Tanfoglio 10mm Problems...(pics)
- Thread starter B
- Start date
What I find interesting is that there is damage on both the slide and barrel, which are made from different grades of steel as well as with different production methods (the slide is cast while he barrel is, presumably, machined from barstock). Though I'm no expert, it would seem that if it was a metallurgical issue with a defective batch of slides, the barrel lugs would not be showing that kind of wear.
This has me confused as well. The damage on the barrel is actually worse than the pictures show. It almost looks like the gun was being violently forced to unlock under massive stress. The ammunition I used was run through 2 other 10mms as well that day and I have been using that load for years with no issues. I am at a loss to think of another possible cause.
It is, I too had concerns. Looks like they were well founded.
No idea. The spring is certainly not enough for full house 10mm but the light stuff should work without issue.
PS. Check your email Walter!!!
dangertree
Business Rep
- Location
- NL/ON/FL/PL
The barrel in the picture appears to have a fully supported chamber and will not give you the same error indicators on your fired brass as say in a Delta Elite having a ramped barrel. So to compare this to a Colt may be irrelevant.
You said that ejection was quite brisk (as most 10MM's are anyway) but you did not mention whether your point of impact had changed as this also could be an indicator of insufficient barrel and slide lockup and result in premature disengagement of the lugs which would absolutely increase your slide velocity and then incorrectly suggest a metalurgical issue as seen in your photos. This could have been a fouling situation where the presense of even a tiny shaving of lead or brass prevented the lugs from fully engaging the slide recesses or, your brass may have exceeded the maximum length creating a headspacing issue or a lead shaving in the chamber area prevented the slide from returning to "full battery position" in which even a reloading manual's suggested starting load could do this damage. Plainly speaking the peak pressures were too much for the mainspring to absorb by itself. I may be somewhat biased in favor of the Colt design but I really question whether a linkless barrel design and the 10MM chambering are a good idea in the first place.
You said that ejection was quite brisk (as most 10MM's are anyway) but you did not mention whether your point of impact had changed as this also could be an indicator of insufficient barrel and slide lockup and result in premature disengagement of the lugs which would absolutely increase your slide velocity and then incorrectly suggest a metalurgical issue as seen in your photos. This could have been a fouling situation where the presense of even a tiny shaving of lead or brass prevented the lugs from fully engaging the slide recesses or, your brass may have exceeded the maximum length creating a headspacing issue or a lead shaving in the chamber area prevented the slide from returning to "full battery position" in which even a reloading manual's suggested starting load could do this damage. Plainly speaking the peak pressures were too much for the mainspring to absorb by itself. I may be somewhat biased in favor of the Colt design but I really question whether a linkless barrel design and the 10MM chambering are a good idea in the first place.
I imagine it was a multitude of things that came together to beat the hell out of the top half of the gun. I haven't heard anything about it since I sent it off, not that I am getting impatient. I don't think the gun will see a whole lot of use when I get it back. It's unfortunate because I really like the ergonomics of CZ style guns. If I were to buy another Tanfoglio I wouldn't buy anything bigger than a .40...
I'm curious as to what Tangfolio will tell you what the actual cause of this failure was. But I have also read elsewhere that relying on the geometry in the angular slot below the barrel may not correctly replicate the physical properties of a linked barrel system such as a true 1911, whereas the slot is not universally adaptable to all chamberings but more to the point different pressure curves such as target loads using mid-weight lead bullets versus maximum loadings and heavier jacketed bullets . Simply put, different pressure curves may require different slot geometries and the linked barrel system is apparently more foregiving in this regard where all is needed is a change to mainspring strength to adapt.
You may have a point that a linkless system, like the one in this case, is perhaps weaker, inherently, than the classic Browning design of the 1911 for the time-pressure curve of a 10 mm. Glock, on the other hand, seems to handle 10 mm power without problems but it has no locking lugs to damage to begin with. So, we're coming back to the locking lugs and the reason for the damage. I still believe that the main culprit here is the metal treatment. Another point that I see referred to very often is the recoil spring role in the whole issue and I believe that there's a lack of understanding, to a certain extent, of what the recoil spring really does. A recoil spring in its "relaxed" position (slide all the way forward) does not exert much of a force on the slide-barrel assembly, as evidenced by the easiness of insertion after disassembly. So, upon firing, the initial recoil speed of the barrel-slide system is limited only by the mass of the system not the strength of the recoil spring. As the latter compresses, it starts retarding the slide-barrel speed rearward but it's still the mass of the system that plays the major factor until the barrel tilts out of the way, an event that is defined by geometry of barrel-slide and locking mechanism rather than spring rating. So, the main role of the spring is to reduce recoil impact of the slide against the frame and to return the slide-barrel back into battery. Increasing spring strength is the wrong way to attempt to correct an early barrel-slide separation or metallurgy problems.
I hope you get your gun fixed, and looks like the dealer is working on it, in the other hand quote from your first post “100 rounds of my lightest target load 180grn LRN at about 1150fps.” I suggest you check your reloading data, I don’t see any the powders listed below that recommends 1150 f/s for a 180 gn bullet. In IPSC you will be shooting 200 power factors, and to bring it in prospective race guns in open division don’t shoot that power factor.
I get it , you don’t understand recommended max bullet velocity and the reasons behind , until than I guess you will be laughing with my suggestion of keeping the velocity within the recommended limits, and I be laughing with your broken guns as a result of that .
