User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
OR, USA
|
Posted: 9/29/2018 10:18:16 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bluemax_1:
If you actually read the reply that you're replying to, the post (by BerlinVet) that is being replied to, asked where/how to get the 32704 ejector. The 32704 ejector is in the 33854 trigger housing. The 47021 ejector is in the 47208 trigger housing. I thought this thread was about the new #47021 ejector. Carry on. |
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 9/29/2018 10:47:48 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bluemax_1:
The 32704 ejector is in the 33854 trigger housing. 30275 is the Gen4 trigger housing with the 30274 ejector. |
|
|
OR, USA
|
Posted: 9/29/2018 11:01:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Direct-Drive]
[#3]
So for anyone reading along trying to track the original intent of this thread.....
To get the new #47201 ejector, you order trigger mechanism housing #47208 The new ejector will be present in that TMH. Pull the new ejector out and install it in your TMH. (this is for 9mm) Let's keep this thread on track. |
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 9/29/2018 11:04:36 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Direct-Drive:
Let's keep this thread on track. Just accept you did not read the post, screwed up, and move on. |
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 12/12/2018 9:49:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: wormraper]
[#5]
I can't believe this issue is still going on with glock. I have a G43 I picked up last year that's ejection is ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL over the place. Brass to face, brass on the left side of the gun, brass in the normal spots, brass just over my right shoulder (I'm left handed), brass actually shot FORWARD of the gun once or twice too. Bizarre. Does with with multiple shooters and with all mags (have a ton). driving me nuts and it has the newer 32704 ejector too. It FUNCTIONS fine, but the erratic ejection was driving me batty, so I just sold it and stuck with shield 9's.
I have a gen 3 G26 I bought 1.5 years ago and it has some issues too. ejection is either right on target, or it's an occasional round back at the face. Not horrible, but annoying. All my other glocks shoot just fine (2 g19s, a g30s and a g21). I just can't justify buying new glocks if they're continuing these problems |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2018 8:28:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: MaverickAA]
[#6]
I run the Gen 4 ejectors in all my Glocks (gen 2's, PF940c's, PF940sc's). I first noticed my ejection pattern going haywire wtih my Gen 2 after thousands of rounds. I replaced that with another 336, but didn't like it. So that one (and all the rest of my Glocks too) got the Gen 4 ejector installed and work great.
Well, after reading this thread I decided to try the Gen 5 ejector. Bad idea (in my case)! The 2-early 4 ejectors are thin (top/bottom, side view) and clear the mag/rounds. The later Gen 4 (what I now use in all my Glocks) is wider (top/bottom, side view) but is angled to clear the mag/rounds. The Gen 5 is wider (top/bottom, side view), is NOT angled, clears the mag, but does NOT clear the rounds. This resulted in having a hard seat of the mag, brass scraping the ejector (underside) and pressure on the trigger housing. While it worked... it also scraped the heck out of my brass. This is not a proper fit. NOT GOOD. So, I don't know if they slightly changed the geometry of the Gen 5 trigger housing.... but I do NOT recommend running the G5 ejector in a gen 2 or PF series (gen 3) Glock. It's NOT right, and I've swapped back to the Gen 4 ejector and all is well again. If you swap to a Gen 5 ejector... CHECK YOUR CASE SPACE UNDER THE EJECTOR!! |
|
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 3:29:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: EzGoingKev]
[#7]
I just checked the 47021 in my Gen3 pistol and it does contact the round in the magazine enough that it puts pressure on it.
|
|
|
ME, USA
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 3:37:06 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By EzGoingKev:
I just checked the 47021 in my Gen3 pistol and it does contact the round in the magazine enough that it puts pressure on it. |
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 5:13:27 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By zwitterr:
gen 4 ejector in a gen 3 gun does the same thing but people do it all the time. I was not impressed with the results I was getting from the 47021 ejector anyways so I just swapped the 30274 back in. I would really like to see a Gen5 and see how it contacts the top round in the mag. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 7:00:54 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By EzGoingKev:
The 30274 ejector touches the top round in the mag. The 47021 ejector is actually pushing that round down requiring an increased effort to seat the magazine. I was not impressed with the results I was getting from the 47021 ejector anyways so I just swapped the 30274 back in. I would really like to see a Gen5 and see how it contacts the top round in the mag.  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 8:06:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: dntama]
[#11]
All the ejectors on my Glocks, gen 3 to 5, and 43 touch the top round. It puts some pressure but not a lot on the top round on my Gen 5s. The 336 does this the least as it is angled and pointed. I don’t think it’s a problem.
|
|
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 8:42:12 PM EDT
[#12]
IDK if it is a problem or not, I would like to see how much contact there is with a Gen5 pistol.
Either way, I was not impressed with how my Gen3 ejected rounds with the 47021 so I don't believe I will keep the 30274 installed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 8:50:45 PM EDT
[#13]
Need a machined ejector that can be tuned like a 1911. I think they have reached the limit of stamping metal.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 10:13:04 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dntama:
All the ejectors on my Glocks, gen 3 to 5, and 43 touch the top round. The 336 does this the least as it is angled and pointed. I don’t think it’s a problem. But that Gen 5 ejector.... awful. It literally put so much pressure on the top round that it pushed the stack down. I can't imagine what kind of unnecessary pressure that puts on the trigger housing  let alone the scraping of brass I experienced (while none with the Gen 4 ejectors).
No Gen 5 ejectors for me, it's a mess. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2018 11:14:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: BuckeyeRifleman]
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MaverickAA:
None of them touched in mine (2 Gen 2's, 2 PF940c's, 1 PF940sc) except for the Gen 5 ejector. That's why I tossed it and went back to gen 4 ejectors. The gen 4's are close, but no contact in mine. But that Gen 5 ejector.... awful. It literally put so much pressure on the top round that it pushed the stack down. I can't imagine what kind of unnecessary pressure that puts on the trigger housing let alone the scraping of brass I experienced (while none with the Gen 4 ejectors).
No Gen 5 ejectors for me, it's a mess.  Attached File Attached FileI can’t even remember which is which. A “mess”!? You are literally making up a problem where there is absolutely none. If you want to stick with the old 336 in your Glock go for it. This is a thread for folks who have issues and are looking for a solution. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2018 12:13:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: dntama]
[#16]
Actually when you think about it the top round also gets pressed even more by the bottom of the slide so may not even touch the ejector once the slide is forward. I don’t think the top round getting pressure by the ejector is an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2018 1:23:50 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dntama:
Actually when you think about it the top round also gets pressed even more by the bottom of the slide so may not even touch the ejector once the slide is forward. I don’t think the top round getting pressure by the ejector is an issue. I’m just cautioning that sometimes one “solution” can cause other issues previously not there. Until we know for sure, I’m sticking with the gen4 ejectors that do not press on the rounds (for non gen 5 guns). |
|
|
|
OR, USA
|
Posted: 12/19/2018 9:11:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Direct-Drive]
[#18]
Another problem that the 47021 ejector solves (for me) is that it makes it easier to reinstall the slide.
My Gen 3 G17's 336 would hook the end plate just outside the notch unless I put pressure on the slide to clear the 336 ejector. The 47021 doesn't interfere when mounting the slide after a field strip. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2018 11:03:25 PM EDT
[#19]
I took my new Glock 45 out today and with the 47021 ejector it came with and along with the new notch in the breech face it launches brass into the next county. I did find that if my high thumb hold rubs the slide stop, it will affect ejection.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2018 11:21:30 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 45FMJoe:
I took my new Glock 45 out today and with the 47021 ejector it came with and along with the new notch in the breech face it launches brass into the next county. I did find that if my high thumb hold rubs the slide stop, it will affect ejection. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2018 1:04:16 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BuckeyeRifleman: What is this notch you speak of?  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2018 1:06:48 AM EDT
[#22]
There is a relief cut into the slide that keeps the back of the case from rubbing against the slide during ejection.
Have heard some reports it can make ejecting an unfired or dud cartridge difficult, possibly because of reduced extractor tension, but have not tried one myself. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2018 11:17:09 AM EDT
[#23]
I am getting BTF with just about every shot from my Gen 4 17. I found this thread and ordered two 47021 ejectors for that 17 and for a new to me Gen 4 34. The assemblies I ordered were from Lone Wolf and they were marked 33667. These don't have the notch at the rear of the assembly for the trigger spring so I guessed I screwed up and ordered the wrong assembly. I read were you can just remover the ejector from the trigger housing assembly and put another in but that Glock doesn't recommend doing that. I did that and installed a 47021 ejector in my Gen 4 trigger housing. I had checked ejection patterns with dummy rounds manually working the slide before and after the swap and the new ejector seems to be working much better. I'll hopefully get to test it out in a couple of days.
The ejector that was in my G17 was a 30374. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2019 11:31:05 AM EDT
[#24]
BTT. Are there any issues with removing the ejector from the THG? No hi jack OP, I just didn’t want to start another thread to get an answer.
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/14/2019 11:51:15 PM EDT
[#25]
Just ordered 2 of the 47021's to test in my 3rd Gen 17/19. They're both running 30274's now which fixed the brass denting issue issue I had on the 19 and the BTF I was getting on the 17. The 17 had the newer dipped MIM extractor while the 19 had the older non-dipped style. The ejection on both are still somewhat weak and erratic with the 30274's so I will see how these run.
I never paid attention to the ejector making contact with the rounds in the magazine so hopefully it's not a concern. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 1/17/2019 11:12:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: OttoLoader]
[#26]
I have gen3 G26 (2011 manf) and gen 3 G19 (2014 manf).
The G26 has consistent ejection. The G19 was somewhat caring but no btf. My action Disassembled each slide. Compared extractors visually. The G19 had rough surface treatment (black coating) the G26 was better. So I cleaned them up with Flitz polish , by hand, no Dremel. Cleaned up all surface and paid attention to shiny contact points. I left the slide alone except cleaning it with breakfree CLP. Both have better more consistent ejectiontion pattern. I attributed the ejection problem due to extractor not holding the cartridge properly, maybe loose maybe tight. Result the spent cartridge "bounce" erratically in the chamber. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 7:33:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: swampvol]
[#27]
Tagged for interest.
Never had any issues with my G19.3 for 5-600 rounds other than an occasional piece of brass to the head every so often. Didn't really bother me, but now when using it in the MCK Roni, I'm almost certain that it is ejecting straight up and hitting the Roni's top frame and knocking the spent case back into the action. Seems to work fine with G17 mags, but with the 33 round mags I'm getting stove pipes a lot. I wonder if the Apex extractor would help too. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 8:08:25 PM EDT
[#28]
I replaced both of the 30274's in my 17 & 19 today with the newer 47021's. There was minor interference with the ejector and the rounds in the magazine with 30274's but it's more noticeable with the 47021 ejector. I don't suspect it will cause any problems unless your topping magazines that have a lot of spring pressure. The 33's rounders might be a challenge.
I will report the results once I get time to test. Anyone tried to swap the entire 5th gen trigger mechanism housing into a 3rd gen? The trigger spring system looks way different but looks like it could work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 11:36:26 PM EDT
[#29]
I've been experimenting with 3 different Poly80 builds (two 19's and one 26)I thought I had the first 19 fixed with the 30274 ejector but it was still giving brass to face. Tried the $55 Apex Extractor and thought it helped but the more I shot it I realized it really wasn't any better.
Latest effort is on the 26 build. Swapped out the 336 ejector for the 30274. No difference. Before I try the 47021, I replaced the OEM extractor with a Suarez "Extreme Reliability" billet one. ($40 on sale right now). Anybody else try one of these? I'll try it out this week and post an update. Suarez Extractor 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2019 10:44:42 AM EDT
[#30]
Originally Posted By tfod:
Need a machined ejector that can be tuned like a 1911. I think they have reached the limit of stamping metal. Originally Posted By twistedcomrade:
BTT. Are there any issues with removing the ejector from the THG? No hi jack OP, I just didn’t want to start another thread to get an answer. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 1/20/2019 6:04:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: kaneman23]
[#31]
I tested both the 17 and 19 today with the new 47021. The 47021 seems to perform better than the 30274. The ejection was noticeably stronger and more consistent similar to OP's video. I only fired about 80 rounds but the brass was in a nice pile at the end instead of spread all over. I also didn't notice any dents or other marks on the brass like the 336 produce with the 19. I'm going to stick with the 47021 for now unless any problems are encountered. So far the only negative seems to be slightly more interference than the 30274.
47021>30274>336 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2019 11:33:03 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alpharomeofifteen:
I've been experimenting with 3 different Poly80 builds (two 19's and one 26)I thought I had the first 19 fixed with the 30274 ejector but it was still giving brass to face. Tried the $55 Apex Extractor and thought it helped but the more I shot it I realized it really wasn't any better. Latest effort is on the 26 build. Swapped out the 336 ejector for the 30274. No difference. Before I try the 47021, I replaced the OEM extractor with a Suarez "Extreme Reliability" billet one. ($40 on sale right now). Anybody else try one of these? I'll try it out this week and post an update. Suarez Extractor https://i.imgur.com/2TAEWKP.jpg Let us know how the Suarez extractor works out for you. I tested my G17.4 and G34.4 with the new 47021 ejectors installed. It helped both pistols, but it seemed to help the 17 more than the 34. Having said that, neither pistol has what I would define as repeatable ejection, but at least the brass isn't going to my face. I guess my next step may be an extractor swap. I am really hoping this issue has been addressed on the Gen 5 guns. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2019 10:12:17 PM EDT
[#33]
Interesting thank you for sharing
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2019 11:42:10 PM EDT
[#34]
So far so good. Put about 40 rounds through it and ejection was strong. Brass to Face: 0%
Peppered the snow with brass about 3 feet from my right shoulder. Not exactly a nice pile of brass but it's better than eating it! I realized that I had swapped slides on this build with another 26 before I put the Suarez extractor in so tonight I swapped all my original parts back to the way they were when I was getting brass to face on nearly every round. I need to make sure the extractor is the only variable I changed. If this is really the fix I'll be buying a few more of these extractors for sure. I post more updates tomorrow if I'm able to test fire again..... 
|
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 1/22/2019 11:22:34 AM EDT
[#35]
Today, the OP is a winner!
Great thread! Great research! Great reference info! Mods, this deserves a sticky. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2019 7:22:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: alpharomeofifteen]
[#36]
'don't mean to turn the ejector thread into an extractor thread but the crux of the problem is brass to face and my own experience is that the ejector type has less to do with consistent, strong ejection than the extractor does.
Put another 40 rounds through with the Suarez extractor installed, with the rest of the pistol configured the way it was when I was getting hit with brass on almost every shot. Results- Brass to Face: 0% Another nice group of holes in the snow a few feet from my right shoulder. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2019 11:23:02 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alpharomeofifteen:
'don't mean to turn the ejector thread into an extractor thread but the crux of the problem is brass to face and my own experience is that the ejector type has less to do with consistent, strong ejection than the extractor does. Put another 40 rounds through with the Suarez extractor installed, with the rest of the pistol configured the way it was when I was getting hit with brass on almost every shot. Results- Brass to Face: 0% Another nice group of holes in the snow a few feet from my right shoulder. https://i.imgur.com/2ukwEJn.jpg |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2019 12:11:16 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By twistedcomrade: Thanks for updating. The Suarez extractor sounds like a winner. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2019 12:02:04 AM EDT
[#39]
How about an "old style" non-mim extractor like this one?
|
|
|
|
ME, USA
|
Posted: 1/24/2019 2:56:11 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By swampvol:
How about an "old style" non-mim extractor like this one? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2019 9:19:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: swampvol]
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By zwitterr: Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's only for Gen 2 guns. So did this erratic ejection start with late model Gen-3s and early model Gen-4s? Are the only differences between those and early model Gen-3s and revised Gen-4s the extractors and ejectors? I read somewhere that the late model Gen3 has a different slide and that is the real issue.?.?.? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2019 9:31:19 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By zwitterr:
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think that's only for Gen 2 guns. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By zwitterr:
Originally Posted By swampvol:
How about an "old style" non-mim extractor like this one? Correct me if I'm wrong but the only 2 differences between this and the current OEM SP01895 (15 degree, MIM) is that the older model extractor at the link (Part #98) has a 90 degree face (to mate with the 90 degree cut on older model slides) and it is machined from bar stock. I'm just parroting from the web. Need more expertise on this subject from experienced Glock armorers/shooters. Image stolen from interwebs: 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 11:08:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: swampvol]
[#43]
The 30274 ejector I ordered off ebay for $9 came in today.
Took me all of 5 minutes to replace the 336. For those wondering, you really only need to remove the pin in the grip to lift the housing up just enough to push the ejector out of the housing. Hopefully it cures the stove pipe issues I'm getting with the Roni and 33rnd mags. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 11:23:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: MaverickAA]
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alpharomeofifteen:
If you read the product Q&A at that link, the question is asked about fitting into a Gen 3 and the answer is yes, but no for Gen 4. Correct me if I'm wrong but the only 2 differences between this and the current OEM SP01895 (15 degree, MIM) is that the older model extractor at the link (Part #98) has a 90 degree face (to mate with the 90 degree cut on older model slides) and it is machined from bar stock. I'm just parroting from the web. Need more expertise on this subject from experienced Glock armorers/shooters. Image stolen from interwebs: https://i.imgur.com/HBeoAyE.png ETA: I'm not sure why Glock would have changed that, as there were no issues with the 90* early type (gen 1-2). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 10:02:53 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MaverickAA:
I just checked my 2 pin G19 gen 2, and that would be correct. My gen 2 has that 90* shoulder, while my gen 3's have the angled shoulder. ETA: I'm not sure why Glock would have changed that, as there were no issues with the 90* early type (gen 1-2). Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MaverickAA:
Originally Posted By alpharomeofifteen:
If you read the product Q&A at that link, the question is asked about fitting into a Gen 3 and the answer is yes, but no for Gen 4. Correct me if I'm wrong but the only 2 differences between this and the current OEM SP01895 (15 degree, MIM) is that the older model extractor at the link (Part #98) has a 90 degree face (to mate with the 90 degree cut on older model slides) and it is machined from bar stock. I'm just parroting from the web. Need more expertise on this subject from experienced Glock armorers/shooters. Image stolen from interwebs: https://i.imgur.com/HBeoAyE.png ETA: I'm not sure why Glock would have changed that, as there were no issues with the 90* early type (gen 1-2). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 10:21:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: alpharomeofifteen]
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alpharomeofifteen:
'don't mean to turn the ejector thread into an extractor thread but the crux of the problem is brass to face and my own experience is that the ejector type has less to do with consistent, strong ejection than the extractor does. Put another 40 rounds through with the Suarez extractor installed, with the rest of the pistol configured the way it was when I was getting hit with brass on almost every shot. Results- Brass to Face: 0% Another nice group of holes in the snow a few feet from my right shoulder. https://i.imgur.com/2ukwEJn.jpg This was a pistol that had weak ejection in general and every other case was ending up hitting my arms, face, down my shirt, or on the bill of my hat occasionally. I do not believe this was a "break in" problem. Suarez extractor cured it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 5:38:28 PM EDT
[#47]
Anyone know where I can get a 47021 ejector all I see are backorders.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 6:06:13 PM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 10:44:09 PM EDT
[#49]
Does the 47208 Ejector work with a G19/GEN4 ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 11:17:03 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By alpharomeofifteen:
I put another 100 rounds through it yesterday and I did not get even one empty case kicked back at me and every ejection was strong. This was a pistol that had weak ejection in general and every other case was ending up hitting my arms, face, down my shirt, or on the bill of my hat occasionally. I do not believe this was a "break in" problem. Suarez extractor cured it. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
