Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 3/5/2006 8:19:25 PM EDT
Well? I know the Glock 40 does not...anyone know about the HK line of handguns?

In all honesty, is this the reason why people claim glocks "blow up"?

Not trying to start stuff....just overheard a guy at the range talking about it, I ended up buying an HK P2000sk .40, he started telling me that it was a "good choice over the Glocks because they explode".

As a past owner of many glocks I never really knew the true explanation of this supported vs. non-supported chamber junk.
Link Posted: 3/5/2006 8:53:12 PM EDT
Heres proof that Glocks go "Kaboom"

Link Posted: 3/5/2006 8:54:24 PM EDT
Well, the USP .40, USPC .40, and P2000 .40 do, so I'd assume the P2KSK does as well.

If you remember...the USP .40 was/is I believe the only .40 handgun out there that was designed around the cartridge, as opposed to being a "scaled up" 9mm.

In other words, HK knows how to make a .40 :-)
Link Posted: 3/5/2006 8:55:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/5/2006 8:56:35 PM EDT by Marksman14]

Originally Posted By NickDrak:
Heres proof that Glocks go "Kaboom"
www.tinypic.com/qsjgxf.jpg
www.tinypic.com/qsjh4x.jpg



Now, please post the reason that those KB'd.

Those both look like double charges to me, and please also explain what would have happened to the user had they been fired through any other firearm...

Link Posted: 3/5/2006 9:05:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/5/2006 9:10:55 PM EDT by NickDrak]

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By NickDrak:
Heres proof that Glocks go "Kaboom"
www.tinypic.com/qsjgxf.jpg
www.tinypic.com/qsjh4x.jpg



Now, please post the reason that those KB'd.

Those both look like double charges to me, and please also explain what would have happened to the user had they been fired through any other firearm...




I dont need to explain why they exploded! I saw it on the errornet, so it has to be the truth

They were both from crap ammo. Thats my point! Dont go out and buy a Glock (or any other pistol for that matter) and shoot crap ammo through it. And when it ends up destroying your pistol, dont fabricate some BS rumor that all .40 Glocks are prone to explode due to a design flaw. If you feed your gun shit ammo, it will shit on you sooner or later. No matter what brand it is, or how much you paid for it.

HK's are fantastic pistols without a doubt. I just prefer the simplicity and the trigger of my G23.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 6:44:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Msokol13:
Well? I know the Glock 40 does not...anyone know about the HK line of handguns?

In all honesty, is this the reason why people claim glocks "blow up"?

Not trying to start stuff....just overheard a guy at the range talking about it, I ended up buying an HK P2000sk .40, he started telling me that it was a "good choice over the Glocks because they explode".

As a past owner of many glocks I never really knew the true explanation of this supported vs. non-supported chamber junk.



Smart man
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:01:27 AM EDT


You can see the standard .40 chamber support all HK's have in the bottom right corner.

Now look at the top left corner. That's the Glock's chamber. Notice the comparison between the two. Like night and day.

I've showed this picture before in a chamber support argument and I've had people say they couldn't tell the difference. For someone who knows what they're looking at, the difference is obvious.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 2:56:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KillAgain:

You can see the standard .40 chamber support all HK's have in the bottom right corner.

Now look at the top left corner. That's the Glock's chamber. Notice the comparison between the two. Like night and day.

I've showed this picture before in a chamber support argument and I've had people say they couldn't tell the difference. For someone who knows what they're looking at, the difference is obvious.



First of all, nothing has a "fully" supported chamber otherwise it wouldn't feed properly. The lack of, or shall I say "less" chamber support as evident in the Glock doesn't make the pistol any more prone to blowing up. In the case of the Glock, this and a slightly looser chamber helps reliability.

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 4:07:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

First of all, nothing has a "fully" supported chamber otherwise it wouldn't feed properly. The lack of, or shall I say "less" chamber support as evident in the Glock doesn't make the pistol any more prone to blowing up. In the case of the Glock, this and a slightly looser chamber helps reliability.

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.



That just makes too much damn sense to be true!
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 4:44:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

Originally Posted By KillAgain:

You can see the standard .40 chamber support all HK's have in the bottom right corner.

Now look at the top left corner. That's the Glock's chamber. Notice the comparison between the two. Like night and day.

I've showed this picture before in a chamber support argument and I've had people say they couldn't tell the difference. For someone who knows what they're looking at, the difference is obvious.



First of all, nothing has a "fully" supported chamber otherwise it wouldn't feed properly. The lack of, or shall I say "less" chamber support as evident in the Glock doesn't make the pistol any more prone to blowing up. In the case of the Glock, this and a slightly looser chamber helps reliability.

