Black SR9, Pictures and peening

[RonS]

Great, I am sure they will do you right!

If anyone else has this problem, please don't let it go or try to relieve the area, the locking face on the barrel does not have to hold the pressure long, but a 9mm is a pretty high pressure cartridge and it does have to hold about 35,000 psi for long enough for the pressure to drop to a safe level. I know that is not the same as a 55,000 psi rifle cartridge, but I don't want it in my face either.

I hope Ruger gets this figured out ASAP, before the compacts come out.

 

[mekender]

i just sent an email with pictures attached to joe cramer, hopefully this will help them get the issue resolved for not just me, but anyone else that is having problems like this

 

[revhigh]

Good job guys !! Keep us informed as to the outcome.

 

[Blackhawk47]

i just sent an email with pictures attached to joe cramer, hopefully this will help them get the issue resolved for not just me, but anyone else that is having problems like this

Can you show us your pictures and tell us how you think this problem can be fixed, I just got to know, this hole peening problem is driving me nuts.

 

[mekender]

i just sent an email with pictures attached to joe cramer, hopefully this will help them get the issue resolved for not just me, but anyone else that is having problems like this

Can you show us your pictures and tell us how you think this problem can be fixed, I just got to know, this hole peening problem is driving me nuts.

my pictures are the ones that started this thread... as for how it can be fixed, i can only imagine that it will take a slight adjustment on Rugers part...

my theory is that the locking surfaces under the barrel are machined a bit too tightly causing slightly more friction than the barrel was designed to meet... for example, if the area that the barrel is supposed to pivot on is .005mm too small, the barrel meets 2% more resistance than it was designed to, thus keeping the barrel in place .0002 seconds too long... as someone else here was told by Ruger, its a timing issue

its either that the angled surfaces on the bottom of the barrel were machined slightly off, or the cam block is out of tolerances... but without a specs sheet and a micrometer, i couldn't say for sure...

 

[mekender]

spoke with joe at about 5pm... hes sending me a shipping label to send my gun in... what he said was that he had seen this issue before, but very few times... he said he figured that he had only had about 10-12 of these problems sent in...

according to him, the problem is that the slide and the locking block has a small gap (a couple thousands of an inch) that lets the slide slap against the block... also said that there is a slight bit of burring that is normal on the front edge of that block, and that it will happen after a few thousand rounds... but that it shouldn't show any deformity in the metal...

was also told that they had fired many thousands of rounds through these guns during testing, so im sure that they caught most of the major problems... he himself said he figured that he had probably fired over 30,000 rounds over a couple of month period...

now, myself having worked for several major computer companies in the tech support field, i know what happens with new products as well as with customers calling with problems... Dell for example estimated that less than 8% of their customers would EVER call for support... Gateway estimated about 10%...

for Ruger to have made some 18,000 (joes estimate)of these guns so far, it would stand to reason that they would have a few problems... so for joe to tell me that he had only seen the problem a handful of times, is well within reason and i would have no reason to not believe it...

what matters is the quick response they are giving to resolving the problems... in my case, i emailed joe at about 4:30 yesterday... i had a phone message left at home before 10am today... i called him back at about 4 this afternoon, left a message and got a return call within 45 minutes...

so far, that is top notch customer service... i am not a person that is so unreasonable as to assume that every brand new product that i buy will be perfect... manufacturing problems happen, human error happens, its not really that big of a deal... what matters is how the problem gets resolved... i have heard from many people so far that have been very happy with the service they got from Ruger, even though they had product problems, their issues were handled with reasonable solutions...

its funny, the few people that i have seen that are the most vocal about how big of a deal these problems are, are people that do not even own the gun... apparently its very easy to raise holy hell about problems with products that you have no firsthand experience with... i guess the anonymity of the internet is a wonderful thing eh?

 

[SmokeJumper]

"...according to him, the problem is that the slide and the locking block has a small gap (a couple thousands of an inch) that lets the slide slap against the block... "

Taking away a couple thousands of an inch leaves zero ...... then what happens? Binding deluxe?

