Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Reloading for a Glock??

  1. #1

    Default Reloading for a Glock??

    I've read that you can't reload brass that has been shot from a glock because the brass isn't fully supported in the barrel. Is this true? I'm thinking about buying a Glock in 357 Sig but won't if I can't reload for it. Also, any negatives with the 357 Sig caliber in general?

    Thanks,
    Mike

  2. #2
    Member BAR300's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    319

    Default voids warranty

    I know for certain that shooting reloads in a glock will void their warranty. Don't know if you care about that. but the thousands of rounds I've shot thru a glock don't look any different than any other spent cartridge.

  3. #3
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    The "fully supported" argument is bunk. You can reload brass after it's been fired through a Glock. Your sizer die will fix any irregularities in the brass. I've reloaded thousands of Glock fired brass and have never seen a problem.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  4. #4

    Default Bunk

    A "fully suported" chamber while different does not prevent the brass from being reloaded once fired in a glock. Brass is nothing more than a loading mechanism that becomes a gasket when put in a chamber. Just be sure and use a taper crimp die on the finished round. Straight cased semi-auto pistols headspace on the case mouth and a taper crimp gives the proper amount of mouth for that job. I'm not sure what the 357 sig headspaces on; I can only assume the shoulder, since it is a bottlenecked round. I've never reloaded for a bottlenecked semi-auto pistol; YET .
    " Americans will never need the 2nd Amendment, until the government tries to take it away."

    On the road of life..... Pot holes keep things interesting !

  5. #5
    Member rimfirematt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    Just in case your not convinced Ill back up what everyone has stated so far. Bunk rumor. I've got brass that is on its 4th loading. Its just fine. once ran through the sizer it looks like any other piece of brass.

    Even the unsized empties look just fine.

    Alot of this rumor probably gets around from people loading super hot loads. Ill admit, on some of my warmer loads you can see the ever so slight bulge, but so far has not caused any issues with reloading.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JOAT View Post
    The "fully supported" argument is bunk. You can reload brass after it's been fired through a Glock. Your sizer die will fix any irregularities in the brass. I've reloaded thousands of Glock fired brass and have never seen a problem.

    Ditto! I agree. I've reloaded tens of thousands of rounds fired through a Glock through and through. It does state in the owners manual that rloaded ammo voids the warranty as do most manufacturers for all their guns .....I don't pay any attention to that and I'm still loading ammo for Glocks...lots and lots of ammo for Glocks. This whole crock of crap about the Glock and it's unsupported chamber is so much drivel it is laughable.

    A GLOCK IS A STRONG A ND SAFE PISTOL AND WILL USE ANY AMMO ANY OTHER MODEL WILL EVER USE AND CERTAINLY ANY THAT IS SAAMI SPEC'D.

    As for the 357 SiG caliber it is a really hot 9mm. Lots of folks like it.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  7. #7
    Member hntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    221

    Default

    The trouble is supposed to be when that unsupported section is resized and pushed back into shape it is weakened. Then that section has to line up perfectly with the unsupported area of the chamber the next time it is fired. I witnessed one blow up one time. Blew straight down and took out the trigger but left the guy's finger in tact, lucky.

    Can't say for sure if it was case failure or a double charge but it made me a believer.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    Most 1911s use unsupported chambers. Are we not supposed to load for those? The unsupported part can be blown out but not at normal pressures. And when you do load TOO HOT that is the place it blows because it is the weak point. But still safe at normal pressure. I've seen 1911s blow cases also but still not at normal pressures. Too much pressure KBOOM with any gun.

  9. #9
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    After resizing, an area of minor deformity is the same as the rest of the case again. There is nothing to "line up". This area of the case is also the strongest part. You'd have to really overload to rupture this. If you stay at least 10% below published hot loads, you will never have any of these problems.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntr View Post
    The trouble is supposed to be when that unsupported section is resized and pushed back into shape it is weakened. Then that section has to line up perfectly with the unsupported area of the chamber the next time it is fired. I witnessed one blow up one time. Blew straight down and took out the trigger but left the guy's finger in tact, lucky.

