PDA

View Full Version : PT1911 primer issue crosspost from TFL



tackdriver
27th January 2007, 13:28
Users on The Firing Line forums are posting issues with oversized firing pin holes that are causing a potentially dangerous problem with ballooning primers.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=233975

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=235131

JKD COBRA
27th January 2007, 14:36
Those are good links tackdriver. Can you post some pictures of how our primers are supposed to look? I saw the pictures of the problem primers, but the pictures of the normal ones aren't up anymore. Also, what does "The firing pin hole is not supposed to be chammerferred" mean? Can you post a picture of what our firing pin hole is supposed to look like?

Cap'n
28th January 2007, 06:34
FWIW -- My pistol exhibits the same primer "cratering" with any of three factory 230-gr loads and my own mid-range 200-gr LSWCBB reloads.

I did replace the firing pin spring with a Wolff extra-strength spring. This appears to have decreased the primer affect by approx 50%; an occasional spent case primer even looks perfect.

I'm enjoying the pistol too much to want to consider the loss of use if a warranty fix is required.

tackdriver
28th January 2007, 09:42
I'd love to show you what a normal .45 primer looks like, but I can't because Taurus still has my pistol. From what I've gathered, the bulging, ballooning primers are bad things to look out for. Otherwise, I believe your primers should be flat except for the divot from the pin strike. They shouldn't look "reinflated" or bulging.

Cap'n -- Trust me, I understand not wanting to lose the gun for a couple of months 'cause that's what I'm going through now. But, they're not replacing the entire pistol for these guys that are sending them back for no reason.

pa_guns
28th January 2007, 11:02
Hi

The pictures on the other thread aren't to great. The "dimple" that takes up about 80% of the primer surface should not be there.

A normal primer hit should have the "ding" from the firing pin and possibly a *little* raised ridge around that. The entire mark on the primer surface should be less than 1/4 area of the primer.

Bob

Justice4all
28th January 2007, 23:48
Here's some pics I took of the primers coming out of my PT1911. The first three are of factory rounds, Fiochi and Winchester White box. The fourth pic is one of my home reloads with a CCI large pistol primer. The load is a low to medium charge of 5gr. of Accurate #2 with an OAL of 1.255 and a Berry's plated 230 bullet. Please click on the pics for larger views.

The last pic is of a normal firing pin strike, with a hint of pin wipe.

http://thumb10.webshots.net/t/20/20/3/87/92/2707387920099715270VhNIpI_th.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2707387920099715270VhNIpI)

http://thumb10.webshots.net/t/58/158/2/44/6/2365244060099715270QLMULc_th.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2365244060099715270QLMULc)

http://thumb10.webshots.net/t/53/753/4/64/44/2797464440099715270zmBbrA_th.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2797464440099715270zmBbrA)

http://thumb10.webshots.net/t/58/58/3/67/9/2437367090099715270slDmqh_th.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2437367090099715270slDmqh)


http://thumb10.webshots.net/t/59/159/2/47/87/2916247870099715270fJAiYH_th.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2916247870099715270fJAiYH)

Cap'n
29th January 2007, 05:36
Yep ... the first four photos are showing the same thing I'm seeing from my PT 1911.

Smudge
29th January 2007, 08:51
I'm seeing the same thing on a variety of rounds - Win White Box Ball, Rem 230 JHP, Federal Hydra Shok, Powerball - everthing I've run through it has this bulging - so its not one lot or brand of ammo. What do we do - this is my 1st 1911 - is it safe to shoot?

TK6411
29th January 2007, 10:18
Not much to be concerned about...the Beretta guys on thefiringline.com all seem to have the same primer marks on their 9mm 92F's and many going back for years with these primer marks. None have reported any problems and have shot their weapons for years with their 92F's producing these same primer marks. While it may look odd...there isn't any rupture of the primer case, which would be of concern. My PT1911 produces the very same primer marks...I see no reason for concern and just yesterday put another 100+ rounds through her without incident. My advice, go out shoot and have fun.

Jim

JKD COBRA
29th January 2007, 10:30
For those of you with the bulging primers, does your serial number end in J or K. One of the members in the other thread posted that his pistol was NZJ. I wonder if Taurus made any updates to the pistols labeled NZK.

Mine is NZK. I will be going to the range this Friday so when I get back I will post pictures of the primers to see if there is any difference.

Justice4all
29th January 2007, 11:51
Mine is NZJ, and I would be very interested in how the primers look.

I've got two PX4's and a 96F, I don't recall either having primers like this, but I'll have to go back through my collection and verify that.

The only guns I've owned that have produced this type of primer is my Baby Eagles, but they weren't nearly as bad as the what comes out of the PT.

That being said, I just put another 100 rounds through it this weekend with zero problems. I would personally just like to send in the slide and maybe get it bushed.

albertr
29th January 2007, 13:06
I've recently removed the series 80 safety parts from my PT1911, and replaced firing pin spring with a reqular one.
I'll try to shot it this weekend and see how primers looks like.
-albertr

TK6411
29th January 2007, 13:32
Justice4all, the Beretta guys on thefiringline.com were very specific about their primer marks from the 92F 9mm models only. Seems a common situation and not a performance or safety issue. Many of them have had their Beretta 92F's for years now - all producing the same primer marks we are seeing with the PT1911 - without any safety issue or incident. I am not concerned at all at this point and will just continue to shoot the PT1911 without any worries.

Jim

tackdriver
29th January 2007, 15:45
Why don't we attempt to diagnose this so we know what's going on rather than trusting that someone's not going to lose an eye from a primer rupture just because it hasn't happened yet.

