Gun guru John Farnam writes [via ammoland.com]
Last weekend, during a Defensive Handgun Course, a student brought a Ruger five-shot revolver, chambered in 9mm. During an exercise, shooting factory 115gr hardball from a well-known and reputable manufacturer, a bullet jumped forward far enough to protrude from the face of the cylinder and thus prevent the cylinder from rotating normally. In fact, the bullet jumped forward far enough to physically separate from the case.
This not only precluded the revolver from continuing to fire, but it also made it impossible to swing-out the cylinder, so the revolver could now not be reloaded!
Tilting the revolver upward allowed the errant bullet to fall back far enough so that we could swing-out the cylinder. After thus fixing the problem, discarding the entire offending cartridge, and then reloading, the same thing happened a second time a few minutes later!
To be fair, this student fired a number of rounds normally before this started happening, but her faith in her revolver was still irreparably damaged.
Back in February of 2012, I did a Quip on this very issue:
“When the revolver fires, remaining cartridges in the cylinder (yet to be fired) are subjected to significant G-forces as the pistol recoils. Sometimes, it is enough to persuade a yet-unfired bullet to migrate forward far enough to protrude from the front of the cylinder, preventing the cylinder from rotating normally, and thus preventing the revolver from firing.
Ammunition manufacturers have been familiar with this issue for a long time, and thus typically put a heavy crimp into 38Spl and 357Mg cartridges as part of the manufacturing process. That crimp usually suffices to mitigate the bullet-jump issue, even in small revolvers.
However, with the advent of small, light revolvers chambered for 9mm, the problem is, once again, rearing its ugly head, as most 9mm ammunition necessarily does not come with any kind of bullet-holding crimp.
In fact, on many boxes of currently-produced, high-performance 9mm ammunition, manufacturers have printed the warning, “NOT FOR USE IN REVOLVERS,” because they calculate bullet-jump will be a problem in some guns.”
This is the reason revolvers chambered for 9mm, although otherwise well-made and perfectly functional, do not enjoy a place on my “Recommended [Arms] List.” Some ammunition is better than others, but all 9mm rounds share this same issue, even expensive high-performance brands. The 9×19 cartridge was designed to function in autoloading pistols, not revolvers!
I’m still a fan of sunbby revolvers and own several, but my recommendation, when you share my enthusiasm for them, is to stick with 38Spl. The bullet-jump issue still exists, to be sure, but to a much lesser degree, particularly when you’re shooting high-performance ammunition, like Cor-Bon’s 110 gr DPX or Speer Gold-Dot. Manufacturers insure that these bullets are adequately crimped-in and are thus unlikely to migrate.
/John
About John Farnam & Defense Training International, Inc
As a defensive weapons and tactics instructor John Farnam will urge you, based on your own beliefs, to make up your mind in advance as to what you would do when faced with an imminent and unlawful lethal threat. You should, of course, also decide what preparations you should make in advance, if any. Defense Training International wants to make sure that their students fully understand the physical, legal, psychological, and societal consequences of their actions or inactions.
It is our duty to make you aware of certain unpleasant physical realities intrinsic to the Planet Earth. Mr Farnam is happy to be your counselor and advisor. Visit: www.defense-training.com
Huh, that is good to know. I imagine this is even worse on light revolvers that shoot .40 S&W.
Afaik there aren’t any 15 ounce revolvers that chamber 40 or 45. I would be concerned for sure. I wonder if the 9mm taper makes it worse vs the straight wall 40 and 45.
makes me think about that article of that 10mm S&W revolver……
now about my Nagant Revolver, its neeeeever a issue, those bullets are seated INSIDE the case, THEN crimped! 1894 Technology to save the day, BEAT THAT! whoooooooo!
I really doubt it’s a problem for that 10mm S&W revolver.
That thing is flat *massive*. He reported the recoil as mild.
It’s something an owner should keep in mind, tho…
It’s not the cartridge to worry about, but the weight of the revolver. Any revolver that is as light as the LCR firing 9mm, .40, or .45 will have bullet jump issues eventually.
Or worse, a Ti wonder snubbie…
I have a S&w 9mm revolver, it isn’t terribly heavy but is a full size gun built in I believe the n frame and bullet jump is definitely an issue. Some brands of ammo you can’t do the full cylinder without an issue but others have been fine so I just have to remember to check a few watch what manufacturer I use. I bought it knowing the issue no planned on reloading for it which can also mitigate the issue. Definitely something to watch for especially with light guns and heavy for caliber bullets.
Yeah you’d think some people would understand the difference between why autoloading ammo is the way it is, and why revolver ammo is the way it is, but some people are determined not to learn.
Yeah, they just think 9mm and that it’s cheap and they want a revolver that shoots 9mm and don’t think things through or do their research.
Well, the 9mm cartridge seems like it’s ideal for a snubbie revolver due to other characteristics. It’s shorter than .38– so the cylinder can be shorter and the gun lighter. It’s a much higher pressure cartridge than .38– so far more velocity from a snubbie-length barrel, and presumably more effectiveness on target.
Both of those things are true. But I lost all enthusiasm for 9mm snubbies after reading this article.
As I understand it, pis tol cartridges like the 9 mm headspace on the mouth and therefore cannot be crimped or they wouldn’t function properly in semi-autos.
Also, Charter (Pitbull) and Chiappa (Rhino) chamber rev olvers in .40S&W. The Pitbull’s pretty light, but night quite as light as the LCR.
I had assumed 9mm LCRs headspaced on moonclips and suggested using .355s with cannelures like Lehighs and Sierra Sig V-Crowns and crimping them. When I realized that I didn’t actually know if they headspaced on the clips I deleted my comment. Do 9mm LCRs headspace on the case mouth?
I would think they’d headspace on the case mouth, but either way the cases won’t be roll crimped. Unless you roll your own, in which case you could probably disregard this whole post. Just don’t try them in your semis.
I remember reading a long time ago about the .38 super which is a semi-rimmed cartridge and how the original pi stols were headspaced on the rim, which lead to inaccuracy. I’m not sure if that was because the cartridge was ‘semi-‘ rimmed or if semi-autos just need to be headspaced at the mouth to be accurate.
The 38 ACP originally headspaced on the mouth, but that was in the old 1902(I believe) model Colts. In the 1911 that could not be done because of a different feed ramp. So with the coming of the 38 super(which was just a +P version of the 38ACP, but the terminology “+P” had yet to be invented) it then headspaced on the extractor, because the feed ramp wouldn’t support the semi rim. This lead to inaccuracy, but that was solved with a shorter chamber, somewhere back around the 70’s or 80’s. Ever since then the 38 super headspaces on the mouth, the same as most every other semi auto round.
Yes, it was my understanding that once they started headspacing the .38 super on the case mouth the inaccuracy problems disappeared. But then it sounds like if the super had been a fully rimmed cartridge it could have been headspaced on the rim without any problems?
But then you have the problem of getting the fully rimmed rounds to feed through a magazine. That’s why revolver rounds are rimmed(usually), and auto cartridges are rimless(usually). The best and easiest headspace is off the rim, but rimless cases feed best through magazines.
Bottleneck rifle cartridges get the best of both of these worlds by headspacing on the shoulder, while still retaining the rimless design. So they have both an excellent surface to headspace on, and also rimless for feeding.
I would think hey would have to; as the LCR can load 9mm without moonclips. (Just need a tool to eject them then).
Semi auto cartridges headspace on the mouth, and thus cannot be ROLL crimped, which is what is typically done to revolver cartridges, as it can be done simultaneously with other operations at almost no cost. Auto rounds must be taper crimped, which is an operation that must be done separately from all other operations in loading a round. Thus it is an extra expense that few makers want to do, as it will add to the cost of the product, thus reducing sales.
Anyone with a revolver chambered for an auto cartridge can purchase the cheapest of Lee loading presses, and a single taper crimp die for whatever cartridge(they are sold separately, as befits a completely separate operation), and then run his factory rounds through this setup, thus crimping the bullets in place, solving the problem at low cost, if one does not count his time. Each round must be run through the die, one at a time. but the press and die should cost around 50 USD, and there is no need to learn reloading, if one only needs to crimp the factory loads.
But if the reloading bug ever bites, with a press you are already part way there. Now that one only needs: dies, scale, and a manual. And then, powder measures, tricklers, more manuals, gauges, micrometers, a better press… the list of wants is endless. But the basics are all one needs. Reloading is kinda like firearms… once the bug bites, one is never enough.
Semi-auto cartridges may often headspace on the mouth in semi-autos but it sure looks to me like they could headspace on the extractor groove too.
That’s beside the point, I think. Semi-auto cartridges aren’t roll crimped because they don’t need to be, as long as they’re fired from a semi-auto pistol.
If one hand loads, it may not be beside the point. I haven’t done it but suspect that you can put a crimp right into the cannelure in the few .355 bullets that have them. May have to use an additional step though. If I had a 9mm LCR I’d at least give it a try rather than giving up on the gun. Then again, I like loading more than shooting and that may not be common;-)
There may be more of us than one thinks. I like working up loads(esp weird ones) at least as well as shooting them. I also love watching my Dillon 650 work. So much happening at once, with so little effort. Just watch the rounds roll out. It never gets old.
But that is still only two of us… maybe we’re alone in the world.
Make that three. Hornady LnL here.
My question(s) would be, do some or all rev olvers chambered in semi-auto calibers headspace on the case mouth as well, or is this function filled by the moon clips, and what about revol vers like the Carter Arms Pitbull that don’t use moon clips, do they then require headspacing on the case mouth. Or is the whole headspacing thing irrelevant in rev olvers due to the fact that the bu llet has to jump through the cylinder gap and into the forcing cone? Could roll crimping your ro unds screw up your accuracy in a revol ver?
I have a S&W 986, it most definitely headspaces on the moon clips. When I bought it, my normal 9 reloads all jumped out and I had the same problem described in the article. I just turned the crimp die in a little, and moved on with life. Problem solved. Easy Peasy.. If you reload.
Well, as a newer owner of the CA .40 Pitbull, I will be wary.
Safety is paramount.
The reason I picked up the CA is because of it’s specific design to be used without moon clips. The design inclusion of spring loaded “keepers” in the cylinder seemed like novel and sound engineering.
I have had no problems in my first 100 rinds fired.
The Pitbull .40 is a solid, great handling, accurate revolver.
There is nothing negative to report that I have come across so far in my brief ownership.
That’s a revol ver I’ve considered buying myself. If you’re carrying it as your primary self def ense weapon it might pay to run an extra box or two of your defen se loads of choice, and maybe also pick out a lighter bull et weight. .40 and 9 mm do fill a nice gap between typical .38 and full bore .357 loads, but then there’s some .38+p+ and ridiculously light .357 loads out there.
Not true. I have defensive 9mm ammo that’s crimped by corbon. Ammo manufacturers just want to cheap out.
Actually that is mostly a myth as the tolerances in many 9mm guns are generous and its the extractor that holds back the cartridge far enough so that it fires. Couple this with the fact that most firing pins have a long enough reach that they will fire off the round even when there is excess headspace.
The P38 with the extractor removed will still fire the cartridge as the firing pin is long enough to reach the primer even when the headspace is excessive. And the gun functions fine without an extractor as the extractor was meant to extract a live round as its not needed in most instances to extract a fired empty when the gun is functioning in the semi-auto mode. The gas pressure blows out the fired empty. Don’t believe me? Then remove your P38 extractor, insert a loaded clip and fire away. The gun will fire off all the rounds in the magazine with no problem.
A few .355 bullets have a cannelure – Lehighs and Sierra Sig V-Crown(s) at least. Perhaps if someone has a light 9mm revolver they could hand load and crimp them. I haven’t tried it myself though.
Just curious if the same phenomenon, bul lets jumping crimp, can happen in semi-autos and cause failures to feed. The front of the magazine would prevent the bull et from jumping too far, but I’d think it could bind up the magazine or cause it to catch on the feed ramp.
I’ve never heard of a case of bullet jump in an autoloader. The more common issue with them is the opposite problem – bullet setback. If you load and unload your semi regularly, and repeatedly chamber the same top round from a magazine, the repeated striking of the bullet on the feed ramp can drive it back in the case, causing dangerously high pressures.
The simple solution? Cycle your rounds through the mag, or better yet, shoot your defensive carry rounds every few practice sessions.
Yes, bul let setback is definitely a much bigger problem unless maybe if your pis tol jams in the middle of a gunfight. However, I doubt too many people pull out their calipers every time they get a failure to feed and check all the cartridges in the magazine. There’s only so much space for a bu llet to jump inside the magazine, so I doubt people would notice it just by looking at the rou nds. If it is an issue, it would only tend to be a problem with lightweight pi stols and probably heavier bull et weights. But a rotating cylinder does nothing to change the Newtonian physics of inertia. Although, now that I think about it, their shouldn’t be any reason for the cases to be jerked back in relation to the bu llets in the maga zine, so my whole point is probably moot.
The possibility for ‘jump’ is far, far less on an auto-loader, simply because the g-loads on the ammo is *magnitudes* less thanks to the reciprocating slide-spring combo soaking most of that up.
I really like kenneth’s advice on hand roll-crimping your auto-loader ammo if you use it in a revolver. But I’d be uncomfortable if your particular revolver head-spaces on the mouth, the roll crimp might *complicate* the head spacing there, and make extraction potentially problematic. With moon clips, roll-crimp away to your heart’s content. So it seems to me.
I’ve entertained the thought of a revolver in 9mm or .40 S&W, just for ammo compatibility with other weapons I plan on owning…
For “ammo compatibility”, why must you have a revolver? There are thousands of different 9mm pistols out there.
As Geoff PR points out, the recoil mechanics of an auto pistol are different from a revolver. What he didn’t mention is that this not only effects how much recoil is transferred to the remaining ammo, but over what amount of time. Aside from the moving mass of the slide and the springs soaking up recoil, an auto pistol, due to ergonomics, also transmits the recoil differently, and I’d be surprised is this doesn’t have a significant effect on the g load on the ammo in the magazine.
EDIT: I just read what you said about bullet/case differential movement in a magazine. I think you’re onto something, the magazine receives the recoil and transmits it to the cartridges, as opposed to the cartridges moving in the cylinder and then slamming to a stop. I’d think the recoil over time thing is why this isn’t an issue in autopistols.
If you gun has a pivoting extractor you need to drop the round right into the chamber to prevent the bullet from loosening up in the case when you constantly cycle it through the mag into the chamber over and over again, which by the way will also let in moisture and gun oil. If your extractor is of the non-pivoting type like in the original 1911 or Browning High Power you have a problem because then you must cycle the round out of the magazine or you will get the extractor out of whack or even break it eventually. Here there is no solution to the problem other than to keep changing the round you cycle into the chamber by not always using the same one.
Primers also are not oil proof despite the propaganda on the factory box, their sealer often does not work. The solution is to put a drop of polyurethane on the primer and a smear around the juncture of the case neck and bullet.
I was going to say the same thing, since the subsequent rounds stay in the magazine they would also be subject to the G-force from the shot/recoil. Then I realized the reason it happens in revolvers but not auto-loaders; the rounds are unable to shift forward when the revolver is fired due to the rim or moon clip, whereas the rounds in an auto-loader are able to shift forward slightly in the magazine reducing the G-force affect on them which would extract the bullet.
Nah, it’s just a question of leverage. Recoil rotates the gun around the approximate palm of the hand; an autoloader’s magazine is at the hub where force is low but the revolver’s cylinder is at the edge where the force is highest.
Bullet pull is a common failure mode in revolvers. Had it happen with 125 grain Golden Sabers (.38 special).
Getting the revolver open took some effort.
Had it happen in a full size .44 magnum before as well. Never had it happen on a .45 acp revolver before, but obviously .45 auto has a low recoil impulse.
To answer the question above, 9mm revolvers generally headspace off of the moon clip, but if cut correctly can headspace off of the case mouth.
Most auto pistols actually headspace off the extractor hook, but that’s an argument for a different place.
I hadn’t heard of this bullet jump issue before this article, nor am I familiar with bullet pull.
I do have a Taurus revolver in .45LC/.410 that I got this past Christmas, which I tried firing .410 shot shells out of. The firing worked fine and I was pleased, but then I wasn’t able to eject the spent shell cases with the extractor, let alone by gravity. I keep meaning to take a screwdriver or other tool to the cylinder to remove them, but I never get around to it. I think I’ve just psychologically written that gun off as being crap and stopped thinking about it.
Now that I read this article and your post, I’m thinking about that revolver again. Is there anything I’m doing wrong with it or any preventative measure I could take to be able to fire .410 shells from it as advertised, without it being a whole production to pry the spent shell cases from the cylinder? It’s the .410 option that appealed to me; I’m not interested in using it for .45LC.
Swing out the cylinder and find something that will serve as a punch (allen wrench e.g.) and tap it out. Don’t pry it out. As far as fixing the root of the problem I can’t help, but if reloads aren’t part of the equation in the first place it wouldn’t really matter if it takes a few extra seconds to clear the shells.
Some (most?) revolvers have help in that regard, with a spring-loaded ‘star’ shell extractor to ‘bump’ the sticky shells out. Or is this hassle specific to the .410 shell?
(On the tiny-yet-wonderful NAA Mini-Revolver, the cylinder pin itself is used to ‘poke’ the .22 shells out one-by one. A bit of the price you pay for sub-miniaturization of weaponry…)
If you’ve ever used a single action army (Rug er Blackhawks, Vaqueros e.g.) the extractor just pokes into the empty case and pushes it out from the inside as opposed to the typical DA rev olver setup where the star extractor pulls all the cases out simultaneously from the rims. If you’ve got a stuck case the SAA way is much stronger, so if you’ve got a case that’s stuck pretty hard in a DA it’s best to punch it out the SAA way. Also had a similar situation with a stuck case in a Ru ger no.1, I had to punch it out with a cleaning rod. (And I won’t be buying any more ‘bi-metal’ case am mo in .303.) Much better than trying to force it out with the relatively fragile extractor.
Is there anything I’m doing wrong with it or any preventative measure I could take to be able to fire .410 shells from it as advertised, without it being a whole production to pry the spent shell cases from the cylinder?
I’ve got a Circuit Judge carbine and I’ve dealt with this. Try shells from a variety of different manufacturers. Different brands expand differently. So far, I’ve had good luck with Federal 000 buck shells. They’re pretty stiff and extract easily. YMMV.
There is at least one manufacturer that makes 115gr 9mm ammo that is advertised as both pistol and revolver ammunition: Remington.
I have shot well over 2000 rounds of Remington ammunition through my Charter Arms 9mm Pitbull with a total of zero crimp jumps (aka bullet jumps).
-Keith.
Does that happen with 45 ACP as well? I am thinking about the S&W governor
The Governor weighs twice as much as the LCR does and .45 is a soft recoiling round. You won’t have any issues, besides the cylinder is so long by the time you get to the 4th, 5th, or final shot, the bullets wouldn’t have traveled all the way down to the end of the cylinder.
Actually I weigh, I don’t know, probably a couple hundred times as much as an LCR.
As if it’s any of your business…
Interesting. I never really knew about the topic but then again I’ve always seen revolvers chambered in 9mm as a solution searching for a problem (.38+p seems pretty good to me).
My airweight 442 locked due to bullet creep on a +p lswchp. I’ve stopped using +p ammo in the gun. Recoil impulse in such a light gun with +p is just too sharp.
“Recoil impulse in such a light gun with +p is just too sharp.”
A *brilliant* way of phrasing that for an unabashed RF geek like myself.
Slew rate that fast *hurts*…
*Applause*
Outside of Korth, my understanding is that the only company making 9mm revolvers is Ruger. Considering the company’s reputation for qc issues, isn’t it more reasonable to assume it’s a gafe in manufacturing rather than an inherent design Problem?
Your perception of Ruger’s QC reputation is a little off. And the reason for this problem has been thoroughly explained above. It’s not about blaming the gun or the ammo. It’s about understanding the differences between the way pistol and revolver cartridges are made.
S&W, Charter and Chiappa also make 9 mm revol vers.
Taurus also.
Just yesterday there was a review of a revolver chambered for 10mm.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/04/daniel-zimmerman/gun-review-smith-wesson-model-610-10mm-content-contest/
I asked why, and found none of the answers compelling. I can only assume such a revolver might be prone to the same issue.
This is a good reminder that pistol and revolver cartridges are made differently, for good reason. You want a snubbie? Get one chambered for .357 Magnum and you have a world of choices to feed it with.
I highly doubt bu llet jump would ever happen in that S&W 610 since it weighs over 3 pounds and 3 times what an LCR in 9 mm does. The powder charge separates the bull et from the case, the case presses against the frame, the frame jerks back the cases and the bul lets being heavy and following Newton’s laws of physics don’t want to be pulled rearward. The heavier the rev olver and the lighter the bull ets the less likely this will be a factor.
Otherwise, you do have a very valid point, there’s a reason why revo lver cartridges have straight walls and rims and semi-auto cartridges have slightly tapered walls and recessed rims.
No one tell Jerry Miculek about this so he can keep on doing the fastest revolver reloads shooting auto loading cartridges with moon clips! ?
I’ll post back when it happens in my Chiappa but so far it’s going 200 rounds strong chambered for 9mm. I wouldn’t hold your breath.
I have been shooting my Ruger LCR 9mm monthly for almost a year now, the only issue so far was shitty steel & aluminum case ammo that was difficult to eject due to expansion under heat + gummy case lacquer. Both tapped out easily once the cylinder cooled off. I shot everything from the cheapest range ammo to +p HST, never once have I been unable to shoot or open the cylinder due to “bullet creep”.
I have the same gun, and I wish I knew about the Aluminum ammo issue. I panicked at first because of the force needed to dislodge the ammo. But several hundred rounds of fmj with some of my carry ammo mixed in, it’s good. I carry the Winchester hollow point ammo.
Another reminder of why testing your carry gun not just with range loads, but with your carry loads is so important. When it comes to stoppages and malfunctions, you don’t know what you don’t know, and testing your gun/ammo combo is the only way to find out about problems.
Makes a case for the .327 Federal Magnum. Rimmed case, crimped, similar bullet weight, etc.
(Flame proof boxers…check)
.327 Fed. Magnum would be awesome if it weren’t for ammo variety, cost and availability.
Plus you get an extra round in the cylinder. .327 should be more potent than 9 mm. I can’t figure out why Ru ger quit making the 3″ SP101, every time I see a used one on Gun Broker it goes for upwards of $1000. Maybe an LCRx with a 2-1/4″ barrel would do it for me.
Taurus also makes a small revolver for 380 ACP. Is it safe to assume this would have the same issue?
I am thinking that flat nosed ammo for 9mm would be a possible work around here. Even if the bullet jumps a bit there is still (probably) enough room for the cylinder to spin with no problem given the overall length of the cartridge is shorter.
I find it rather interesting that people would want a revolver chambered in non revolver ammunition which head spaces on the Mouth of the case, especially the 9mm, people forget that the American 9mm or .38 special Caliber shoot the same Diameter bullet, with higher grain weighted bullets, with same or better results. hard to beat a souped up 9 {.357}
The conclusion is to thoroughly test one’s defensive ammo and revolver. Bullets walking out of case due to recoil is likely a phenomena that is dependent upon brand. Further note that some designs, like 147 grain JHP, will have much more surface contact between bullet and case than others, like 115 FMJ.
The observation from the class is a good one, but may be more limited in scope than the entire class of 9MM snubbies.
My LCR 9mm also had a failure due to bullet creep. I had multiple failures with two boxes of Blazer Brass. I sent them back to CCI and they replaced them and said their test showed they were under crimped. The replacement rounds and close to 400 additional rounds have shot flawless. I have tried half dozen different brands both range ammo and SD with no further problems. It did make me nervous for a long time afterwards.
As to why I bought 9mm instead of .38, mostly so I didn’t have to stock yet another caliber. I have since added a .357 carbine so probably would not have bothered today. I do like my LCR, kicks pretty hard, I don’t go out and shoot 50 rounds through it in one outing. Usually ready to lay it down after 20 rounds.
Right tool for the right job. Revolvers are cool, but why would you want one in 9mm?
I consolidated calibers.
my rifles are all 5.56, my pistols 9mm.
I can only think of 3 reasons why anyone would want to carry a revolver to begin with.
1. Is a paranoia about an auto pistol jamming up at a critical moment but as we can see revolvers can jam up as well.
2. If you have a revolver that has no exposed hammer or one that is shrouded as in the S&W original body guard model 38 or 49 you can fire the revolver in an emergency from inside the pocket but beware you only have 5 shots and try reloading one under stress or trying to conceal even the “J” frame Smiths as opposed to a much flatter auto loader.
3. People not familiar with guns or not mechanically inclined may love the revolver because of its simplicity of loading, checking if its loaded and simplicity of use. I find a lot of women prefer them for carry.
I quite carrying revolvers years ago because of the above problems.
I’ve fired a few thousand rounds of .38spl in my Ruger SP101, and never had this happen.
“During an exercise, shooting factory 115gr hardball from a well-known and reputable manufacturer..”
Just about all the crap 9mm ammo I’ve shot in my life fits this description. It’s range ammo, never to be used for personal protection.
This is only a problem for this handgun if it also happens with good quality personal protection ammo.