I just got an ammo can with 1000 rounds of 9mm 124grn NATO surplus that cost me $159 dropped off to me by UPS. Ammoman, so 35lbs of shipping included. A plinking I will go, a plinking I will go, a bargain but not Wolf, oh a plinking I will go.

That's potent stuff!

Whatcha gonna shoot it out of?

It'll be coming out of the bore of a G19. Yeah, NATO rounds have a lot of pressure in them.

9mm is my plinking, paper punching caliber. My brother has had my P226 for a good while now and the $ factor of plinking in .45acp (about every other pistol I have) was getting old. So it gave me an excuse to buy another 9mm.
I shifted gears and went home with the G19. I've always given Glocks a hard time since every handgun I own is a Sig or a 1911 with the exception of a Taurus snubbie and a Kel Tec P3AT.

I figure buy the time I finish the case (factor in another 300-400 HPs) and I'll be able to pass proper judgement on Glock.

So how did it go???

NATO 9mm in a G19; I'm very interested.

Quoted: So how did it go??? NATO 9mm in a G19; I'm very interested.

I'll defer to Raulin's experience, but a G19 has no issues with NATO pressure rounds.

Quoted: Quoted: So how did it go??? NATO 9mm in a G19; I'm very interested. I'll defer to Raulin's experience, but a G19 has no issues with NATO pressure rounds.

Thats a matter of opinion.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So how did it go??? NATO 9mm in a G19; I'm very interested. I'll defer to Raulin's experience, but a G19 has no issues with NATO pressure rounds. Thats a matter of opinion.

Troll?  Ya' think?  

I have seen OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary.  It is not a matter of any reasonably informed opinion.  The GLOCK 19 owners manual (pg. 15 part 26) specifically mentions NATO as an acceptable specification.  NATO 9mm is not some boogy-man cartridge that blows up all kinds of pistols.  Many common carry loads are equally energetic.

Tell me why NATO 9mm is not compatible with a G19 or any 9mm GLOCK.

And while you’re at it, find one reputable source that suggests NATO, SAAMI +P, or any commercially loaded +P+ is not acceptable for use in a 9mm GLOCK.

I would make sure I had my facts straight before I called someone out as a troll.  No hard feelings.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't own one, or care to, but every time someone let me shoot  a glock, it was very nice.  And accurate.  Someday that bug might get me.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So how did it go??? NATO 9mm in a G19; I'm very interested. I'll defer to Raulin's experience, but a G19 has no issues with NATO pressure rounds. Thats a matter of opinion. Troll?  Ya' think?   I have seen OVERWHELMING evidence to the contrary.  It is not a matter of any reasonably informed opinion.  The GLOCK 19 owners manual (pg. 15 part 26) specifically mentions NATO as an acceptable specification.  NATO 9mm is not some boogy-man cartridge that blows up all kinds of pistols.  Many common carry loads are equally energetic. Tell me why NATO 9mm is not compatible with a G19 or any 9mm GLOCK. And while you’re at it, find one reputable source that suggests NATO, SAAMI +P, or any commercially loaded +P+ is not acceptable for use in a 9mm GLOCK. I would make sure I had my facts straight before I called someone out as a troll.  No hard feelings.

I used the troll emoticon in reference to myself, sorry for the confusion(I have yet to find a thread dealing with proper emoticon usage on ar15.com)

I still think that Glocks have inadequite chamber support for high pressure rounds(+P,NATO 9mm.,  and any .40S&W round).

I just was looking to get some Glock snobs up in a fit. I guess I did. I'll never do it again.

Whoops.  Sorry, I thought you were calling ME a troll.  Like I said, no hard feelings...

I am curious, though; why do you think GLOCKS "have inadequite chamber support for high pressure rounds"? High pressure 9mm and 40S&W are two completely different cases.  

SAAMI pressure specs for standard pressure 9mm and 40S&W are identical (35,000psi).  +P 9mm (37,500psi) and (generally speaking, most all) NATO 9mm is exceeds 40S&W pressures.  I'm qualifying the 9mm NATO pressure spec because I'm not aware of a specific pressure standard for NATO 9mm.

I have read about chamber support concerns regarding 40S&W but I have no reason to think that those possible issues relate in any way to 9mm.

