Sig 239

[waksupi]

I have a friend, with a Sig 239. He says he has trouble sizing sufficiently to reform the cases. He also says the barrel is ramped quite a bit, from the factory, causing a definite bulge down by the web.
It seems someone here had experience with these. Any suggestions?

[versifier]

If there's a bulge above the web, it sounds like Glock-itis, insufficient case head support. I have not heard of that problem with a Sig before, but maybe I lead a sheltered life. I doesn't sound like it's a good candidate for shooting handloads, at least with it's current barrel. Check out this site and see what you think.
http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb-faq.html

[Frank46]

Waksupi, I have a sig 239 in 40 S&W that I have had for about 4 years now. Have shot winchester, remington and probably other commercial ammunition. Your comment is the first that I have heard about the glock bulge. All of my cases do not show even the slightest bulge on the back end above the feed ramp. Could be that someone did a little jack leg gunsmithing on the bbl?. I have about close to 1200 rounds through mine. Never failed to feed or fire. Nice little carry pistol. Frank

[waksupi]

Waksupi, I have a sig 239 in 40 S&W that I have had for about 4 years now. Have shot winchester, remington and probably other commercial ammunition. Your comment is the first that I have heard about the glock bulge. All of my cases do not show even the slightest bulge on the back end above the feed ramp. Could be that someone did a little jack leg gunsmithing on the bbl?. I have about close to 1200 rounds through mine. Never failed to feed or fire. Nice little carry pistol. Frank

Frank, it is supposed to be a factory barrel. I will have my grubby little hands on it in a couple hours, and will take a close look at it.

[9.3X62AL]

I haven't noted the Glock-like case swelling on the SIG-Sauer 40 caliber pistols, either. Kinda weird, that.

The Gunzone "Glock kB!" FAQ is about the best info I've seen on this subject. A few years ago I asked some pointed questions to a Glock tech rep "off the record" on this subject. He was a little vague, but the sum and substance of what he had to say to me paralleled the Gunzone information closely.

In toto, I am pretty much convinced that the 40 S&W and maybe the 357 SIG are the pistol calibers requiring the greatest attention to detail while crafting ammunition from the standpoint of user safety. I flatly WILL NOT use reloaded ammunition in any Glock 40 caliber pistol, unless it has an aftermarket barrel installed. This case swelling issue in the described SIG-Sauer pistol is the functional equivalent of "Glock swelling", and I would lean strongly toward a re-barrel if it were my pistol--or limit use to factory ammo in its "as-is" condition, and pliers-crush the fired casings to discourage re-use.

[waksupi]

well, he brought it in for us to look at today. Definitely not over ramped. But the spent primers showed some wiping. First thing he was told, was cut back on the powder. One of the guys at work is Sig trained, and he did some work on it to slick it up a bit. We all went shooting after work, and there was no doubt in our minds, that his loads were way too hot, and we appreciated the barricades between us.

[9.3X62AL]

Thanks for the follow-up, Ric.

Anyone who has read the cautionary information in the last several editions of the Speer Reloading Manual concerning the 9mm Parabellum and bullet seating depth should apply the same rationale to the 40 S&W. Both calibers run at very high pressures, and have very small "boiler rooms" to create that pressure within. If powder weight is excessive--and/or bullet seating depth gets too deep--a severe over-pressure situation can occur. Unlike many 9mm loads sold in this country, the 40 S&W's typical 180 grain bullet @ 950 FPS is pretty much maxed out--and trying to extend the caliber beyond that rating is unwise in the extreme. 40 S&W self-loaders should NOT be treated like a Ruger Blackhawk, pressure-wise. If 10mm pistol performance is wanted, GET A 10MM.

Of all the good reasons for preferring a 45 ACP over the 9mm or 40 S&W, its lower working pressures and resulting user-friendliness for the handloader is its best attribute.

Rant concluded, and we now return you to our regular scheduled programming.

[Dale53]

Back in the seventies, there were a bunch of revolvers blowing up. Catastrophic failures, with generally two or three chambers blown out of a revolver were happening to all brands of .38's with wadcutter loads and bullseye. Lots of speculation, wild speculation - pressure excursion, too small a charge of powder in a case, etc. All of this despite these loads working well without problems for many, many years. the NRA commissioned H.P. White, Ballistic Labs, to determine what the problem REALLY was.

