close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Video: Stock 9mm Extractor Vs. LWD 9mm Extractor

Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by JBarbaresi, Jun 11, 2011.

  1. My Gen4 G19 has a prefix of PYX and was test fired in Sept 2010, and came stock with the 0-3 RSA which is still the RSA I am using. To date it has well over 3,000 rounds through it without a single malfunction, failure, or stoppage (when I was the shooter). A majority of the rounds were 115gr WWB and 115gr Federal Champion, however it has also seen its fair share of 147gr Winchester Super X BEB, 124gr Federal HST, and 147gr Federal HST. It is by far my favorite handgun I currently own, as well as my favorite Glock I currently or previously have owned because I favor the short frame and the RTF3 grip texture. I trust it with my life and carry it with me every day. My only "complaint" is that with some of the weaker loads it has a tendency to eject brass straight back at my head and often times even throws it to the left. Not a big deal, more annoying than anything else.

    Honestly, my intention with this video was to order a LWD extractor and film the ejection pattern consistency of the OEM one back to back with the aftermarket one, proving once and for all that the "issues" with the late model Glocks is an out of spec extractor like many members have been thinking lately. After reviewing the videos, I was a little surprised to see that not only did the LWD extractor not function any better than the OEM extractor, but the OEM extractor was not nearly as inconsistent as I originally thought until I was able to view myself shooting in 3rd person. Yes, I took a couple pieces of brass to the head, and a couple ejected to the left still, but for the most part they both did very well. Even though the videos didn't show the results I was hoping for, in the name of fairness I thought it only appropriate to still post it for people to see.

    The caviat to all of this... my results may not equal yours so if you are thinking about ordering a LWD extractor don't let this video deter you. I am probably not the best person to be conducting this experiment simply because A) my gun was never really malfunctioning in the first place, B) I am still using the 0-3 spring which may be slowing the slide down just enough to throw off the ejection pattern slightly, and C) I have so many rounds through this gun with the OEM extractor that it is already well "broken in", as significant wear can be seen in the pictures below the video link. Even after making this video, I am still convinced that the extractors may be out of spec just enough to be causing some issues in some of the guns that have not been fired very much. I believe the advice to shoot several hundred rounds of high powered loads to "break in the spring" prior to shooting the softer loads was good advice after all, but I believe the higher powered loads were helping to break in the stock extractor, not the spring.

    I will repeat this experiment if/when I receive an 0-4 or 0-4-1 spring from Glock and see if the ejection pattern changes at all. Video link is below, and pictures of the unusual wear on the stock extractor can be seen below that.

    Glock 19 Gen4 Stock Extractor Vs. LWD 9mm Glock Extractor

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Quentin

    Quentin

    232
    0
    May 10, 2011
    Idaho
    Very informative video, JBarbaresi! Thanks for putting this up for us. I'm interested in what you think of the 0-4 when you get it, hopefully Glock sends you one...
     

  3. Thank you for doing that vid and you're right..OEM looked much better to me.
     
  4. 4-Fun

    4-Fun

    276
    3
    May 21, 2011
    It appears that the extraction of the white box winchester was better with the stock Glock extractor.

    The Lone Wollf threw more brass "just over" your right sholder than the OEM extractor.

    I couldn't see any real improvement.
     
  5. ViperGlock

    ViperGlock

    919
    0
    Apr 2, 2011
    Thanks for taking the time to do the video. My impression is that the Glock extractor did a little better over LWD. I wonder how some +P or +P+ would have done.
     
  6. Thank you very much for your informative video!!

    After I watched your video, I came to the conclusion that the gen4 19's problems are not because of the extractor or recoil springs, no matter which spring, 0-3, 0-4, or 0-4-1, they all suck, neither a needed break in time for gen4's. Or when I hear that proper grip sh.. I can't hear it anymore, that's just BS. A gun has to work, even when I fire it with two fingers.

    There is something else wrong with these guns. My gen4 with 0-4 spring is still ejecting brass in my face.

    I have a feeling that Glock will not help us early gen4 19 buyers with our BROKEN guns, because we were "just" cheap beta tester/objects for them. All we can do is to sell it as fast as possible, and buy one next year, If those fools called engineers have fixed all issues.

    The sad thing is, they still sell thousands of broken guns every week!

