1911 Accidental Discharge

[GLOOB]

We're not talking about Glocks.

Well, where you referenced "something very wrong with [my] guns," I chose to clarify. As I already discussed, I did not have a 1911 in front of me to play with. I was describing my other guns, so you were in fact talking about guns other than 1911's in your post.

Assuming .050 inch tall upper barrel lugs, and an additional .012-.015 inch drop to the bed, the total would be on the order of a 16th inch. (.0625) A large primer's radius is .100 inch...which would place the firing pin strike very near the edge and unlikely to fire the primer. Not impossible...but highly unlikely.

0.2" diameter primer. 0.0625" drop. You think it highly unlikely? You think there aren't guns out there that hit a few hundredths of an inch off center, normally? I don't know.

And do you think the firing pin has to move more than a couple tenths an inch to reach the primer, while the frame/slide are moving that 1/4" or so to get that far? I don't know.

If this IS the case, this is why the FLGR is causing drop fires, and regular guide rod not. It's not the recoil spring "absorbing energy" or "cushioning" the fall. This is what I said all along. I didn't refute the outcome. I disagreed with the reasoning attributed to it. But I'm looking forward to your amusing correction.

 

[judgedelta]

Never done any testing with a muzzle drop, but did drop a Browning Hi-Power, in a case, on the hammer one time. Bullet hit the sheetrock wall about a foot in front of my face. Mighty hard on the underwear... NEVER AGIN did I put a loaded gun in a case.

 

[1911Tuner]

You think there aren't guns out there that hit a few hundredths of an inch off center, normally?

Sure there are...just none that I've seen hit a full 16th inch off and fire.

It's not the recoil spring "absorbing energy" or "cushioning" the fall.

Probably not. I'm just tryin' to factor in everything. Nothing means everything. Everything means something. I've done a little drop testing in my time.

I've dropped just the slide and barrel...and then dropped the same slide and barrel assembled to a frame, complete with recoil spring and FLGR.

I had to drop the whole gun from nearly twice the height as just the slide and barrel to get a primer to fire.

I don't know what conclusion we can draw from that...but there it is.

But I'm looking forward to your amusing correction.

My goodness! Testy, aren't we?

 

[1911Tuner]

Never done any testing with a muzzle drop, but did drop a Browning Hi-Power, in a case, on the hammer one time. Bullet hit the sheetrock wall about a foot in front of my face.

Hammer all the way down?

 

[GLOOB]

My goodness! Testy, aren't we?

Not everyone has the pleasure of being misquoted and trolled by a moderator. I'm flattered.

I had to drop the whole gun from nearly twice the height as just the slide and barrel to get a primer to fire.

I don't know what conclusion we can draw from that...but there it is.

This is exactly what I would expect for one of two reasons.

Was the safety on (slide locked) or not?
If the slide was locked, it tells you exactly what I already stated several posts ago. When the slide is locked the ground has to stop the momentum of the entire gun, not just the slide. The ground is going to give a bit more under the impact. Unless you have a really thick and heavy block of concrete or your ground is built on bedrock, this will make some difference.

If unlocked, could be the whole breech dropping business and the primer being hit off center.

 

[1911Tuner]

Was the safety on (slide locked) or not?

I've done it both ways. On this particular test, the assembled gun was off-safe. I ran the test because I witnessed a quick-draw artist drop his pistol during the draw, and he'd snicked the safety off during the draw. Slide and barrel only was done to simulate the gun being ON safe without damaging a safety.

Not everyone has the pleasure of being misquoted and trolled by a moderator.

When/where have I misquoted you? I don't normally include a whole paragraph in a quote, but center on the sentence or phrase that I'm responding to.

Trolled? Because I offered a possible explanation as to why a FLGR may be the real culprit in a drop-fire because it keeps the barrel from moving back far enough to link completely down and out of alignment with the firing pin?

Is it that you're not open to theories or evidence other than your own and a different one sets your teeth on edge?

That's not trolling. That's offering a possible explanation to something that you may have missed. A discussion for all to consider.

Or is it when you expose your own lack of knowledge that you get out of sorts?

Let's take this one as a f'rinstance...

And I quote verbatim:

When the slide is locked the ground has to stop the momentum of the entire gun, not just the slide.

The momentum of the entire gun is irrelevant. The gun could weigh two pounds or fifty and it wouldn't affect the test one bit. It's the firing pin's momentum that dents the primer after the gun hits the ground and stops...not the gun's. 2 pounds or 50...the firing pin would be moving at the same velocity because both guns would be moving at the same velocity...assuming that they were dropped from equal height.

