9mm – Page 2 – The ExhaustNotes Blog

Thoughts on the 9mm Double Charge Issue

By Joe Berk

A few days ago I blew up my 9mm Springfield Armory 1911. It was hellaciously frightening. I wrote a blog about it and I’ll provide a link at the end of this post. My initial conclusion was that I had committed the cardinal reloading sin: I double charged a case. Instead of the intended 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant, I cycled the round twice at the charging station and I inadvertently loaded 10.8 grains. I know what you are thinking and that’s okay. If I read about somebody doing this, I’d think they were a dumbass, too. I’ll get back to that later.

5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 behind a 125-grain powder coated bullet is good. 10,8 grains is not.

Thinking about the double charge issue more, several additional thoughts emerged. Were there other possibilities?

One other possibility is that instead of the failure being due to a double charge, it might have been a squib charge (which would lodge a bullet in the bore) followed by another round. This was dismissed for several reasons:

- - I knew it wasn’t preceded by a squib charge because the prior round felt normal.
  - If it was a squib charge, the following round probably would not have chambered. Squib charges resulting from no powder and pressure being provided by the primer only (in a handgun) tend to push the bullet into the barrel a very short distance (the bullet doesn’t go into the barrel far enough to allow another round to chamber).
  - The were 5 holes on the target, which is the number of rounds I had fired.
  - The barrel was not bulged (TJ inspected it and pronounced it good).

Count them: 5 holes on the target. The fifth hole is the one at the bottom. This bullet was tumbling due to its low velocity. When the case blew out, the pressure vented elsewhere.

A friend asked if I could have seated two bullets in the case. I set bullets (one on top of the other) next to a cartridge case. I think you can see that seating two bullet in the case is not possible. The bottom bullet would set higher in the case than you see in the photo below (the web near the case base and the thickness of the case “floor” would cause it to seat much higher in the case). I would not have been able to seat the second bullet even if there was no powder in the case.

A photo showing that two bullets in a single case is not possible.

I pulled the bullets in the photo above from two cartridges using an inertia bullet puller. Both had exactly 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant, which is what I intended. These are the pulled bullets on top of their cartridge cases:

125-grain powder coated bullets pulled from their cases and then placed back on top of their cases.

After I pulled the bullets and put the powder back in each case, you can see the level at which the right amount of propellent (5.4 grains) sets in the case.

5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 in 9mm cartridge cases.

I wondered: Would a double charge (i.e., 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5) fit in a cartridge case without it spilling out of the case? The answer is yes. I took the powder from one case and poured it in the other. The case can easily hold 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5. Take a look:

10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5 in a 9mm cartridge case.

It would be better if the powder was bulky enough that it would spill over the case rim if I double charged it. I know that my 9mm Unique load sits higher in the case (my Unique load for the 125-grain bullet is 5.0 grains).

Trickling 5.0 grains of Unique onto the powder scale.

Here’s what 5.0 grains of Unique looks like in a 9mm case:

5.0 grains of Unique in a 9mm cartridge case.

The question then was how much Unique can a cartridge case hold? I was specifically interested in determining if a double charge of Unique would overflow the case. To answer this, I completely filled a 9mm case with Unique and weighed that amount of propellant:

A 9mm cartridge case completely filled with Unique.

I weighed the amount of Unique held by a completely-filled 9mm cartridge case. The filled 9mm case held 7.9 grains of Unique.

Weighing the Unique held by a completely-filled 9mm case.

A completely-filled 9mm cartridge case can hold a hair over 7.9 grains of Unique propellant.

A double charge of Unique would be 10.0 grains. I concluded that a double charge of Unique would overflow the 9mm case, and this would provide an additional safeguard against an inadvertent double charge. I was careless enough to not notice a case double-charged with Accurate No. 5. I’d like to think I wouldn’t be careless enough to miss powder spilling out of the case, as would occur with Unique. The next time I load 9mm ammo, it will be with Unique.

You might be wondering about the numbers here. Bear in mind that Unique is a less dense propellant than Accurate No. 5. 10.0 grains of Unique occupies more volume than does 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5.

The challenge now is what to do about the approximately 1400 rounds of 9mm and .45 ACP I already have loaded on the Lee Turret press. I thought I might be able to quickly screen the rounds by weight, but that’s not going to work. The weights of the powder, the brass case, and the bullet all vary, with the bullet (as the heaviest item) having the greatest variation. On the 9mm cartridges, I found that the weight variation of the completed 9mm cartridges varies from 192 grains up to 198 grains. The powder charge is 5.4 grains. If a cartridge weighs 198 grains, would it just be at the upper edge of the weight distribution with the correct single charge, or would it be a 192-grain cartridge with a double charge? It’s even worse on the .45 ACP rounds, because the weight variability of the completed cartridge is more than the 9mm, and those powder charges are in the range of 5.0 grains or 5.4 grains (they are lost in the case compared to 9mm ammo). I can’t take the chance that there’s another double charge in there. I’m breaking down and checking every cartridge. It’s a lot of work, but it’s better than blowing up a gun.

This is the .45 ammo I loaded on the Lee turret press. It’s 700 rounds. I have another 700 rounds of 9mm ammo similarly loaded.

You might be wondering what it’s like to get back on the range after blowing up a gun. I was afraid I might return with a very serious flinch (you know, when you jerk the gun in anticipation of it firing). I’m happy to report (and maybe brag a little bit) that I’m just fine. I had my 9mm S&W Shield out with ammo that I tore down, checked, and reloaded, and I also had my Colt Python (in which I shot .38 Special wadcutters).

An S&W 9mm Shield target shooting the 5.4 grain Accurate No. 5, 125-grain powder coated bullet load described in this blog.

A Colt Python target shot with 148-grain powder-coated wadcutters. I’ve done better and I’ve done worse.

At this point, I’m convinced that I screwed up and double-charged the 9mm round I wrote about last week. TJ (of TJ’s Custom Gunworks) disassembled the gun and pulled out the case you see in the photo at the top of this blog. There was a lot of pressure in there (about 10.8 grains of Accurate No. 5’s worth, actually). Like I said in the earlier blog, it’s an opportunity. More good news is the barrel wasn’t damaged. Even more good news is that TJ is doing an action and reliability job on my 1911. TJ is replacing the two piece guide rod (two-piece guide rods are a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist) and doing a few more good things to this pistol. I’ve already purchased and received replacement grips and a new 9mm magazine. I’ll provide an update in a couple of weeks after I get the 1911 back, and I’ll do another blog on what it’s like disassembling and reassembling 1400 rounds of reloaded ammo.

Stay tuned!

Please click on the popup ads!

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

More reloading and firearms stories are here!

KABOOM!

By Joe Berk

It occurred in an instant, on the fifth and last round in the magazine. It was as if a cherry bomb had gone off in my face. I heard a voice yell “whoa!” and I realized the voice was mine.

I stared at the smoking Springfield Armory 9mm 1911 in my hands, waiting for the pain, the blood, and whatever might follow. My hands, still wrapped around the grips, were stinging. I knew something bad happened, but I didn’t know how bad it was and I wasn’t especially looking forward to finding out. My gun had blown up. The entire gun was smoking and smoke continued to waft from places it wasn’t supposed to: The grips, the line between the frame and the slide, the trigger, around the hammer, and the ejection port (which was closed; at this point, I didn’t know if there was a live round in the chamber). Gray smoke curled out everywhere.

I slowly relaxed my grip and looked at my hands. There was no blood, but my palms stung like they had been slapped with a baseball bat. As I eased my hold, the 1911’s left grip fell away in two pieces (as you can see in the photo at the top of this blog). There were no cuts and there was no bleeding, but I had powder tattoos all over both hands. I returned my focus to the gun. It was still smoking. It smelled funny, too. Was that burnt flesh or just the powder and residual oil?

The first four shots from that magazine were delightfully tight, and I ordinarily would have felt good about seeing that. On each of the preceding four shots (and the fifth one, for that matter), the front sight had been outlined against the blurred rear sight and the bright orange muzzle flash, the way things are supposed to look when the hammer drops.

The first four rounds were forming a nice group. The fifth was a disaster.

I was still afraid to look at my hands. My face was now tingling and I knew I’d caught something. I had safety glasses on and I could see okay; that was good. I worked up enough courage to put the gun down and look at my hands more closely. They seemed okay. I knew from previous bad things happening that sometimes you don’t feel anything for a few seconds (the golden minute, I think they call it), but I looked again and I was okay.

The 1911’s right grip appeared to be intact (but it wasn’t; more on that in a second). The slide was locked forward. I tried to pull it back but it would only move about an eighth of an inch. I pressed the magazine release and nothing happened. I pulled on the magazine and it came out. It was mangled; the front was bent in and the follower angled upward. I still wasn’t sure if there was a live round in the chamber. I cocked the hammer and dropped it a couple of times…and there was nothing. I concluded it was safe to put the 1911 in its case. I scooped up my marbles and left. I didn’t even pick up my brass, and this was Remington brass that had only been reloaded once…that’s how shook up I was.

When I got home, I looked in the mirror. I had one little spot on my right cheek that bled and had already stopped (I’ve done worse shaving). I washed my hands to get the powder residue off (that took a while). There were no cuts. Dodged a bullet, I did. Figuratively and literally.

Once home, I examined the 1911 more closely. The trigger was too far forward in the frame. The event probably screwed up the trigger mechanism. The right grip, which I thought was okay, had a hairline crack along its length. Not that it matters; you can’t buy just one grip (you buy them in pairs). The slide would not move to the rear more than a little bit; it was not coming off the gun.

The trigger moved far forward. You can see the outline on the trigger denoting where it was normally positioned.

The left grip fell off the gun when I released my grip. The right grip had cracked, but it remained in place.

What could have caused this? There are a lot of possibilities. The first (and most likely) is that I double charged a cartridge case when reloading. In other words, I put twice as much propellant in the case as I should have. Of all the reloading equipment I’ve ever used, it’s easiest to do this on the Lee turret press I’ve been raving about. I’m not badmouthing Lee or their turret press; I’m simply making an observation. If that’s what happened, it was entirely my fault.

I could have fired a squib load, had a bullet lodge in the bore, and then fired another bullet on top of it. I’m pretty sure that is not what happened because of the holes on the target. There are four clean holes from the first four rounds, and one lower, oblong hole from the fifth round (when the gun blew up). You can see this on the target above. The bullet didn’t have as much energy behind it and it had started to tumble.

I could have experienced a case failure in which the rear of the case tore off, which would have allowed the hot gases to impinge on the gun internally. There’s some evidence to suggest this. I can look into the bore and see that the cartridge case is still present, but the interior of the case is partly torn away. The lower third of the case’s base is gone (the upper two thirds are present). In the area where the case’s base is gone, I can see the breech face and the firing pin. I later found part of the cartridge case inside the magazine.

This was a tough photo to get (mea culpa on the image quality). You are peering down the barrel from the muzzle end. The upper arrow points to what’s left of the cartridge case; the front of the firing pin is visible. The lower arrow points to the breech face.

The gun could have fired out of battery. That is to say, it may have fired without the slide being fully forward. I can move the slide back about 1/16-inch, cock the hammer, and the trigger will release it. I don’t know if it is doing that because the internals are damaged, or if it could do it before the event. Or, there could have been grit in the chamber that prevented the cartridge from chambering completely. When I look into the bore, I can see residual blue powder coating from the bullet that seems to be lodged between the case mouth and the forward edge of the chamber.

I cast around on the Internet a bit and I found several references to the 9mm 1911 Springfields having tight chambers. I know mine has a very tight chamber. Maybe a cartridge wasn’t resized completely and it failed to completely chamber? If that happens, the slide won’t go all the way forward and the gun shouldn’t fire so I don’t think that’s likely, but who knows.

After I returned home, I examined the magazine again and I could see what I thought was an imprint of the primer on the magazine. I shook the magazine and felt something rattling around inside. It was the primer. It had been flattened, and there was a hole where the firing pin had struck it. I’m guessing the hole was caused by the excess pressure.

A mangled magazine. The left arrow points to the primer imprint. The right arrow points to the distorted follower.

The primer and a bit of brass residue. These were inside the magazine.

An inside view of the primer. Note the circular cutout where pressure sheared the brass against the firing pin hole.

My Springfield 1911 is toast, at least for a while. I have two ways I can go on this (well, three, if you count scrapping the 1911 altogether, but that’s not a choice I want to consider). One option is to return the gun to Springfield Armory, but I don’t want to do that. If the failure was a problem with the gun, I don’t want to have the same guys who screwed it up attempt to fix it. Every gun I’ve ever bought from Springfield has required at least one warranty repair (including this one, but for a different issue). Two of my friends bought 1911s from Springfield and they’ve had to go back for warranty repairs (one had to be returned twice when they didn’t fix the problem the first time). I don’t know what Springfield’s warranty repair turnaround times are these days, but it’s probably measured in weeks or months. The last thing that ruled out a warranty repair was that this event occurred with my reloaded ammo and that voids the warranty. I’m not in denial here; it is likely my reloaded ammo is the reason this happened.

Nope, I’m going to go with the approach that’s always worked for me. It’s the silver lining in this sad tale (that and the fact that I wasn’t injured). I’m bringing the 1911 to TJ’s Custom Gunworks tomorrow. I’ve already talked to TJ and he tells me my 1911 can be repaired. The repairs will be on my dime, but I know the work will be perfect and I know the gun will literally be better than new. I’ll have TJ do a bit of custom work while he has the gun, too. TJ told me he’ll have to cut slide release off to remove the slide from the frame, and when he disassembles it, we’ll learn more. I’m thinking a double charge is the likely culprit (which would be my mistake), but maybe TJ will find otherwise. I’ll keep you posted.

I had a serious debate with myself about posting this blog. It’s an interesting story; that puts it in the plus column. If I double-charged that case, that’s an admission of carelessness on my part and that puts it in the minus column. In the end, if it helps other people from making the same mistake (assuming the fault lies with me), this blog will have served a purpose and that is why it is here.

Please click on the popup ads!

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

More good reloading and firearms stories are here.

Join our Facebook Milsurp Target Shooting group.

Shield Savvy

By Joe Berk

I promised an update on my Smith and Wesson 9mm Shield, and this is it. I’ve put 2,500+ rounds through the Shield (all reloads with different bullets and powders). Until I recently took my Shield to good buddy TJ, I was growing increasingly dissatisfied with the pistol’s frequent failures to extract, and I wasn’t alone. If you Google “failure to extract” and “Smith and Wesson Shield” you’ll find a lot of people are having this issue. My problem is in the rearview mirror, though, and my Shield is 100% reliable now. That’s because of TJ. I’ll get to that in a minute.

That target above? It’s 50 rounds at 30 feet through my Shield, shooting offhand. If you’re a reloader, here are the load specifics:

- - Jim Gardner 125 grain powder coated roundnose bullets (Jim sized these to 0.356 inch, which is his standard bullet).
  - Cartridge overall length 1.145 inches.
  - 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant.
  - Lee factory taper crimp (light crimp; see below).
  - Ammo loaded on Lee Classic 4-Turret press.
  - Mixed brass.

Ordinarily, I tailor a load to the handgun, and I thought I would be able to do that relatively easily with the Shield. I found that not to be the case. The Shield seemed accurate enough with nearly every load I tried, but nearly all had reliability issues. On the low end, the lighter loads didn’t have enough energy to cycle the action (a common enough problem on compact semi-autos). Light, mid range, and hot loads all gave the Shield extraction issues. The Shield experienced a failure to extract about every other magazine. It was very frustrating. I scoured the Internet forums for this issue and the opinions were all over the map. Here’s a smattering of the drivel I found:

- - Don’t use Winchester ammo because the rims are smaller (I measured them; that was baloney).
  - Don’t use cast bullets because they hang up (I knew that was baloney).
  - Don’t shoot aluminum ammo (which I never do, anyway).
  - Don’t shoot 115-grain bullets.
  - Don’t shoot 125-grain bullets.
  - Don’t shoot 147-grain bullets.
  - Clean your gun after every round (seriously?).
  - Don’t limp wrist your gun (again, seriously?).
  - Don’t do this, don’t do that, don’t do this other thing…
  - Do this, do that, do this other thing…

It was all written by people who apparently love the sound of their keyboards clacking. None of it was useful information. I felt stupid for wasting my time reading it.

Help us keep the content coming: Please click on the popup ads!

What I found was that the extraction problem occurred more with powder coated bullets than either plated or jacketed bullets. Other than that, there wasn’t a lot of correlation between any of the load variables I could play with and the gun’s failure to extract propensity. Then, during one range visit when I had a failure to extract, I fell back on my failure analysis background. I put the loaded gun down on the bench (being careful to keep it pointed downrange) and took a photo with my iPhone.

A cartridge case caught during extraction on the mouth of the case immediately below it.

Wow. How about that? It was apparent that the case being extracted was hanging up on the case mouth of the round still in the magazine, and it was a strong enough obstacle to pull the extractor off the rim. This brought up a lot of questions in my mind centered on the crimp and the bullet. The Gardner bullets have a slight ramped step just north of the crimp. And when I crimp a bullet for a semi-auto, I put a slight taper crimp on it with the Lee taper crimp die. I want enough of a crimp to remove the case mouth flare (part of the reloading process to assure the bullet will enter the case mouth without shaving lead or copper), and enough to assure the cartridge will chamber easily. Maybe I didn’t have enough crimp, I thought, and that was causing the case being extracted to hang up.

One of my reloaded 9mm rounds with a taper crimp and a Gardner powder-coated bullet.

I examined my ammo and I thought it looked good (actually, I thought it looked great; like most reloaders, I enjoy looking at my finished ammo). But, to make sure, I loaded another box with as much taper crimp as I could get out of the Lee die. Lee is right when they say their taper crimp die makes it impossible to deform a case: I put a very pronounced crimp on all the cartridges in the next box of ammo. But that wasn’t the answer, and it created a new problem. With a semi-auto like the 9mm or the .45 Auto, the cartridge headspaces on the case mouth. When I used a more pronounced crimp, I started getting misfires. The rounds were going too far into the chamber, and the firing pin wasn’t igniting the primers reliably. Nope, more crimp wasn’t the answer.

At this point, I was getting a little frustrated. All these problems aside, I wanted to like my Shield. I wanted to use it as my concealed carry weapon, so I needed the thing to be reliable. Faced with this issue, I knew it was time for what works every time: A visit to TJ’s Custom Gunworks.

TJ examined the Shield. He observed that the magazine positions the first cartridge in the magazine unusually high in the gun, and that was probably aggravating the failures to extract. But there’s not really anything you can do about that. It’s the gun’s design. It is what it is.

The Shield’s magazine sits relatively high.

A loaded round waiting to chamber when the Shield’s slide returns to battery.

TJ then took a look at the extractor. It was pretty dirty with combustion residue, but he felt it should work. TJ, honest as always, told me he could polish the ramp and the chamber (they come from the factory pretty rough), but he didn’t know if that would fix the failures to extract. I asked TJ to proceed.

A photo from TJ showing how dirty my extractor was. Even though it was funky (shame on me), TJ felt it would not have caused the extractor to slip off the case rim.

Here are a couple of photos of the chamber and the ramp as they come from the Smith and Wesson factory. The Shield always fed and chambered reliably; it was only the extraction that was an issue. TJ explained that if the chamber is rough, it can hang on to the fired case as it is being extracted. I’ve experienced that on other guns. The Shield’s chamber and its ramp looked about like I’d expect them to look on a mass-produced pistol, which is to say not very good. I asked TJ to work his magic on both the ramp and the chamber.

The Shield’s feed ramp and chamber as delivered from the factory. Rough, but not ready.

Another view of the factory Shield feed ramp. It looks like it might have been cut by hand with a dull chisel.

TJ did his usual excellent job, and here’s what things look like now.

What a good ramp looks like. Slick. Smooth. Shiny.

TJ told me he also put a slight undercut on the extractor to allow it to get a better grasp on the case rim.

The Shield’s extractor, as seen from the bottom. This is the piece that pulls the fired case out of the chamber. TJ undercut the area indicated by the arrow to give the extractor a better grip on the case.

I picked up my Shield a few days later and went to the range that afternoon. The Shield is now what it is supposed to be. You saw the target at the top of this blog. I fired 50 rounds without a single failure to extract and eject. The gun just feels a lot smoother and slicker now. My Gardner bullet and Accurate No. 5 load is perfect. And the recut extractor drops the cartridges in one nice small pile on the floor behind me. Wow. I’m impressed. Then, just to make sure (and because I was having so much fun) I fired another box of 50 rounds (again, with ammo loaded on the Lee Classic Turret press using the load at the top of this page).

Another target, another 50 rounds. Reliable as death and taxes, and accurate. Now, the Shield is as it should have been from the factory (thanks to TJ).

The Lee Classic Turret press does a magnificent job, and now, so does my Smith and Wesson Shield. It’s the way the pistol should have come from the factory.

It’s bothersome that most of my recent gun purchases have required additional work to get them to perform the way they should. In my former life as an aerospace manufacturing guy, I used to manage organizations with machine shops. I know it would cost a little more for the gun companies to do the kind of things TJ did to my Shield (and several other guns, for that matter). I wish the gun companies would do that; they ought to just hire TJ as a consultant (he knows what they need to do). The bottom line here? If you have a Smith and Wesson Shield and you want it to be what it is supposed to be, get in touch with TJ.

There are a lot of things I like about the Shield. Accuracy and illuminated sights are at the top of the list. You can get a feel for its accuracy from the targets shown here. None of this was bench rested; it was all shooting offhand on an indoor range with banging and clanging and brass flying all around me.

I found that after firing a a box of ammo, gunshot residue tends to occlude the sides, front, and rear of the front sight, and that causes the red to glow a lot less. But that’s a minor point. The Shield’s high visibility sights are great.

Holstered, the S&W Shield is about the same size as the Rock Island Compact 1911.

Another Shield-to-Compact-1911 comparison: The holstered Shield on top of the holstered 1911. Length and height are about the same.

The Shield is narrower than the 1911, and much lighter. It should be easier to carry concealed.

I bought a Bianchi leather holster for the Shield. It’s similar to the Bianchi I use with my Compact 1911. When I put the Shield in its holster I was surprised: It’s really not any smaller than my Compact 1911. It’s a bit narrower, but by the time both guns are holstered, the overall width is about the same. Where the Shield has a clear advantage, though, is weight. And even though the Shield with its polymer frame is much lighter than the Compact 1911, the recoil is quite a bit less than the .45. Now that the Shield has been made more reliable by TJ, it will make a good concealed carry gun. Incidentally, TJ worked his magic on my 1911, too. It’s one of the most reliable handguns I’ve ever owned.

Ten rounds from the Compact 1911, ten from the Model 60, and ten from the Shield. All are in the 10 ring, 28 of the 30 are in the X-ring.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Lee’s Classic Turret Press and the S&W Shield: Range Results

By Joe Berk

Check out that photo above. It’s a flat dark earth Smith and Wesson M&P 9 Shield, with ammo reloaded using the Lee Classic Turret Press Kit. Yep, this is a “two-fer” blog: A first look at the Shield, and an evaluation of the first loads prepped with the Lee Classic Turret Press Kit.

I initially tried two loads in the Shield:

- - 124-grain plated roundnose Rainier bullets and 5.2 grains of Accurate No. 5 powder.
  - 124-grain plated roundnose Rainier bullets and 5.6 grains of Accurate No. 5 powder.

I wanted to start low and work up, partly because that’s good reloading practice and partly because the Shield was new to me and I didn’t know how it would work and what it would like. The first reduced load (5.2 grains of Accurate No. 5 and a 124-grain plated bullet) wouldn’t cycle the Shield’s action. I fired 50 rounds this way, one at a time. I’d have to pull the slide back and release it after each shot. For the Shield portion of the evaluation, I knew I needed to bump up the load. For the ammo portion of the evaluation, every load fed and fired flawlessly. The Lee turret press had done its job.

Bumping up to the 5.6 grains of Accurate No. 5 (still with the 124-grain plated bullet), the Shield’s action cycled but a couple of times the slide closed after the last round in the magazine fired. I fired 50 rounds in this test, loading 5 rounds in the Shield’s magazine each time. The Shield was pushing the slide back far enough to strip off a new round, but on two magazine loadings the slide did not go far enough back to engage the slide stop after the last round. I needed to bump the charge a scosh more. For the ammo eval, every load fed, fired, and ejected flawlessly. Again, the Lee turret press had done its job.

The Lee Classic Turret Press, a phenomenal value and a great reloading setup.

At this point, I knew I needed to go a little higher on the powder charge with the 124-grain plated bullet, and I knew the Lee Classic Turret Press was making good ammo. Everything fed and there were no jams.

The first rounds loaded to an overall cartridge length of 1.610 inches. I later moved that back to 1.140 inches.

I loaded the above 9mm ammo to an overall length of 1.160 inches, which is longer than I usually load 9mm. The Lee manual has the cartridge overall length with a plated 124-grain Rainier bullet at 1.169 inches. The cartridges would go in the Shield’s magazine and they fed fine when shooting, but when loading them in the magazine, the first cartridge tended to go horizontal instead of being angled up as others were loaded on top of it. That hung up the magazine while cartridges were being loaded into it. In the past, I had normally loaded 9mm at around 1.120 to 1.130 inches overall length. I decided that for my next load I would go up to 5.8 grains of Accurate No. 5, and I would seat the bullets for an overall cartridge length of 1.140 inches. I went home and in 20 minutes I had loaded another 50 rounds. That Lee Classic Turret is fast.

50 rounds of custom-crafted 9mm ammo created on the Lee Classic Turret Press.

The popup ads keep us going…please click on them!

When I returned to the West End Gun Club, I set up a target at 50 feet, took out the Shield, and loaded the first magazine. Loading to a cartridge overall length of 1.140 made it easier to load the magazine. So far, so good.

Next, I fired 20 rounds to assess the ammo’s functionality. Everything worked perfectly. Every round fed, every round ejected, and life was good. The Shield’s bright fixed sights were printing a bit to the left, so I held to the right on a fresh target and rattled off 30 rounds.

Thirty rounds at 50 feet from the Shield. Not too shabby for a belly gun.

The Shield’s recoil was not at all uncomfortable; it was way better than a .38 snubnose revolver. The Shield is a very light pistol (19.0 ounces). That’s lighter than the S&W Model 60 (23.2 ounces) or a Compact 1911 (33.4 ounces). Those weights for the 1911 and the Model 60 may not sound like a lot, but (trust me on this) it’s enough to weigh on you at the end of the day. I guess the Shield’s light weight is the big advantage of a Tupperware gun. I like it, and I like the fact that the gun is pleasant to shoot.

A few days later, I was on an indoor range and I set up the Alco target that has four mini-silhouettes on a single sheet. I ran it out to 21 feet and put 50 rounds on target (dividing them roughly between the four targets), all shot offhand while standing. The load was the same as the one mentioned above. That’s 5.8 grains of Accurate No. 5 and a 124-grain plated Rainier roundnose bullet at an overall cartridge length of 1.140 inches, and for these, I used mixed brass.

The quad mini-silhouette from Alco Target in Monrovia, California, and 50 rounds fired standing at 7 yards.

I also tried two different powder-coated bullets with Accurate No. 5. One was the 147-grain Boudreau flat nosed bullet with 4.8 grains of Accurate No. 5. This is an accurate load in the Shield (even more so than the plated bullet load mentioned above), but it leaded the bore. The other was the Boudreau 124-grain round nose bullet with 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5; it, too, leaded the bore. The plated bullets did not lead the bore at all so I think they are a better load. I loaded more 147-grain powder coated bullets with a lighter charge to see if that would eliminate the bore leading, but they did not and I had cycling issues. 4.8 grains of Accurate No. 5 is what this 147-grain powder coated bullet wants.

The Shield with 124-grain powder coated roundnose bullets. These leaded the bore.

147-grain powder coated bullets. These, too, leaded the bore. They are accurate, though.

Another Alco quad mini-silhouette with 5-shot groups fired standing at 7 yards, this time with the 147-grain powder coated Boudreau bullet and 4.8 grains of Accurate No. 5.

Let’s talk about the Shield a bit. My Shield is the first iteration (not the Shield 2.0, as that model is not sold in California). The Shield has a 3 1/8-inch barrel.

The Shield’s 8-round magazine. The left arrow points to the spacer. It can slide up, as indicated by the right arrow.

The Shield’s magazine could be better. It has a plastic spacer at the bottom, and that spacer rides up when loading the magazine. Conceivably, it could interfere with seating the magazine in the gun. In my opinion it is a poor design. The collar slides down as easy as it slides up, so that’s good. You get two mags with the Shield. The one you see above holds 8 rounds and it has a grip extender that feels just right to me. There’s another one that doesn’t have the grip extender and it holds 7 rounds. I haven’t done anything with that one, other than checking to make sure it was in the box when I bought the gun.

The Shield’s sights are the best I’ve ever used. They are bright and easy to see. The sights let in light from the sides, and that design just flat works. It’s the first gun I have ever shot with these sights. They are better than my SIG P226s’s Tritium sights, and those sights are good. The photo below isn’t enhanced; it’s what the Smith’s sights actually look like.

The Shield’s sights. They are the best I’ve ever used.

The Shield’s trigger, in a word, is terrible. There are other triggers available for the Shield, but I will leave this one alone. The trigger got a little better with use and a couple of cleanings (I’ve put about 600 rounds through the Shield so far). The Shield is a striker-fired gun and the trigger is not what I would consider good, but it’s better than it was initially. Compared to a good 1911 like the Springfield, it’s awful. But, it’s good enough to get rounds on target (as you can see above).

The Shield’s slide release, out of the box, was super stiff and essentially unusable. I could release the slide with two thumbs, but not with one. I found it best to pull the slide back and let it go to release the slide. This aspect of the design (or its execution) is poor, and requiring two hands to release the slide is not good for a defensive weapon. A close examination of the slide stop showed that it was rough where it interfaced with the slide, so I judiciously worked it over with 600-grit sandpaper, and it releases more easily now. I can release it with one thumb with no magazine in the gun, but it still takes two thumbs and a lot of effort with the mag inserted and that’s bad. It’s surprising that Smith and Wesson would let this happen.

A SIG P226, the Smith and Wesson Shield, and a Springfield Armory 1911, all chambered in 9mm. Flat dark earth is the new black.

I had the SIG and my 1911 with me when I shot the Shield. The Shield doesn’t look that much smaller in a group photo, but it is flatter and it will carry concealed better. In subsequent blogs, I’ll explore different loads prepared on the Lee Classic Turret press fired in all three of the guns above. I fired a few rounds through the Springfield, and they worked just fine; the same is true for the SIG P226. Interestingly, the lighter loads that wouldn’t work in the Shield did work in the Springfield. It’s counterintuitive, but compact handguns are tougher to make work well than are full size handguns. That’s because the recoil spring in a compact handgun has to be much stiffer than one in a full size gun.

The Shield’s sear deactivation lever. You have to push it down to remove the slide and barrel.

To takedown the Shield, you do not simply unlock the slide takedown lever. There’s a sear deactivation release in the magazine well (identified with a red arrow in the photo above), and you have to push that down before you can turn the slide takedown lever for disassembly. You can’t do it with your finger; you need a small screwdriver or a thin pen. With the SIG, you just turn the slide takedown lever with the slide back.

Cleaning the Shield is a breeze. You make sure the gun is unloaded, release the mag, lower the sear deactivation lever, rotate the slide takedown lever, and the gun comes apart. The slide comes off the frame, and the spring subassembly and barrel come out. That’s it. Five parts (the magazine, the receiver, the barrel, the spring subassembly, and the slide.

The plated ammo I loaded on the Lee turret press didn’t lead at all. Zero. Zip. Nada. The powder coated bullets did, which surprised me. All were accurate.

The bottom line? Let me put it this way: I like the Shield; I love the Lee Classic Turret Press kit. The Shield will get better with more shooting and I want to try more loads in it, but that 5.8-grains of Accurate No.5 and 124-grain plated Rainier roundnose load is a winner. The Lee Classic Turret press and all its accessories were good to go right from the beginning. Its design and quality are excellent.

The Lee Classic Turret Press…what can I say? It’s awesome. It’s fast, easy to use, inexpensive, and it makes great ammo. I say it’s the best bang for the buck in the reloading world. As an engineer I’m impressed; as a consumer and reloader I am delighted. I have already fired several hundred rounds loaded on the Lee Classic Turret Press in my Shield, the Springfield, and the SIG and once I settled on a load, every one of them fed, fired, extracted, and ejected perfectly in three different handguns. I had a box of 1000 124-grain plated 9mm bullets a few days ago; I like the Lee turret press so much they’re all gone now (they were either sent downrange or they’ve been loaded and labeled and they’re waiting their turn to go downrange). I love reloading and shooting; I love it even more now that I’m loading with my Lee turret press.

A word of caution here…these loads performed acceptably in my guns. Your firearms may vary and you need to develop your own loads. Always start low and work up in any load development program.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

More Tales of the Gun!

More information on Lee reloading gear.

Our earlier blogs on Lee equipment:

Lee Safety Prime
Lee Auto-Drum Powder Measure
Lee Classic Turret Press Kit
Lee Bench Plate
Lee’s Modern Reloading Manual
Lee Safety Powder Scale
Lee Classic Turret Kit Unpacking
Lee .44 Magnum Dies 1
Lee .44 Magnum Dies 2
Lee .44 Magnum Dies 3
Lee .357 Magnum Dies

A Tale of Two 9s

I recently tested two 9mm loads to assess:

- How 124-grain roundnose Boudreau powder-coated bullets performed in the SIG P226 and the Springfield Armory 1911, and
- The effect of seating depth on accuracy with 124-grain roundnose Ranier plated bullets in the Springfield Armory 1911.

A friend of mine recommended Boudreau powder-coated bullets. They are reasonably-priced and I liked the look. Ralph, the Boudreau master caster, recommended seating the bullets at 1.055 or thereabouts, which is deeper into the case than I usually go but that’s what I did with these. They look pretty cool. One of my shooting buddies observed that the loaded rounds looked like lipstick. That’s good; that’s the look I was going for.

These are the Ranier plated bullets.

I tried Accurate No. 5 propellant for the first time. My local reloading shop had this propellant in stock so I thought I would try it (these days, you take what you can get). Accurate No. 5 is a flake powder like Unique, but it burns much cleaner. It doesn’t leave the sooty residue Unique leaves, and there’s much less smoke (that’s partly due to the powder-coated bullets, too).

I also wanted to evaluate bullet seating depth’s effects on accuracy with the Ranier bullets. There’s nothing too scientific or rigorous in this evaluation; I just wanted to get a feel if the 1911 was more accurate or less accurate with the bullets seated deeper in the case or further out (I didn’t do this evaluation with the SIG).

My load manuals don’t make a distinction between powder-coated bullets versus other bullets. I read some comments online that indicate powder coated bullets get the same velocity with lighter propellant charges. I finally found some data on the Hodgdon powder website for 124-grain powder coated bullets, and it showed the charge range running from 4.6 to 5.4 grains of their Accurate No. 5 powder. This was a quick-look test, so I loaded 10 rounds at 4.6 grains, 10 rounds at 4.8 grains, 10 rounds at 5.0 grains, 10 rounds at 5.2 grains, and finally, 10 rounds at 5.4 grains. As mentioned above and per Ralph’s suggestion I seated all bullets to a cartridge overall length (COAL) of 1.055 inches. I fired one 5-shot group at each charge level with the 1911, and one single 5-shot group at each charge level with the SIG P226, all at 50 feet. Like I said above, it was not a rigorous assessment; I just wanted to get a feel for what worked and what didn’t. Here are the results:

These are the targets (the Springfield 1911 target is on the left and the SIG P226 target is on the right). I worked my way from the top down and left to right with each charge weight, so the top bullseye on each target is with 4.6 grains of Accurate No. 5 and the bottom right one on each target is with 5.4 grains of Accurate No. 5).

All of the powder-coated-bullet loads functioned perfectly in both guns and none of the cartridges exhibited any pressure signs. The heaviest charge on the Accurate site (5.4 grains) gave the best accuracy in both guns. That’s the load I’m going to go with on future loads with this bullet. The load had modest recoil and it was pleasant shooting. These are good bullets and they function well with the Hodgdon-recommended charges. I will also mention that I was a little surprised: This was the first time the Springfield Armory 1911 outshot the SIG. In the past, my SIG P226 had been more accurate than any 9mm handgun I ever tested, including my 1911.

The next test was to assess the effects of seating depth on accuracy. My buddy Paul and I had a discussion on this topic and we both realized that after sending 9mm projectiles downrange for 60 years and evaluating powder, bullets, primers, and more, we had never investigated bullet seating depth as a variable in 9mm reloading. The 9mm cartridge is a short one, and most semi-autos have generous chambers to improve reliability. The combination could naturally lead to the cartridges swimming around in the chamber, perhaps more so than a .45 ACP cartridge. It stands to reason that a longer cartridge (i.e., not seating the bullet as deeply in the case) could minimize movement of the cartridge in the chamber and improve accuracy. But there are other requirements at play, like getting the cartridges in the magazine, not seating the bullet so far out that it hits the rifling before the round is fully chambered, and reliable feeding of the bullets from the magazine into the chamber. So I thought I’d run a quick experiment.

For these tests I used Ranier 124-grain plated roundnose bullets and the Springfield Armory 1911. It was unscientific. I made 25 rounds with 6.4 grains of Accurate No. 5 (a max load) and the Ranier bullets seated to a COAL 1.100 inches (which is about what I would normally do), and another 25 rounds with the same powder charge, but with the bullets seated to a COAL of 1.156 inches (which is a little more than a twentieth of an inch further out). Here are the results:

It was an easy load to shoot and there were no flattened primers or other pressure signs. All loads functioned reliably in the 1911. There was little to no leading with the Ranier plated bullets, even though this was a max load.

Here’s what the targets looked like. The top two little guys are with the bullets seated out for a COAL of 1.156 inches; the bottom two little guys are with the bullets seated deeper and a COAL of 1.100 inches.

What this quick look says to me that the Ranier plated bullets are more accurate if they are seated further out. These worked in my 1911 magazine; I didn’t check them in the SIG P226 magazine (nor did I shoot this load in the SIG). If I was to do this test again, I’d check to make sure the longer cartridges would fit in the SIG’s shorter magazine and I’d also test them for accuracy in the SIG.

I haven’t assessed the Boudreau powder-coated bullets at different seating depths. I will get to that later. I’ve got a bunch of the Ranier bullets, and a bunch of the powder-coated bullets. Primers…that’s another story. Everybody needs primers.

The standard warning: The load data included in this blog are for my guns. Yours may be different.

Want more gun stories? Please click on the popup ads!

More Tales of the Gun!

The CZ 2075 9mm Rami

As concealed carry powerhouses go, it doesn’t get much better than the CZ 25 Rami. One of my good buddies owns one and I had an opportunity to play with it. I was impressed. On the plus side, it is an all-metal gun with a flat black finish, a hammer (greatly preferred by yours truly over a striker-fired pistol), great sights, and a marvelous trigger. My bud had a trigger job on his, and it was awesome (light and crisp, with zero creep, just like it should be).

The three-dot sights on the CZ are crisp and non-gimmicky. There’s no glow-in-the-dark nonsense and they stand out. In the photo below, the sight picture is just the opposite of what it’s supposed to be (you want the front sight to be in sharp focus, and the rear sight to be a bit fuzzy, but I couldn’t get my iPhone camera to cooperate when I shot these photos).

I liked the feel of the CZ. I didn’t get to fire it, but I think I might have an opportunity at some point. The one you see here is chambered in 9mm. The Rami was also available in .40 S&W, which I think might be a bit much for a gun this small.

The Rami was discontinued in 202o with the introduction of newer CZ models. I haven’t seen the new handguns, but I can’t see how they can be any better than the CZ 2075. This pistol just feels right.

More Tales of the Gun!

Never miss an ExNotes blog.

A Tale of Two Hi Powers

Good buddy Robby has been a friend for 30 years. I first met Robby on a consulting gig in Georgia. He’s a fellow engineer, a firearms aficionado, a reloader, and a hell of a shot. Robby and I see each other whenever our paths cross, and more often than not the talk is about guns and reloading. Robby is a competitive pistolero and a hunter, he enjoys a finely-figured bit of walnut as much as I do, and we both appreciate the finer points of Ruger No. 1 and bolt action rifles. Robby shared with me that he recently acquired an FN Hi Power. I asked him if he would do a guest blog for ExNotes and what follows is the well-crafted result.

My grandfather: The man who taught me basically everything I know. Hunting, fishing, archery, how to shoot, how to walk through the woods silently, how to approach anything that needed fixing. Everything. He grew up during the Great Depression, he was a highly decorated recon scout during WW II, he was a cop and a security guard and he retired as a postman. I saw my grandfather as the definition of a man. He owned two handguns, one centerfire rifle (a Model 70 Winchester), a .22 and a very illegal shotgun that he sawed off because his brother split the barrel.

I own one of his handguns (a Colt Detective Special) and I have the .22 and the Model 70. The Colt Detective Special is a fine little snubby with a black paint job because someone let it rust while I was in college. I painted it and took it into my possession.

My grandfather’s Nazi war trophy with artillery sights.

My younger brother has the other handgun. It is an automatic that my grandfather took from an SS officer after dispatching him in northern Italy. It is the first automatic that I ever saw, held or fired. My grandfather kept it in the car when he delivered mail on the rural route he ran, he took it on camping trips with my brother and me, and he kept it close everywhere he went. He kept it in a holster with the German’s name written on the flap. It was a mystical gun that seemed more like Excalibur to me than some manmade object. I had all of the other firearms, so I was fine with my brother hanging on to Excalibur.

Another view of the World War II German Hi Power.

What was this mystical weapon, you ask? Just a fine Belgian copy of John Moses Browning’s “improvement” of the 1911. A 9mm Browning Hi Power, to be exact. The design was unfinished when JMB departed this mortal world, but a Belgian named Dieudonné Saive finished the design and after incorporating a few of Browning’s older patents, created the most widely-issued sidearm in history. Anyway, I am making a short story extremely long.

My brother possessed Excalibur and I needed one for myself. I bought lots of different pistols, including a couple of 1911s, and built a few custom polymer pistols with all the trimmings, but I still didn’t have a Hi Power. I was super excited when I saw Springfield and FN resurrecting the Hi Power, and I was determined to have my own.

Well, after looking for unicorn teeth in the retail shops and online, I was thinking my Hi Power was a pipe dream. The SA and the FN are made of unobtanium and the one I found online was priced accordingly. Before heading off to find The Lady of the Lake, I stopped by a local gun shop to see if I could find a 9mm AR lower. Yes, I have wide and varied tastes when it comes to things that go BANG. The owner and his minions were all tied up, so I decided to window shop a bit. I saw the Hi Power before I made it to the case. I pretended to look at everything else, hoping that no one would notice that Excalibur’s brother was RIGHT THERE in the open!

Once I got the attention of a person employed by this fine establishment, I asked to hold “that one.” “That one” had oversized, red, laminated wood grips that were apparently sized for Andre the Giant and looked much like lipstick on a large sow. I asked the owner if he knew the vintage and he replied that he thought it was a 1980s production gun. The tag affixed to the trigger guard said “consignment” and the price was $1199. That was a quick “nope” from me and I headed back to the truck with no AR lower and no Excalibur.

A week or so later, I ended up at the same shop again after dreaming up some other materials that I might need to finish the AR 9 I started. I asked to hold the Hi Power again. I noticed that it had been marked down $100 and the owner told me that it came with a spare mag and another grip. The red, behemoth handles needed to go, so I was glad to hear there was an immediate option. I still wasn’t keen on paying north of a grand, though. If it had been an actual Browning with that deep Browning bluing, that might have been much harder, but it was a well-worn FN with circus handles and non-OEM sights. It didn’t even have the “artillery” sights that my grandfather’s had. That’s what he called the adjustable-to-500-meter sights that Excalibur wore. I handed it back again and left.

My 1952 Fabrique National (FN) Hi Power with Hogue grips.

Viewed from either side, the Hi Power and its new grips look good.

A couple more weeks rocked on, I received my yearly bonus from work, I finished the AR 9, and I couldn’t get the Hi Power out of my head. We were headed that way to pick up one of my daughter’s friends and I decided to stop by and see if I could talk the guy down to $900. I walked in, eyeballed the cases and found it nestled between a couple of other pistols that I didn’t even look at long enough to identify. I asked the guy that offered to help me how much was being asked for the Hi Power this week. He yelled across the shop and asked the owner. $850 was the answer! I holstered my negotiating skills and said, “I’ll take it!”

When I made it back to the truck with it in a plastic grocery bag, I took it out and showed it to my very unimpressed better half. She said,”That is the “gun-est” looking gun I have ever seen…”

I responded, “Exactly, it is beautiful!” And off we went.

I got it home after a few hours of birthday shopping with my 15 year old, her friend and the wife and had to go straight to the yard and shoot my newest acquisition. It did not disappoint! The aftermarket sights are installed properly and are right on the target. The trigger breaks cleanly, there’s no hammer bite, and there were no failures or hiccups of any kind. Perfect…just like I hoped. Except for the furniture. I ordered a set of Hogue hardwood grips in Kingwood after a pretty thorough scouring of the internet in search of something fitting for my wooden desires.

I started my research on the serial number and completely struck out. Apparently, FN is pretty liberal and somewhat random with their numbering system, so I dug deeper. Thumb print on the right side, *S on a couple of parts, internal extractor and the five-digit serial number helped me narrow it down to a 1952 production run.

Both Hi Powers shoot well. These are 50-ft targets. My grandfather’s (and now my brother’s) Hi Power shot the group on the left; my FN Hi Power shot the group on the right.

I messaged my brother and asked him to drop Excalibur by so I could compare the two. I shot both and they are equal in all things. Except mystique. Hopefully, in time I will add a bit to mine.

Robby, that’s an awes0me story and a fine-looking pair of Hi Powers. Thanks so much for sharing it with us and our readers. You and your brother are a couple of lucky guys. Always a pleasure to hear from you, my friend, and our best to you and your family.

Help us keep the content coming: Please click on the popup ads!

More Tales of the Gun!

Stay current with our latest articles on guns, motorcycles, watches, books, movies, reloading, bicycles, construction stuff, Jeeps, philosophical ramblings, rants, and more!

Adios, Mi Amigo!

Well, I had a good day on the range until my Model 59 broke. It’s the gun my father bought for me before I went overseas and I’ve had it for 50 years. I was having fun and I’d just fired 80 rounds at a 25 yard target. I went to put the next magazine in and it wouldn’t seat. Uh oh. When I pulled it out, the piece you see above fell from the magazine well. I pulled the slide release, dropped the slide, and wowee. This wasn’t good. Or maybe it was (more on that in a second).

Please click on the popup ads…it’s what keeps the blog going!

Ugly, ain’t it? Surprisingly, the surface fractography doesn’t look like a fatigue failure (there are no characteristic beach marks). I make it to be a brittle failure.

The photo below is my beautiful jeweled Model 59 barrel, all dressed up with no place to go. The arrows point to the ramps on either side of the chamber (the photo below shows the ramps on the left side). Those ramps are what smack into the aluminum frame with each shot.

The arrows in the next pic point to the matching right side of the Model 59 frame. Note the worn area. It’s where the barrel ramp contacts the frame ramp when the gun recoils. That ramp (along with the mating ramp on the barrel) drops the barrel slightly to disengage it from the slide when the slide moves to the rear. You can see this area took a beating over the last 50 years. The photo shows the opposite side of the frame, where it didn’t break.

You might think I’m mad at the gun, but I’m not. I have a good dose of mechanical empathy. Imagine you are that aluminum ramp on the Model 59 when a 9mm cartridge lights off and the barrel is recoiling toward you at speed. WHAM! Do that 20,000 or 30,000 times in a row and think about how you would feel. Nope, the Model 59 did its job for 50 years. I can’t be mad at it.

You read that right. I had 50 years of fun with my Model 59 on the range, carrying it on hunting trips, keeping it handy when I felt I needed to, and on one occasion, threatening a late night marsupial Sue thought was a burglar (the ‘possum was not impressed). I’ve fired between 20,000 and 30,000 rounds through my Model 59 (a guess based on how many boxes of 9mm I’ve reloaded). Very few of these (maybe none) were light loads, as the best 9mm accuracy is at the top of the spectrum. From what I’ve found in the endless stream of what passes for information on the Internet, semi-auto aluminum handgun frame life expectancy estimates are around 10,000-20,000 rounds, so I’m in the zone. Maybe I’m even ahead of the game.

I figure the cost of my reloaded 9mm ammo is about $.15 per round, so if I fired 20,000 rounds through this gun, that’s $3K in ammo. Dad paid something like $135 for the Model 59 back in 1972. Ignoring inflation, the ammo costs make the gun the least expensive part of the deal. Somehow that makes the fact that my Model 59 is toast slightly less bothersome. I probably could part it out (grips, slide, barrel, jeweled parts, etc.), but I don’t think I will. My buddies suggested putting it in a wooden frame and hanging it on the wall. That sounds like a good idea. I guess I can’t bitch too much. 50 years of service ain’t too shabby.

Some of you might be wondering why I don’t just get the gun repaired. It can’t be fixed; even Smith and Wesson told me it’s a goner. They didn’t offer to buy it back like Ruger did when I wore out a .357 Mag Blackhawk, but hey, Ruger is Ruger and Smith is Smith. One of my friends said I should buy a new 9, and I’m ahead of the curve on that, too. I bought a SIG P226 Scorpion a year or two ago. The SIG is the finest 9mm handgun I’ve ever owned, a worthy successor to the Model 59. If it lasts 50 years like the Model 59 did, I’ll be 120 years old and I’ll feel like I got my money’s worth with it, too.

More Tales of the Gun are here!

Never miss an ExNotes blog!

A Note From Bob on TJ’s Custom Gunworks

My good buddy Bob, who enjoys playing with things that go bang as much as I do, followed the stories I’ve done on my TJ-modified revolvers and pistols. Bob wrote to ask if the guy really is that good. He is, I said. In fact, he’s better.

Bob took the plunge and had TJ refine several of his guns. Bob sent this note to me after he took his TJ-modified automatics to the range.

Joe,

I got my Berettas back from TJ. I initially took him a M-1951 and a 92 and when he was done with those I picked them up and dropped off another 92 for a Level 1 package and a Radom P-64 that I was having trouble with. Picked those up a few weeks ago and finally got to the range yesterday. Took the M-1951 and both 92s and what a difference. Just wonderful.

You were totally right about TJ. And I would like to do a guest blog at some point. Any tips?

Bob

Bob, thanks for the note and the photos, and the offer to write a guest blog. We always love receiving them. As for tips, if the question refers to writing, my advice is to just be yourself. If it refers to shooting, that’s easy: Focus on the front sight. And thanks again!

Hey, all of our gun stories are here on our Tales of the Gun page! Revolvers, autos, milsurps, lever guns, single shot rifles, reloading, and much, much more!

Never miss an ExNotes blog…sign up here for free!

Check out my custom guns from TJ’s Custom Gunworks! I’ve had six handguns and a rifle customized by TJ, and every one of them is a stellar example of his craftsmanship. These include my Model 59, a bright stainless Colt 1911, my MacManus Colt 1911, the Rock Island Compact, a Model 60 Smith and Wesson snubbie, a Ruger Mini 14, and my new Colt Python. TJ’s emphasis is on reliability and perfection and he’s met both of those objectives in every case. When it comes to custom firearms, TJ is in a class of one!

Ruger’s Custom Shop Super GP100

Colt has a custom shop, Remington has a custom shop, Winchester had a custom shop, Savage has a custom shop, Springfield Armory has a custom shop, CZ has a custom shop, and Smith and Wesson has a custom shop. It seemed Ruger was the only one of the big players that didn’t have a custom shop.

That’s changed. Ruger recently announced that they, too, now have a custom shop, except they do things differently. Rather than taking orders for custom features on their regular line of firearms, Ruger’s approach is to produce limited numbers of highly-customized guns. Stated differently, Ruger picks the features they want to add to their custom guns; your choice is to purchase it (or not). It’s not a bad way to go.

Note the new Super GP100’s dark PVD finish, the green fiber optic sight, the slotted barrel shroud, and other custom touches.

Ruger’s two most recent custom shop models are revolvers they call the Super GP100; one chambered in 9mm and the other chambered in .357 Magnum. These revolvers have a number of custom features, including a shrouded and vented barrel, 8-shot capacity and the ability to use star clips for speedy reloads, radically-fluted cylinder (I like the look), PVD (that’s physical vapor deposition) finish, polished and slicked up trigger and internal componentry, oversized Hogue hardwood grip, an 11-degree barrel crown (that’s supposed to enhance accuracy), and a fiber-optic front sight (never had one of those before; I’m eager to see if it really does anything for me).

Befitting its custom status, the Ruger Super GP100 comes with a higher-quality carrying case.

The Super GP is offered in two chamberings: .357 Magnum and 9mm Parabellum. The 9mm version is not approved here in the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia. That’s probably okay, as I would go for the .357 if given the choice. But that’s not a choice that’s going to be offered any time soon. Read on, and you’ll see what I mean.

The 9mm version of Ruger’s new Super GP100 revolver. It looks good. Note the shorter cylinder.

I like the way Ruger handled the 9mm Super GP100. The cylinder is shorter to match the 9mm cartridge, and the barrel extends back into the frame. This means the 9mm bullet has less of a jump to the rifling in the barrel, which should improve accuracy. It’s the same thing Smith and Wesson does on its .45 ACP revolvers.

Ruger doesn’t stock these guns. True to the custom shop concept, Ruger builds them as orders are taken. But it wouldn’t do any good to order one now, unless you just want to get a place in line. Due to the press of handgun orders induced by the election, the pandemic, and the recent civil rioting in major US cities, Ruger has its workforce focused elsewhere on meeting the unprecedented demand for its standard guns. As an aside, it’s tough to buy ammo right now, too, for the same reasons. That’s not bothering me, as I reload on my RCBS reloading gear and I’m well stocked.

I’m in the market for a .357 Mag revolver, but I’ll probably go with a more traditional handgun. Maybe a .357 Blackhawk or a S&W Model 27. I’ll keep you posted.

Revolvers, rifles, reloading, and more…check out our Tales of the Gun page!