    But, I'm not gonna wait. I will look into other gun brands.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011
  7. i shot some 124gr +P Federal HST after I made the video. I recorded it so I could see the results and it was the same thing with both extractors that you see in those videos. I am surprised that the "heavier" loads, even the 147gr winchester super x, don't seem to eject any further than the 115gr WWB does.

    if the 0-4/0-4-1 spring doesn't seem to help i am probably going to buy a new trigger housing/ejector and see if that makes a difference just out of sheer curiousity. the only other thing i can think is that as the rounds deplete in the magazine and the mag spring loosens up, the extractor is grabbing the rounds slightly different because all of the "left" and "straight back" ejections seemed to be on rounds 12-15.
     
  8. SCC

    SCC Member Me

    8,093
    17
    Jun 10, 2007
    kennesaw GA.
    Looks like you need some eye protection
     
  9. JBP55

    JBP55

    9,665
    258
    Mar 4, 2007
    Louisiana
    Thanks for the video. The OEM extractor did a better job.
    They would both work better with a lighter recoil spring.
     
  10. voyager4520

    voyager4520 -----

    8,589
    0
    Apr 25, 2009
    SE Colorado
    I'm pretty surprised as well, I didn't see any difference between the two. I'd think that because the trigger housing was changed to allow for a shorter backstrap, that may have something to do with it, but people reporting brass to the face with Gen3 models suggests there's something else underlying.

    I'll say that with my two Gen3 .40's, G23 May 04 test-fire with extractor that's obviously machined and my G27 Aug 09 test-fire with extractor that appears MIM, both eject crisply to the right. My G27 extractor hesitates halfway through it's range of motion, has a .5mm tall porous bump on top in the middle, and chews up the rim of the casings pretty bad. But it feeds and ejects fine.
     
  11. i posted this over in the other thread too because i read your response there first.

    i have never really watched myself shooting 3rd person before. since undertaking this "experiment" i've gone on youtube and watched a lot of people shooting and paid attention to the extraction/ejections, especially hickok45. i have noticed that even with gen3 glocks there is the occasional random ejection to the left or straight back.

    i value your opinion because i know your experience level and ability to make objective comments. am i making a mountain out of a mole hill based off what you see in that video?
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2011
  12. i think people having issues with their "new" glocks are having issues because their extractors might be slightly out of spec and aren't able to pivot as they are supposed to. this may be causing malfunctions because the lighter 9mm loads like federal champion and WWB don't have enough force to properly actuate the extractor (for those who report trouble removing the extractor because it gets stuck/wedged in the slide). a stiffer recoil assembly like was used in the early gen4 models would only increase the chances of a problem manifesting. shooting hotter ammo or lightening the recoil spring tension (hence the 0-4 solving some problematic guns) would help to actuate the extractor for those first few hundred rounds or so and allow the extractor to "wear" in the places it is fitting tight. it could be considered a "break in period" like many have suggested should not be necessary for a glock.

    another thought i am having is that Glock used the same extractor bend angle on the new gen4 sf trigger housing for the 9mm models, it may need to have slightly more or less bend in order to eject to the right more consistently. my only doubts to this theory are because not everyone is experiencing the erratic ejections, at least to my knowledge. most people only report stovepipes or fte type issues.
     
  13. Tiro Fijo

    Tiro Fijo

    6,281
    8
    May 31, 2011
    Just curious, how many of the people having problems with brass hitting them in the face clean their extractors after a range session? The extractors foul tremendously on all SA handguns and need to be kept scrupulously clean. I clean mine after every range session on all my SA handguns.
     
  14. i can't speak for everyone else but i detail strip and clean my guns every time i shoot them, slide and frame components.
     
  15. Jimbo45

    Jimbo45 WITNC2

    382
    0
    Jan 21, 2004
    USA
    JBarbaresi, tell us more about the mags you are using. Are they new gen 4 mags? If so, do you have any older ones to try, or can you get/borrow some? Your video seems to bolster my doubt that the extractors are entirely to blame for the face brass.

    The reason I ask about the mags, is I notice in your vid, the face brass always happens during the last few rounds in the mag. This would lead me to believe it is something mag related, and or weight/recoil/flip related. Less rounds in the mag = lighter pistol = different recoil characteristics. This theory could also lend credit to the RSA being responsible, but there again, we have gen 3's with the face brass issue.

    I have 5 glocks, with the oldest being 18 years old, and the newest, about 2 years old, and have fired and tested many others over the years. The only face brass I have had, is with my G22 using a LW 40-9 conversion barrel and G17 mags. It only does it about once every 7 mags though. It never bothered me, especially since I was using a conversion barrel, so what can one expect?

