At what point do you stop trusting a good gun?

B

Bartholomew Roberts

Moderator
I own a Browning Hi-Power with almost 32,000 rounds on it. It has been a great, reliable pistol for many years now and I am very handy with it. However, during the time I have owned it, I have replaced a number of parts. Only two (arguably three) of those parts would have presented an immediate problem in a self-defense situation:

1) the KKM barrel sheared off its lug at 7,102 rounds
2) the extractor claw broke off at about 31,500 rounds
3) the ejector tip broke off at 19,894 rounds (despite this, the gun continued to run but stoppages went up to about 10-20%)

The first two would have likely gotten me killed in a self-defense scenario. The ejector was solvable but would have complicated the problem.

So I have a pistol that I am extremely comfortable with, that I know well, and that has been a proven good performer for many years; but in the back of my mind I start thinking "This pistol has a lot of rounds on it and I've replaced a lot of parts. Two of the worst problems I've had with it came with no warning in the midst of me shooting." Statistically, I think the odds are solidly in my favor; but I am starting to doubt the pistol.

So just out of curiosity, I thought I would ask others at what point they would be leery about carrying a well-used pistol that they had a lot of time and experience with?
 
I presume you have the original barrel.

I used a P-35 to make expert in IPSC years ago. Won a sectional with it.

I found shooting +p after a while did shear off the underlug off the barrel!

It P-35 was not made for +p+ at all (love it as I do.)

I do have the MK III but I use Glocks now. IDPA I used a 17 to make expert and win a few state trophies.

I got the Glock cause it had the realizability of the P-35 but lasted much longer and could use +p+ all day.

Yes fix it back up and then use it as a fun range gun.

Then, ha ha ha, as Tommy Lee Jones said, get a Glock cause it 'works every time'.

Deaf
 
If the gun has been properly repaired, and you've fired a hundred rounds to prove it, I'd go back to trusting it.
When I've had any sort of issue, if I think I've identified the problem and fixed it, then there's no reason to not trust it.
I remember having what I thought was an ejection issue, about one case in 100 would not eject, and I worked for months, 100-200 rounds at a time, trying to isolate the problem; extractor, ejector, what?
I'm a lefty, and it turned-out one case in 100 was bouncing off my thumb and back into the ejection port. I paid more attention to my grip, and it hasn't happened again in ten years.
 
I already have other Hi-Powers that have been customized similarly that can be slipped into the rotation that have between 2k-3k rounds on them. Based on my evaluation of the original Hi-Power, that should mean another 10k rounds possible before any parts breakage.

The thing is, I have an emotional attachment to this pistol now after so much time. I mean, I know it. I could pick it up and tell which Hi-Power I was shooting blindfolded. So I am reluctant to give up on it without a good objective, rational test that would tell me it is time to switch it out.

I've got a few Glocks as well (they are my second highest round count pistols behind this particular Hi-Power). I don't carry them because they are so thick in the slide I have to rework my entire wardrobe. Having shot the S&W M&P, I actually like that pistol better than the Glock; but it is hard to justify all the new purchases in holsters, mags, etc. when I have pistols that are close enough to do the job.

If the gun has been properly repaired, and you've fired a hundred rounds to prove it, I'd go back to trusting it.
Click to expand...

When the extractor broke, I tested the new extractor with 500 rounds. I didn't get any failures to extract until just after 300 rounds and then I had 3 between 300 and 500. That is one of the factors that made me a bit uneasy about this pistol.

I've since replaced the brand new Wolff extractor spring I used with a factory Browning spring and run 417 rounds without any failures to extract. For a normal "range gun" I wouldn't have gone to that level; but for one I carry I have very high expectations in the reliability department.
 
Bartholomew Roberts:

Sounds like you have replaced "user replaceable parts". If there are any you have overlooked, try replacing them too. Otherwise, the suggestion of relegating the Browning to "target shooting" might be an apt one, though I don't know what the service life of the Browning might be. I have commercial T series HP purchased new in 1967. With the exception of some Canadian WW2 surplus, the loads I've fired in this pistol, mostly lead bullet hand loads weren't hot loads, though the Canadian surplus might have been, I don't know. In any case, my old Browning sheared the square cross bar in the frame,I don't recall this parts proper name. Also the slide cracked, just below the ejection port. Repairs were effected. I used to hear people claiming to shoot Major Loads in IPSC competition with the HP . This ever seemed a good idea to me, but what do I know. Possibly going Glock might be a good idea, but there are any number of 9mm Luger pistols to be had these days,take your pick. You might give some thought to the CZ75 pistols. They are all steel, carry more ammunition than the HP, and are current production. They weigh about the same as the HP too.

As to comment from Deaf Smith, while one should always remember the old saw about To Each His Own, I can't see why one would want to use +P loads, let along +P+ for what is essentially Target Shooting. I pursued IPSC shooting for quite a while, wasn't especially good at it, though I enjoyed myself. I shot 45 ACP lead bullet handloads for Major, 9mm Luger was strictly Minor caliber. Once again, To Each His Own.
 
Round counts are like car mileages. One car with 100K miles will drive differently than the same make and model with the same mileage and possibly even worse than the same car with 200K with a different owner. Gun wear depends on variables such as maintenance, ammo preference, and storage conditions. A trustworthy round count number for a particular firearm cannot be determined because each shooter and gun is different. But, if you don't trust it, retire it.
 