Speculation is that the firing pin hole is too large and that the primer is ballooning back into the hole. For those of you with the bulging primers -- can someone measure the diameter of the hole? Then measure the standard firing pin hole on another milspec 1911 that does not leave these marks?

If that matches up, how does the diameter of the Taurus firing pin compare to the milspec.

If both these match up, could there be a headspace problem?

pa_guns
29th January 2007, 16:56
Hi

If it's the firing pin hole then you *should* see the edge of the hole marking the bulge in the primer. If it's not the firing pin hole then something else is going on.

Different pistol designs unlock in different ways, what is safe in one may not be safe in another one.....

Bob

Justice4all
29th January 2007, 17:06
Why don't we attempt to diagnose this so we know what's going on rather than trusting that someone's not going to lose an eye from a primer rupture just because it hasn't happened yet.

Speculation is that the firing pin hole is too large and that the primer is ballooning back into the hole. For those of you with the bulging primers -- can someone measure the diameter of the hole? Then measure the standard firing pin hole on another milspec 1911 that does not leave these marks?

If that matches up, how does the diameter of the Taurus firing pin compare to the milspec.

If both these match up, could there be a headspace problem?

I'll do some measuring tonight and post back. I've only got a Kimber Ultra carry on hand, so I'm not sure that's the best example. I'll try to get a hold of the S&W later this week (father in law has it). I will also try to check out the 4 PT's that are coming into my local shop. I know the guy that runs it pretty well, so he might be willing to go along with this.

Later.

pa_guns
29th January 2007, 20:50
Hi

One example of what *might* be happening. I'm *not* saying is happening ...

If the barrel starts to unlock from the slide a bit early the primer will begin to bulge. The cause is pressure still being present in the barrel. A properly functioning 1911 will only unlock after the pressure drops to a very low level.

If this is what is going on (as opposed to a primer hole issue) then the timing of the pistol needs to be worked on. If it's not fixed then the rest of the pistol will take a beating. Ultimately something bad will happen.

It's well worth it to diagnose the problem and fix the real cause ...

Bob

jpwilly
29th January 2007, 22:42
I'm going to take a good look at the primers next time I'm out shooting my PT-1911. I have to admit I didn't even look at the spent brass twice let alone the primers when I shot it the first time.

gunfighter48
30th January 2007, 00:22
I have a Kimber Pro Carry II and a PT1911. My fired casings have the "doughnut" primer appearance. I measured my Kimber FP hole and it measuerd .097 " and the PT1911 measured .098 ". What I did notice is the the FP hole in the PT1911 looks like it is countersunk slightly. That appearers to be what is causing the primer to flow back and fillup the space when fired. This leaves the primer with a "doughnut" looking ring around the firing pin mark.

Is it dangerous, I have no idea. I've fired 700 rnds thru mine with out any mishap. I've read other posts on the different newsgroups that said yes it's dangerous and some that said it's not! Typical newsgroup opinions! I'm going to call Taurus tomorrow and see what they say. Probably send it back to them for repair or replacement. Might as well take advantage or the Lifetime warranty!!

pa_guns
30th January 2007, 06:50
Hi

If the primer is simply flowing back to match the contour of the breech face then there's nothing massive wrong. I'd still get them to fix it though.

Checking spent brass on a couple of rounds each time you are out is a good idea with any pistol ....

Bob

sdmahr
30th January 2007, 07:46
For those of us who reload, we're always checking our spent brass ! ! !

I've not seen anything unusual about the primers on my PT1911. They look "normal". I do however get a nasty "smack" on the side of the brass which I assume is it hitting the back edge of the ejection port on its journey half-way across the range.

Cap'n
30th January 2007, 07:47
Gunfighter48, please let us know Taurus's comments on this issue.

I put another 143 rounds through mine yesterday. Again, since replacing the firing pin spring with a Wolff extra-strength spring, the primer mushrooming seems to have decreased by 50%; an occasional spent primer even looks 'perfect.'

Smudge
30th January 2007, 17:50
Not much to be concerned about...the Beretta guys on thefiringline.com all seem to have the same primer marks on their 9mm 92F's and many going back for years with these primer marks. None have reported any problems and have shot their weapons for years with their 92F's producing these same primer marks. While it may look odd...there isn't any rupture of the primer case, which would be of concern. My PT1911 produces the very same primer marks...I see no reason for concern and just yesterday put another 100+ rounds through her without incident. My advice, go out shoot and have fun.

Jim
Very good - thanks. Makes me rethink using +p ammo though.

Smudge
30th January 2007, 17:52
For those of you with the bulging primers, does your serial number end in J or K. One of the members in the other thread posted that his pistol was NZJ. I wonder if Taurus made any updates to the pistols labeled NZK.

Mine is NZK. I will be going to the range this Friday so when I get back I will post pictures of the primers to see if there is any difference.
Mine is an NZJ - it is bulging but mostly not as pronounced as the pics.

gunfighter48
31st January 2007, 13:39
Called Taurus this morning and they said to send the pistol back to them. No comment on whether it was safe to shoot with the bulging primer. So guess I'll send it back to them and see if they repair or replace it.

The serial # on mine also starts with NZJ.

JKD COBRA
31st January 2007, 14:13
Thanks for the info guys. I will be going to the range Friday so I guess we will find out if there is any difference between the NZJ and NZK models. As soon as I get back I will post up some pics.

Flip1147
2nd February 2007, 10:20
I checked some of my brass I've been collecting after reading this post the other day and none of it has any bulging, or mushrooming to it. By the way my serial # starts with NZH.