The physics and the mechanics both have to be factored in...together...not separately.

I have a few theories on this question that I can't prove...or disprove...because it would require about 2,000 frames per minute and I don't know anybody who has access to a camera that'll do that...so they remain theories.

 

[GLOOB]

Trolled? Because I offered a possible explanation as to why a FLGR may be the real culprit in a drop-fire because it keeps the barrel from moving back far enough to link completely down and out of alignment with the firing pin?

No. This is obvious to me. Plain as day. You present it like you invented it. I already alluded to this as the real reason for FLGR increasing drop fire, rather than the other "recoil spring/energy absorption" theory, which you jumped in to agree with.

Is it that you're not open to theories or evidence other than your own and a different one sets your teeth on edge?

No, I don't like your circular logic. You said that you agree with someone else that I disagreed with; hence you disagree with me. Then you prove that I am right. But you don't even understand what you're doing.

The momentum of the entire gun is irrelevant. The gun could weigh two pounds or fifty and it wouldn't affect the test one bit.

You may feel free to disagree on this particular point. But the heavier the gun, the more "safe" it is, relatively. I don't care what your floor is made out of. When a solid steel object is dropped on it, it undergoes elastic deformation. When a really heavy object hits the ground, you will feel it in the next room. This gives more time for the firing pin spring to slow down the firing pin. The mass of the gun will make a difference if you take into account everything. The amount of difference will be dependent on the floor and what's underneath it.

 

[1911Tuner]

You said that you agree with someone else that I disagreed with.

I'm sure that you saw it that way...but all I did was offer an explanation as to WHY a FLGR could be the deciding factor in a dropped discharge.

But you don't even understand what you're doing.

lolWUT!?!

You may feel free to disagree. But the heavier the gun, the more "safe" it is, relatively.

I don't have to disagree. You just contradicted yourself.

When a really heavy object hits the ground, you will feel it in the next room.

And that has nothing to do with the firing pin's momentum. 2 pounds or 50, the firing pin is moving at the same velocity.

An example of considering the physics and the mechanics separately:

Gun A and Gun B dropped from equal heights. A fires and B doesn't...because B has a fresh firing pin spring...and for no other reason.

See how that works?

 

[GLOOB]

And that has nothing to do with the firing pin's momentum. 2 pounds or 50, the firing pin is moving at the same velocity.

Yes, but the heavier gun will not stop and rebound as abruptly as the lighter gun. This is taking into account the floor as a real object, not as a theoretical slab of unobtanium with infinite mass. Real objects do not stop immediately when they collide. The objects compress like a spring. They can also take permanent deformation. The heavier the objects, the longer this takes, all else equal. More compression, more permanent deformation, more time, more slowing of the firing pin by the spring.

One way to visualize it is... how high can you bounce the part off the ground in question? You can probably bounce a 1911 barrel higher off of concrete than an entire 1911, before the concrete starts to chip or the parts start to bend at impact, possibly even bending beyond elastic deformation. Say leaving dents in the muzzle, etc.

This isn't even considering that the floor might be wood or linoleum. Or a relatively small rock on the ground. Or a thin slab of sidewalk concrete over soft dirt. Instances where the floor will be significantly moved and/or deformed by impact.

See how that works?

Getting a little testy, are we?

 

[1911Tuner]

*sigh*

So, lemme see if I've got this.

If the safety is locked, the greater mass makes it more likely to fire.

The heavier the gun, the less likely it is to fire because elastic collision.

Your arguments are becoming a little convoluted, Gloob. In layman's terms, I believe that's called "Grasping at straws."

But I'm gettin' a little bored with this, so...okay...you can have it both ways this one time.

I concede. Declare a victory. I'm gonna go watch TV.

 

[GLOOB]

If the safety is locked, the greater mass makes it more likely to fire.

I never said or suggested anything of the sort. I have never backtracked on anything I said in this entire thread. You go out of your way to try to take things out of context to disagree with me, but your only points that make any sense are supporting my own comments. You don't seem to realize it.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

At some point in the near future, I intend to do a live round drop test onto concrete in which I'll work to make sure that the round fires. The reason being to test a theory I've got that it's not as dangerous as it seems on the face of it. There's a pretty good chance that the bullet will never leave the barrel...and even if it does...there won't be enough velocity left to pose much of a hazard above the height of the soles of a pair of tennis shoes, and mainly from concrete or small jacket fragments.