    I have had one other glock with an ejection issue. I did own one of the early G21SF's that had the chincy ambi safety a couple years ago. When new, and using new mags, with WWB .45, I would get a failure to extract occasionally. Not often, but coming from years of glocks without a single malfunction, this one having a couple in one training session, was a concern. After much testing and evaluation, it only seemed to do it with the WWB. When hand cycling empty cases out, with a loaded mag inserted, it was obvious, that the outgoing empty case rims were catching on the case mouths of the top round in the mag. Sometimes catching hard enough, that the case would pop out of the extractor's hook. This was the extraction issue with that gun. Three things on this pistol, I think caused this condition: 1. the ambi SF held mags a little higher in the mag well, and thus higher in the way of the ejecting case, 2. new mag springs, 3. WWB .45 had a very square edge, with very little bevel, to the rear edge of their case rims, that were more apt to catch on the loaded round's case mouth, in the top of the mag. After the mag springs wore in a little (they were so tight the first week, I could barely seat a loaded mag in the pistol), I could fire even the square edge rimmed WWB, with no problems.

    You might consider some testing like I did. At the range, safely load an empty case in the chamber, and seat a fully loaded mag. Try hand cycling from this setup, both fast and slow, and then with a downloaded mag, say one or two rounds in the mags instead of a full mag. Maybe these newer pistols are holding the mags a bit higher in the frame, like my SF did? Maybe the ejecting empty cases are being hungup or otherwise affected by the top round in the mag, for this, or another, reason?

    Also, try shooting your pistol with one round in it. Both with an empty mag in, and with no mag in. Do this over and over and record it, and see how the ejection is affected with no mag, or empty mag, compared to your vid with fully loaded mags. And, if you can, get/borrow some older mags (3 or more years old) and see how those work. I would be interested in your results.

    Oh, and yes, I was a bit surprised to see you shooting a pistol that routinely throws brass in your face, with NO eye pro on!? :wow:
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2011
  16. Gary1911A1

    Gary1911A1

    3,308
    71
    Jun 14, 2005
    Ohio for now
    Thanks for posting the video. Maybe it's the recoil spring causing the problem or maybe a combination of the recoil spring and extractor.
     
  17. JBP55

    JBP55

    9,665
    258
    Mar 4, 2007
    Louisiana

    Not at all, keep up the good work. Great video.
     
  18. Quadaholic

    Quadaholic

    4
    0
    Jun 11, 2011
    So. Cal.
    JBarbaresi I'd hate to be a tree that pisses you off!
    As mentioned before, next round of testing, use some eye protection! :pirates:
     
  19. oh come on guys, everyone knows that the brim of hat is just as good of eye pro as anything else :tongueout: i guess after being in the military for so long and only previously being able to shoot at ranges, it's tempting to not have to follow "the rules" in my own back yard. i know better, and point well taken. next time the glasses will go on.

    the magazine as the cause is a thought i also shared (see post #7), because I too noticed that the crazy ejections tend to happen towards the last few rounds. all 4 of these magazines i used in this video are gen3 g19 magazines. my thought is that as the magazine empties and the magazine spring tension loosens up, the rounds will not be feeding up as aggressively and could cause the extractor claw to grab the casing slightly differently as it gets chambered. if the magazine spring is too light towards the end it could also be causing the spent brass to roll off the ejector slightly differently.

    i liked your suggestion of shooting with only a few or one round in the magazine, or with no magazine at all, and compare the results. that will be my next test as i wait for the 0-4 spring. thanks for the suggestion.
     
  20. Jimbo45

    Jimbo45 WITNC2

    382
    0
    Jan 21, 2004
    USA
    Yes, but another way to look at it, is, when there are only a couple rounds in the mag, there isn't much weight for the spring to push up, and it may actually be easier for the mag spring to move these couple rounds quickly. A fully loaded mag most likely would feed slower and less aggressively, since there is a LOT of weight (rounds) to push up. You may notice this when downloading mags by hand; the last few rounds pop out more quickly than than when its is full or near full. Plus, factor in the inertia of the rounds, when the gun is in recoil, actually working against the rounds moving upward, when the gun flips and rolls upward and back. There are a lot of dynamics, that are mag related, during firing, that affect feeding and extraction, that many folks don't even consider.