I recently purchased a Springfield m1a socom. I took it to shoot and it did fine on the first magazine. The second magazine I pulled off one shoot and when I pulled for the second I dumped five rounds before I could get my finger off the trigger. I got the literature about slamfire issues with the gun. Read a few things online about it and everybody said it was uncommon. I was using some surplus Russian ammo bought offline from CTD. Any suggestions? I love the rifle but don't know much about slamfire and possible solutions.
Slamfire
- Thread starter Ldwillia
- Start date
Re: Slamfire
No chance it was your finger bouncing on the trigger under recoil? I once doubled an AR-10 (accidentally) by not having a good grip on it shooting while kneeling.
No chance it was your finger bouncing on the trigger under recoil? I once doubled an AR-10 (accidentally) by not having a good grip on it shooting while kneeling.
Re: Slamfire
Sounds like a keeper!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ldw.308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Might clean it real good and try some better ammo. </div></div>
This and a call to SA is where I would start.
Sounds like a keeper!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ldw.308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Might clean it real good and try some better ammo. </div></div>
This and a call to SA is where I would start.
Re: Slamfire
You most likely didn't have 5 slamfires in a row. Either you have a talent for bumpfiring, or there's something very wrong with that rifles trigger causing the hammer to slip as the bolt went into battery giving you full auto fire. I would contact Sprinfield Armory before doing anything. They're probably going to want the rifle or trigger mechanism back and give you a RO number. Don't attempt to shoot the rifle again until the problem is resolved.
You most likely didn't have 5 slamfires in a row. Either you have a talent for bumpfiring, or there's something very wrong with that rifles trigger causing the hammer to slip as the bolt went into battery giving you full auto fire. I would contact Sprinfield Armory before doing anything. They're probably going to want the rifle or trigger mechanism back and give you a RO number. Don't attempt to shoot the rifle again until the problem is resolved.
Re: Slamfire
That happened to me once with an M-14 overseas. I was shooting LC M118lr. I'm quite certain it was an accidental bump fire. The rifle had a scope mounted but was otherwise unmodified. I started being more deliberate with my trigger control and it never happened again.
I would think the odds of five slam fires in a row would be extremely low, unless the primers are extremely soft. Does anyone have any input on the primers on the ammo in question?
Has it ever done it while initially chambering a round?
That happened to me once with an M-14 overseas. I was shooting LC M118lr. I'm quite certain it was an accidental bump fire. The rifle had a scope mounted but was otherwise unmodified. I started being more deliberate with my trigger control and it never happened again.
I would think the odds of five slam fires in a row would be extremely low, unless the primers are extremely soft. Does anyone have any input on the primers on the ammo in question?
Has it ever done it while initially chambering a round?
Re: Slamfire
Aren't Russian primers known to be hard?
Regardless, send that thing back to SA! That way you're guaranteed to NOT be in possession of an illegal NFA item. Once SA has inspected/tuned/fixed/released it, then try it again. If it repeats the funny business - work on your trigger control. First off though - get that thing away from you. Felonies are bad.
Aren't Russian primers known to be hard?
Regardless, send that thing back to SA! That way you're guaranteed to NOT be in possession of an illegal NFA item. Once SA has inspected/tuned/fixed/released it, then try it again. If it repeats the funny business - work on your trigger control. First off though - get that thing away from you. Felonies are bad.
Re: Slamfire
shooting my 223 varmit AR, from a bech and not holding it tight in the shoulder, will let it "bounce".. that and it has a VARY light 2 stage in it... it has been know to "bump" 3 or 5 round bursts.. witch is funny as hell when the target is a groundhog
shooting my 223 varmit AR, from a bech and not holding it tight in the shoulder, will let it "bounce".. that and it has a VARY light 2 stage in it... it has been know to "bump" 3 or 5 round bursts.. witch is funny as hell when the target is a groundhog
Re: Slamfire
Did you inspect the primers on the "slamfired" rounds?
Another thing to ispect is the firing pin, making sure it moves with ease and doesn't stick at all.
Did you inspect the primers on the "slamfired" rounds?
Another thing to ispect is the firing pin, making sure it moves with ease and doesn't stick at all.
Re: Slamfire
Its not a illegal NFA item unless it has been illeagally altered or a unregistered auto trigger group. Try better ammo and watch your trigger control. IF it fires while chambering the first round then you know its a slam fire and have the rifle looked at. How light is the trigger pull? More than likely it was a bump fire. Any way good luck.
