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



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-14-2012, 07:55   #1
HAMMERHEAD
Senior Member
 
HAMMERHEAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 4,711
When did Glock change it's .40s&w chambers?

I'm in the market for a used Glock 23, and since I handload, I want to find one built after Glock tightened up the chambers.
No, I'm not worried about KB's, I just want the improved chambers to reduce wear and tear on the brass. I'll be buying off Gunbroker, so there's no way to check other than by knowing what year to look for.
I don't want a new one, and I'm not interested in an aftermarket barrel.
So, does anyone know what year or serial number prefix started the improved chambers?
Thanks.
HAMMERHEAD is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 08:04   #2
Arc Angel
Deus Vult!
 
Arc Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 10,956
Blog Entries: 55
Tighter 40 caliber chamber mouths first came to my attention somewhere around late 2005. Buying older used 40 caliber Glocks, sight unseen and unexamined, is NOT the smartest move you could make. (I would hope you realize that - when it comes to mysterious 40 caliber Glock, 'kaBoom! problems' you've got a lot more to consider than just the chamber mouths - Yes?)
Arc Angel is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 08:19   #3
HAMMERHEAD
Senior Member
 
HAMMERHEAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 4,711
Thanks much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arc Angel View Post
Tighter 40 caliber chamber mouths first came to my attention somewhere around late 2005. Buying older used 40 caliber Glocks, sight unseen and unexamined, is NOT the smartest move you could make. (I would hope you realize that - when it comes to mysterious 40 caliber Glock, 'kaBoom! problems' you've got a lot more to consider than just the chamber mouths - Yes?)
Yes, not just chambers, but why buy one with the old chamber?
No used guns around here to look at, but there some very affordable 23s on GB.
Thanks AA
HAMMERHEAD is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 08:34   #4
vmann
Controller
 
vmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,761
my ****ty old 2001 23 has thousands of rounds though it....no issues....what a piece of junk
__________________
19 OD,22,23,27, Taurus PT101FS, Sig P226, S&W 4006

U.S. ARMY
vmann is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 08:36   #5
SJ 40
Senior Member
 
SJ 40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 7,026
I have a G 22 from 2002,it has what I would call a very generous chamber.
I also have a G 22 from 2006,it's chamber is much less generous than the 02. While no where near match grade it's still night and day improvement on my 02.
What I see from those two dates that I have squares with what Arc Angels findings reveal.
SJ 40
SJ 40 is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:14   #6
HAMMERHEAD
Senior Member
 
HAMMERHEAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 4,711
Thanks SJ 40.
The tighter chambers generally do help at the 25 yard line and beyond IME. I had an old E series G-35 with a 'generous' chamber that had very poor accuracy. None of us, including our club's IDPA champion, could get it to shoot any better than 5" at 25 yards. My E series G-20 was a tack driver by comparison.
I'm not going to shoot NRA bullseye with the 23, but I do like plinking at 25 and 50 yards. Handloads will be at modest pressure using slow powders and well inspected brass.
HAMMERHEAD is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:23   #7
tacmc6
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Florida panhandle
Posts: 86
kaboom factor

I have a 2001 G22 and a 2005 G23 that were duty weapons. Now retired I still shoot them frequently. Is there anything I need to watch ref. the "kaboom" factor other than keeping them clean? I shoot mainly WWB 165gr and Winchester Ranger 180gr., no reloads. THANKS
tacmc6 is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:30   #8
HAMMERHEAD
Senior Member
 
HAMMERHEAD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 4,711
AFAIK, most kabooms are caused by faulty handloads - weak brass, overcharges, etc...
Keep your springs fresh and use quality ammo, they should run like they always have.
HAMMERHEAD is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:58   #9
Arc Angel
Deus Vult!
 
Arc Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 10,956
Blog Entries: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAMMERHEAD View Post
AFAIK, most kabooms are caused by faulty handloads - weak brass, overcharges, etc...
Keep your springs fresh and use quality ammo, they should run like they always have.
First, you're welcome! Second, I am so tired of getting into stupid internet arguments over this topic that I hesitate to post any further on it; however, for you I'm going to make an exception:

1. You have to be careful which powder you reload with. If it has an unusually high, 'pressure spike' to it (like, say, Accurate Arms #5) then it's not going to get along well with Glock 40 caliber pistols.

2. Any 40 caliber Glock that has even the slightest tendency to EITHER (a.) fail to completely return to, or (b.) fire out-of-battery can turn out to be a problem.

3. I remain leery of the tendency for 40 caliber Glocks to peen the underside of the slide. Personally, I've always agreed with those gunmen who took the time to file down the protuding, 'fingers' on their G: 22, 23, & 27 lock blocks.

4. With the possible exception of 10mm and 357 SIG models, I am positive that harmonic polymer frame vibration has more of an adverse effect on 40 caliber Glocks than it does on other calibers.

5. I, also, suspect - but I have no way of definitely proving - that older Glock polymer frames, 'vibrate' more than newer ones. I have, also, noticed that many large police departments don't continue to field their polymer frame pistols much after 7 or 8 years - Many after only 5 or 6. (No, I don't know, 'Why'? It's just something I've noticed.)

Like I said, I don't care what someone else does with his Glock; and I'm not going to waste my time or intellect arguing any further on this topic. The world is full of fools and their opinions. Neither you, nor I are going to change that.
Arc Angel is offline  
Old 10-14-2012, 11:24   #10
SJ 40
Senior Member
 
SJ 40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 7,026
Hammerhead

I took some measurements of my barrels at the chambers approximately 1/8" deep in the chambers of both barrels.I know not the best means or device for exact measurements but what I have on hand without melting some Cerosafe.
Prefix FCG 2002- 0.429
Prefix KBW 2006-0.425
Measurements taken from 3 o'clock to 9 o'clock,side to side.
That said I consider both guns more than accurate,not bullseye guns but I am pleased with their accuracy. SJ 40
SJ 40 is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

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 17:27.




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


Users Currently Online: 1,256
353 Members
903 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42