to shoot what ammo I might happen to come across actually has value, then, yes, a gun which might slamfire on the wrong ammo is a serious liability, and an unnecessary one at that.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575

    Post imported post

    Marshaul

    OK Iunderstand the SKS ran without return springs may have problems and agreewith you fully.
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dallas, Texas, USA
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    Not sure what previous Glock barrels were like and I only have one to go by - My Glock was built last January - but when I look at it next to a LWD barrel it does have bit more gap at the 6 o'clock postion and it leaves a noticable bulge there in the fired casing.

    I bought it for it's reliability and ruggedness so I'm thinking you've been listening to haters without knowing the details of their experiences - like: Were they using reloads and had a hot load in it? Or do they even have much experience with a Glock in the first place?

    I trust my Glock implicitly but I also don't push it to extremes like it's indestructable. Just like any other gun I have.

    Just my opinion. Certainly no lab thatI'm in testing everything.

    But this guy ran his own tests and showed it has some toughness we shouldn't expect from any gun:

    http://www.theprepared.com/index.php...id=90&Item

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj5Kc...layer_embedded#

    Is this tough enough and reliable enoughfor you? Would you try this with any other gun?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    SeniorDep,

    I was also considering going with a Glock for my everyday carrier. I finally decided on the Springfield Armory XDm .40 (Bi-Tone green & Blk)

    The glock just did not feel right in my hand and the sights did fall into alignment naturally for me either. I really really wanted a glock, but I spent a few weeks doing some serious research and I just felt better with the XDm. Then I started looking at all the different generations of Glocks, and the tons of new stock that was previous generations that I found alot of.


    Now they just released an XDm 3.8, a shorter version of the standard XDm.

    Find a range that rents both guns, and fire them to see which feels better in your hand and which one is easier to hit the target with, do not listen to any of us, you got to figure this out by finding which has a better fit for you.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    CommonMan101,

    I've seen both of those examples of Glocks reliability and the are quite impressive. But I'm on GlockTalk.com and even it's memebers there seem to have alot of problems with jamming, FTF, FTE and so on. This is what worries me the most and makes me second guess a Glock. They do feel great in my hand though and I some times I say to myself "I'm getting a Glock, end of story", and at other times I hear others people's experiences and say "There's no way in this world I'm messing with one of those things".

    So I'm really torn with the decision. I've been researching guns for close to 2 years or more and more specifically handguns for about 7 months. And I mean alot of researching. Iknew how to disassemble a Glock, XD, and 1911 before I ever even picked one up.

    I'm really looking into an XD or a Glock, or possibly a 1911. But this is what concerns me:

    1. Glock- No external safties, just a trigger safety with a DAO trigger

    2. XD- Trigger safety and grip safety but once grip safety is depressed it's SAO.

    3. XD- Has 2 HUGE frame rails that can be removed, but the back ones are polymer

    4. Glock- Has 4 frame rails, but they are kind of tiny

    5. 1911- Probably not as durable as the GLock/XD. I've never seen any torture tests done to one besides firing alot of rounds in a short amount of time. Be they are quite nice to look at.

    OK I'm done with my rant, I'm just trying to figure out what's the best pistol for me.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    The two major causes of firing out of battery are hammer follow or a malfunctioning disconnector.

    On external hammer guns like the 1911, if the hammer follows the slide it may strike the firing pin at just the right time so as to permit the pin to strike the live round, but the gun is not yet fully in battery (i.e. the slide is still partway back).

    If the disconnector fails on any gun, the sear is effectively disabled during the recoil cycle, the lock no longer functions, meaning the hammer may follow (as above), or, on striker fired guns, the striker goes right forward as soon as at is done being pushed back. Same result.

    This should never happen on any properly functioning handgun. Whereas, there are accounts of Glocks KBing even with factory ammo. :P Many Glock fans deny this, but why then did they suddenly change the design, after seemingly being content for years telling owners not to reload for their Glocks? Either way, buy a new Glock and it shouldn't be susceptible to KBs with its new fully-supported chamber.

    Also, some long guns, like later SKSs, have a "free floating" (i.e. half-assed engineering) firing pins which lack a firing pin return spring, which, in combination with "soft" non-mil-surp primers and some crud in the firing pin channel causing the pin to get stuck, leads to frequent out of battery discharges, or at least slam-fires.

    Opinion: any gun with a firing pin which "normally" strikes the primer during feeding, and relies wholly on the hardness of the primer to avoid discharge from this, is of incomplete mechanical design.

    Edit: with that said, it's a very good idea to keep your firing pin channels clean, as this can cause out of battery firing, or "full-auto" firing, on just about any gun. However, on most guns that represents an extreme case, and is rather rare
    No s*&t, Sherlock. I have a hard time believing anyone would deliberately design a firearm in which the primer would be struck at any time other than the intended moment of discharge. I used to think the worst-designed firearm in history was that cheap Japanese WWII POS with the exposed "suicide sear", but if anyone has everdeliberately designed a firearm as you describe, then the Jap pistol goes to #2 on my list.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dallas, Texas, USA
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    I wish you happy hunting for finding one you'll be happy with. When I start getting any kind of failure I'll be sure to pass on what I know. I also use aftermarket barrels and they are flawless so far too.

    I can't say I shot the first round out of it since they come with two casings that were fired at the factory but I've gone from#3 to over 1,500 combined rounds of 10mm, 40sw, and 357sig so far without a hitch. Do I expect it to always be that way? no, but it's good enough for me. I've been shooting since I was 6 and every gun I've shot has had some kind of bum ammo fed into it at some time.

    The grip did not feel natural to me when I started using it but now it feels just fine and now my hand goes right to the postition of great control over it naturally. When I shot a cousin's 45 XD at our last shoot the thing that stood out for me was how smooth the trigger was compared to my Glock.