When the extractor broke, I tested the new extractor with 500 rounds. I didn't get any failures to extract until just after 300 rounds and then I had 3 between 300 and 500. That is one of the factors that made me a bit uneasy about this pistol.
Click to expand...

You're never going to stop feeling "uneasy" so just stop worrying about it and carry the gun you want

A brand new gun can fail too, but odds are it won't do it in a "shootout"
 
If the gun has been properly repaired, and you've fired a hundred rounds to prove it, I'd go back to trusting it.

When the extractor broke, I tested the new extractor with 500 rounds. I didn't get any failures to extract until just after 300 rounds and then I had 3 between 300 and 500. That is one of the factors that made me a bit uneasy about this pistol.
Click to expand...

That's a tough situation. Three failures to eject in 200 rounds would be difficult to isolate. Same ammo? Same mag? Same lube? Gun clean, or dirty?
If the gun was working reliably, the extractor broke, and then after repair the gun started to have ejection issues again, do you exclude the new extractor as a cause? Or, since all that's changed is the extractor, do you look at that again? I, for one, can't afford many 500-round proving sessions.
 
Just the fact that you're asking us this question suggests that there's a nagging suspicion about the future reliability of this gun.
Not good for a self defense weapon.
That last thing needed for a carry gun is anything less than a 100% trust in it.
It sounds like it's past time to demote it into a range and practice gun.
 
As far as preventive maintenance goes, the main reason I clean this pistol at all is so I can inspect parts for developing cracks. I know beyond a doubt that it will run as filthy as I can get it. So I do regular PM inspections on this pistol. This PM includes regular replacement of the recoil spring and firing pin spring and replacement of other springs when a problem is demonstrated.

Part of the issue is I am not aware of any documentation on typical parts replacement for a Hi-Power at this round count. That is one of the reasons I've been keeping meticulous records on this one.
 
Retire it

The bottom line is that you have doubts.....that may not go away, no matter what you do. The shadow of that doubt may, in fact, be more of a factor for you than the gun itself. If you ever did need to use the gun in extremis and that shadow got in the way, even for a moment, the results might be very bad indeed.
That all being said.....I was curious, am still.....about how many of those 30K+ rounds fired were fired in SD? If none....then chances are very good that the next 30k rounds will also be fired the same way.
Now....I know that minds are already thinking (correctly so) that "you never know, you gotta be ready." True enough, I suppose....do you go to dangerous places? Live in a high crime area? Stay out late and walk the streets?
Dunno.
What I do know is that a new gun can fail. The best guns made can fail and do. You never know. Trust your gun 100% because it has never failed. Ok. Never failed yet.
I have a Springfield 1911 Loaded version. Great gun. Lots of rounds through it. Never failed. Then, one day, I was shooting and the front half of the slide broke off and went downrange. Springfield repaired it. "Improper heat treatment" they said. Do I trust that gun? Yes, I do.
The big issue is whether you can rid yourself of that shadow of doubt.
 
There's no reason to retire it. It's story is a normal one. Parts replaced as needed and then move on.

Every gun you get you will doubt if you begin doubting them when a part needs replacement because every gun you get will require parts be replaced.

It's that simple.

The source of the problem is not the gun. It's the shooter.

tipoc
 
I kinda look @ guns like cars. everything needs work and replacements eventually. Wear is a natural part of use. now if there's something unfixablebent frame or it wont start reliably regardless of repairs or if repairing is more costly then replacing, then its time to get rid of it.

But I also understand the 'gut feeling' when it comes to guns. If it lingers and fills you with doubt it might be best just to be over it. Regardless if it needs to be replaced. I had that same feeling about some guns exposed to corrosive it took like a year to stop worrying I missed something on clean up. Sometimes it still annoys me.
 
I am of two minds on this one. With the failures you've described, I want to say, "retire it." However, I also understand the psychological component that says, "carry the gun you trust." You know this gun & you know it well. That counts for something, should you ever have to draw.

Here's my suggestion: Do you have a gunsmith that you trust? If so, send it off to the smith for a thorough inspection and rebuild of whatever parts need it. Then head back to the range and treat it as a new gun, shooting however many rounds you think need to go through a gun before one trusts it for carry.
 
So just out of curiosity, I thought I would ask others at what point they would be leery about carrying a well-used pistol that they had a lot of time and experience with?
Click to expand...
OK, to answer what I would consider about a gun in my use. Not in reference to your particular gun, or situation, I will use an old joke about a male function problem.

"Disappointment is the first time it doesn't work the Second time. Disrepair is the second time it doesn't work the first time"

With a firearm I am trusting my life to, one failure, without oblivious ammo problems being the cause, would probably retire it to range use only. I wouldn't want to get to the "disrepair" stage in a desperate situation.:D
 
I do regular inspections on the gun; however those did not catch the two critical failures. While I don't mind doing preventative parts replacement, I don't really have a good source of data to establish what good replacement intervals are.

I suppose the main thing that caused me to doubt the pistol was that on top of the sudden failure, the problems with the replacement part didn't become apparent until after 300 rounds. As I get some more rounds through it, I'll feel more comfortable that the problem is actually solved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top