Posted: 3/21/2005 8:51:02 AM EDT
|
How wide spread was/is the problem with Glock slide rails? Was reading thegunzone.com and there it was made to sound like a pretty widespread problem. Maybe depending on model? Also does anyone have a serial number range for the affected pistols? Lastly, how sensitive are Glocks to different makes of ammunition as well as reloads, hot loads, etc? I know this is somewhat subjective, but I've owned numerous Rugers and they will digest just about anything you put in them with no problems. It seems that I keep reading about Glocks and catastrophic failures (KB'ing?) when used with certain ammo, or (worse?) just because. I've run across a few arguments concerning these topics, and I don't mean to start any more. Just looking for some on the level info. |
First of all, I wouldn't put too much stock in anything that thegunzone.com has to say. Those are the same folks that "broke" the story of the USMC purchasing 10,000 G37s  I can't recall seeing any issues with the slide rails in the past two years (at least). That's not to say it doesn't happen but if even one issue showed up I'm sure the anti-Glock gang would drag it up every time someone even mentioned "Glock".If you are interested in finding out about KaBooms, read this link first: A brief primer on Kabooms That should clear up all the misconceptions that get spread around by the online experts. Generally most problems occur with the G22 because of the high pressure .40 round. I suspect that most failures are caused by the case rupturing at the 6 oclock position due to weak brass. I don't consider a case rupture a KaBoom but we'll save that for another thread  My G17 & G19 have eaten everything I've fed it: Wolf, WWB, UMC, Blazer, Blazer Brass, Magtech, Federal, reloads, and American to name a few. |
There were a few Glocks in the "E" serial prefix range that the rails could break. You can check out GSSF Online for more information about the manufacturing defect. |
A fair number of Glocks in the E series have been affected by the "upgrade". Out of all the S/N's they are calling back only a very small percentage will actually have a problem however they are calling entire ranges of S/.N's back just as a precautionary measure. If you have a particular model you are concerned about, call Glock and they will advise you what to do. Glocks will feed just about everything you put in them, however, they may not like everything. Play it safe and stick to quality, current mfg. SAAMI spec ammo. Forget uncle Bobs reloads. If you must reload - buy an aftermarket barrel which will be more tolerant of a potential case failure. |
| The Frame Replacement Program was instituted in response to a limited number of pistols made between Sept 01 and Feb 02 shearing off the rear frame rails. If your serial no starts with an E, give GLOCK, Inc a call and ask for Tech Services, if you send it in, lemme know. |
|
It's one thing for a source to be ignorant/incompetent, but add dishonest to the mix and you get The Gun Zone. Speir's a pathological prevaricator. Of course my experiences are merely anecdotal and not scientific, but I've fired well over 150,000 of my reloads (all fmj's or plated bullets) through my 9mm and .45ACP Glocks. I can honestly say that EVERY SINGLE failure to feed or fire (and there've only been a few) was my fault. You'd think that Glock's "design flaws" would have raised their ugly heads at least once out of 150,000+ of my reloads. I have experienced a KB. Rather than blame Glock, I accepted responsbility, as I was (1) shooting .400 Cor-Bon reloads through an aftermarket barrel, and (2) was using powder that was too fast, with a heavy bullet, and (3) let a feedramp setback get by me. Although the incident was clearly my fault, Glock sold me a replacement G21 for $250, plus taxes; let me keep my original G21 barrel as a spare; threw in a new set of Trijicons; returned my aftermarket connector; returned my blown-up barrel and .400 Cor-Bon case. I couldn't have dreamed of better treatment from a firearms manufacturer. I recently was privileged to have been offered one of the (maybe the only) Glock factory .400 Cor-Bon barrel for a G21, for playing around with for a few weeks. I fired a few hundred rounds of my .400 Cor-Bon reloads through the barrel, with excellent accuracy and no negative experiences at all. |
|
I don't own a thesaurus and realized pretty quickly that the information provided by Speir was horseshit. I don't waste mouse clicking energy dropping by his pathetic site any longer and haven't for some time. When I first visited the illustrious subject site, he was displaying a picture of a KB'd Glock that had "blown up due to Glock's lack of chamber support, blah, blah, blah." A cursory examination of the picture revealed an aftermarket barrel. I did waste a few moments of my time on a few occasions probing ol' Dean to test his knowledge of firearms. I found his knowledge and his reasoning ability to be lacking. He apparently has less than a rudimentary understanding of h.s. physics, as he has maintained in several posts that a case blow-out caused by out-of-battery firing would result in a major KB, such as a split barrel, damaged slide, etc. More horseshit. (Hows that for thesaurus verbage?  )I've followed your frame rail saga and am disappointed in your treatment by Glock. Glock's been inconsistent in their treatment of their customers regarding the recall. I don't consider the frame rail issue to be an upgrade. They manufactured "X" number of frames with defective rails. One doesn't "upgrade" a part that was manufactured incorrectly, one recalls and replaces that part, assuming that repair isn't feasible/possible. I'd still be screaming, if I were you, regarding your having to pay for shipping to Glock for your frame replacement. Oh, my discussing firearms with Dean Speir would be tantamount to Einstein's discussing physics with Forrest Gump. I never can remember whether Gump's name has one "r" or two. Re: Glock's chamber design, etc.: I've fired well over 150,000 rounds of my reloads through my Glocks, with no design-related problems. Wouldn't you think that I'd have had SOME problems, had Glock's design been faulty? Contrary to certain Oregon p.d. employees, I'm honest, to a fault. |
I edited out some of WalterGA's post for succinctness. Hope no one is offended. WalterGA, have you reloaded for the .40 caliber Glocks? Some of the readings I've run across indicate that the bulk of the problem seems to lie with the .40 caliber pistols. The consensus being that the Glock design is safe with 9mm, but with calibers >= .40 your on the edge safety wise. It would seem to me that the fact that no one is reporting very many problems with .45's undermines this theory. Anyway, I put a down payment on a Glock 35. I was originally looking for a 34, but I think that as I (hopefully) move through the ranks of IPSC and IDPA the .40 will be more useful in the long term than the 9mm. Thanks again for all the posts. |
|
Spiff, The main issue with the .40 S&W is the tremendous chamber pressures involved. That is why there is no SAAMI spec for .40 +P. Because of that, it becomes crucial not to use reloads in the .40, on occasion over charged reloads get fired, increasing the chamber pressures and a KB happens. |
Nope, I don't/won't reload .40's. The fallacy of the greater-than-9mm caveats from such "sources" as The Gun Zone is that the .45ACP is a low-pressure round, and in no way relates to the problems incurred in reloading .40's. You just don't have as much margin for error in the .40's. Wingnut's pretty much nailed it. I have reloaded over 10,000 .400 Cor-Bons and 3000 .40 Supers, for shooting through my G21 and G30. With the exception of a few that were shot through a Glock factory .400 Cor-Bon barrel, they were all shot through aftermarket barrels, of course. |
Wingnut - There is data out there that claims this situation is worsened with the use of heavier .40 loads such as the 180 grainers, and that it is best to use lighter bullets in .40 cal such as the 165g's whether they are reloads or not. What's your take on this? |
|
I think the concensus is to be viligant on the calibers around which the Glock was not originally designed. That is, .40 on the small frame, and .45 on the large frame. Think about it. Anyone objectively reading the Zone's Glock info will note a dearth of kBs regarding models in the MILLIMETER chamberings. Not unheard of, but certainly not on the scale of those models beginning with a point-FOUR. The second(forward) frame pin came about due to the earliest G22s taking a beating. Mind you, Glock is not alone in this, as I feel the same issue plagues every 9mm model which was re-designed around the new wonder-round in the 90's. Most have beefed-up the weight of the slide, as well as heavier recoil-spring systems. Every .40 I've owned, or shot, has exhibited signs on the brass which leave me leery. Primer wipe, indication the pin was not yet fully withdrawn from the strike..... Bulged brass near the case head, regardless of the level of chamber support in the barrel....... Undue wear of the finish on the frame, right at the limit of the slides travel during recoil.... I've never been a fan of the .40, both for this reason, and the added recoil and muzzle flip. For less recoil, and muzzle rise, one can also have a bigger bullet in the .45. Until the double-stack Glocks, and other makers models, all you had to sacrifice to the 9mm was capacity. For equal recoil(OK, that's pushing it), and flip, you can have the power of the 10mm. Where does the .357 Sig fit into this equation? I'm wondering if the powder charges are compressed, thus helping to prevent bullet set-back that may be one of the things that plague the .40 & .45? |
| Victor Louis: Not to be contentious, but nothing has plagued the Glock .45's. Your source is fallacious. I personally don't believe that there's EVER been a KB with a Glock 45ACP that wasn't the result of an overcharge or bad brass. My experience in reloading .45ACP's for Glock .45's is probably 10,000 greater than that of Dean Speir. |