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.



I never called anything fully supported. If you actually read my quote you used....

And the lack of chamber support can cause hot loaded ammunition or weak brass to rupture the casing resulting in a KB.

I'm not sure if you understand why brass is used for casings for most ammunition, but I'll give you a hint. It has to do with rapid expansion of the metal.

Look at the pictures Nick Drak troll posted of the HK that shot an overcharged round. Look at the casing, see the part where the casing ruptured? That is the weakest point of a casing.

Now think about a casing expanding in an HK chamber where the weakest part of the casing is surrounded by steel as opposed to the Glock barrel where there is very little backing.

Do you understand? Without proper backing the brass can possibly expand until it ruptures. Especially if there isn't any backing on the weakest part of the casing.

That being said, grossly over charged loads will cause any gun to Kaboom. But without proper chamber support, the gun is only as reliable as the brass.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 12:18:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KillAgain:

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

Originally Posted By KillAgain:

You can see the standard .40 chamber support all HK's have in the bottom right corner.

Now look at the top left corner. That's the Glock's chamber. Notice the comparison between the two. Like night and day.

I've showed this picture before in a chamber support argument and I've had people say they couldn't tell the difference. For someone who knows what they're looking at, the difference is obvious.



First of all, nothing has a "fully" supported chamber otherwise it wouldn't feed properly. The lack of, or shall I say "less" chamber support as evident in the Glock doesn't make the pistol any more prone to blowing up. In the case of the Glock, this and a slightly looser chamber helps reliability.

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.



I never called anything fully supported. If you actually read my quote you used....



I never claimed you did. I was merely making a statement that pertained to the topic of the thread.



I'm not sure if you understand why brass is used for casings for most ammunition, but I'll give you a hint. It has to do with rapid expansion of the metal.



I think you lost me, Im not very technical



That being said, grossly over charged loads will cause any gun to Kaboom. But without proper chamber support, the gun is only as reliable as the brass.



That's right, the gun is only reliable as the brass so we're talking about "case failure" here. Even with a lack of case support, as in the case of the Glock, if one shoots good ammo, there's not a problem.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 3:19:07 PM EDT

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.


You are so off base with that statement. The extractor does not have any role in determing headspace. The cartridge headspaces on the mouth edge, that is why you cannot roll crimp the 9mm, .357 SIG, .40, or .45 ACP. The mouth of the case rests against the chamber edge, that determines how far the round goes into the barrel. The extractor has nothing to do with it.

On another note:
Only a fool would say you can not blow up a HK or any other gun for that matter. It is just that the more support you give a cartridge from the web forward the more pressure it is going to take to blow the head out of the case. Once the head blows, the gun, be it HK, GLOCK, or SIG is going to KB. The farther up the case wall from the extractor groove that the case is unsupported the more likely it is to blow in that area and do so at a lower pressure. As the case wall extends up the side of the case from the web the thinner the case wall gets. So the longer the unsupported area the less pressure it is going to take to blow the case. That is why a fully supported chamber will withstand pressures that will blow a case head in a not fully supported chamber. But if you try hard enough you can blow any gun out there.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 5:44:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Big-Bore:

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.


You are so off base with that statement. The extractor does not have any role in determing headspace. The cartridge headspaces on the mouth edge, that is why you cannot roll crimp the 9mm, .357 SIG, .40, or .45 ACP. The mouth of the case rests against the chamber edge, that determines how far the round goes into the barrel. The extractor has nothing to do with it.

On another note:
Only a fool would say you can not blow up a HK or any other gun for that matter. It is just that the more support you give a cartridge from the web forward the more pressure it is going to take to blow the head out of the case. Once the head blows, the gun, be it HK, GLOCK, or SIG is going to KB. The farther up the case wall from the extractor groove that the case is unsupported the more likely it is to blow in that area and do so at a lower pressure. As the case wall extends up the side of the case from the web the thinner the case wall gets. So the longer the unsupported area the less pressure it is going to take to blow the case. That is why a fully supported chamber will withstand pressures that will blow a case head in a not fully supported chamber. But if you try hard enough you can blow any gun out there.



Thanks BIG-BORE, that is the answer I am looking for.
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 5:47:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

I think you lost me, Im not very technical



We can tell.



That's right, the gun is only reliable as the brass so we're talking about "case failure" here. Even with a lack of case support, as in the case of the Glock, if one shoots good ammo, there's not a problem.



Actually I was talking about chamber support.

In fact read above in your post where you quoted me.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 3:43:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 9:54:08 AM EDT by BrianNH]

Originally Posted By Big-Bore:

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.


You are so off base with that statement. The extractor does not have any role in determing headspace. The cartridge headspaces on the mouth edge, that is why you cannot roll crimp the 9mm, .357 SIG, .40, or .45 ACP. The mouth of the case rests against the chamber edge, that determines how far the round goes into the barrel. The extractor has nothing to do with it.



Really ? The extractor has NOTHING to do with headspace you say??? Do you really think that every time a cartridge is chambered that it is stuffed all the way in until it bottoms out in the chamber edge as they are in the photos? Your statement (above) that the mouth of the case resting against the chamber edge is what determines how far the cartridge goes in the barrel is WAY off base. You my friend clearly mis-understand what is happening inside your pistol, but I'll help. There are some misconceptions about headspacing off the case mouth, it isn't exactly as you describe it.

Semi auto, rimless, straight wall cases do headspace off the case mouth, however, headspacing is controlled by the case length, and not because it's bottoming out the ledge in the chamber as you described, but because the extractor is holding the rim against the breechface. What if one handloads, and say their case dimension is say, .050 too short? Do you think in that scenario the case will rest against the chamber edge? It doesn't because the extractor wont let it go that far forward.

Take a 1911 for example, pull the slide off and slide a cartridge under the extractor. Stare at it for a while and think about it. When that cartridge is chambered, that's as far forward as it will go.

Maybe this might help.

A glance at the SAAMI drawings for cartridges and chambers reveals a source of confusion. They are conveniently shown one above the other with bunches of dimensions, but the only two we care about here are case length and chamber depth. Since the .45 ACP is everyone's favorite cartridge let's use it as an example. The .45 ACP cartridge drawing shows a dimension of .898" with a tolerance of -.010". In other words a case that measures anywhere between .898" and .888" is okay and it isn't unusual to find them even shorter.

Now let's add a complication in the form of the extractor. If the extractor wasn't there every case would go into the chamber until it hit bottom and it really would headspace on the case mouth. Of course it might not go bang then either. Given the variables in cases and chambers there might not be enough firing pin protrusion to hit the primer.

So how the heck does the good-old .45 manage to go bang so reliably? It's simply because it has a good extractor. When the round is stripped from the magazine it slides under the extractor hook and is held against the breech face. Unless the slop between the rim thickness and the width of the cut in the extractor is greater than the firing pin protrusion, the gun can't help but go bang. Imagine that. Ain't conventional wisdom grand?
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 2:08:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KillAgain:

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

I think you lost me, Im not very technical



We can tell.








It's all about the sarcasm.

Subtlety is lost on this board
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 9:11:50 AM EDT
Is it just me or has anyone noticed the KB gun pictures posted aren't Glocks? Glocks don't have exposed hammers for one thing, actually they don't have a hammer at all. The second one looks to have some type of safety mechanism on the rear of the grip near the slide. And in picture #4, the logo on the side of the barrel looks an awful lot like HK.

Even so, there is no such thing in a semi auto handgun as a fully supported chamber, just that some are more supported than others. There can also be issues with brass, that's why it's strongly recommended to shoot only modern brass in the 45LC. Old stuff was balloon head construction and could fail in that area. If you take some time and section several different brands of brass, you'll find that the amount of material in the bottom of the case where the primer goes varies considerably. If you were into handloading, you'd notice that differing case brands have different case capacity. Ever wonder why? And finally, no gun is KB proof. I had a KB in a 1911. The ammo was reloads from a local police supply and supposedly good stuff. I found the one double charge. Even major manufacturers aren't immune from this. There is a reason you are urged to wear safety glasses while shooting.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 9:27:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NickDrak:
Heres proof that Glocks go "Kaboom"
www.tinypic.com/qsjgxf.jpg
www.tinypic.com/qsjh4x.jpg



Am I missing the joke here.... those are both HK'ss, not Glocks.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 9:34:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 3gundave:
Is it just me or has anyone noticed the KB gun pictures posted aren't Glocks? Glocks don't have exposed hammers for one thing, actually they don't have a hammer at all. The second one looks to have some type of safety mechanism on the rear of the grip near the slide. And in picture #4, the logo on the side of the barrel looks an awful lot like HK.



LOL. That's kind of a joke. You know, Glocks always Kaboom, right? Of course the pictures are of a USP45FS and USPC45 relabelled as "Glocks".

Subtlety was lost.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 9:36:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By pathfinder74:
Am I missing the joke here....



Yes.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 12:43:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

Originally Posted By KillAgain:

You can see the standard .40 chamber support all HK's have in the bottom right corner.

Now look at the top left corner. That's the Glock's chamber. Notice the comparison between the two. Like night and day.

I've showed this picture before in a chamber support argument and I've had people say they couldn't tell the difference. For someone who knows what they're looking at, the difference is obvious.



First of all, nothing has a "fully" supported chamber otherwise it wouldn't feed properly. The lack of, or shall I say "less" chamber support as evident in the Glock doesn't make the pistol any more prone to blowing up. In the case of the Glock, this and a slightly looser chamber helps reliability.

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.



+ 1
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 12:50:20 PM EDT
Sometimes subtley is totally wasted on us old guys.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 5:33:25 PM EDT
Steyr M40 was as well



Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Well, the USP .40, USPC .40, and P2000 .40 do, so I'd assume the P2KSK does as well.

If you remember...the USP .40 was/is I believe the only .40 handgun out there that was designed around the cartridge, as opposed to being a "scaled up" 9mm.

In other words, HK knows how to make a .40 :-)

Link Posted: 3/11/2006 8:08:57 AM EDT
No, the extractor does not determine headspace, never has, never will, at least not under the current design. If you remove the extractor from a pistol the pistol will still fire. I’ve done it too many times when fire-lapping semis with rough bores. The extractor is designed to do nothing but just what its name says, it extracts. Yes, secondarily it does help hold the cartridge against the face of the bolt but it does not have as its primary roll of firing the round as you say by holding it against the bolt face. There is a range of +-measurements determined by SAAMI and there is a range of protrusion allowed for the firing pin. This all works together to make the gun go boom when you pull the trigger even if there is no extractor in the pistol. For example, a HK-P7 will often run just fine with no extractor at all. Not recommended but it will more often than not run just fine until the flutes get filled with carbon, but I digress. If the cartridges are within spec and the chamber is within spec you can remove the extractor from any gun out there and it will still fire just fine. If it was the extractor’s job of holding the round against the bolt face for firing then what would be the need for the cut in the chamber for the round to headspace on? And if you did not need the round to headspace on this cut then why does EVERY SINGLE reloading manual warn against roll crimping rounds that headspace on the mouth. If it were as you say then the rounds would headspace on the extractor and you could roll crimp to your hearts desire, but they do not. Furthermore, are not most extractors spring loaded that allows for in, out, as well as some fore and aft movement? How could that be good for maintaining consistent headspace?
No, if the chamber is cut correctly and the ammo is within spec the mouth of the case will butt up against the headspacing shoulder cut into the chamber. Any reloader will tell you what will happen if you run a too short a case into a chamber where it is designed to headspace on the mouth. If what you say is correct then you could make .357 SIG cases by running the .40 S&W case into a .357 SIG sizing die, and you cannot. They come out too short, go into the chamber too far, and extractor be damned misfires occur.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 8:55:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By cyclone:
Steyr M40 was as well



Originally Posted By Marksman14:
Well, the USP .40, USPC .40, and P2000 .40 do, so I'd assume the P2KSK does as well.

If you remember...the USP .40 was/is I believe the only .40 handgun out there that was designed around the cartridge, as opposed to being a "scaled up" 9mm.

In other words, HK knows how to make a .40 :-)




Second that....

The Steyr was designed around the .40
Then it was scaled down to the 9mm
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 12:52:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pathfinder74:

Originally Posted By NickDrak:
Heres proof that Glocks go "Kaboom"
www.tinypic.com/qsjgxf.jpg
www.tinypic.com/qsjh4x.jpg



Am I missing the joke here.... those are both HK'ss, not Glocks.



Yeah, its a joke called trolling. Both of those happened with double charged rounds. I'd post pictures of what happens to a Glock when a double charge occurs, but we already know what happens.

