Range Report Ammo casing failure?

[saleen322]

Your 210's at 970FPS makes plenty of sense to me. If your accuracy is good, that is a nice mild load and would be fine in a 1911 format gun as you are close to the 45ACP 230@850.

There is actually quite a bit of difference. The 10mm 210 has a sectional density of about 0.187 compared to a 45 230 grainer @ around 0.162 or a gain of 15% over the 45. This translates into greater penetration with similar bullet construction. Add to that the 10mm 210 is going about 14% faster using a round that will penetrate deeper. Energy also favors the 10mm 210 to the 45 230 in the order of 440 ft/lbs to the 45s 369 ft/lbs, or 19% over the 45. They are similar in recoil however with the 10mm @ 7 ft/lbs vs the 45 @ 6.6 ft/lbs or only 6% more than the 10mm. The only thing more velocity would get the 10mm with this load would be to have more recoil and shoot completely through the target quicker.

I agree that revolvers are stronger. However steel is stronger than plastic. That is why you have more documented evidence of destructive failures with non-steel pistols than 1911s which have been around for 3 times longer than most of the polymer pistols. The OP had the BB ammo fail and it only destroyed the magazine. Proper spec ammo and a new magazine and he is good to go.

 

[Sevens]

I do think the Buffalo Bore round is likely over pressure as well, and by that I mean it likely exceeds 37,500 PSI. Why do I think this? Basically it's just a hunch and I'll try to explain why, but I've owned and "tore down" some Underwood 10mm ammo and what I found was their choice of powder (at the time 800x) was WELL over book max, which means it was (and likely still is) over pressure. I hear UW switches up powder from time to time based on availability, but they use the same powders us reloaders have available to us.

Now having handloaded for quite a while, using BOOK data (from the manufacturer), I've topped out at around 1260-1270 fps using a 180gr bullet in a 4.6" Glock 20. To get 1300 fps, I have to go OVER book max, which means I'm likely going over pressure too. Does Buffalo Bore use a custom powder? I don't know

I don't know how Buffalo Bore measures the pressure in their ammo, but accusing them of willingly and knowingly producing and marketing 10mm ammo that exceeds SAAMI spec when they specifically state that it doesn't... Well, that smells like slander and when we are simply a bunch of enthusiasts who love to play with our hobby & chat about it in forums, I think slander steps outside the boundaries of things we ought to be doing. Just my opinion.

Furthermore, while they may have indeed been using IMR-800X, it might be worth mentioning that Hodgdon's published max for a 180gr slug is 8.7 grains, and Hodgdon states that this "max" loads generates 1,210 FPS at 30,000 PSI which is a full twenty percent below SAAMI specification for maximum pressure in the 10mm cartridge.

I also consider myself a well-established handloader. But I'll take a flyer and suggest that:
--I don't know the game as well as Buffalo Bore does
--I don't have their collective experience
--I don't have their first-hand test results and data
--I really don't have the equipment & test guns they've got
--they haven't actually shared with us specifically the powder they use

The photos in this thread make me wanna never own a Delta Elite, that's for sure.

I also know that Hornady has a lot more technology, resources and testing equipment at their disposal than BB and furthermore that Hornady has made a name for themselves creating high-performance rounds that shoot at normal pressure. Yet when I called Hornady and asked them why they didn't load their 10mm hotter, the reply was that they couldn't load it any hotter and still stay below SAAMI limits.

10mm ammo is not like .38, 9mm and .45.
10mm ammo is like .38 Super. That means that "factory" ammo is generally watered down for reasons that are beyond simple, one-sentence explanation. That's the truth. And Hornady makes a Grand Canyon wide range of "soft" to "better" 10mm ammo. Check Hornady's published spec's for their XTP and for their new Critical Duty in 10mm and see how they make 10mm. Nothing they build meets the original Norma specifications for the round.

If we had the ability to get Hornady to answer stuff without trotting out a company line, the answer to that query may have been something along the lines of:

"10mm guns vary wildly across the board because the major players in factory ammo have been making "teenage girl" level 10mm ammo for it since the 1980s, namely FEDERAL and their Hydra-Shok. So many guns can't handle true 10mm and we know that we won't make a lot of money on more 10mm ammo, so there's no point in putting the effort in to it. 10mm is a pain the keister for these reasons and it's probably why Remington, Winchester and Federal (all of which are far bigger and more established in factory ammo than we at Hornady are...) also refuse to try any harder to make full-spec, hardcore, real-deal 10mm factory ammo."

But I don't work for Hornady.

Maybe we should contact Cor-Bon and ask them how they get a 180gr JSP to run 1,300 FPS from a 4.6" barrel?

 

[Sevens]

What I see in this thread:

The OP bought -factory- ammo and it went KABLOOEY and he's angry. I believe he -SHOULD- be angry, he has every right and it's completely natural. I think it'd be nuts if he wasn't angry. I feel horribly bad for him.

I think Colt is making sub-standard barrels in these pistols... if all the new Delta Elite pistols show the chamber support that the pictures in these threads show. I think this whole thing happened because of Colt and not because of Buffalo Bore.

I worry or wonder if Buffalo Bore will be forced to weaken their ammo because Colt is such an established gun maker that Delta Elites will go KABLOOEY when they are fed 10mm ammo that runs a 37,500 PSI chamber pressure.

That's a bummer for 10mm enthusiasts that wish to run factory ammo, but it won't matter much to those of us who like 10mm and have been handloading our own stuff for a couple decades or more.



Colt, the gun maker whose early Delta Elites got a reputation for frame cracking.

Colt, whose answer to that exact frame cracking was to CUT AWAY the portion of the frame that cracked and get rid of it! (I'm not saying that was a bad answer, just making note of it)

Colt, who puts plastic MSH's and plastic guide rod parts on their $1,061 MSRP Delta Elite pistols.

Colt, who has made at least one Delta Elite with horrific chamber support pictured in this thread. (More? Ugh.)

If it matters, the 180gr JHC from Buffalo Bore chrono'd 1,259 FPS with a SD of 15.74 FPS from my 2008 production Glock 29 with 17lb recoil spring and 3.78" factory OEM Glock 10mm barrel. And to make it completely clear... I really don't like Glock pistols, I only one -ONE-, I hope to never own another.

 

[saleen322]

I think a lot of you are making good points. I do piggyback with James K and think it was a number of unlucky things coming together. Gun makers build a safety factor into their guns at least to meet the old proof standards of a 30-40% over-pressure proof round. SAAMI lists the ceiling on 10mm as 37.5K so me, I take that as something I want to load and maintain a safety margin under that not see if I can run at 37.4 because that is within specs. A good brass case should be able to hold spec pressure in it but maybe one gets through with a weak spot......? My 1911 barrel chamber is clearly cut different than what I seen from the Colt examples which provides some more support than the Colt model. And just maybe this time the planets align so that all of the minimum standards line up and it fails.

However to get back to the point, it does seem that BB runs more pressure than your standard ammo makers. While BB may have ammo fairies that can bless their rounds to get more power at the same pressures as most everyone else (and the reloading manuals), my theory still is they are loading hotter. YMMV

 

[JohnKSa]

Nothing they build meets the original Norma specifications for the round.

That's precisely my point. In spite of their well-deserved reputation for being able to squeeze extra performance out of a caliber while still staying within pressure limits, Hornady isn't coming close to matching the specs of BB 10mm. And when queried about the issue, they state that they can't do better and still stay within SAAMI limits.

By the way, Norma didn't stop selling the original spec rounds because there was no demand for them. Nor was lack of demand the reason that no other major ammo manufacturer stepped up to fill the void created when Norma quit making the original spec rounds.

The rounds were tearing up guns and considered to be too high in pressure.

Here's the quote from an FBI bulletin on the 10mm:
http://www.bren-ten.com/website/id7.html (see page 5)

"The high chamber pressures generated by the commercial loadings, with the resultant heavy recoil and muzzle blast, tended to offset the otherwise excellent performance of the round."​

Here is a quote from SSA Urey of the FBI in his publication entitled 10mm Notes.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf

"Commercial offerings too high pressure..."​

Note that at the time commercial offerings were Norma original loadings or equivalent.

Another source:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/s-w_1076_pistol.htm

"Early FBI testing of the full power Norma 10mm Auto round found it was too high-pressure, was hard on the converted 1911 test pistol..."​

 

[Peter M. Eick]

There are some really good points going on here. I think we all agree that the Colt DE in question is over throated and that an unlucky combination led to the blowout.

Now lets switch gears to the last few posts. In John's post I read he is basically saying that the guns can handle the pressure of the round as originally laid out by Norma and SAAMI. I tend to agree with this and find the 200@1200 is hard on a 1911 format gun.

In Saleen's post I read he is basically saying that if the spec limit is 37.5 and the industry as a whole runs around say 30.0 (see post above) then anyone going over industry "convention" is over-pressure.

In Steven's post, I read he is basically saying that BB has pressure tested the rounds and according to their website they are within the SAAMI spec limit and presumably darn close to the 37.5 limit.

I tend to view that all of these posts are correct in some way and we agree.

Yes the full power SAAMI limit ammo is hard on a 1911 format or similar guns. Yes BB is running more pressure than conventional 40 Short and Weak level 10mm loads from most manufactures. Yes BB is getting more power by running it right up to the SAAMI limits.

So where do we go from here? I know I keep my "Nuke loads" (at or above SAAMI pressure limits) in my 610, Witness Hunter or Contender. I don't put them in 1911 format guns anymore. I keep my "current reloading book max" (10mm) loads in my 1911's and any of the guns above as plinker loads.

If I were to buy some BB, Corbon, Double Tap or similar boutique ammo, I would keep it out of the 1911's and into a gun more engineered to take the true pressure limits. Winchester, Remington, Hornady or the like, go ahead and shoot them in any 10mm. I kind of equate this to shooting a 38 special in a 357 Magnum.

Fun topic to discuss as it brings in so many aspects of firearms engineering.

 

[spacecoast]

Even assuming my speculation is correct, BB isn't selling instant grenades in a 20 round count box. They couldn't stay in business if they did that. In my opinion, what's going on is that they push right up to the limits of what they can get away with nearly all the time. Not surprisingly, with that strategy, they get away with it nearly all the time. But once in awhile, someone shoots some of their ammo in a gun with a little less case support than usual--maybe when the temperature is a little high--maybe in a gun with a leade that is tighter than normal--maybe they're using a batch of brass that is a little weaker than normal, maybe the gun has a tendency to bang the round around during feeding and sets the bullet back a little too much. When too many factors add up the wrong way then there's an incident.

Maybe BB makes enough money selling at the top end of the market that they are willing to pay their lawyers to deal with the occasional incident if necessary.

 

[Sarge]

Excellent summary, Peter.

These are two ways to end all this speculation about which ammo is or isn't over SAAMI pressure.

You can contact the manufacturer and ask. I've done this on occasion and have been surprised at how candid a few of them were- right down to the specifics of the load itself.

Of course you might not believe them, which leads us to the second solution. Dig in your wallet or pass the hat and raise enough money to have the ammo independently tested.

 

[Ruger45LC]

I don't know how Buffalo Bore measures the pressure in their ammo, but accusing them of willingly and knowingly producing and marketing 10mm ammo that exceeds SAAMI spec when they specifically state that it doesn't... Well, that smells like slander and when we are simply a bunch of enthusiasts who love to play with our hobby & chat about it in forums, I think slander steps outside the boundaries of things we ought to be doing. Just my opinion.

Furthermore, while they may have indeed been using IMR-800X, it might be worth mentioning that Hodgdon's published max for a 180gr slug is 8.7 grains, and Hodgdon states that this "max" loads generates 1,210 FPS at 30,000 PSI which is a full twenty percent below SAAMI specification for maximum pressure in the 10mm cartridge.

I also consider myself a well-established handloader. But I'll take a flyer and suggest that:
--I don't know the game as well as Buffalo Bore does
--I don't have their collective experience
--I don't have their first-hand test results and data
--I really don't have the equipment & test guns they've got
--they haven't actually shared with us specifically the powder they use

The photos in this thread make me wanna never own a Delta Elite, that's for sure.

Yes I know that 8.7gr 800x claims 30,000 PSI, and while that does leave a bit of room for improvement, we don't really know how much more before pressures really start to take off. It's also questionable whether the old Norma 10mm ammo was within spec or not, either way I've read it was very inconsistent ammo. Plus, I'm have nothing against BB as they do make quality ammo, I'm just curious how they do it since it doesn't seem to add up.

I stated that I don't know what powder BB uses and that maybe they have a custom blend of rather slow burning powder that allows them to achieve 1,350 fps from a 5" barrel. From everything I've got loading the 10mm with powders available to us (that maybe BB doesn't use), I can't get those numbers using book maximum data. Either way, if they're not over pressure, I'd say it's a safe bet to say they're right on the ragged edge pressure wise for mass produced ammo.

And I know they have more data than I do, by a wide margin, but the three powders that have yielded me the highest velocities in the G20 10mm with 180gr XTP bullets are VV 3N38, 800x and Longshot on warm days. VV3N38 got me around 1,345 fps but with no data, it was my own and highly compressed to the point of bullet crush.

Using 800x I was able to get 1,315 fps seated at 1.270" (which mimics what BB claims their 180gr does from a G20), but that's 15% over the book maximum of 8.7gr, whereas dropping the OAL down to 1.250" got me 1,360 fps. Longshot at 5% over book gets me right around 1,280 fps from the 4.6" which probably isn't wildly over pressure, but probably is slightly. Real life numbers but I wouldn't say they're within pressure spec for the 10mm either.

That's why I say maybe BB uses a custom blend powder, but it would have to be a pretty impressive blend to get those numbers and remain under the SAAMI rating of the 10mm (37.5K PSI), especially since you also said BB's 180gr JHC did 1,260 fps from a 3.78" G29 of yours, that's a VERY warm load. I'm wondering if BB pressure tests their loads, although I hear Underwood does not.

 

[Sevens]

Either way, if they're not over pressure, I'd say it's a safe bet to say they're right on the ragged edge pressure wise for mass produced ammo.

That's a reasonable statement.

Now if we went shopping and brought home a w-i-d-e selection of 9mm ammo, would we find the same?

In my opinion, we would find exactly that. However, there's quite a bit less risk in 9mm, because 9mm guns are mainstream and the chambering has walked a "typical" path in the industry. 9mm chambered, newly manufactured guns know that the ammo they will digest will be built to right about 35k PSI. In fact, that's what the ammo makers build so that the guns run all the time. And running almost -any- smokeless powder up to the full spec of it's design/rate makes the most of the charge and burns it (relatively) cleanly.

If you come home with a box of Winchester White Box, 115gr FMJ 9mm, you had better plan & expect that stuff to be a "max load." That's how they craft it.

Things are different when it's 10mm. (or .38 Super.) Enthusiasts know how we got here, but the novice buying public likely doesn't realize that "factory 10mm" can and will run the gamut. Hornady's offerings in particular are baffling to me because they build & sell .40 S&W ammo that runs to like 90-95% of what some of their 10mm ammo will run.

I can't find blame with Buffalo Bore in what happened here. It sure stinks like a Colt failure to me. But hey, at least it's not a shocker. Colt could write volumes about poor decisions. Thank goodness that prancing horse looks so good. That emblem has a strength that has kept a company alive.

 

[Slamfire]

Colt made a 10mm pistol around a legacy design. A design, if you recall, originally shot 45 ACP rounds at or around 15,000 psia.

Converting things to higher pressure rounds has risks. It may be that the M1911 has to have as much of the barrel beveled for reliable feed. Given that the geometry of the breech can't be changed without going to a completely new design, this is probably a limitation of the M1911 design with high pressure rounds.

This is something Colt users are going to have to live with. I don’t want to assign blame to Colt or Buffalo bullets, but not everything in this world is plug and play. And sometimes you can do everything right and still lose.

Which is why being lucky is best. Luck will always beat skill and training.

 

[DaleA]

I’d like to thank Chris32817 for posting the full replies from Buffalo Bore.

Chris posted both full replies from Buffalo Bore and stated his opinions. That’s pretty fair of Chris I would say and gave us all plenty of fodder for thought and discussion.

Personally I am surprised BB was as forward (maybe I mean undiplomatic) as they were in their replies. I guess I just assume any big company will weasel word any reply they send out to the general public because they know it will be published and they are afraid of What Might Happen. It shows what happens when you assume something like I did. It’s kind of refreshing to find a company that speaks out.

For me, personally, as in just my view on guns, I really like the 10mm round but I really, really like 1911 style handguns so the two are probably never going to hook up in MY shooting bag. However I don’t really care for the Glock so it wouldn’t bother me much at all about what a 10mm would do to that gun which means for me the two might be a match made in gun heaven.

 

[spacecoast]

Tim's response about "working the Sunday before Christmas" (not once, but twice) comes across as whiny and unprofessional, as does his "you failed to state which item # you were firing" statement. It was his decision to answer email on Dec. 22, not the customer's, and you should never point out the customer's lack of complete information on the first go-round as "you failed...".

 

[JohnKSa]

Now if we went shopping and brought home a w-i-d-e selection of 9mm ammo, would we find the same?

In my opinion, we would find exactly that.

I feel pretty confident in stating that you wouldn't find that in ammunition from any of the the major manufacturers. They are careful (duly diligent, perhaps) to insure that their loadings remain under maximum SAAMI pressure under any and all circumstances that are reasonably likely to occur.

I'll give you one example. I once purchased a large quantity of +P+ 9mm ammunition from a major manufacturer. Since I like all my fingers, my guns and my eyes, and often the person standing next to me while I shoot, I didn't just buy the stuff and shoot it for effect.

First, I verified the pressure specification for the gun I intended to use the ammunition in. THEN before purchasing the ammunition, I contacted the ammunition manufacturer to verify the pressure specification for the particular ammunition in question to insure that it was under the pressure specification for the particular gun I planned to shoot the ammunition through.

The surprise was that the pressure specification for the ammunition was EXACTLY at the maximum limit for +P, it wasn't actually above it as the +P+ designation suggested.

So WHY was it marked +P+?

The reason the manufacturer labeled it +P+ was because it was loaded to the maximum limit for +P and therefore the manufacturer could not guarantee that it would remain under that limit under all reasonably occuring circumstances. So rather than run the risk of selling ammunition that might exceed the specified maximum for +P, they went ahead and labeled it as +P+.

There are a couple of lessons there, but the one that is especially applicable to this topic is:

Loading right up to the maximum is really loading over maximum unless you are only loading for a single gun which will only be shot under a very tightly controlled set of circumstances.