Its not a illegal NFA item unless it has been illeagally altered or a unregistered auto trigger group. Try better ammo and watch your trigger control. IF it fires while chambering the first round then you know its a slam fire and have the rifle looked at. How light is the trigger pull? More than likely it was a bump fire. Any way good luck.
Re: Slamfire
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its not a illegal NFA item unless it has been illeagally altered or a unregistered auto trigger group. Try better ammo and watch your trigger control. IF it fires while chambering the first round then you know its a slam fire and have the rifle looked at. How light is the trigger pull? More than likely it was a bump fire. Any way good luck. </div></div>
Your statement is completely contrary to my prior understanding. Can you point me to the law that substantiates your claim? The only legal definition of a machine gun I'm aware of is "any gun that fires more than one shot with only one pull of the trigger".
I've never seen any exceptions that as long as you didn't modify your gun to work that way, its A-OK to have an unregistered machinegun.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its not a illegal NFA item unless it has been illeagally altered or a unregistered auto trigger group. Try better ammo and watch your trigger control. IF it fires while chambering the first round then you know its a slam fire and have the rifle looked at. How light is the trigger pull? More than likely it was a bump fire. Any way good luck. </div></div>
Your statement is completely contrary to my prior understanding. Can you point me to the law that substantiates your claim? The only legal definition of a machine gun I'm aware of is "any gun that fires more than one shot with only one pull of the trigger".
I've never seen any exceptions that as long as you didn't modify your gun to work that way, its A-OK to have an unregistered machinegun.
Re: Slamfire
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” The term also includes “the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person
The way I read it, if the gun slamfires its not been modified or designed to shoot that way. Correct me if im wrong.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as “any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” The term also includes “the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person
The way I read it, if the gun slamfires its not been modified or designed to shoot that way. Correct me if im wrong.
Re: Slamfire
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok."
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok."
Re: Slamfire
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok." </div></div>
You are 100% wrong Broker.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok." </div></div>
You are 100% wrong Broker.
Re: Slamfire
So your saying that every person that has a slamfire or has a double fire is a felon? Im not saying that the gun doesnt need to be fixed! Im saying that it wasnt made to shoot auto, intended or altered to shoot auto. It doesnt have any auto parts. It does say more than once "designed & intended". It boils down to what your reading & who is reading it. You are right in it only matters in how the judge reads it! I have seen this in court many times, lawyers read it one way & the judge reads it another, but the judges way is the only one that counts!
So your saying that every person that has a slamfire or has a double fire is a felon? Im not saying that the gun doesnt need to be fixed! Im saying that it wasnt made to shoot auto, intended or altered to shoot auto. It doesnt have any auto parts. It does say more than once "designed & intended". It boils down to what your reading & who is reading it. You are right in it only matters in how the judge reads it! I have seen this in court many times, lawyers read it one way & the judge reads it another, but the judges way is the only one that counts!
Re: Slamfire
I slam fire on an M1A is pretty rare, and even more so when magazine fed with multiple rounds going off, it sounds like you have a trigger group issue. I would contact Springfield and tell them what happened. your rifle went full auto and that is not a slam fire issue they should take care of it for you.
As for the law you would only be in violation if you knowingly fired a rifle with a trigger that went full auto. The answer to the question when it happens is always this is the first time it has ever happened, I will get the trigger replaced.
I slam fire on an M1A is pretty rare, and even more so when magazine fed with multiple rounds going off, it sounds like you have a trigger group issue. I would contact Springfield and tell them what happened. your rifle went full auto and that is not a slam fire issue they should take care of it for you.
As for the law you would only be in violation if you knowingly fired a rifle with a trigger that went full auto. The answer to the question when it happens is always this is the first time it has ever happened, I will get the trigger replaced.
