AlphaCharlieDelta
Member
- Location
- The Wet Coast
Thats the only draw back... I find the oem glock mags feed unreliably unless you replace the spring with a heavier one... maybe the few I have are just bad.
The Freedom Ordnance FX-9 OWNERS thread.
- Thread starter trailskinpat
- Start date
Sniffer from experience and reading folks comments on this site mags and the LRBO is as much individual gun as it is mags. In my case the only mags that worked in my gun were some 10/32 SHK mags out of Korea.
What I did conclude was most Glock and clone mags, when they failed was due to the notch in the follower not engaging the arm of the lock back part in the FX9. After several trials I settled on using locktite and a piece of cardboard similar to cigarette or primer packaging to fill in the notch.. Mags with the notch filled in all caught the arm of the bolt open part. Freedom Ordnance won't admit it but the part that is supposed to lift up to catch the bolt is a design flaw. Wolverine bent the part when my gun was in for warranty and it still did not work 100%. Since I added the material to the notch of the mags they all engage properly and the bolt on my FX9 holds open on the last round. The FX9 is rthe only gun I have ever owned that would not hold the bolt back using mags designed for the gun.
If the S&W Response is allowed into Canada at a decent price point I would think the FX9 days would be over. Mine works now but with round nose bullets My Raven9 rules the roost here but at a significantly greater price. Even the Raven9, IMHO will fall victim to the Response due to the price difference. Well it won't if Lockhart dropped it's pricing. We shall all see.
Take Care
Bob
What I did conclude was most Glock and clone mags, when they failed was due to the notch in the follower not engaging the arm of the lock back part in the FX9. After several trials I settled on using locktite and a piece of cardboard similar to cigarette or primer packaging to fill in the notch.. Mags with the notch filled in all caught the arm of the bolt open part. Freedom Ordnance won't admit it but the part that is supposed to lift up to catch the bolt is a design flaw. Wolverine bent the part when my gun was in for warranty and it still did not work 100%. Since I added the material to the notch of the mags they all engage properly and the bolt on my FX9 holds open on the last round. The FX9 is rthe only gun I have ever owned that would not hold the bolt back using mags designed for the gun.
If the S&W Response is allowed into Canada at a decent price point I would think the FX9 days would be over. Mine works now but with round nose bullets My Raven9 rules the roost here but at a significantly greater price. Even the Raven9, IMHO will fall victim to the Response due to the price difference. Well it won't if Lockhart dropped it's pricing. We shall all see.
Take Care
Bob
My LRBHO has worked great on the FX9 so I feel kinda lucky. The FX9 does feel like a toy gun in some respects but I've grown to like it. What I dont like is the on / off reliability. One day it runs great and the next its a jammomatic.
I did a few PCC matches this year and it became crystal clear that if you had a reliable gun you had a huge head start as most aren't.
And for that reason I have moved to an SPC9, it seems they are reliable out of the box so fingers crossed.
Sniffer are your jams ammo specific? Over two days does your gun go from being super reliable using the same ammo then it becomes a jammamatic the next day?
My FX9 will shoot all the variation of cartridges I have used to date while my Raven9 only wants round nose bullets. I pretty much limit my match shooting to 124 gr BDX bullets while my practice ammo turns to TC and LSWC bullets all of which will not run in my Raven9 but will in my FX9.
The above situation did not exist with my Ruger PCC that I sold and of course my CX4 Storm 16" and my CZ Scorpion I lost in a boating accident a few years ago. All three of those PCC's made by much larger companies shot every style of ammo I could put my hands on.
I would line up for a S&W Response but suspect I will have to wait until next October.
Take Care
Bob
My FX9 will shoot all the variation of cartridges I have used to date while my Raven9 only wants round nose bullets. I pretty much limit my match shooting to 124 gr BDX bullets while my practice ammo turns to TC and LSWC bullets all of which will not run in my Raven9 but will in my FX9.
The above situation did not exist with my Ruger PCC that I sold and of course my CX4 Storm 16" and my CZ Scorpion I lost in a boating accident a few years ago. All three of those PCC's made by much larger companies shot every style of ammo I could put my hands on.
I would line up for a S&W Response but suspect I will have to wait until next October.
Take Care
Bob
Last edited:
Sorry to hear about your boating accident - tragic news and oh so common among the gun community over the last few years.
I have asked the same question - how does my gun go from being super reliable on day one to a jammomatic on day two?.
I started off using 147gr RNFP (so not true round nose) and it ran 90% of the time. I have lots of 147 RNFP and found a good load that I liked (only downside was that it was so quiet that sometimes the timer wouldn't pick it up). I figured the issue was the flat nose so switched to 135gr RN (true round nose) and found that the gun ran 90% of the time and seemed to exhibit the same issues.
As mentioned it seems to run fine on day one, I clean my guns pretty thoroughly but dont think this is a factor as I have ran 600 rounds through it in a day (pretty dirty after 600 rounds of Titegroup) and I have cleaned to various degrees between day one and day two (from quick wipe & oil of the bolt and feed ramps etc to full on clean) and noticed no improvement.
Now that I am using round nose bullets I can rule that out. I also switched from Magpie mags to genuine Glock and had the same issues with both so probably not the issue.
That has got me thinking the issue is ammo length related. I was loading to 1.110" which it seems is middle of the road for length. I know some folks are loading longer (1.120") and some shorter (1.085"). I have spoken to each and they tell me their rigs work fine with their respective ammo. I am going to try 1.085" first.
Thinking out loud my jams are where the round has went straight up (ie vertical instead of horizontal / at 90 degrees to the chamber) and the bolt then smashes into it jamming things up good. I am wondering of this is down to a slight length variance in that round as I load on a progressive (gonna say it is slightly longer than the others?) so there is a little flex / slop.
Could it be that this slightly longer round is picked up from the mag and because of the additional length interacts differently with the feed ramp resulting in it getting sent straight up and jamming as described?
This is where I am at and as mentioned I will continue testing (have made up a bunch of 1.085", hopefully I find something that works. I like the FX9 and have gotten it to a point that when it runs it shoots flat but the unpredictable jams sure get old.
I will be moving to an SP9 next year but plan to keep the FX9 for practice / spare gun etc.
I would think 1.110 is to long for 147 gr bullet. I don't use the 147's only because for me the recoil impulse with a
Comp was not significantly reduced using the 147 gr vs 124 gr RNBDX bullet. I load them 1.1" OAL and they run like butter thru all my PCC's. I have to load to min 135 PF which is a bit higher than the 125 you use in IPSC if that is the sport you choose. 125PF in a carbine is super light when it comes to recoil.
If you are stuck on the 147 gr bullets try 1.058 which is the OAL for the Lyman 147gr lead bullet. If this solves your problem...your welcome LOL. If it doesn't switch to 124 gr BDX RN or 125 Can Pro RN they will run problem free at 1.1" OAL.
Take Care
Bob
ps Considered a "Go Fund Me" in order to replace the CZ Scorpion but found the field overwhelmed with applicants for the same purpose. Seems like we should be buying life jackets for or carbiines.
Comp was not significantly reduced using the 147 gr vs 124 gr RNBDX bullet. I load them 1.1" OAL and they run like butter thru all my PCC's. I have to load to min 135 PF which is a bit higher than the 125 you use in IPSC if that is the sport you choose. 125PF in a carbine is super light when it comes to recoil.
If you are stuck on the 147 gr bullets try 1.058 which is the OAL for the Lyman 147gr lead bullet. If this solves your problem...your welcome LOL. If it doesn't switch to 124 gr BDX RN or 125 Can Pro RN they will run problem free at 1.1" OAL.
Take Care
Bob
ps Considered a "Go Fund Me" in order to replace the CZ Scorpion but found the field overwhelmed with applicants for the same purpose. Seems like we should be buying life jackets for or carbiines.
For those having issues with the LRBHO, I've been there and done that. There's a couple of solutions that can work.
1. Gen 5 regular capacity pinned to 10 rounds Glock factory mags (orange follower) and +10% power spring. This only works with regular cap pinned mags. Every one that I've done works well.
2. Gen 5 regular capacity pinned to 10 rounds Glock factory mags (orange follower). Take the mag apart and trim the piece on the follower to allow it to come up higher (but not so much that it comes out the top). Replacing the spring with a +10% spring also helps when the factory spring gets tired. I've had 100% reliability with every one that I've trimmed and +10% springed (or is that sprung?).
None of the above solutions are likely to resolve issues where when you try to insert a pinned factory mag on the closed bolt, that it sometimes doesn't quite seat properly. This is linked to how tight that 10 round pushes against the rivet which is stuck through the window at the back of the mag. The FX9 needs just a little wiggle room in the mag.
3. Find a way to import MBX steel mags (pined), sob and ##### about the cost of the mags/importation/poor exchange rate/U.S. credit card fees but then never look back. Also never worry about destroying that little plastic shelf on factory Glock mags when it hits the metal stop on the FX9. FYI...the MBX mags will stick to a magnet (the stainless is not too stainless). These mags have worked excellent in my FX9. I did invest in a spare mag stop for my FX9 just in case (I like to smack mags a little on the hard side). Also, whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa$$$
1. Gen 5 regular capacity pinned to 10 rounds Glock factory mags (orange follower) and +10% power spring. This only works with regular cap pinned mags. Every one that I've done works well.
2. Gen 5 regular capacity pinned to 10 rounds Glock factory mags (orange follower). Take the mag apart and trim the piece on the follower to allow it to come up higher (but not so much that it comes out the top). Replacing the spring with a +10% spring also helps when the factory spring gets tired. I've had 100% reliability with every one that I've trimmed and +10% springed (or is that sprung?).
None of the above solutions are likely to resolve issues where when you try to insert a pinned factory mag on the closed bolt, that it sometimes doesn't quite seat properly. This is linked to how tight that 10 round pushes against the rivet which is stuck through the window at the back of the mag. The FX9 needs just a little wiggle room in the mag.
3. Find a way to import MBX steel mags (pined), sob and ##### about the cost of the mags/importation/poor exchange rate/U.S. credit card fees but then never look back. Also never worry about destroying that little plastic shelf on factory Glock mags when it hits the metal stop on the FX9. FYI...the MBX mags will stick to a magnet (the stainless is not too stainless). These mags have worked excellent in my FX9. I did invest in a spare mag stop for my FX9 just in case (I like to smack mags a little on the hard side). Also, whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa$$$
Toxic had "your gun" in front of your conclusions. Virtually every FX9 is a,variant of the one next to it. I found just filling the notch in on my Glock and Glock clone mags solved the lock back issue which accplishes the same thing as you are doing except at the other end of the problem. In order for the lock back feature to work the follower must meet the a
Bolt catch
In the case if the FX9 if tje bolt catch part that engages the follower should be longer. Because of the dimentions if it was made longer to work all the time it would interfere with the loading cartridge. That would not work, as I found out. Either you fill in the follower notch or file the follower as much as necessary, to allow it to rise in the mag to engage the bolt stop mechanism. It's BS design but it is what it is.
Some FX9's work properly some do sometimes and some just don't.
Pay your money and take your chances for an FX9 or buy a Ruger, S&W, CZ, B&T, SIG, Wilson or Beretta when you can.
I have yet to find a bullet design beyond a round nose bullet that will function reliably in my Raven9 and it set me back $2,300.
Take Care
Bob
I've also ran into some LRBHO issues this past weekend. --Unrelated do people abbreviate last round bolt hold opens as "LUR-BOHs" when talking?
I've shot 300 rounds through my fx-9 since getting it. They were in 3 different range sessions of 50, 150, and 100. First 50 were with the stock magazine -- No issues whatsoever. Next 150 were with cheap ass ETS mags from I Run Guns, they worked flawlessly also. During this session however the LRBHO spring backed out of the gun to the point that I could see it just below the LRBHO toggle. I left my gun at the range and the gunsmith replaced the spring. Then my LRBHO felt good and appeared fixed but would not engage with either mags for the next 100 rounds.
My gun was pretty dirty since I handed it to the smith directly after shooting so I'm hoping that is the issue, although it seems like my fx-9 is just acting how most do now.
I've shot 300 rounds through my fx-9 since getting it. They were in 3 different range sessions of 50, 150, and 100. First 50 were with the stock magazine -- No issues whatsoever. Next 150 were with cheap ass ETS mags from I Run Guns, they worked flawlessly also. During this session however the LRBHO spring backed out of the gun to the point that I could see it just below the LRBHO toggle. I left my gun at the range and the gunsmith replaced the spring. Then my LRBHO felt good and appeared fixed but would not engage with either mags for the next 100 rounds.
My gun was pretty dirty since I handed it to the smith directly after shooting so I'm hoping that is the issue, although it seems like my fx-9 is just acting how most do now.
Man mud. Cut some cardboard material from a cigarettet pkg or similar material and use Krasyglue to glue in pieces filling in the follower notch on your mags. This should fix your problem it did mine for mags that would not engage. That is the easiest fix. I tried other material but the press board material seems to work the best. PM me your phone number and I can call you and give you likely a better understanding of the process.
Tale Care
Bob
Tale Care
Bob
I figured you wouldn't be disappointed.
Totally worth the cash and a huge upgrade IMO (possibly one the best / easiest you can make on the FX9). The stock charging handle is terrible.
Nickk makes quality gear, I just picked up one of his magwells for my SPC9 and it is a thing of beauty too, well machined delrin that fitted perfectly.
This will give you a starting point (reach out to Nickk):
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/threads/fx9-enhanced-charging-handle-made-in-kelowna.2133408/
Or
https://freedomventures.shop/index.php?route=product/product&path=270&product_id=1772
