close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Lyman & Lee Manuals

Discussion in 'Reloading' started by CaptainXL, May 31, 2012.

  1. CaptainXL

    CaptainXL

    321
    2
    Nov 20, 2009
    Illinois
    Just noticed this --- Both the Lyman's 49th Edition and the Lee 2nd Edition Loading Manuals have notations in the .40 S&W sections of thier books that say not to use the data shown in for .40 S&W in chambers that are not fully supported.

    Specifically, in the .40 S&W section of the Lee 2nd Edition manaul it says: "Do not use reloads in Glock or similar guns with chambers that do not fully support the cartrige due to intruision of the feed ramp."

    The Lyman 49th Edition .40 S&W section it says: "Warning: Only use this data in handguns that fully support the cartridge in the chamber. If used in unsupported chambers, cases can ruture and cause harm to the shooter or bystanders."

    There are not any of the "warnings" printed in sections of the reloading manuals for any other calibers. The "warnings" are printed only in the .40 S&W sections both of the reloading manuals.

    Up until now I have reloaded only for 9mm. I have not loaded .40 S&W up until this point but recently bought a set of .40 S&W dies with plans to load for a G27.

    WTF??? Are they serious? I assume that everyone just ignores the warnings. Or, am I wrong? Should I take the warnings seriously and load .40 S&W only in lighter loads?
     
  2. TN.Frank

    TN.Frank Glock4Life

    5,679
    183
    Oct 11, 2004
    Avondale, AZ.
    Basically it's CYA for those Glock "Kabooms" that happen once in a blue moon. They don't want to be held responsible IF something happens like that.
     


  3. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,933
    164
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    Ignore it and just look for warning signs. Most Glock barrels now are very well supported.
     
  4. CaptainXL

    CaptainXL

    321
    2
    Nov 20, 2009
    Illinois
    That's what I figured. I've read too many posts on this forum to think that anyone really paid any attention to the warnings.

    I guess everyone has to keep their back sides covered but I'm still curious as to why the warnings are only printed in the .40 S&W sections of the two manuals and not all of the other caliber sections of the books.

    Oh well, onwards and upwards.

    Hopefully will begin reloading some Precision Delta 180 gr FMJ .40's next week for the first time. Plan on using some Unique and some PP to work up some test loads.

    Have only loaded 9mm's up until this point in time.
     
  5. F106 Fan

    F106 Fan

    8,033
    268
    Oct 19, 2011
    I wouldn't ignore the warnings! Suppose I had a Glock Gen 1 .40. That chamber isn't very well supported. Or course, I am guessing that there is actually a Gen 1 .40 - I wouldn't know. Sometime back, actually, a long time back, there was a problem with Glock .40s.

    But it IS a fact that there are still Glocks in circulation where the feedramp seriously undercuts the chamber.

    I would check my chamber by dropping a round in place and see what I thought about the support of the case near the feedramp.

    Somebody on this forum posts photos of the various barrels and I know I have seen similar photos in General Glocking. A forum search will probably turn up something.

    There's a reason the warnings are there. For newer models it may not be an issue but it certainly used to be a problem. As the warnings are only related to .40, it is also apparent that the folks writing the manual knew exactly which guns had the defect.

    Richard
     
  6. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,933
    164
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    You worry about everything. I said ignore the warning AND LOOK FOR WARNING SIGNS. Factory ammo in .40 is sometimes kinda stout PLUS brass in .40 back in the early days was a little thin. Download modern brass just a bit and it will work fine even in the old barrels.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  7. F106 Fan

    F106 Fan

    8,033
    268
    Oct 19, 2011
    I agree!

    Look for signs by checking the round in the chamber and by looking at expended brass. Look for the photos of the unsupported chambers and look for photos of the Glock pimple. Good information to have.

    But the tipoff that looking is even required is right there in the manual. There was, at one time, a problem sufficient to justify adding the warning to the manual. Just something to show that some amount of investigation is warranted.

    Were it not for the published warnings, this thread wouldn't even exist.

    I have heard that Federal brass was a little wimpy in the early days but I have seen the photos of the unsupported cases and the Glock dimple.

    Richard
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  8. WiskyT

    WiskyT Malcontent

    11,682
    1
    Jun 12, 2002
    North Carolina
    They have a term for that. It's called the "Ski Pass" syndrome or something like that. Back in the 70's, the ski resorts were getting sued. So they put a simple warning on the back of the lift pass. After a few years, the warnings had gotten so long, convoluted, and the print was so small, that no one bothered to read it anymore. That's what is going on here. They provide data and then spend a chapter in the beginning, and then several more throughout the manual, warning you to not use any of the info in the book.
     
  9. ColoCG

    ColoCG

    936
    0
    Mar 18, 2011
    Colorado
    Ok, your confusing me now! Which isn't hard, is it pimple or dimple and is that anything like bulge? :rofl:
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  10. michael e

    michael e

    2,811
    3
    Nov 20, 2010
    I noticed this in a couple of my new ones, in my older ones it doesnt have this warning. Got another one that has a full page of disclaimers, boils down to someone tried to blame them for something and lawyers got involved. Old guy at work has some books from the 70s that make the loads in my books look like powder puff loads.
     
  11. Highspeedlane

    Highspeedlane NRA Life Member

    3,342
    1
    Jan 25, 2008
    New England
    I have a Gen 2 made in 1995 and the chamber was huge. Looking at cases from it, I can see where the brass would likely fatigue pretty quick from resizing and reloading.

    Glock barrel on left, Wilson match barrel on right. What a difference.

    [​IMG]
     
  12. Glock Gen 2 introduced in March 1989. Gen 3 introduced in January 1998. .40 S&W designed in January 1990 and introduced several months later.

    There are though, I believe, three Glock chamber/barrel iterations for .40 S&W.
     
  13. F106 Fan

    F106 Fan

    8,033
    268
    Oct 19, 2011
    I always thought of the bulge as a large ring entirely around the case. The entire chamber is too large.

    OTOH, the pimple (or dimple or whatever) is a section of brass that is bulged out right where it meets the feedramp. There are plenty of example photos of brass failure in this region. The entire head doesn't separate, just a blown out area where the feedramp is overcut.

    I realize this is kind of an old problem and it's been known for years and years. But it's strictly a .40 S&W Glock problem that, AFAIK, has since been corrected. Still, there are probably barrels around from the earlier versions.

    I don't load .40 but if I ever do, it will be for a Sig 229.

    Richard
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  14. Colorado4Wheel

    Colorado4Wheel

    14,933
    164
    Nov 2, 2006
    CO
    Booooooo.


    I hope I didn't scare anyone.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2012
  15. F106 Fan

    F106 Fan

    8,033
    268
    Oct 19, 2011
    Well, I do load for a Glock G21SF so that ought to count for something.

    The P229 would be a match for my wife's duty weapon. There's no way we're going to shoot reloads in the department's weapon but we might just buy a duplicate to use in practice.

    Around here, both the PD and the SO use Sigs - just the way the choices came out. The patrol guys use a P226 and the plainclothes folks use a P229.

    Richard
     
  16. dkf

    dkf

    5,432
    123
    Aug 6, 2010
    For carry I'll take the barrel on the left any day.

    Here is a new vs old pic with a LW thrown in. As you can see the newer Glock barrel is better and good enough for me.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Zombie Steve

    Zombie Steve Decap Pin Killa

    18,083
    18
    May 31, 2007
    Old Colorado City
  18. ColoCG

    ColoCG

    936
    0
    Mar 18, 2011
    Colorado
    :phew:Well I'm glad you cleared that up.

    I also have an old Gen 2 G23 in .40 That never had a bulge of any size on it. For years I even did a couple of things with it that I didn't know you wern't supposed to do until I started reading on the internet.

    And that was load lead in the factory barrel and they were 155gr lead swc to boot. They fed, fired, and ejected fine without any noteworthy leading or bulges or pimples or dimples. :dunno:
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2012
  19. Yep, that is why I use my LW barrel for reloads and the Glock Factory barrel for factory ammo.