    Practically, as an end result, the safety on an XD functions the same - it won't shoot until you pull the trigger - yes, with the XD you do need to depress the safety on the backstrap, and I like that feature,but you're still pulling the trigger on purpose and there is no lever to switch like a 1911 has - you just pick it up and shoot. We can drop them all we want and put pressure on the trigger from the side withoutthem triggering. Neither one should ever fire just from dropping it - the safety is always on in both when your booger hook isn't involved. No switch to forget about or flip in an emergency draw.

    He was nailing4 inch targets at 45 yards with my Glock and after we were done said it was more accurate than his XD. I am not accurate enough to test that though!

    I'm sure you'll be happy with whatever you end up with. Good luck! I don't personally know anyone who is displeased with owning either. Heck the one guy I know that has a Taurus 45acp is happy and I haven't seen a failure out of it either but I've onlywitnessed a few hundred rounds come out of it.


    Added in edit: Of course thebest answer to your struggle in choosing is to get all 3!! Nothing wrong about having a Glock, XD and a 1911 in the stable!




  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the reply CommonMan101. I guess I'll just go to the shop this week and hold all of them again and go off what feels best for me. And if it turns out the gun is a dud or just doesn't function correctly after a few hundred rounds, I'll just get rid of it. But I'll let everyone know what I get. :celebrate

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Also, some long guns, like later SKSs, have a "free floating" (i.e. half-assed engineering) firing pins which lack a firing pin return spring, which, in combination with "soft" non-mil-surp primers and some crud in the firing pin channel causing the pin to get stuck, leads to frequent out of battery discharges, or at least slam-fires.


    I still remember the day I realized that the AR15 suffered from that problem. I've never had a slamfire as a result, but I quickly ceased chambering of rounds when at home (or if I need/want to, I'll at least ride the BCG back home slowlyand use the forward assist if needed to obtain lock.)

    Surprised the HELL out of me the first time I popped an un-fired cartridge out and saw a dimple on the primer..

    No such oddities with any of my other weapons including one XDm (fully supported chamber) in .40.

    To the OP: It's really gonna come down to comfort. If you aren't planning on shooting reloads, I can't say I'd be too worried about kabooms in a Glock (although I'll admit that my choice of .40 and the kaboom stories did play a role in picking my USP and XDm.) I do still plan to pick up a Glock 20 (10mm) and 21 (.45) eventually to add to the collection though. Solid guns, and in the case of the 21, it just felt good.

    Related note: I do have a friend who daily-carries a Glock in .40 and the perceived 'risk' doesnt faze him in the least.

  22. #22
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    Orphan wrote:
    marshaul wrote:

    Opinion: any gun with a firing pin which "normally" strikes the primer during feeding, and relies wholly on the hardness of the primer to avoid discharge from this, is of incomplete mechanical design.


    Marshaul

    M1As, M14s and Garands, just to name a few, all have free floating firing pins. I do not believe any of them suffer from incomplete mechanical design. If you are reloading for any of the above rifles one would be advised to use the harder primers. You cant blame a screwdriver for not being a good hammer.
    Off topic: marshaul - shame on you.

    Good post Orphan.

    You beat me to it. My M1A is certainly not "half-ass" engineered and I most certainly have had slam-fires with some primers. (Federal primers have slam-fired, the rest of the normal commercial primers didn't seem to, but I ordered some mil-spec CCI No. 34 and haven't looked back.)

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Well, I guess that's just going to have to be chalked up as a difference of opinion. I would not consider a gun with which I "certainly have had slam fires" to be an ideal tool in my toolbox. It has its purpose, no doubt, but I consider that purpose to be limited by short-sighted design.

    I would suggest that if government is going to be commissioning the design and manufacture of totally new small arms, that new small arms technology needs to be equally available to the public. And this means that the design ought to be appropriate for civilian use.

    I don't think that a design which is patently unsafe when used with store-bought ammo of the designated caliber is appropriate for the average civilian. While I'm sure I would personally have no trouble sticking to the right ammo, I just don't see this as ideal in terms of safety and versatility, both of which are important to the civilian.

    And your "screwdriver and hammer" analogy is way off. We're talking about something little more complicated than an inertial firing pin return system, in most cases. Nothing that couldn't simply be added to almost any existing design with little effort at any point in its design.

    While you're correct in so far as the tool functions and designed, I think that design intention is half-assed. Like I said, when the government builds weapons, it ought to make those weapons ideal for civilian use whenever feasible.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kent Co, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    398

    Post imported post

    Seniordep2010 wrote:
    5. 1911- Probably not as durable as the GLock/XD. I've never seen any torture tests done to one besides firing alot of rounds in a short amount of time. Be they are quite nice to look at.
    They just aren't well known. My Dan Wesson has gone a thousand rounds or more without cleaning a few different times, and over on 1911forum.com you'll see a few different posts of some very dirty 1911s that just keep going and going including a 2000rd test of a Les Baer recently. I'm sure Glock guys will go on and on about how their guns haven't ever needed cleaning and whatever, that's fine, but for me personally 1000rds between cleaning is more than enough. Even if it isn't as long as what Glock fanboys make claims about, they pay the price with an inferior trigger pull and an uncomfortable platform (in my opinion). Having the ability to carry cocked and locked on what is undoubtably the nicest trigger of the three you mentioned is a big plus. If you actually shoot all three, I'd be willing to bet quite a bit you want the 1911 when you're done. It's just a wonderful shooting platform.



    In no way is that a bash of the Glock or XD. They are both nice guns and I like the way XDs shoot...but they just don't compare to a proper 1911. Depending on the budget I often recommend Glocks to people. It just depends entirely on what the gun will be used for.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •