GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-10-2012, 15:12   #51
molar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 384
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhgeyer View Post
Success! But not the way I expected. The Fedex truck showed up this AM with, among other things, 2 new non-dipped extractors from Glock. I took one to the shop and did my best to imitate an old non-LCI type extractor. Took out the claw angle, cut the pad that spaces it to the frame more than I intended. I also made a Spring Loaded Bearing (SLB) with a much longer "head" to really tension the already 20% extra power White Sound Defense extractor depressor plunger spring (EDPS). I used my homemade extractor depressor plunger (EDP) (see pics above).

Well, got to the range and it didn't work. Gun didn't jam, but it still sent low power loads into my face.

Luckily I had brought the other new non-dip extractor with me. I installed that with my homemade EDP, the White Sound EDPS, and the SLB I had originally made with only a slightly longer "head" - probably about like a non-LCI SLB. This combination works perfectly! I put around a hundred rounds of everything from WWB to +P hollow points and it all went out up and to the right in a relatively normal pattern.

Now - hold your breath: I tried the "1911" test. Didn't think that would ever work. BUT IT DID!!!! About 20 times in a row!

Looking closely at the new non-dip extractor (NDE), I notice that a couple of things are different. The claw is a little closer to the breechface (are you listening MOLAR?). I haven't taken a measurement, but I could swear looking at them stacked up that the extractor itself is a bit longer at the back, which would put a little more tension on it.

It looks like Glock may finally have stepped up to the plate on this one. But, before I get too excited I guess I should wait and see how everyone else makes out with the new NDE. Just because it works in my gun doesn't mean it will work in everyone's. I also should try it with all stock parts in the tensioning channel. Right now none of them are.

I have lost interest in the Apex extractor. I hope Apex doesn't take a bath after all the development effort they put into their extractor. But it is clear to me that I don't need it. It is also clear to me that I was wrong in believing that the 17 degree angle on the claw was the major contributing problem.

So, I have a new theory about why some guns are developing problems after 800, 1000, or 2000 rounds. Maybe the extractor parts (extractor, EDP, EDPS, and SLB) are wearing out. Maybe they all, or some of them, need to be replaced periodically as routine maintenance.
I'm listening. I'm gonna have to order a new non-dip lci extractor if none of my other combos work.

Funny you mention extractor parts wearing out. Last night while I had my 3 9mm glocks stripped, I noticed that the EDP assembly was a few mm shorter in my 19 than my 17. The spring was compressed more, resulting in shorter overall length. Now, the interesting part is that my 19 only has 500 rounds through it, while the 17 has several thousand. I wonder if Glock got ahold of some incorrectly manufactured or weak EDP springs? This would not explain why most of the problems occur in the 19, though, as the EDP springs are standard across all models. It may be a contributing factor to those who experience BTF after several rounds, though.
molar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2012, 15:15   #52
Fire_Medic
CLM Number 261
Polymer Butcher
 
Fire_Medic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Gunshine State
Posts: 8,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhgeyer View Post
I called Glockparts.com LLC out in Bailey CO. Someone here told me that he had the new ones. It's in a thread somewhere. Anyway, when I called him I told him specifically not to send dipped extractors. He agreed. Told me he had just gotten a shipment in and, while he hadn't opened them, he assumed they would be the new style. Hope this helps.
I placed my order with them today thanks, I found the info in a thread over on M4C.

FM
__________________
Florida Glockers Club #2250, BHP Club #2250, Niners Club #2250, G1 Niners Club #2250, Black Rifle Club #2250, S&W Club #2250, 40SW Club #2250


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

RIP GioaJack!
Fire_Medic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2012, 19:25   #53
molar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 384
I just put calipers on the SLB's from my 19 and 17. The 19's SLB was shorter, but not by as much as I figured. It was 0.015" shorter. I have noticed that it is much easier to take the slide plate of the 19 than my 17 or 26. There can't be much extractor tension at all.
molar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 06:51   #54
dhgeyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by molar View Post
I just put calipers on the SLB's from my 19 and 17. The 19's SLB was shorter, but not by as much as I figured. It was 0.015" shorter. I have noticed that it is much easier to take the slide plate of the 19 than my 17 or 26. There can't be much extractor tension at all.
That was one of the first things I noticed when I first got my first Gen 4 19 (the one I finally gave up on), and the one I have now. I compared the extractor tension by just pushing it outward with my finger. I did this side by side with my CZ85 Combat, S&W M&P FS 9mm, and my Kahr CW9. The Glock's extractor tension is very weak. That is why the first thing I did was to make an SLB with longer "head" to compress the spring more. Then the stronger spring and my SLB.

The EDP is designed to contact and mate with the SLB, which limits the outward travel of the extractor. I still can't figure out if this "feature" is intended as an integral part of how the extractor is supposed to work. If it is, then it is one easy explanation as to why the guns start to fail after a while. The end of the SLB takes a beating and gets deformed fairly quickly.
dhgeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 12:28   #55
1wise1
Member
 
1wise1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Carrollton (Dallas) TX
Posts: 43
Seems to this impartial observer like this rises to the level of a candidate for sticky.. Would you guys consider additional photographs illustrating the differences in parts and damage?
And Fire_Medic, where did you find that thread? I can't locate it. Thanks
1wise1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 16:12   #56
Paul53
Geezer Boomer
 
Paul53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Rosa's Cantina
Posts: 3,817
FWIW: Gen 4 19, maybe 1 or 2% weak ejections, landing on my arm, but none to face. Has dipped extractor. Bought a Lone Wolf extractor (only) and was getting BTF so often the gun was unuseable. Back to the stock dipped extractor. SN #SFDXXX.
__________________
"A little learning is a dang'rous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, And drinking largely sobers us again."

Paul53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 06:24   #57
Southwind
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Southwest Indiana
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southwind View Post
... Here are some rough measurements of the force required to knock the casing loose from the extractor when the casing is just before contacting the ejector.

Stock extractor, stock SLB: 55 grams
Old nonLCI extractor, nonLCI SLB: 185 grams.

Some intermediate numbers:
Stock extractor, nonLCI SLB: 90 grams
nonLCI extractor, stock SLB: 135 grams

...
I thought reopening this thread would be as good a place as any for this observation. Randy Lee has posted instructions for fitting the Gen 3 G19 Apex extractor if necessary. In that post he says that the holding force should be 3.5 to 4 pounds which is 1500 plus grams, nearly 10 times what I got with the old extractor. As best I can tell from his picture, we are measuring the same thing. Wow!

Note that the gen 3 extractor has a nub added at the bottom of the claw to stop the downward travel of the spent brass so it isn't relying on the spring pressure alone to hold it in position. Looks to me like a really great solution.

The post I'm referring to is here:
http://www.apextactical.com/blog/ind...-g-fre-fitting
Southwind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 11:27   #58
bentbiker
NRA Member
 
bentbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 4,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southwind View Post
This link should work a bit better:
http://www.apextactical.com/blog/ind...g-fre-fitting/

Perhaps a little nub of epoxy would allow enough proof-of-concept testing (firing) with a specific problematic gun before committing to purchase of the Apex part.

Last edited by bentbiker; 11-29-2012 at 11:39..
bentbiker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2012, 13:34   #59
Southwind
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Southwest Indiana
Posts: 98
Thanks for the fix.
Southwind is offline   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

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 16:34.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,421
435 Members
986 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42