I guess my point is that, AFAIK, case failures have just as much to do with the design of the case as they do chamber pressures.  So, grouping 9mm with 40S&W based on chamber pressures isn't usefull as far as case failures are concerned.

Maybe someone who knows this stuff better than me can set us BOTH straight.

Everybody play nice now.

So far I've put 400 rounds of it through the G19, 300 rounds in the gun's maiden voyage to the range.
It fed fine, accuracy was ok but this was the first time I'd fired a Glock for more than a few mags. And it's pretty clean too. No issues with NATO and the G19.

This is first/only Glock I own. I'm pleased so far. And as far as the NATO pressures go, I read it was alright while flipping through the manual of my buddy's G17. This is why I went ahead and scooped up the case at a good price to break it in and get to know it.

Quoted: Whoops.  Sorry, I thought you were calling ME a troll.  Like I said, no hard feelings... I am curious, though; why do you think GLOCKS "have inadequite chamber support for high pressure rounds"? High pressure 9mm and 40S&W are two completely different cases.   SAAMI pressure specs for standard pressure 9mm and 40S&W are identical (35,000psi).  +P 9mm (37,500psi) and (generally speaking, most all) NATO 9mm is exceeds 40S&W pressures.  I'm qualifying the 9mm NATO pressure spec because I'm not aware of a specific pressure standard for NATO 9mm. I have read about chamber support concerns regarding 40S&W but I have no reason to think that those possible issues relate in any way to 9mm. I guess my point is that, AFAIK, case failures have just as much to do with the design of the case as they do chamber pressures.  So, grouping 9mm with 40S&W based on chamber pressures isn't usefull as far as case failures are concerned. Maybe someone who knows this stuff better than me can set us BOTH straight.

I'm no expert; maybe someone that is can set the record straight.

I have seen threads about the 40S&W round in the Glock and the chamber support issue. I have never seen one specifically about the 9mm. I guess I am wrong to group 9mm with 40S&W.

The threads about the 40S&W Glocks have shown that the high pressures can cause a hole to be blown in the rim of the shell casing; which shoots hot gas into places it shouldn't be. The damaged case can also have its whole base ripped of f when it is being ejected, which I can guess would cause one very annoying stovepipe. I have no personal experience with this, so I'm open to any information showing the contrary.

No hard feelings towards you Glockers.  I'm sorry if I came acroos as malicious, etc. Just trying to add a little pep to the Ammo subforum.

I welcome some pep to the handgun ammo subforum.  Anything to attract more readers and posters!  There's not nearly enough traffic in here for my tastes.  But anyway...

Here's a pic comparing GLOCK chambers in 9mm, 357sig, and 40SW.  It appears the 357sig has the most support with the 9 and 40 being about equal.  


I think 40S&W reloads are responsible for the bad rap some associate with GLOCKs chambered in 40S&W.  Don't shoot reloads and you'll never have any issues.  Aftermarket barrels can have additional case support but AFAIK a "full supported" chamber in a browning action gun is somewhat of a myth.  Some aftermarket manufactures sure advertise "full support" so maybe I'm wrong about that. (??)

Most (all??) guns that utilize a modified browning action have some lack of case support.  GLOCKs just have less support than some.  It's a design trade-off.  The up-side is GLOCKs will feed damn near any round you'd care to try with exceptional reliability.  The down side is less tolerance for weak cases.  GLOCKS don't seem to like reloads very well.  The polygonal rifling is one reason.  The other reason is the possibility of a reloaded case having a weak chamber from one too many resizes.

Why does the 40 seem to be more suseptable to 6 o'clock case failures than 9mm?  I'm not entirely sure.   I *think* it has just as much to do with the designed strength of the 40SW case vs. the 9mm case.  GLOCKS just don't tolarate weak cases very well.

Here are some pictures of other chambers showing their level of case support:

Star BM


CZ-75


GLOCK 17


GLOCK 26


The source of the G17 and G26 photos says they have "sufficient case support at the chamber to handle high-end 9mm loads without worry." FWIW

Star 28


GLOCK 37 and GLOCK 21


Browning MkIII Hi-Power

Wow. Very damnned helpful. Thanks!

tag