Go Back   CMP Forums > CMP Sales > M1A/M14
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-16-2018, 05:02 PM
M14 M14 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: south mississippi
Posts: 804
Default BM59 - Just in Case...

...all of the M14 crowd hasn't seen this yet.

http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=234259

I would also like to add a few words. Let me preface this with the fact that the letter has not been independently verified by anyone at Sarco yet, so people should not jump to conclusions until it has been.

Or, you can contact JRA and ask them. The point is, that even if there is a remote possibility of this being true, extreme caution is advised, and if I owned one of these, I would stop shooting it until I knew for sure it wasn't affected.

The M14 enthusiast IMO, are the greatest proponents of the Italian M1 variants. That's why I'm posting the link here. Broader coverage to lesson the possibility of any injury.

Share this with all your contacts, family members, and social media outlets, so we can all work together to get the word out....in the event that this is the case.

....and before anyone ask, all I know for sure, is that I was told that there has been a failure, and I only know about one so far. I do not know, and cannot share at this time, the extent of that failure. I do know a dire warning when I read it, and any warning that states injury or death may occur if the owners continue firing the rifles, should be heeded.....until is has been dispelled or affirmed.

As a manufacturer myself engaged in these type builds, this information was given to me early in the hopes of curbing any more instances. My information comes from a credible source which I cannot reveal at this time. Please don't ask.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-18-2018, 11:38 AM
nf1e nf1e is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,911
Default

Just a little here say information to add to this.

1. Possible serial number range
From what I understand the range is 1497-1857, I had purchased a receiver from them in this range. There customer service took care of me and went above and beyond to rectify the situation.

2. thanks for posting this info. Btw, I spoke with Classic Firearms yesterday afternoon . They said they were aware of this JRA recall, but non of the JRA BM59 rifles sent to Classic are/were affected or involved in the recall.
__________________
Semper Fi
Art
Sgt USMC 66 -72
RVN 67-68

Last edited by nf1e; 09-18-2018 at 11:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-18-2018, 12:13 PM
ordmm ordmm is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nf1e View Post
Just a little here say information to add to this.

1. Possible serial number range
From what I understand the range is 1497-1857, I had purchased a receiver from them in this range. There customer service took care of me and went above and beyond to rectify the situation.

2. thanks for posting this info. Btw, I spoke with Classic Firearms yesterday afternoon . They said they were aware of this JRA recall, but non of the JRA BM59 rifles sent to Classic are/were affected or involved in the recall.

So what was the receiver defect that forced a recall?

Quite a bit of history about op-rod track out of spec issues and the usual extraction issues but obviously something very serious must have been wrong with the receivers.

Did you experience any function issues or case fails?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-18-2018, 12:33 PM
shack357 shack357 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 112
Default

I talked with Classic as well..they said it was a small batch of receivers that were sold by another company and had bad heat treat. Based on the letter they were Sarco receivers and anything sold by Classic or AIM are just fine.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-18-2018, 12:36 PM
SEANinMICH SEANinMICH is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Howell Michigan
Posts: 2,862
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shack357 View Post
I talked with Classic as well..they said it was a small batch of receivers that were sold by another company and had bad heat treat. Based on the letter they were Sarco receivers and anything sold by Classic or AIM are just fine.
Which sounds all good and well, but my understanding is that these failures did not manifest until one thousand rounds or more had been put through the rifles. If I were a JRA bm59 owner with a cast receiver in any serial number range, you’d be hard-pressed to get me to fire that thing ever again.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-18-2018, 02:16 PM
M14 M14 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: south mississippi
Posts: 804
Default

I have to applaud Sarco for doing the right thing in all this, and making it known to the public and for protecting their customers.

They must have a huge investment and a great impending loss forthcoming if the serial range is correct. 361 receivers minus 50 that were allegedly sold already, leaves 311 to be destroyed and/or studied. That's a big hit for any company to absorb.

Maybe the other entities (companies) involved in this will shoulder some of the loss and responsibility.....metal suppliers, casting company, machining shop, heat treat company, etc. etc.

I do find it disturbing however, purely from the aspect of safety first, that this was known about, as far back as July, and the public at large is just now hearing about it. From my knowledge and experience as a manufacturer, that's not how I would have handled it.

Given, it does take some time to track down the issue before it may be determined what exactly happened, and what went wrong before an announcement was made, but "any" failure in my estimation, should have been announced immediately, and a notice posted that the investigation was pending. A non-firing notice for all owners should have been posted until the determinations and facts were known. This is just my humble opinion, but you all know that I have always been about safety first.....and responsibility. Hence, this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-19-2018, 11:38 AM
ordmm ordmm is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 356
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shack357 View Post
I talked with Classic as well..they said it was a small batch of receivers that were sold by another company and had bad heat treat. Based on the letter they were Sarco receivers and anything sold by Classic or AIM are just fine.
As another pointed out, based on the serial range, that would mean upwards of 360 receivers.

If that's a "small batch" wonder how large a production run JRA is doing. Or does JRA actually cast and machine their receivers?

Can see why Sarco addressed the issue considering a potential of somewhere around 360 units.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-07-2018, 09:39 AM
Trace86 Trace86 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shack357 View Post
I talked with Classic as well..they said it was a small batch of receivers that were sold by another company and had bad heat treat. Based on the letter they were Sarco receivers and anything sold by Classic or AIM are just fine.
Better check your receivers, I have one purchased from Classic in that serial number range. It is the BM59 Paratrooper model.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-07-2018, 10:55 AM
Trace86 Trace86 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nf1e View Post
Just a little here say information to add to this.

1. Possible serial number range
From what I understand the range is 1497-1857, I had purchased a receiver from them in this range. There customer service took care of me and went above and beyond to rectify the situation.

2. thanks for posting this info. Btw, I spoke with Classic Firearms yesterday afternoon . They said they were aware of this JRA recall, but non of the JRA BM59 rifles sent to Classic are/were affected or involved in the recall.
Classic customer service seemed surprised when I informed them I had one of their BM59 in the recall serial number range. I contacted JRA about my rifle because the rear sight base was unstable, when I mentioned my serial number I was told not to fire the rifle and that it needed to be returned. Fortunately it was still in unfired condition. One other thing I noticed when trying to disassemble for initial cleaning and inspection is that I could not remove the op-rod from the receiver. Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-07-2018, 11:16 AM
nf1e nf1e is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,911
Default

Great you caught it before doing damage to yourself or others.
__________________
Semper Fi
Art
Sgt USMC 66 -72
RVN 67-68
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:03 PM.