"its funny, the few people that i have seen that are the most vocal about how big of a deal these problems are, are people that do not even own the gun... apparently its very easy to raise holy hell about problems with products that you have no firsthand experience with... i guess the anonymity of the internet is a wonderful thing eh?"

Maybe that should read, "... the few people (even though there were more than a few) on THIS forum who are most vocal.......".

This sure isn't the only ball game in town. Others are talking up the isssues ...... a lot.

Why is it OK to say a gun is great, but comment on half-assed fixes for problems which should never have existed and suddenly it wrong?

It's explained to a degree by the simple fact that people who jump on the first will gun will typically defend it to the death --- to avoid looking foolish for buying an unproven gun. Some cannot admit they got screwed.

 

[JDG]

Thats no good for any amount of shooting.

 

[Blackhawk47]

"...according to him, the problem is that the slide and the locking block has a small gap (a couple thousands of an inch) that lets the slide slap against the block... "

Taking away a couple thousands of an inch leaves zero ...... then what happens? Binding deluxe?

its funny, the few people that i have seen that are the most vocal about how big of a deal these problems are, are people that do not even own the gun... apparently its very easy to raise holy hell about problems with products that you have no firsthand experience with... i guess the anonymity of the internet is a wonderful thing eh?"

Maybe that should read, "... the few people (even though there were more than a few) on THIS forum who are most vocal.......".

This sure isn't the only ball game in town. Others are talking up the isssues ...... a lot.

Why is it OK to say a gun is great, but comment on half-assed fixes for problems which should never have existed and suddenly it wrong?

It's explained to a degree by the simple fact that people who jump on the first will gun will typically defend it to the death --- to avoid looking foolish for buying an unproven gun. Some cannot admit they got screwed.

I do agree with this NO clearance means binding. The first barrel on my SR9 had between .001 and .002 the replacement barrel had .016 clearance both barrels had the same amount of peening.



Personally I like the design of the SR9, even with the problem I have had, I dont feel I got "SCREWED" at all. And yes I would buy another one.
I personally own other brands of pistols, (Glocks, SIGs, Kinbers, Colt, S&W, Kel Tec and possibly some others I don't remember) and I like them all. Have I had problems with them, YES, 2 of the Glock, 1 SIG and the Kel Tec. I also know that anything made/mass produced by man is subject to problems. This peening problem that few SR9s are having can be corrected. I can say this for a fact three other man in my shooting club purchased SR9 when they first came out, no problems so far and all three have right at 4000 rounds through them. It has been great working with Ruger on this problem, fast turn around no questions asked just great people to talk and work with.

 

[SmokeJumper]

It has been great working with Ruger on this problem, fast turn around no questions asked just great people to talk and work with.

Too bad they won't treat the folks who purchased the early release guns as well as they have you. The solution for those folks is to BUY the REDESIGNED parts ----- Yea, that's 'Customer Service' at it's finest.... :?

 

[mekender]

It has been great working with Ruger on this problem, fast turn around no questions asked just great people to talk and work with.

Too bad they won't treat the folks who purchased the early release guns as well as they have you. The solution for those folks is to BUY the REDESIGNED parts ----- Yea, that's 'Customer Service' at it's finest.... :?

so far, ive only heard a couple of people complain that they were asked to pay for parts... i have to wonder if this is really the "policy" solution to this issue or if its a employee not doing their job correctly... in fact as i recall, they offered to send out, for free, a mag loader that would solve the problem... odd that them offering a free fix wasnt good enough, so people complained...

 

[RugerMarkIII]

mekender,

the mag loader did nothing to fix the problem for those whose magazines were too stiff. Keep in mind, the gun already came with a mag loader. The other one did the same thing as that one, it was just fancier.

 

[Blackhawk47]

It has been great working with Ruger on this problem, fast turn around no questions asked just great people to talk and work with.

Too bad they won't treat the folks who purchased the early release guns as well as they have you. The solution for those folks is to BUY the REDESIGNED parts ----- Yea, that's 'Customer Service' at it's finest.... :?