    Can't say for sure if it was case failure or a double charge but it made me a believer.

    I say again. Mule muffins!! What blows up is the overloaded, beyond SAAMI specified pressure regardless of caliber. The SiG is as unsupported as the Glock and we don't cry about that one. Have you ever seen a SiG Blow up? How about a 1911 which is as unsupported in a 45 ACP as any Glock.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  11. #11
    Member hntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    221

    Default

    It's possible that it was a double charge but when it happen it was noted that there were many cases of this occurring in glocks and there were no mention of any other handguns that this has happened in.

  12. #12
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    What was the caliber? I'll guess 40S&W, which normally runs very high chamber pressure and is quite easy to push beyond the red line. I know of a G22 that blew up as well. The guy was homeloading hot and also running lead bullets. The combo destroyed the gun, but the blast went upward as it split open the top of the chamber. The guy was lucky not to suffer any injury. The gun was "totaled".
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  13. #13
    Member hntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    221

    Default

    It was a 40 and I think that the instructor stated that it was glock 22's that were blowing up so that makes sense.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Eureka MT
    Posts
    3,048

    Default

    I have loaded and shot a lot of jacketed, plated and lead bullets through a glock 21 and several 22s. The 21 handles everything nicely, the 22s didn't like my lead bullets and leaded badly. Didn't bother to find out why as they weren't my guns. Using plated or jacketed with normal pressure they worked fine without bulging cases or anything else abnormal. Watch carefully for leading in polygon barrels and either fix it or don't shoot lead. ALL guns blow up from too much pressure. Glock 22s operate at close to kboom pressure to start with . It doesn't take much increased pressure from someones hot handload to push it over the edge. Some people just can't resist pushing the edge. So it's not handloading that is the problem it's improper handloading. Pressure signs can be hard to read on handguns, but if your getting bulges in the case head area you better back off.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    137

    Default

    JOAT has a very good point that the SAAMI pressures for .45 ACP and .357 Sig are wildly different. The argument that most .45 ACP 1911 pistols have unsupported chambers is irrelevant because it operates at about half the pressure of .357 Sig. (21k psi vs 40k psi).

    I've also noticed what seems like different loading trends for the two cartridges (everyone with a 1911 seems to want to load it so light that it barely cycles with a normal 16 lb. recoil spring, vs. everyone shooting .357 Sig wants to launch bullets at warp speed).

    I should point out that I don't shoot, nor load .357 Sig, but my observations loading .45 ACP have been that it is extremely sensitive to bullet setback, being a short fat cartridge. My own experiments with varying OALs and W231 powder have shown very significant differences in velocity and ES, which tells me it's having a very significant effect on pressure. What would happen if you have a new reloader who doesn't happen to get very good neck tension on his .357 Sig rounds, and foolishly started with the max load in a given manual? The first couple rounds go off just fine, but then a bullet moves back in the case and spikes pressure. The first rounds which might still be within SAAMI max pressure only show bulged brass, but that bullet that moved back caused pressure to hit 50k psi, and there's no way the brass can contain the pressure anymore, so you get the stereotypical Glock "kaboom" which the .45 ACP shooters adamantly claim is impossible because their own brass looks fine. That scenario is totally fictional, but I can easily see it happening.

    Personally, if I did load .357 Sig I would be nervous if any of my brass showed bulged cases--to me that's a crystal clear danger sign! To say that it's all good because the sizing die will iron out the bulge seems similar to saying that "I'm getting awesome velocities from this load in my '06, but the primers keep falling out when I eject the fired case. It's all good though because when I run the brass through the sizing die, it punches out the spent primer anyhow." (It should go without saying that primers falling out of rifle brass upon ejection generally indicates extremely excessive pressure).

