It's true that everything that is susceptible to failure must be made and designed to well over100% of minimum specs. Nobody should release a pistol that is incapable of firing almost every"standard" ammunition.
Federal regulations allow for "implied warranties". Federal law will allow for class action suits against makers of guns that don't properly fire standard ammunition. Anything stamped "9mm" should function in guns marked "9mm" unless specific statements such as "+p" are applied to ammo or gun. SAAMI regulations provide a good starting point.
So, if, for example, glock pistols were notorious for malfunction with 115 there would already be a huge history of lawsuits. Of course, this isn't legal fact, but look at Remington and the trigger suits. A "safety" must provide a safe firearm.
Under those codes, any group or individual can find a product that fails to live up to "reasonable expectations" that the providers of the product gave, and sue. This is a problem. There was a class action suit filed against the makers of splenda. The basis of the suit was that the group expected to lose weight by using sugar substitutes, and they didn't lose weight.
This issue is the sole reason that ruger, for example, began selling their products with no warranty, only an agreement to service firearms t h at were found to be defective. In all literature, ruger put in that there is no warranty, either stated or implied, on their products.
Federal regulations allow for "implied warranties". Federal law will allow for class action suits against makers of guns that don't properly fire standard ammunition. Anything stamped "9mm" should function in guns marked "9mm" unless specific statements such as "+p" are applied to ammo or gun. SAAMI regulations provide a good starting point.
So, if, for example, glock pistols were notorious for malfunction with 115 there would already be a huge history of lawsuits. Of course, this isn't legal fact, but look at Remington and the trigger suits. A "safety" must provide a safe firearm.
Under those codes, any group or individual can find a product that fails to live up to "reasonable expectations" that the providers of the product gave, and sue. This is a problem. There was a class action suit filed against the makers of splenda. The basis of the suit was that the group expected to lose weight by using sugar substitutes, and they didn't lose weight.
This issue is the sole reason that ruger, for example, began selling their products with no warranty, only an agreement to service firearms t h at were found to be defective. In all literature, ruger put in that there is no warranty, either stated or implied, on their products.
IMO nothing beats a FMJ for feeding reliability. Why a plastic nosecone on a HP isn't popular here is a mistery to me. My choice of weight would be mid way, 124 gr.