JKD COBRA
3rd February 2007, 16:21
Sorry I am late with the pictures guys. I just got back from the range, here they are NZK: (There are actually eight spent rounds total pictured below. Two pictures of four and then another two pictures of four.)

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/140883.jpg

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/140884.jpg

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/140882.jpg

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/140885.jpg

What do you guys think? They look different then this bulging picture that was posted on another forum:

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/140886.jpg

albertr
3rd February 2007, 16:54
Here's how primers look after being fired from my PT1911, S/N NZI957XX (top row). The bottom row - after being fired from SA 1911. Speer GodDot (CCI primers?) seem to exhibit the problem more than WIN white box.

http://www.iral.com/~albertr/cz75/pt1911_brass.jpg

Note that I have replaced the firing pin spring on this PT1911 with a regular weight one.
-albertr

pa_guns
4th February 2007, 08:34
Sorry I am late with the pictures guys. I just got back from the range, here they are NZK: (There are actually eight spent rounds total pictured below. Two pictures of four and then another two pictures of four.)


Hi

The pictures from the other forum show a pistol that probably is unlocking early. That's a big problem in a 1911. Your primers to not show this problem.

We could debate the size of the firing pin hole for weeks and about all you could say is that's it's a bit over the ordinance specification. That does not necessarily make it wrong, just different.

Bob

JKD COBRA
4th February 2007, 08:50
Thank you for the information Bob. I am still learning about primers so I appreciate the advice.

jpwilly
5th February 2007, 21:33
Checked my brass this weekend and no bulging from Remington UMC JHP, WWB and CCI Brass case, my model is a NZJ...doesn't appear this is an accross the board thing.

pa_guns
5th February 2007, 22:12
Hi

Well if it is an early unlock thing it should be pretty rare. I suspect that Tarus will be all over it if it is. Since the pictures on the other site are so poor there is no way to be entirely sure.

Bob

albertr
6th February 2007, 13:00
I can try to make better pix if it would be helpful. Just let me know what you want to see...
Thanks,
-albertr

pa_guns
7th February 2007, 14:21
Hi

All of the pictures on this forum have been first rate. They pretty well show what needs to be seen. It's the pictures of the original "problem" primers over on the other place that I would love to have a better version of. I'd also love to get a good look at the breech face of the pistol that shot the rounds on the other forum.

Bob

Combat Controller
9th February 2007, 07:50
Ehh.... Now I need to go shoot some more. I have buckets of .45 brass but it came from all my 1911's... I have put over 4k through mine so far and no problems of any kind. This does make me think though that I saw some primers that gave me pause the other day.

albertr
9th February 2007, 14:09
So, what;s the overall conclusion on this issue? Is it harmless? Is the gun safe to shoot?

-albertr

pa_guns
9th February 2007, 20:05
So, what;s the overall conclusion on this issue? Is it harmless? Is the gun safe to shoot?

-albertr

Hi

Which gun? We seem to be talking about a number of guns all at the same time. The worst looking of the bunch is still not documented here ...

Bob

albertr
9th February 2007, 20:19
I was mostly thinking about my own PT1911, since I didn't realize that it could be multiple/different issues with bulging primers. I posted a picture of my primers on this thread... does it look any different from other pictures posted here? Thanks.
-albertr

pa_guns
9th February 2007, 20:24
Hi

There is an enormous difference between the original pictures and most of what has come up since. The original pistol probably has major problems. The more recent stuff pretty much looks ok.

Bob

Flip1147
10th February 2007, 21:54
Went shooting this last Thursday. I shot a hundred rounds of CCI blazer brass and a few Hornady hallow points. I then collected all my brass for inspection later. When I got home and inspected the primers, I found maybe ten that had a faint hint of a bulge to them. Everything else had the normal dent you would expect a primer to have. Wish I had a way of posting some pic's :(

pa_guns
10th February 2007, 22:00
Hi

Some of this can be like any other thing you worry about. If you look long enough you will start to see all kinds of things that may or may not be there.

Check the primer against something flat. If it's really a "dimple" and not just a color change you can tell it that way.

Bob

gunfighter48
11th February 2007, 01:31
Went shooting this last Thursday. I shot a hundred rounds of CCI blazer brass and a few Hornady hallow points. I then collected all my brass for inspection later. When I got home and inspected the primers, I found maybe ten that had a faint hint of a bulge to them. Everything else had the normal dent you would expect a primer to have. Wish I had a way of posting some pic's :(

Does it look anything like these? These are from my PT1911, called Taurus and they said send the pistol back to them. So last Monday I shipped it Fedex back to them. Waiting to see what they do, repair or replace.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e11/gunfighter48/PrimerBulge.jpg

albertr
11th February 2007, 07:21
That's exactly how it looks after my PT1911 too. Please let us know if Taurus was able to fix it, and what did they do.
-albertr

pa_guns
11th February 2007, 09:16
Does it look anything like these? These are from my PT1911,



Hi

Those are a problem, but nowhere near as much of one as the original post on the other site.

Bob

TK6411
11th February 2007, 13:14
My cases have the same primer marks and I so far haven't seen any need for over concern. I've talked to the Beretta guys on thefiringline.com who have similar primer marks from their 92F's and they are not concerned either as many have been using their 92F's for years now without incident. My service issued M9 also had similar primer marks and the armorer of my unit didn't see it as big issue. Now the balooning primers of some are a different matter altogether. Still, I am curious as to what Taurus does by replacing the guns and if the replacements show any odd primer marks.

pa_guns
11th February 2007, 14:09
... I've talked to the Beretta guys on thefiringline.com who have similar primer marks from their 92F's and they are not concerned either .....