    I may be overlooking something, but I'm right there with rbuck351--bulged brass at the case head area is a problem and indicative of excessive pressure. It should not be viewed as normal.

    Mike

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    137

    Default

    To better answer MikeStaten's original question, I wouldn't have any hesitation loading for .357 sig, but as I mentioned in my prior post I'd back down loads that showed bulged cases. You can certainly reload the bulged brass, but you need to be aware that by continually resizing a bulged case, you are doing something called "work-hardening" the brass. Over time, the brass becomes brittle and will rupture. How much time, or how many loadings will it take to do this? Impossible to say, but it *will* happen at some point. Much safer to download until you don't see the case bulging anymore.

    I tend to prefer larger calibers and heavier bullets, but I would have no hesitation buying a gun (Glock or Sig) in .357 Sig and reloading for it, with the caveats I've already mentioned. I think it's a fine cartridge.

    Mike

  17. #17
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    I believe we are mixing a couple scenarios a little bit. The Glock chamber is an extremely loose fit. On my G22s, I can "wiggle" a round probably a good 15 thousands side to side. I ought to go mic it to have an actual number, but suffice it to say that it's very loose. It makes for a more reliable feeding gun, but the sides of the case are not supported by the chamber walls. Because the 40S&W is running at such high pressures with normal loadings, the brass is going to "fire form" to the chamber. It's not overpressure signs like a bulge or primers, it is a uniform case wall expansion.

    The straight walled cases of the 40 S&W will take this expansion and resizing many times before they start to give up. Not sure exactly when they start to give up, because I haven't found that point yet. I've got 40 brass that's been reloaded 10 times without any signs of work hardening or splits. It's all Glock fired. I load way low as all my reloads are nothing but paper punchers. Even with bottom of the scale loads, my 40 brass expands noticably in the Glock and you can really feel it when running the sizer die.

    The big internet unsupported chamber myth also claims that the small area of the case over the feed ramp is going to bulge. I call total BS on that issue. This area is such a small sliver of the case (at the case's strongest point) that there is no way you could bulge this area without something else coming apart.

    Now, when you start talking about 357 Sig, you're dealing with a necked case. Whole different ball game as far as what cycles of expansion and resizing are going to do. I'd expect the 357 Sig brass to fail long before 40 S&W. However, that's a hypothetical as I don't have a 357 Sig to speak from personal experience on that round.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  18. #18
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeT View Post
    JOAT has a very good point that the SAAMI pressures for .45 ACP and .357 Sig are wildly different. The argument that most .45 ACP 1911 pistols have unsupported chambers is irrelevant because it operates at about half the pressure of .357 Sig. (21k psi vs 40k psi).

    I've also noticed what seems like different loading trends for the two cartridges (everyone with a 1911 seems to want to load it so light that it barely cycles with a normal 16 lb. recoil spring, vs. everyone shooting .357 Sig wants to launch bullets at warp speed).

    I should point out that I don't shoot, nor load .357 Sig, but my observations loading .45 ACP have been that it is extremely sensitive to bullet setback, being a short fat cartridge. My own experiments with varying OALs and W231 powder have shown very significant differences in velocity and ES, which tells me it's having a very significant effect on pressure. What would happen if you have a new reloader who doesn't happen to get very good neck tension on his .357 Sig rounds, and foolishly started with the max load in a given manual? The first couple rounds go off just fine, but then a bullet moves back in the case and spikes pressure. The first rounds which might still be within SAAMI max pressure only show bulged brass, but that bullet that moved back caused pressure to hit 50k psi, and there's no way the brass can contain the pressure anymore, so you get the stereotypical Glock "kaboom" which the .45 ACP shooters adamantly claim is impossible because their own brass looks fine. That scenario is totally fictional, but I can easily see it happening.