Re: Slamfire
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: flounderv2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok." </div></div>
You are 100% wrong Broker. </div></div>
If your in possession of a firearm that knowingly fires more than 1 round when the trigger is pulled once, whether designed that way or not, it is an illegal weapon. Just because a weapon wasn't designed with that function does not make it exempt. If the weapon by flaw "Slam Fires" then it is considered an illegal weapon. Whether you agree or not you should ask yourself... Do you want to be the one to have to defend it in court? Good luck with that. I heard a US District Judge utter these words in court once, and I always will remember it.. "Ignorance is no excuse." And no I'm not calling you ignorant so don't take it that way. I'm simply saying just because someone doesn't know something is wrong doesn't mean they're absolved.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So your saying that every person that has a slamfire or has a double fire is a felon? Im not saying that the gun doesnt need to be fixed! Im saying that it wasnt made to shoot auto, intended or altered to shoot auto. It doesnt have any auto parts. It does say more than once "designed & intended". It boils down to what your reading & who is reading it. You are right in it only matters in how the judge reads it! I have seen this in court many times, lawyers read it one way & the judge reads it another, but the judges way is the only one that counts! </div></div>
Exactly...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: flounderv2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok." </div></div>
You are 100% wrong Broker. </div></div>
If your in possession of a firearm that knowingly fires more than 1 round when the trigger is pulled once, whether designed that way or not, it is an illegal weapon. Just because a weapon wasn't designed with that function does not make it exempt. If the weapon by flaw "Slam Fires" then it is considered an illegal weapon. Whether you agree or not you should ask yourself... Do you want to be the one to have to defend it in court? Good luck with that. I heard a US District Judge utter these words in court once, and I always will remember it.. "Ignorance is no excuse." And no I'm not calling you ignorant so don't take it that way. I'm simply saying just because someone doesn't know something is wrong doesn't mean they're absolved.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So your saying that every person that has a slamfire or has a double fire is a felon? Im not saying that the gun doesnt need to be fixed! Im saying that it wasnt made to shoot auto, intended or altered to shoot auto. It doesnt have any auto parts. It does say more than once "designed & intended". It boils down to what your reading & who is reading it. You are right in it only matters in how the judge reads it! I have seen this in court many times, lawyers read it one way & the judge reads it another, but the judges way is the only one that counts! </div></div>
Exactly...
Re: Slamfire
Had an AR 10 and had a gunsmith install an adjustable match trigger ( he had been an Army Armorer)...had 3 rounds go off, changed my U trou. ( I was at public range).
Took it back, smith readjusted it, and all is well.
Had an AR 10 and had a gunsmith install an adjustable match trigger ( he had been an Army Armorer)...had 3 rounds go off, changed my U trou. ( I was at public range).
Took it back, smith readjusted it, and all is well.
Re: Slamfire
Pull the trigger group and see if you have a broken hammer strap. When mine broke it went full auto.
Pull the trigger group and see if you have a broken hammer strap. When mine broke it went full auto.
Re: Slamfire
For everybody arguing about what constitutes an illegal automatic, I suggest you read the following if you haven't already and then decide for yourself.
Olofson released
For everybody arguing about what constitutes an illegal automatic, I suggest you read the following if you haven't already and then decide for yourself.
Olofson released
Re: Slamfire
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fngmike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For everybody arguing about what constitutes an illegal automatic, I suggest you read the following if you haven't already and then decide for yourself.
Olofson released </div></div>
Man that crap pisses me off. Too much ambiguity and room for interpretation. I feel bad for that guy as it was obvious it was an accident and not a result of an intentional act or known malfunction.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: flounderv2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok." </div></div>
You are 100% wrong Broker. </div></div>
Care to retract flounder?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fngmike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For everybody arguing about what constitutes an illegal automatic, I suggest you read the following if you haven't already and then decide for yourself.
Olofson released </div></div>
Man that crap pisses me off. Too much ambiguity and room for interpretation. I feel bad for that guy as it was obvious it was an accident and not a result of an intentional act or known malfunction.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: flounderv2</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: country888</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) at 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(23), and the National Firearms Act (NFA) at 26 U.S.C. 5845(b), define the term “machinegun” as <span style="font-weight: bold">“any weapon which shoots</span>, </div></div>
The design element is irrelevant when it comes to the actual act. Thats like telling a judge "I didn't design for it to happen so it's ok." </div></div>
You are 100% wrong Broker. </div></div>
Care to retract flounder?
Re: Slamfire
Ldw.308
Send it back to SAI, you paid a lot of money for the warranty.
Did you pull the trigger group and look at it? You probably only need to send them the trigger. SAI triggers are known to break hammers.
Ldw.308
Send it back to SAI, you paid a lot of money for the warranty.
Did you pull the trigger group and look at it? You probably only need to send them the trigger. SAI triggers are known to break hammers.