Hi

If your PT 1911 was patterned after a Walther P-38 like the Beretta's are you might be right. Unfortunately the PT1911 is built on a M1911 design. They lock up and unlock *very* differently.

There's almost 100 years of experience out there with the 1911 design and they are *not* supposed to dimple primers. I suspect that's why Taurus is taking the pistols back and fixing them.

Bob

TK6411
11th February 2007, 21:56
True, the pistol designs between the Beretta and the 1911 are diferent in how they lock. I just can't see anything to overly be concerned with since we are not dealing with ruptured primers just a slight swelling of primer material near the firing pin strike dent. If my Army armorer wasn't concerned about such marks I find it hard to argue with his knowledge and experience. I have had the M9 for years and shot maybe 5000+ rounds with zero problems...so my own experience tells me its nothing to be overly concerned about. Now that doesn't mean I am not interested to hear others opinions but so far no one has come forward to say its a serious safety issue...not even Taurus. Taurus seems to just say return the pistol for replacement just as a cover their a** thing under their lifetime warranty program. No one has anything in writing from Taurus as of yet saying this is a safety issue of serious concern. I talked to Taurus and they would not confirm nor deny any safety issues with the PT1911 and the primer mark issue.

pa_guns
11th February 2007, 22:08
Hi

Ok, then let me say it - with a properly machined breach face those primers mean that a 1911 is getting ready to do something bad.

Bob

locobombero
11th February 2007, 23:10
Has there been a consensus as to what serial # group this is affecting?

locobombero
11th February 2007, 23:52
One last question. In the second "The Firing Line" link MES228 sates....

"The firing pin hole is not supposed to be chammerferred."

Eluding that this is whats causing the issue. I have not had a chance yet to fire my PT1911 yet so I can not say as to my primers. However I tool a look at my serial NZKXXXXX numbered gun and this is what Im seeing......

http://members.cox.net/alt.email02/PT1911_Chamfer.JPG

Is this what we are assuming is the cause of this issue. There is an obvious chamfer to the firing pin hole. How does this compare to other 1911 firing pin holes? Im almost tempted to send the gun in before I even shoot it. However Im going to shoot it first so I can see how the primers react. Opinions?

Thanks

Combat Controller
12th February 2007, 00:35
Well here is what I just saw with a quick look.

NZE28xxx no chamfering like in the picture. Over 4k rounds and not even a single failure to date. I looked in 10 other 1911's and every single one was flat, not chamfered. I knew it was so, but I did a visual inspection anyway.

I conclude, especially after looking at some brass in a bag from a range session in which it was fired heavily, that my PT1911 does not suffer from this problem.

My guess is that you will see some ballooning, and this could also lead to rapid wear on your parts.

Combat Controller
12th February 2007, 00:36
BTW, the surface looks a little rough under your FP hole. Is is an optical illusion?

locobombero
12th February 2007, 02:10
No optical illusion. Best I can tell is its tooling marks. You can barely feel the surface with your finger. Dont think its metal stress as best I can tell.

Combat Controller
12th February 2007, 02:26
Mine is smooth... Hmm... Inconsistant.

albertr
12th February 2007, 09:45
locobombero,

My PT1911 has a chamfer to the firing pin hole just like yours. I think dimentions-wise it matches the size of primers' dimples.

-albertr

JKD COBRA
12th February 2007, 13:59
Here are some pics of mine, NZK:

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/143013.jpg

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/143014.jpg

locobombero
12th February 2007, 15:48
albertr / JDK

What kind of primer strikes are your guns producing? Im making a special trip to the range tomorrow to get some rounds down range with my gun. I'll update as to what kind of primer strikes Im getting.

pa_guns
12th February 2007, 16:27
Eluding that this is whats causing the issue. I have not had a chance yet to fire my PT1911 yet so I can not say as to my primers. However I tool a look at my serial NZKXXXXX numbered gun and this is what Im seeing......



Hi

That's not what a 1911 breech face is supposed to look like. It's probably not a hazard, but it will cause functional problems. I'd send it back to the factory.

Bob

Combat Controller
12th February 2007, 19:38
Yeah, I would sent it back too. Shoot, first problem I have heard about with the Taurus too. Glad mine doesn; thave that problem, esp. after having it reblued....

JKD COBRA
12th February 2007, 20:12
albertr / JDK

What kind of primer strikes are your guns producing? Im making a special trip to the range tomorrow to get some rounds down range with my gun. I'll update as to what kind of primer strikes Im getting.
I put up some pics of my primers in this thread. Just go back to page three and they should be there. Let me know what you think after you look at them.

JKD COBRA
12th February 2007, 20:13
Hi

That's not what a 1911 breech face is supposed to look like. It's probably not a hazard, but it will cause functional problems. I'd send it back to the factory.

Bob
Bob, what do you think about the pics of my firing pin hole?

pa_guns
12th February 2007, 20:59
Bob, what do you think about the pics of my firing pin hole?

Hi

I don't think the bevel around the hole looks quite right. If it's deep enough it will make things work poorly. I don't believe it will cause a failure though.

Bob

locobombero
12th February 2007, 21:44
I put up some pics of my primers in this thread. Just go back to page three and they should be there. Let me know what you think after you look at them.

JDK

Just took a look and I am in no way an expert. However they do look different when compaired to the pics of the primers with bulging issues. You can deff see where the chamber leaves an impression on the primer. Is this bad? I have no idea. I'll deff compair your pics to my primers tomorrow after I hit the range.

ThumpDawg
12th February 2007, 21:46
Heres my .02

http://www.hunt101.com/img/473658.JPG (http://www.hunt101.com/?p=473658&c=500&z=1)

I have 500 rds through my PT1911 so far and not a single failure. I cant decide how to approach this..