    Personally, if I did load .357 Sig I would be nervous if any of my brass showed bulged cases--to me that's a crystal clear danger sign! To say that it's all good because the sizing die will iron out the bulge seems similar to saying that "I'm getting awesome velocities from this load in my '06, but the primers keep falling out when I eject the fired case. It's all good though because when I run the brass through the sizing die, it punches out the spent primer anyhow." (It should go without saying that primers falling out of rifle brass upon ejection generally indicates extremely excessive pressure).

    I may be overlooking something, but I'm right there with rbuck351--bulged brass at the case head area is a problem and indicative of excessive pressure. It should not be viewed as normal.

    Mike
    Mike this is a very good post and you make some valid points here. The point about the difference in operating pressure between the 45 ACP and the 357 SiG is good. Not also that applies to the 40 S&W, the parent case for the 357 Sig, and the 9x19 Parabellum. They all are spec'd at almost twice what the 45 ACP is spec'd at. I can't speak for all but I think a lot of this, loading the 45 light and smaller calibers heavy, comes from making major power factor. Easy with the 45 because of bullet weight but high velocity is prefered for fast shoots so we move to the smaller calibers with light bullets and push the limit. To consider the non competitive side, I think those who prefer the light caliber, light bullet for what ever purpose, buy the 9's and load them to the highest velocity. That just supports their thinking. So from that angle we are more likely to over load the 9's and forty than the 45. The 147 grain 9mm load was never very popular and that load at 9x19 pressure specs will make major.

    First let me say that any of these calibers in any gun, if they bulge brass, they are at excessive pressure. That is a a point that must be considered here. Also the SiG, purveyors of the 357 SiG cartridge, is also unsupported to the same extent as the Glock, regardless of caliber. And many 1911 are made in calibers other than 45 ACP. Namely 10 mm, 40 S&W and 9mm. Some of these are supported and some are not.

    The SiG 229, which was the first model made for the 357 SiG has about .090" of unsupported case wall above the solid web of the case. This of course goes for the 40 S&W as well. If any ammo factory or handload bulges the case when fired it is about 48,000 psi or more, this of course will vary with brass and that is the very reason the safety margin is well established to protect the shooter and gun from brass failure.

    You also make a good point about the bullet being pushed into the case as it hits the ramp during loading. This does reduce the internal capacity of the case and increase pressure. The 9x19 is worse in this regard for two reasons. The case is tapered and without correct crimp to swage the case straight around the bullet it won't grip any but the very case mouth around the bullet and with this little surface area, very little grip will be maintained. Also as the 9mm bulet is pushed into the case it reduces case volume to a greater extent than the bottle necked 357. But you're correct, this does boost pressures considerably as you pointed out with the velocity variations. You did hit upon the #1 reason for all handgun KABOOMS!!!. W 231 powder or any similar fast pistol propellant. There is too much space in the case and a double charge can easily go unnoticed. Nothing wrong with the powder, it is just that it is easy to double charge it. This applies to several other powders like Power Pistol, Clays, Universal, etc, depending on caliber. When loading for any of these, I only use a powder that will fill the case with a normal loading. Powders such as 3n37 or N350 or any slower, bulkier powders, will fill the case and still be under max and we can actually seat the bullet on the powder charge. This also will help stop the bullet from being pushed into the case as it hits the ramp. So we solve two problems at once.

    If we take an intelligent approach to this, just as we should do with any handloading venture, we'll soon find that it isn't the gun that is unsafe. Any gun can be damaged. When we see these accidents we can see the weak points of the designs but IF we stayed within the envelope we would be safe and happy and have all of our fingers.

    I suppose under this thinking the PA-18 is dangerous because of its susceptability to moose stalls.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  19. #19
    Member marshall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Murphy View Post
    I suppose under this thinking the PA-18 is dangerous because of its susceptability to moose stalls.
    Murphy, that is funny stuff...

    I wasn't sure what guys referred to as mosses stalls until l I rode in the back without a stick and watched a guy with poor rudder skills get into a steep bank, high G, piss poor turn about a moose in windy conditions. I won't make that mistake ever again...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •