Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Want Your Ejection Problems Solved? Listen to Dave.

Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by 3/4Flap, Feb 19, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DaveKnowlin's fix may be The Fix.

    I just did it and then ran out the back door and fired 4 rounds into the dirst right-handed. All 4 empties went straight out to the right.

    Gotta shoot some more, but this looks promising.

  2. MarkCO

    MarkCO Millennium Member CLM

    Dec 21, 1998
    OP said he would explain, so opened...
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2012
  3. Last edited: Feb 19, 2012
  4. Referenced here;

    The fix involves removal of the extractor and reduction of the step that limits extractor travel inward, allowing the extractor to swing inward and maintain tension on the case for what must be just a micro-second of extra time, which effects ejection.

    The jury is not back in yet on my pistol but initial examination of the ejection pattern of the 4 RWS rounds I fired into the dirt outside the house was dramatically different than previously; all went straight out to the side. This from a gun that is increasingly tossing them all over...including at my face.

    Maybe a good gun to experiment on as Glock told me they have experienced some issues with "L" barrels in regular G17's like mine, whereby they encourage stouter loads to insure adequate ejection. So far I have never experienced a JAM in this pistol, but the degrading of ejection PATTERN has me annoyed. I might make a jaunto the range tomorrow and shoot it some more. wife bought me some WWB 115 yesterday when she made the trip to the Big City for supplies so we'll see what that junk does.

    I hope Dave weighs in, also.
  5. Radian


    May 17, 2010
    Speer Lawman and a hat? CoC Trainers, snug necked t shirts, ISMI 15lb springs...
  6. PS: I used a couple jeweler's files and a hard stone.

    ENTIRELY what I did was;

    1} Cleaned up the extractor claw a bit to allow better bite of the case.
    2} Polished both sides of the extractor.
    3} Took some material off the shoulder/step whatever you call it. Don't ask how much. Due to the angles it was not easy to gauge the start dimension with my calipers. I aimed at Dave's nominal .005". I know I took some material off. Not alot.

    Now, since the Glock extractor acts in the same way as a Mauser 98 extractor more-or-less, you want to make sure the radius of the cartridge case head does not but against the bottom of the presented extractor during feeding. Should ride up nicely UNDER the extractor as the round rises.
  7. NucPhysics


    Apr 19, 2009
    I thought you just exchanged it for a Walther PPQ...just kidding:wavey:
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2012
  8. SCSU74

    SCSU74 St. Cloud Proud

    Jul 24, 2010
    The Northwoods
    Sounds like a good idea. Maybe order another extractor before taking these steps...

    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


    Feb 1, 2012
    Can we get some pics?
  10. 3/4 Flap, I sure wish you'd done your experiment in two stages -- first with polishing the top and bottom surfaces and then the reduction to the step that limits how far inward the extractor rotates. I say that because many people have had success by just polishing the top and bottom (and sometimes the pivot "cone"). I don't remember anyone ever touching the step, but I welcome people trying different things. As much as I would like to believe the step is an issue, since the extractors are clearly rotated out with a cartridge in the chamber vs an empty chamber, the only affect of the step is during loading, as you pointed out, and when it again touches during extraction. While the removal of .005" would theoretically allow pressure for some extra time, I would think it to be way less than minuscule. I'd be very suspicious that your success, if it continues, is the result of freeing up the extractor by polishing the two surfaces, and cleaning up the claw.

    Please keep us up to date on your further testing. I could well be following in your footsteps in the next few days.
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2012
  11. Radian


    May 17, 2010
    for sure on the spare. good thing is they are el cheapo part.
  12. bentbiker;

    I tho''t somebody might notice....

    I wanted to be honest and tell exactly what I did. As for the actual removal of .005 well, that is a guess. It was noticeable but I had trouble measuring it. The grip on the cases can be felt as different in hand cycling the action.

    Cases do not come out with necessarily more force but rather with more repeateddirection.

    You may be right, but I figured it was worth the suggestion. Like Radian says, the part is cheap.

    Too early to speak with any authority, but in theory it should benefit the grab on the case. I have seen this effect other pistols. So why not the Glock...
  13. Dave Nowlin

    Dave Nowlin Fisher of Men

    Dec 20, 2011
    Savannah, Tn.
    My thought, and it is only theory at this point, is that if the extractor holds the round more firmly as it strikes the ejector then the ejection will be more predictable. I believe previous to my rework the case head wasn't held firmly enough to cause a consistent hit on the case head by the ejector. As more people try this fix we may figure out how to solve the brass in the head issue. I don't believe Glock has figured it out so maybe we can help.
  14. Thanks, Dave.

    It should be added that the lowering of the shoulder does not impact case head tension while the extractor is grabbing the widest part of the case head, but rather, it MAINTAINS some form of hold on the case for longer as/if the case head shifts up during cycling of the action.

    And here is my theory;

    We are generally and most commonly discussing erratic ejection, not loss of extraction. Sometimes there are jams but themain beef seems to be that cases get tossed here and there and sometimes down your underwear... I submit that erratic ejection may be caused by erratic EXTRACTION or more accurately, erratic control of the case during the drawing back of the slide before the case hits the ejector.

    The ability of the extractor to maintain tension on the case whether the case is dead center of the breech face or slightly north or south of center MIGHT allow more consistent ejection. That is the goal, and with the first few rounds from my gun I fired it seemed to be the case.

    We'll see. Got dumped on with snow again last night and might pack up the sled and ski up to the range for more testing with a variety of ammo.

    What we want is for the slide to maintain consistent grab on the case head all the way thru the rearward draw of the slide until the ejector strikes the case head. Anything that can help achieve this should in theory allow more consistent directioning of the case as it leaves the bolt face region.

    Picture a baseball being struck in the sweet spot of the bat. Same swing, same spot, same direction. Now, picture the ball striking here and there, sometimes close to the grip, other times right near the end of the bat. Ball flies up, down, this or thataway.

    That is the best example I can find of what is going on in the cycling of a semiautomatic gun mechanism vis-s-vis extraction and ejection.

    Now, the fix MAY not be 100% related to EXTRACTOR design.

    What we haven't discussed is what has happened to SLIDE production. Is there a differing shoulder inside the slide on new model G's? Did a thicker finish in combination with a slightly larger/taller shoulder occur in recent slide production? That, too, could be the reason, and IMO could be the reason some report no change in performance regardless of extractor/ejector. conjecture, to be sure, but who knows.

    I will not accept continued performance as it is. I'll get it fixed in my gun whether Glock does it or I do it or I'll get rid of the gun. What works for mine might work for others' guns, might not, but the purpose of the thread here is to address an issue that seems to be left out of the current "accepted" process of parts-swapping.

    Usta be that gunsmiths were gun SMITHS. We all know that old-school ways are about kicking their last, and the new "armorer" is for the most part not a gunsmith but rather a "parts swapper". This works in military circles and is of course a very good thing due to the availability of parts, etc. But let's not forget the fixes that come about thru good old trial, error and the careful use of the tools of the trade. For me I have few options. No "Glock Armorer" about, and a shop full of gunsmithing and knifemaking hand tools...

    Good luck, all.
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2012
  15. M&P15T

    M&P15T Beard One

    Apr 7, 2011
    Arlington, VA.
    I swear, if this simple fix is the answer, someone should be charging GLOCK for it.
  16. True.

    But look, this is the way of the world.

    Back when I was selling guns we were jobbers for a number of higher-end gunmakers at the time. We saw the cocamameyiest stuff come thru.

    Remember when S&W revolver barrels were unscrewing? And when SAKO shipped rifles with Rockwell divits on the TOP of the barrels? How about Heym SR20 bolt handles that fell off...and sent their guns out with trigger mechs fitted with hardwarestore washers...? Overpriced Valmet semiautos with the scope mounts that sloshed around and utterly refused to zero? I've seen those and many others.

    Look, we all know it; Gun companies make guns to sell them. That is the reason they get made. No one is doing ME a favor by providing a service called "Gun Making". The market decides...{or should, Herr Obama}...what products make it or not. So the market gets involved.

    Gun engineers get paid to go to work and complete "projects". Sometimes the project is actually a success!

    And MANY ideas come from the market and get incorporated into the production of

    Yeah, I think it could be this easy. Maybe not. Maybe so.

    Now think of it this way;

    The ultimate creative idea gun fix was provided by Herr Glock himself. Not a gunmaker, not even a gun "guy" as far as I know, he looked at ways to fix common "problems" and came up with the Glock itself! Now Gaston needs a little help and we can try our best to give it to him.

    Last edited: Feb 20, 2012
  17. jw38


    Jun 25, 2010
    Taking my 19, 23 and 27 apart to clean up the extractors. Thanks for the info. Best "new" news on GT in sometime.
  18. rootpass


    Jan 23, 2012
    Didn't TexasPO offer this suggestion awhile back with great success? I think you are all on to something.
  19. I don't recall or didn't see the thread but it has not been repeatedly treated here even tho the front page is JAMMED with a continuous and unending flow of "My Glock don't work right" threads.

    Who knows, maybe a Glock Armorer would possess respected status enough here to walk thru the process w/ pix and convince the Moderators to post a sticky?

    Not sure how that works but since many Glocks don't, my own included, I think it might rank up there with Public Service Announcements in the great tradition of the "Don't Litter" Indian, "Please Kids Don't Eat Paint Chips".
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2012
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.