If the real question is whether it'll fire -- can't you just use empty cases with primers?

In these discussions I had questions about whether the recoil spring, if the slide moved, might change things. Then as I was reading to today I got to thinking that if we're talking about the firing pin's inertial movement, it seems as though all my original concerns were irrelevant, as it's the PIN's inertia that matters and that is a function of its innate characteristics (mass/weight). If the slide moves a bit, it will arguably shorten the time before the pin hits the spring, but not much else. Pin and primer alignment seems to be about the only other factor that might affect things.

Many guns have firing pin blocks, some have strikers (like Glocks), and they don't enter into it.

 

[1911Tuner]

If the real question is whether it'll fire -- can't you just use empty cases with primers?

Already done that a couple dozen times. I want to do it with a live round because I don't think that it presents nearly the danger that many believe it does. If the bullet even makes it out of the barrel, it's unlikely that it'd have enough velocity to present much of a hazard above shoe sole height. The missiles would come from the concrete shattering. Possible owies, but no real or life-threatening damage unless you're a Yorkshire Terrier.

Think about it. If you fire a bullet straight into a concrete wall, it flattens out and immediately stops. If it bounces, it's only for a short distance. Aside from not flattening out due to being contained in a barrel...why would it behave any differently?

And keep in mind that the slide only moves about a 10th inch when the bullet exits...so the assembly would be very close to the floor when the bullet impacts.

That's why theories exist, after all...to be proven or disproven.

 

[short barrel]

1911 much safer than the striker fired plastic guns, I think. Although I often carry and SR9.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Already done that a couple dozen times. I want to do it with a live round because I don't think that it presents nearly the danger that many believe it does. If the bullet even makes it out of the barrel, it's unlikely that it'd have enough velocity to present much of a hazard above shoe sole height. The missiles would come from the concrete shattering. Possible owies, but no real or life-threatening damage unless you're a Yorkshire Terrier.

I understand. You're trying to resolve a "damage" question, not the "whether" question.

Back to my OTHER point, also not fully understood (at least by me).

Aren't we concerned about the inertial movement of the firing pin ONLY? Heavier things don't fall faster than light things, and a heavier gun isn't going to behave much differently than a light one in a drop. It's the firing pin that's moving and interacting (and trying to overcome the firing pin spring) and striking the primer. Seems as though even if the slide moves a bit, its not going to move enough to prevent a firing pin and primer collision --and might even hasten it.

 

[Nom de Forum]

1911 much safer than the striker fired plastic guns, I think. Although I often carry and SR9.

They are not necessarily safer. Any 1911 without a firing pin blocking safety feature could fire when dropped. A strike fired "plastic" pistol such as the Glock and M&P have a firing pin blocking safety feature. The Glock also has the cruciform of the trigger bar blocking the firing pin preventing firing when dropped. The Glock also has the pivoting trigger safety preventing the trigger from being actuated by momentum when the pistol is dropped. At least one safer feature the Glock has that the 1911 does not is that should the firing mechanism mechanically fail when the pistol is a rest the firing pin cannot receive enough energy to fire the cartridge. As discussed earlier in this thread this very improbable situation could occur with a fully cocked 1911. Both types of pistols are extremely mechanically safe if in good operating condition.

 

[1911Tuner]

Seems as though even if the slide moves a bit, its not going to move enough to prevent a firing pin and primer collision --and might even hasten it.

When the gun hits the ground muzzle down, the barrel is pushed backward...which pushes the slide. As to whether it makes any difference in the firing pin's collision with the cartridge is still a matter of speculation.

My suggestion was that if the barrel moved far enough to hit the VIS in the frame, it would be linked completely down and the cartridge with it...which would put the firing pin striking near the edge of the primer and far less likely...though not impossible...to fire it.

And the FLGR that sits flush with the barrel bushing wouldn't let the barrel move that far, leaving the primer more in line with the tip of the pin.

This would depend a lot on whether the firing pin or the barrel won its respective race...which would make their respective spring tensions a factor in the outcome.

Other variables would include whether the hammer is cocked or down when the drop occurs and how much "give" is in the surface the gun is dropped on. And, of course, what height the gun is dropped from. Everything means something. Nothing means everything.

We all accept that a 1911 made to original specs can fire if dropped perpendicularly onto a hard, unyielding surface. Now the question remains: "What happens after it fires?"

That's what I want to find out.