TD

albertr
12th February 2007, 22:13
locobombero,

Here's mine:


http://www.iral.com/~albertr/cz75/pt1911_breech1.jpg
http://www.iral.com/~albertr/cz75/pt1911_breech2.jpg
http://www.iral.com/~albertr/cz75/pt1911_breech3.jpg
http://www.iral.com/~albertr/cz75/pt1911_brass.jpg

-albertr

Combat Controller
12th February 2007, 23:03
Heres my .02

I have 500 rds through my PT1911 so far and not a single failure. I cant decide how to approach this..

TD

Well, if your firing pin hole is not chamfered, no worries. If it is... Hmm...

locobombero
13th February 2007, 01:10
Im almost willing to say we may have found a trend here. Looks so far everyone with the chamfered firing pin hole are having the same imprints on the primers. Now here's what we need to decide.

1. Is this of concern? (Id say yes over the long run)
2. Are we looking at the same issue as what the thread originally showed? (I say yes but to a lesser degree)

I still say Taurus hit this one out of the park in terms of a great gun. However just like most major mass producers of fire arms looks like a bad batch made it out of the factory. I personally would like to see Taurus do a voluntary re-call on this. It obvious the problem was identified and and fixed in later production. I still like this gun and will continue to if a replacement has to be made. But this issue concerns me.

pa_guns
13th February 2007, 06:25
Hi

It looks to me like when they drilled the firing pin hole in the breech face they wound up with a burr. Next step was to get a little heavy handed taking the burr off. Not every pistol had a burr, not every operator had a heavy hand.

Best bet - shoot a picture and email it to Taurus. See what they will and will not take care of.

The problem you may run into is the brass hanging up on ejection due to primer flow. It's not going to blow up on you ...

Bob

albertr
13th February 2007, 07:46
Well, if it's gonna be a cosmetic defect and not a safety concern, I'd rather save the shipping costs and time. The gun shots great, about 1K rounds and not a single hiccup.
-albertr

Mike1951
13th February 2007, 09:43
I called Taurus this morning. I told them I had a PT1911, NZK s/n, that had the chamfered firing pin hole. I mentioned that I had seen other cases reported where they had requested the return of the pistols.

The C/S rep left to talk to someone else and returned shortly.

She said they weren't aware of the issue (typical C/S response).

I then told them I had another PT1911, NZG series, that has a proper firing pin hole with clean, sharp edges. I explained that there was an obvious difference in the two guns' firing pin holes.

Again she leaves to speak with someone else.

At that point, they offered to have Fedex pick up the NZK. I have never fired the NZK, as I bought it when they were still cheap as a backup to first PT1911. I explained that I didn't want to return it until I had a chance to shoot it some and determine for myself if there was a problem.

I doubt a recall will happen anytime some as Taurus is still in a state of denial. Perhaps they're still trying to determine the extent of the problem or maybe their internal communication is so bad that some of their people really aren't aware.

Anyway, since I have prime examples of both a proper and a chamfered firing pin hole, I should be able to provide a good comparison. I'll try to get to the range soon.

locobombero
13th February 2007, 11:14
Hi

It looks to me like when they drilled the firing pin hole in the breech face they wound up with a burr. Next step was to get a little heavy handed taking the burr off. Not every pistol had a burr, not every operator had a heavy hand.

Best bet - shoot a picture and email it to Taurus. See what they will and will not take care of.

The problem you may run into is the brass hanging up on ejection due to primer flow. It's not going to blow up on you ...

Bob



Well, if it's gonna be a cosmetic defect and not a safety concern, I'd rather save the shipping costs and time. The gun shots great, about 1K rounds and not a single hiccup.
-albertr

Bob
So do you really think its more of a cosmetic issue vs safety issue? Im with albertr in that if its not a safety issue and the gun performs as expected I personally can live with it.

TK6411
13th February 2007, 12:00
So far no one including Taurus has indicated nor expained any real safety issues regarding these primer marks. The gun functions and performs flawlessly otherwise...sounds like a cosmetic issue at this point till we have some hard facts pointing to a serious safety issue. Anyone have any facts to support this being a serious safety issue please come forward as we definately would like to hear. Speculation is one thing, hard facts another. I'm keeping an open mind and want to hear why its more than a cosmetic issue.

tackdriver
13th February 2007, 12:39
If one of these primers rupture, you're going to have some of that gas that should be pushing the bullet through the barrel coming back at your eyeballs at high pressure through the gaps in the frame.

I think we can say from the seven pages of responses here that there is a manufacturing defect in some of these pistols that could be dangerous. Why anyone would risk losing an eye rather than getting his/her pistol fixed for free is beyond my understanding.

I'm sending mine back Thursday at Gander Mountain's expense.

TK6411
13th February 2007, 13:03
I keep hearing a lot of "if's" yet no facts as to what is actually happening and how its anything more than cosmetic. I think there is a difference between crying wolf and having subtantiated facts regarding a serious issue. On the "if's" from another gunmaker I have a Glock 22 .40 cal also and hear a lot of what "if" it goes "kaboom" with its supposed "unsupported" chamber...lots of "if" threads on that subject as well, yet little in the way of hard facts. I continue to use, and the local PD continue to use the Glock 22 as its primary service pistol without incident. What I am concerned about is a lot of heresay without documentation of a true serious problem with the PT1911. So far its not been established that there is a serious safety issue regarding the PT1911 and while I am open minded on the subject I just require facts as opposed to off the cuff speculation. I am sure others agree that we need facts regarding this issue.