H.P. White determined that there was nothing wrong with a small charge of a fast burning powder. They also determined that the revolvers in question (S&W's, Dan Wesson's, Rugers, and Colt's) would easily withstand a double charge of the standard 2.7 bullseye. As I recall, the pressures of a single charge were something like 8,000 psi, a double charge was about 30,000-35,000 psi (remember the Smiths were "K" frames that were used for the .357 magnum when the model 19 was put into production). However, when the wad cutter was seated 1/16" (.0625") too deep over a double charge, the pressure went to about 67,000 psi. This the revolvers could not tolerate and catastrophic failures resulted. The reason for the sudden rash of blown up revolvers was the wide spread use of progressive presses by people that had NO reloading background. In other words, the general shooting public.

In the past, the Star loader was the only progressive of any note and it was expensive and generally only used by Police Depts and really experienced reloaders. The seventies produced much more disposable income and many people bought progressives that really should have had a training course (opinion mine) before trying to use one. The progressives many times would allow a double charge (operator error) and running too many cast bullets with excess lube filled the nose of the bullet seater and caused deep seating of bullets. The combination of a double charge and deep seating is really hard on a handgun .

Now, with the sudden growth of Cowboy shooting and the brisk sales of Progressive Presses, we started to see Cowboy guns blowing up (lots of them in .45 Colt). Instead of building on the information that has been scientifically gathered in the past and furnished to the shooting community through the NRA's American Rifleman, the speculation has started again (the .45 Colt is a really big case and those light cowboy loads use small charges of fast burning powders, etc, etc,). I even had an "investigator" contact me for my opinion. I referred him to the H.P. White tests and conclusions and HE WAS NOT INTERESTED because they differed from his theories...

Just in case I am misunderstood here, I have two progressives that I use a LOT. The Dillon 550B and a Lee Pro 1000 dedicated to the .32 H&R. It is my carefully considered opinion, that a person, male or female, should be mechanically inclined before they try to use a progressive press. If not, then they should confine themselves to a manual loader (single stage or possibly the Lee Turret).

I'm gonna hate myself for publishing this, I know. I will, no doubt get some really negative feedback. But there it is, so flame on... However, I also believe that I owe the information to those who were too young to be around when this problen was addressed originally. So, there it is.

This ties in directly with the discussion of the Sig (9mm and .40's, etc).

Dale53

[9.3X62AL]

Good thoughts, Dale. No flames needed here.

It astounds me that the "investigator" dismissed the H.P. White data out of hand. If EVER there was an unbiased, professional research organization--H.P. White Laboratories is it.

[StarMetal]

Dale,

Good report. I have said the same thing about a novice reloader buying a progressive press.

I'm kind of skeptical on seating a wadcutter too deep. ALOT of them ae seated flush to the case mouth. I mean after all they aren't like a SWC with a lot of nose sticking out. Even the one's that seat with a slight shoulder sticking out, I can't see how seating them a minute deeper is going to raise the single charge, that you stated at about 8000 psi, to 67,000 psi. A double charge..maybe. There's still more to I believe. Dang nab it, I wish I were disgusting rich, I'd buy these revolvers and equipment and by God I'd load them the way you described and see if I could blow them up.

Joe

[felix]

Joe, you sound like the engineer in charge of building the Titanic. ... felix

[Dale53]

Staarmetal;
Seating a wadcutter 1/16" too deep is not a problem. Seating it 1/16" too deep over a double charge can lead to disaster!

My home town police force used to be a "force to be reckoned with" in PPC circles nationwide. They ran a match or two a year for LEO's. So that the local officers could shoot the match, I and a few of my fellow club members would run the match for them. I was the score keeper. The matches were shot outdoors and we scored inside of the indoor range (our officers have a really nice facility as the police chief of the time it was built was a champion shooter).

At any rate, with two hundred competitors (top prizes were handguns) there was a lot of shooting going on. Most departments had a designated "reloader" that generally used a Star machine to keep the department in ammo for practice and matches. While scoring, we would hear the "pop, pop, pop" of normal wadcutter loads. From time to time, we would hear a "POW!" and know that someone had just fired a double charge. There was never a revolver damaged to the best of my knowledge. However, couple a double charge with a deep seated bullet and the pressures go over the top and disaster is THERE!

Dale53

[StarMetal]

Dale,

I believe it's possible with a double charge and a solid wadcutter, but may be hard to do with the hollowbase wadcutters.

Joe

[Dale53]

Starmetal and others;
I went back a re-read my original comments. When I originally stated seating the bullet 1/16" too deep resulted in great pressure, I left out the critical "over a double charge". I have now corrected this. Starmetal was quite right in questioning that merely seating a bullet 1/16" too deep would result in serious problems. Deep seating over a DOUBLE CHARGE in the .38 special (or .45 Colt, for that matter) is the problem. Since H.P. White did not investigate the .45 Colt, I have no factual data on them. However, with the MUCH smaller margin of strength in original Colts or Clones, I would not be surprised at all to learn that a simple double charge of a fast burning powder would be enough to take one of those guns apart. There is just not much metal around the .45 Colt in an original Colt Cylinder or Clone Cylinder.

It behooves ANY and ALL of us to take extraordinary precautions when loading to be sure that we do not double charge and we keep the bullet seating die clean. A good "mechanic" will visually notice a deep seated bullet and will also recognize sublimnally when something is not quite right. This has been mentioned here by others and I subscribe fully to the "Establish a system and WORK the system". That is our best defense.

Lecture over

Dale53

[StarMetal]

Dale,

I had a 3rd generation Colt SA in 45LC. It was originally a 357 that I rebarreled and put a 45LC cylinder in. My standard load was 255 gr SWC RCBS over 9.0 grs of Unique. Just tad warmish for older Colts. Shot bunches of those. Then one day I notice while cleaning the cylinder that ere was a crack between two chambers. I had probably been shooting it some time like that. I got a new cylinder. Then for a test I took the old cylinder and was pounding on it with a light sledge hammer. I was surprised to find it quite tough but very soft. It would smash or bend, but not break or shatter. Interesting. No relationship to your wadcutter/doublecharge story but thought I'd tell it here.

Joe

[Dale53]

starMetal;
Your story of the .45 Colt brings to mind a .45 ACP (1911) that I had. I was heavily involved in IPSC in the old days when it was practiced as a martial art (real guns, not "game guns"). Over a five year period, I put 75,000 rounds thru my 1911. At any rate, about half thru that time period, I discovered that my slide was cracked. I started a personal investigation and was able to determine the cause. First of all, my recoil spring had "collapsed" (weakened). The standard is sixteen pounds and mine was 12 lbs. Second, and probably the prime cause, I was shooting a load of Unique developed for the #68 H&G bullet). However, I was shooting the H&G #130. If you will look at a picture of the two, the #130 extends down in the case considerably further than the #68. I chronographed my load. It was going over 1100fps (with comparable pressures) compared with the 950 fps that the #68 should give. It doesn't take much, with a case of limited capacity (here is that old debbil again) to get seriously increased pressured when the already limited capacity is reduced. Both bullets weighed the same, but one reduced the case capacity enough to cause a problem when loaded to "hardball equivalent" (actually, because of the failure to recognize the different bullet's effect on pressures, MORE than hardball equivalent).

Now, the load I was shooting was not going to blow the gun up, but it sure was hard on it. A new slide was fitted, an 18 lb spring was used along with a Wilson Shok Buff, the load reduced to sensible limits and the pistol continues on...

We, if we do anything, will make errors. The trick is to learn from it and share with our fellow shooters. Perhaps, they won't have to re-invent the wheel quite so often.

Dale53

[fecmech]

Not exactly pertinant to the 239 but this may be of interest to Dale and Starmetal. The picture below is a scan from the Rifleman article of the HP White report on Bullseye powder in .38 wadcutters. It shows the pressures for various seat depths and powder charges. Nick

[StarMetal]

fecmech,

Thanks...that's interesting. Not to dispute anything, but my god, who would seat bullets as deep as the deepest ones in that chart? That , to me, would be hard to do by accident.

Joe

[Dale53]

I wish that I could read that. It is just too small for my "bad eyes". Is it possible to enlarge it?

Dale53

[fecmech]

Dale--I reposted a bigger image, if you click on the thumnail it will enlarge. Nick