I cant see Ruger treating first model coustomers different from later model customers. Do you have a dog in this fight if so what kind of problems are you having with your SR9 that they wont fix?

 

[JohnKSa]

I do agree with this NO clearance means binding.

The locking surfaces of this kind of pistol can be surprisingly tight without causing problems. I've got one pistol where the lockup is so tight that the barrel can be pressed into the slide and it will stick in place even if the slide is turned upside down. Binding hasn't been a problem with it--there's a considerable amount of force available to unlock the gun (you can see what it's doing to the metal of the barrel) and also a considerable amount of spring force available to slam the gun closed into battery.

There has to be some clearance, but very little is required. HOWEVER, I'm not necessarily sold on the idea that it's ONLY a clearance issue. I still think that there's a possibility of a metallurgy problem as well.

 

[desertrat]

Well, JohnKSa, if it is a metallurgy problem too, as you suspect, it's a sporadic one because it seems that very few owners have reported having that problem on this forum. It could be that Ruger may be having a quality control problem with their barrel alloy consistency. If they are they had better get to the bottom of it quickly before they lose loyal customers.

 

[Blackhawk47]

I do agree with this NO clearance means binding.

The locking surfaces of this kind of pistol can be surprisingly tight without causing problems. I've got one pistol where the lockup is so tight that the barrel can be pressed into the slide and it will stick in place even if the slide is turned upside down. Binding hasn't been a problem with it--there's a considerable amount of force available to unlock the gun (you can see what it's doing to the metal of the barrel) and also a considerable amount of spring force available to slam the gun closed into battery.

There has to be some clearance, but very little is required. HOWEVER, I'm not necessarily sold on the idea that it's ONLY a clearance issue. I still think that there's a possibility of a metallurgy problem as well.

Could be a metallurgy problem but I think that is not the case, very high % to get two soft barrels in a row. I still think something is out of tolerance CNC software, wax forms, parts like the slide, cam block, barrel, milled or casted too big or too small. Then there is the spring the SR9 has a very very heavy recoil spring as compaired to my P95s, Glocks. Examble being my wife can easily pull the slide back on my P95s but cant move the slide on the SR9.

 

[JohnKSa]

What I'm saying is that there's likely a metallurgy issue with a large percentage (all, most, ?) of the barrels that shows up more rapidly when the clearance is excessive.

The reason I say that is because I have some guns that are pretty loose in that area that do not show peening in spite of considerable use.

... the SR9 has a very very heavy recoil spring as compaired to my P95s, Glocks.

Interesting... That makes a lot of sense. That suggests that slide velocity in the design was high and they're trying to keep it down with a heavier spring.

So maybe the metallurgy is decent but just not for the higher slide velocity of the SR9 design. Dunno about that but I'm not satisfied with the explanation that it's simply a matter of too much clearance.

 

[Blackhawk47]

quote]... the SR9 has a very very heavy recoil spring as compaired to my P95s, Glocks. [/quote]Interesting... That makes a lot of sense. That suggests that slide velocity in the design was high and they're trying to keep it down with a heavier spring.

So maybe the metallurgy is decent but just not for the higher slide velocity of the SR9 design. Dunno about that but I'm not satisfied with the explanation that it's simply a matter of too much clearance.[/quote]

I dont think its a clearance problem but something else one of those cant see the forest for the trees thing.

 

[Mountaineer]

mekender:

I hope you keep the forum updated on the status of your SR9. Presumably, you'll have some resolution in fairly short order. Being interested in the SR9 myself, I've been following this thread carefully, and frankly, I don't know what to think. It seems that some have acquired pistols that function flawlessly, whereas others have not. I suppose it would be an acceptable risk to buy the SR9 if there were some degree of assurance that Ruger would have a ready fix for defects such as those you've experienced. I would, however, expect one trip back to Ruger to be sufficient to resolve any such defects. So I'm waiting. It is just unfortunate that you have to be the evaluator.

 

[revhigh]

I suppose it would be an acceptable risk to buy the SR9 ...

In about a year maybe, once they get all the testing done in the marketplace.