Mike1951
13th February 2007, 13:12
What I am concerned about is a lot of heresay without documentation of a true serious problem with the PT1911. So far its not been established that there is a serious safety issue regarding the PT1911 and while I am open minded on the subject I just require facts as opposed to off the cuff speculation.

Amen!!!!!!!!!

Combat Controller
13th February 2007, 13:34
Well, the way I see it is if something is not as designed (kimber call your office), all kinds of problems may crop up. A chamfered FP hole is not in the design. From an engineering perspective, this could cause a serious risk to your eye, even if it is a small one. I would think one would want what one paid for, a "correct" 1911 in the specifications.

locobombero
13th February 2007, 14:48
Well guys I took my PT1911 out to the range today and for me and my gun Im calling it case closed. Heres my observations of my gun. I ran 100 rounds through it and kept just under half of the casings to get a good representation of what is going on. What Im getting on my primers is an imprint of the chamfer. Kind of like a finger print of the gun. There is no deformation, bulging, or ballooning of the primer in any way shape or form. Every single round fired and ejected with out issue. I do not see an unsafe situation with my gun. I will occasionally check to make sure there is no worsening, however I doubt I will see this. At this point it is my suggestion to gauge your individual gun accordingly. I now feel this is a purely cosmetic issue resulting from out of the norm tooling and/or hand fitting. I think that the original issue was a far worse situation that would present its self in very obvious findings should it occur on another gun. Like I said this is my findings for my individual PT1911 and I am comfortable with this gun. Please judge yours accordingly.


Here is a pic of the casings I saved. The two lower right casings are random ones I picked up that was lying on the range. I was planning to use them as bench mark casings, but to be honest the primer strikes on them are worse then those produced by my gun:

http://members.cox.net/alt.email02/PT1911_1stCasings.JPG

Here are 2 of the worst imprinted primer/casings I had kept. Notice no ballooning/bulging.

http://members.cox.net/alt.email02/PT1911_Case_Caliper01.JPG
http://members.cox.net/alt.email02/PT1911_Case_Caliper02.JPG

I hope this aids some of you in passing judgment on your guns what ever direction you go.

tackdriver
13th February 2007, 15:48
I keep hearing a lot of "if's" yet no facts as to what is actually happening and how its anything more than cosmetic. I think there is a difference between crying wolf and having subtantiated facts regarding a serious issue. On the "if's" from another gunmaker I have a Glock 22 .40 cal also and hear a lot of what "if" it goes "kaboom" with its supposed "unsupported" chamber...lots of "if" threads on that subject as well, yet little in the way of hard facts. I continue to use, and the local PD continue to use the Glock 22 as its primary service pistol without incident. What I am concerned about is a lot of heresay without documentation of a true serious problem with the PT1911. So far its not been established that there is a serious safety issue regarding the PT1911 and while I am open minded on the subject I just require facts as opposed to off the cuff speculation. I am sure others agree that we need facts regarding this issue.
:dead_hors

You're only chosing to ignore the facts. Do so at your own risk.

TK6411
13th February 2007, 16:39
What are your facts...please show us where you have any confirmable information that the primer mark issue being discussed is anything but cosmetic? Where are your facts concerning its safety issue? I have no stock in Taurus, just a purchased PT1911 so I have no vested interest in disuading anyone from a serious issue of concern, not that I would think they would. I do however dislike unsubstantiated scare tactics and what if's...lets get some real facts on the table and discuss the relative merrits. If this was a serious safety issue I am sure that Taurus would have issued a warning and alert on their website along with a recall or mentioned it when I called them about the primer mark issue.

BTW, here are similar primer marks from an AR-15 (Wilson Combat UT-15) that functions perfectly well.

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/4472/wolfaq5.jpg

Another example of such primer marks in another gun that has zero problems along with my M-9.

pa_guns
13th February 2007, 18:10
Another example of such primer marks in another gun that has zero problems along with my M-9.

Hi

I'm having a *very* hard time seeing the problem on the primers in that picture.

Bob

locobombero
13th February 2007, 18:24
Enlarged just for Bob. ;)

http://members.cox.net/alt.email02/wolfaq5.jpg

Same kind of imprint that we are seeing on some of the PT1911's. I for one truly feel this is just a cosmetic issue. If you can take a straight edge and see a balooning/bulging primer then I think you should then be concerned. Unfortunately Im to blame for some of it but I think this thread has everyone running scared.

albertr
13th February 2007, 19:49
I took another look at my PT1911' primers, and I don't see any balooning too. I feel that it's more cosmetic issue, unless proven otherwise.
-albertr

pa_guns
13th February 2007, 21:39
Hi

That's not the same issue as in some of the other pictures. It's the raised hemispherical dimples that are "exciting".

Bob

locobombero
13th February 2007, 23:06
Bob

Your absolutely right. Just seems as though as of late the imprint on the primers has developed a life of its own sending everyone down the same "MY GUN IS UNSAFE" road as the real deal nasty issue that originally started the thread. Lord knows I was heading down that road until I shot the gun and took a nice hard look at what was actually happening with my gun. I just hope there are not too many of the nasty buggers out there like in the original post.

Cap'n
14th February 2007, 06:41
1. My PT1911' s/n is NZI xxxxx.

2. My primers show the same mushrooming primer crater ... no bulging.

3. My pistol's firing pin hole is chamfered.

4. Thus far I've fired 1,300 rounds in three weeks without malfunction. The condition of primers has been consistent throughout.

5. I'll continue to examine fired primers but for now am considering this a cosmetic issue vs a safety issue unless new information develops.