They end up in about 3-4 peices, and make me wonder what happened to the poor guy shooting it.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 12:56:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Big-Bore:
No, the extractor does not determine headspace, never has, never will, at least not under the current design. If you remove the extractor from a pistol the pistol will still fire. I’ve done it too many times when fire-lapping semis with rough bores. The extractor is designed to do nothing but just what its name says, it extracts. Yes, secondarily it does help hold the cartridge against the face of the bolt but it does not have as its primary roll of firing the round as you say by holding it against the bolt face. There is a range of +-measurements determined by SAAMI and there is a range of protrusion allowed for the firing pin. This all works together to make the gun go boom when you pull the trigger even if there is no extractor in the pistol. For example, a HK-P7 will often run just fine with no extractor at all. Not recommended but it will more often than not run just fine until the flutes get filled with carbon, but I digress. If the cartridges are within spec and the chamber is within spec you can remove the extractor from any gun out there and it will still fire just fine. If it was the extractor’s job of holding the round against the bolt face for firing then what would be the need for the cut in the chamber for the round to headspace on? And if you did not need the round to headspace on this cut then why does EVERY SINGLE reloading manual warn against roll crimping rounds that headspace on the mouth. If it were as you say then the rounds would headspace on the extractor and you could roll crimp to your hearts desire, but they do not. Furthermore, are not most extractors spring loaded that allows for in, out, as well as some fore and aft movement? How could that be good for maintaining consistent headspace?
No, if the chamber is cut correctly and the ammo is within spec the mouth of the case will butt up against the headspacing shoulder cut into the chamber. Any reloader will tell you what will happen if you run a too short a case into a chamber where it is designed to headspace on the mouth. If what you say is correct then you could make .357 SIG cases by running the .40 S&W case into a .357 SIG sizing die, and you cannot. They come out too short, go into the chamber too far, and extractor be damned misfires occur.



You know what guys? He's right.

So...that gets a good old huge +1

Also, interesting note about the Steyr. I was unaware. I always liked those things, I like to think of them as a product improved Glock. Probably going to be one of my next purchases, only in 9mm flavor.
Link Posted: 3/11/2006 3:05:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/11/2006 3:45:20 PM EDT by smoken44]

Originally Posted By BrianNH:

Originally Posted By Big-Bore:

While the pics are good, and do show basic differences, they aren't totally accurate because the cartridges are sitting in deeper than they would be if an extractor was holding them.


You are so off base with that statement. The extractor does not have any role in determing headspace. The cartridge headspaces on the mouth edge, that is why you cannot roll crimp the 9mm, .357 SIG, .40, or .45 ACP. The mouth of the case rests against the chamber edge, that determines how far the round goes into the barrel. The extractor has nothing to do with it.



Really ? The extractor has NOTHING to do with headspace you say??? Do you really think that every time a cartridge is chambered that it is stuffed all the way in until it bottoms out in the chamber edge as they are in the photos? Your statement (above) that the mouth of the case resting against the chamber edge is what determines how far the cartridge goes in the barrel is WAY off base. You my friend clearly mis-understand what is happening inside your pistol, but I'll help. There are some misconceptions about headspacing off the case mouth, it isn't exactly as you describe it.

Semi auto, rimless, straight wall cases do headspace off the case mouth, however, headspacing is controlled by the case length, and not because it's bottoming out the ledge in the chamber as you described, but because the extractor is holding the rim against the breechface. What if one handloads, and say their case dimension is say, .050 too short? Do you think in that scenario the case will rest against the chamber edge? It doesn't because the extractor wont let it go that far forward.

Take a 1911 for example, pull the slide off and slide a cartridge under the extractor. Stare at it for a while and think about it. When that cartridge is chambered, that's as far forward as it will go.

Maybe this might help.

A glance at the SAAMI drawings for cartridges and chambers reveals a source of confusion. They are conveniently shown one above the other with bunches of dimensions, but the only two we care about here are case length and chamber depth. Since the .45 ACP is everyone's favorite cartridge let's use it as an example. The .45 ACP cartridge drawing shows a dimension of .898" with a tolerance of -.010". In other words a case that measures anywhere between .898" and .888" is okay and it isn't unusual to find them even shorter.

Now let's add a complication in the form of the extractor. If the extractor wasn't there every case would go into the chamber until it hit bottom and it really would headspace on the case mouth. Of course it might not go bang then either. Given the variables in cases and chambers there might not be enough firing pin protrusion to hit the primer.

So how the heck does the good-old .45 manage to go bang so reliably? It's simply because it has a good extractor. When the round is stripped from the magazine it slides under the extractor hook and is held against the breech face.Unless the slop between the rim thickness and the width of the cut in the extractor is greater than the firing pin protrusion, the gun can't help but go bang. Imagine that. Ain't conventional wisdom grand?




Brian is correct in stateing that the extractor does control headspace to a certain extent. A Glock 10mm will fire 40 SW........which has appproximately 1/4" shorter case. How is this possible you say? When the round is stripped from the magazine it slides under the extractor hook and is held against the breech face. The 40 SW sure as hell isn't headspaceing off the mouth. Would I fire thousands of rounds.......uh no. You would probably be changing extractors on a regular basis. Use the correct chamber for whatever you are shooting.

Glocks have pretty beefy extractors......I have no idea how another brand would fare useing the above scenario.

Top Top