'Preciate everyone's interest / efforts on this issue. Hope as time passes our collective experience will be reassuring.

pa_guns
14th February 2007, 07:17
Hi

Ok, let's be a little more clear.

When the primers back out of the case so you can see the whole primer sticking up from the back of the brass that's bad.

When the primers raise up well above the back of the brass a rounded dimple that does not match the breech face that's bad.

Both of these things mean that there's more pressure than there should be.

Some, but not most, of the pictures posted around seem to show dimples.

Printing the back of the primer to the breech face may simply mean that you have soft primers.

Bob

JKD COBRA
19th February 2007, 08:54
Quick update:

I fired another 100 rounds and although most of my primers looked ok, I did find a few that did not. Here they are:

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/144965.jpg

What do you guys think of those? Those would be considered to be "bulging" correct? I just got off the phone with Taurus and told them about my primers. The lady mentioned that they have not heard about this problem but to send the pistol to them and if they find a problem it will be fixed under warranty.

So far, I am happy with how Taurus is dealing with the issue. I am going to package up the pistol, a long with those three primers, and send it off to Taurus today. As soon as I get more information from Taurus I will pass it along. Just keep checking your primers guys. Mine looked 'ok' for the most part, but after I kept checking I was able to find some that did not look good. So just be safe out there and keep checking.

pa_guns
19th February 2007, 09:24
Hi

The quick check is to put them up against something flat and see how much they bulge.

If there's a bulge check the breech face to see if it's dished. If it's not then something odd may be happening.

I have absolutely no doubt that Taurus will fix it if it's a problem.

Bob

JKD COBRA
19th February 2007, 10:17
Thank you for the advice Bob. They did look like they were raised a little bit. I just dropped off the pistol at UPS so Taurus should have it by tomorrow. As soon as I find out what Taurus has done to fix it (or if they decide that there is not an issue) I will let you know.

pa_guns
19th February 2007, 11:02
Hi

If there is anything wrong , I'm sure they will take care of it.

The reason you need to check the brass against a flat surface is that the primers may have been set in low and swaged. In that case when they dimple they are only coming back to the level of the rear surface of the brass. It's pretty much imposable to tell about that kind of thing from a normal picture.

Bob

gunfighter48
21st February 2007, 00:00
Does it look anything like these? These are from my PT1911, called Taurus and they said send the pistol back to them. So last Monday I shipped it Fedex back to them. Waiting to see what they do, repair or replace.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e11/gunfighter48/PrimerBulge.jpg

Got a letter from Taurus on 2/15/07 saying they received my pistol and it would be 3 - 4 weeks to process. Imagine my surprise when FedEx delivered a package from Taurus today. They sent me a new pistol. This one also has a firing pin hole that is slightly beveled. So it will probably give some amount of the of the "nipple" effect as seen on my brass from my last PT1911. But the bevel on this one is a lot less than the last one. So I'm satisfied and will enjoy shooting the new pistol and NOT worry about the "ring around the hole" syndrome!!

ThumpDawg
21st February 2007, 00:13
Gunfighter48

Glad to hear Taurus responed so quickly. I still wonder though if they will ever acknowlege this as an actual issue. Congrats on the new gun though.

Did you have to go through an FFL to ship or receive the gun??

TD

gunfighter48
21st February 2007, 00:36
Gunfighter48

Glad to hear Taurus responed so quickly. I still wonder though if they will ever acknowlege this as an actual issue. Congrats on the new gun though.

Did you have to go through an FFL to ship or receive the gun??

TD

Nope, took it to a FedEx center they shipped it with no problems or hassle. Taurus sent it back to me by FedEx, just needed an adult signature to receive it.

I was never convinced that it was a "serious" problem. But figured it had a lifetime warranty and I might as well make use of it. The fact that they sent me another pistol with the same firing pin hole bevel tells me that it's not a issue with Taurus. I was very clear in my letter to them that "I don't think Taurus would want the primer to rupture and send hot gases and material into my face" So I'm sure that they wouldn't send another pistol to me if it was perceived by them to be a problem. The corporate legal staff would have a fit if they did that!! (I've worked around corp. legal staffs for 35 years and you don't do anything anymore without legal staff approval. If they thought there was any chance of liability they would pull all the pistols with beveled firing pin holes in a microsecond!!) I have read on other forums and posts that some Beretta and Glocks display the same type of firing pin rings on their primers. So it doesn't seem to be just a PT1911 issue.

pa_guns
21st February 2007, 06:47
I have read on other forums and posts that some Beretta and Glocks display the same type of firing pin rings on their primers. So it doesn't seem to be just a PT1911 issue.

Hi

Glad Tarurus took care of the problem. It sounds to me like your pistol is headed back to the factory. Hopefully they will figure out how to better tweak the assembly process from it. Everybody does this sort of stuff.

I know I'm a broken record on this but - Glocks, Beretta's, and P-31's don't work the same way a 1911 does. What's a problem in one isn't a problem in another one. My concern is that we *don't* brush this kind of thing off. Taurus will take care of it.

If your pistol has the problem, get it fixed. Trust me on this - guns blowing up in your hands are no fun. Been there done that, still got the scars. :(

Bob

gunfighter48
22nd February 2007, 01:47
Went to the Metaloy site tonight to check on their refinishing work and found an interesting item. In the work section they have a reliability package and part of that package is to chamfer the firing pin hole!! Looks like the PT1911 is ahead of the game since the two that I have had both have a chamfered firing pin holes. Don't know what the chamfering is supposed to do but thought it was interesting that it's part of Metaloys package. :D

http://www.originalmetaloy.com/gunwork.html

Mike1951
22nd February 2007, 01:55
On the Sightm1911 website I found the following article:

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/tech/reliability_secrets.htm

It contains the following:
Note the firing pin hole in the face of the breech. This should be lightly chamfered, or beveled. A sharp edge here can catch the edge of a chambering cartridge. Iíve used one of the conical heads of a Dremel, held in the firing pin hole by hand, and rotated with the fingers to achieve this chamfer. It doesnít take a lot; just enough to remove any sharp edge.

I started to mention this earlier, but I think the chamfer on the PT1911 is more than the writer intended.

TK6411
22nd February 2007, 09:53
I've showed my PT1911 to my armorer and local gunsmith, both agree that the chamfering is fine on the pistol and that I should not be concerned. They both have seen similar chamferred firing pin holes before, usually done by a gunsmith in order to increase reliability, which seems to be the case with my PT1911...its super reliable and never have had a problem or issue arise with feeding and extraction. So maybe Taurus is ahead of the ball game and we just have a minor cosmetic effect on the primer as a result.

I've looked around and found other gunsmiths chamferring 1911 firing pin holes as part of their acurazing and reliability services, ie Bob Rodgers: http://www.rodgerspistolsmithing.com/1911services.html. So there must be something to it.

Hanzo
22nd February 2007, 20:54
Had smith check my gun and spent brass out, said that it isnt anything to be worried about. my brass has a ring around the pin mark too but not bloated, and is caused by the rounding off of the FP hole edge.

But if the primers baloon out of shape then that is a problem and should be returned for repairs.

gunfighter48
23rd February 2007, 17:03
After I got my new pistol back for Taurus, I found out the reason for the chamfered firing pin hole. Several gunsmiths do this in their reliabiliby packages to prevent the case from catching on the firing pin hole. It looks like Taurus just chamfers a little more than the smiths do. In my case the primers weren't balloned/bulged as much as just showing the ring around the firing pin indentation. So I'm not going to worry about it anymore, just enjoy shooting it. See the sites below.

http://www.originalmetaloy.com/gunwork.html

In the list of things he does to improve reliability is to chamfer the firing pin hole.

Here's another site.

http://www.sightm1911.com then click on "Library", then click on "Technical", then click on "Reliability Secrets by John Marshall"

It contains the following:
"Note the firing pin hole in the face of the breech. This should be lightly chamfered, or beveled. A sharp edge here can catch the edge of a chambering cartridge. Iíve used one of the conical heads of a Dremel, held in the firing pin hole by hand, and rotated with the fingers to achieve this chamfer. It doesnít take a lot; just enough to remove any sharp edge".

If I had read the previous posts closely enough, I would have seen that TK6411 had already provided this info. Sorry

TK6411
23rd February 2007, 22:44
gunfighter48, thanks for reconfirming the issue. Its been quite a subject since the original post and its a relief to have some facts before us instead of just idle speculation. Safe to say the PT1911 chamferred firing pin hole or not is a safe, reliable firearm. Mine has been flawless and the best pistol I've ever owned, much to my surprise. I can't recommend the PT1911 enough. I'm going out Sunday afternoon and shoot the heck out her.

Hanzo
24th February 2007, 22:36
i love this gun, its like the energizer bunny, it just keps on firing...and firing ...and firing. no failures yet!

JKD COBRA
1st March 2007, 14:34
Ok guys, I have an update for you. FedEx dropped off the pistol today. It did not take nearly as long as I thought it would have. So far I have been happy with the service from Taurus.

One minor thing is the box they used to ship the pistol in was too thin. It was bulging in the middle because the Taurus case was stuffed inside it. Becuase of this, my case now has a decent size crack on the bottom of it. I will be calling Taurus today to see what can be done about that.

When I opened the case my pistol was inside a clear plastic bag and the pistol itself was very oily and the barrel was a little dirty (which is fine with me). I am glad they fired some test shots and I have no problem cleaning the pistol.

There was also an invoice left with the pistol and this is what it said:
http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/148263.jpg

I think I have a basic understanding of what was said, but can you guys elaborate on it a little bit for me since I am still a beginner?

Lastly, the firing pin hole is still chamferred (which we now know is for reliability) but it does look like they cleaned it up a little bit. I will post some before/after pics for you guys. Here are the BEFORE pictures (these were taken BEFORE it was sent to Taurus).

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/143013.jpg

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/143014.jpg

And here are the AFTER pictures:

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/148256.jpg

http://www.mustangmods.com/ims/u/303/8241/148255.jpg

What do you guys think?

JKD COBRA
1st March 2007, 14:41
BTW - if you guys want to see anymore pictures just let me know.

TK6411
1st March 2007, 14:55
Thanks for the update and your great info. Glad to hear Taurus came through. I've never been happier than I am currently with Taurus and my PT1911. I think we can effectively say the case is closed with regards to any remaining safety concerns about the chamferred firing pin hole of the PT1911.

JKD COBRA
1st March 2007, 14:59
Thanks for the update and your great info. Glad to hear Taurus came through. I've never been happier than I am currently with Taurus and my PT1911. I think we can effectively say the case is closed with regards to any remaining safety concerns about the chamferred firing pin hole of the PT1911.
I would agree TK. The only reason I sent them the pistol was because of the firing pin hole and it looks like they pretty much left it alone.

I forgot to mention this earlier, but I will be going to the range tomorrow and will be putting 200 more rounds through it. And of course, once I get back I will post up some pictures of the primers.

And lastly, I just got off the phone with customer service about my damaged case and the lady said she will have to talk to a manager to double check the policy, but she said as soon as they have a new case available they will send it to me. So I am very pleased with their service and the final test will be tomorrow at the range.