[p5200]

I've been checking several forums about glocks shooting left of POA and have seen it said caused by operator error by wrong grip, trigger control, and a few said the locking blocks being MIM parts, they are not that dependable and they replaced them with the Lone Wolf Locking blocks and cured the problem. Anyone here, replaced their locking block and cured their problem? I would purchase a Lone Wolf locking block if, I would be able to re-center my adjustable rear sight on my 34 gen 4 but, if I still have to adjust to far right on my rear sight, I might as well keep the crappy factory sights instead of buying a set of adjustable Dawson sights. Thanks! :cheers: https://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=919398 Well, I placed my order for the Locking Block I assume, it will fit my 34 gen 4? :nailbiting:

 

[ChrisD46]

There is a useful post on the subject here (search) with quite a bit of information . *I bought one to experiment with as my G17 MIM locking block had pretty clear wear marks favoring the left side where as the Lone Wolf locking block (awesome quality) has shown the most even wear marks possible . I haven't done a bench rest test yet - just gun games but hope to in the near future .

 

[p5200]

There is a useful post on the subject here (search) with quite a bit of information . *I bought one to experiment with as my G17 MIM locking block had pretty clear wear marks favoring the left side where as the Lone Wolf locking block (awesome quality) has shown the most even wear marks possible . I haven't done a bench rest test yet - just gun games but hope to in the near future .

Were you able to center your rear sight more or, were you even having the shooting left problem? Thanks!

 

[p5200]

I searched under your user name and found your posts, I think I will order one seems like a well made part! :cheers:

 

[JBP55]

Were you able to center your rear sight more or, were you even having the shooting left problem? Thanks!

The one I tried years ago on a Gen 4 Glock made no difference in shot placement at 25 yards.

 

[gjarcher]

Well, I started off shooting left with the G40. Eventually, I adapted my grip, then experimented with trigger control. Now, I no longer shoot left ... I shoot left and right equally well:burn:

Some may argue that it shouldn't be so difficult to master a pistol ... Well, in my limited experience, they are all about mastering the pistol, eh?

 

[WeeWilly]

Given that your locking block isn't touching your barrel when the gun is locked up, there is no physical way it could affect POI.

Having said that, there are guys that report installing the LW LB and curing their shooting left problem. The force is strong with LW LB's.

 

[DJ Niner]

Given that your locking block isn't touching your barrel when the gun is locked up, there is no physical way it could affect POI.

What holds-up (or supports) the rear of the barrel, keeping it in battery, when the slide is fully forward and locked?

 

[WeeWilly]

What holds-up (or supports) the rear of the barrel, keeping it in battery, when the slide is fully forward and locked?

The RSA. The bottom of the lug isn't touching the locking block at all. This is a common misconception, probably rooted in the LB name, which is also probably at the root of the placebo effect of switching the LB causing some change in POI.

Dismount the slide, hold it 90 degrees to the receiver and see where everything sits when the gun is in battery, this should help dispel any misconceptions as to the role the LB might play in POI.

 

[cciman]

Shooting left is a well known phenomenon of shooting handguns, just like slicing the golfball.

BUT, BUT, BUT.....

Be sure to specify which direction you want it to go when you order the replacement locking block :eyelashes:

 

[sciolist]

The hit will be where the gun is pointed when it goes off.

 

[OttoLoader]

I did not find many reports outside of glock talk thread of the lone wolf lb increasing performance.
If the OEM locking block is noticably out of spec (pin hole or some other obvious dimension) I would replace it with a new OEM locking block. Make sure it is secure and aligned.
I would also inspect the OEM slide stop and OEM rsa, replace if suspect.
I would not buy a lone wolf lb, stick with OEM.

 

[DJ Niner]

The RSA. The bottom of the lug isn't touching the locking block at all. This is a common misconception, probably rooted in the LB name, which is also probably at the root of the placebo effect of switching the LB causing some change in POI.

Dismount the slide, hold it 90 degrees to the receiver and see where everything sits when the gun is in battery, this should help dispel any misconceptions as to the role the LB might play in POI.

Remove the slide/barrel assembly from the frame. Remove the RSA. Reinstall the slide and barrel (you'll have to invert the frame to do so, or the barrel will fall out), and push it forward into the locked position. The rear of the barrel is still supported in firing position, even without the RSA installed in the pistol.

I understand the spring provides tension to hold the barrel in the highest possible position when locked, and when the pistol is perfectly clean and lubed there is enough clearance that what you say is true. But to say it isn't touching the top of the locking block at all (as in EVER), I think is a bit misleading.

Does the bottom of the feed ramp portion of your barrel have any rub marks on it, especially at or near the front 20% or front corners? Mine do. Those marks are from the top of the locking block, and if the gun gets dirty enough, or if you get some questionable cartridges (long seated bullet, high primers, glob of primer sealant, crud buildup at the front of the chamber; anything that binds the cartridge between the chamber and the breech-face as the slide closes and the barrel locks), the spring by itself WILL NOT be able to overcome the additional friction to push the barrel high into the slide cutout to get it off the LB. When the slide closes on that round and it is fired, the bottom of the ramp WILL be touching the locking block. That's where the rub marks come from.

You'll get the same thing when the pistol gets very dirty. I see this more often on the "C" model Glocks, as they get more firing residue between the slide and barrel, and slide assembly and the frame (you get a lot of hot/dirty powder gasses swirling around in that area on the "C" models).

 

[OttoLoader]

The locking block will come in contact during the firing cycle when the slide moves back and the barrel unlocks. That is when most contact with the barrel lug and feed ramp occur. Perhaps the name of the locking block could be changed to the unlocking block.
The bottom of the barrel lug slides in contact with the locking block.
After about 600 rounds my G19 gen 3 show the shinyspots where this wear occurs. Also near the front by the slide stop and on the top front edges where the slide cycles over it.
The gen 4 rsa is different than the gen 3 so check the clearance around various points.

In the perfect world where all parts are in spec and tolerence stack works out then when ready to fire the round is seated the barrel is locked and not in contact with the the locking block. All is aligned and hits poa poi dead center.
However this is not a perfect world and if your Glock will not shoot dead center in a bench rest and bags and with different shooters then you may have some unsatisfactory part hardware problem. I would use only OEM parts if replacing any. Also stematic trouble shoot.
I am fortunate that my only two Glocks both gen 3 have no problems not even the dreaded btf.
Yet I systematically test them to make sure all is well.
I say some time OEM parts are bad and it is the gun not the shooter.
Most of the time it is the shooters technique.
So elimnate hardware problems then work on your fundamentals.

 

[DJ Niner]

I knew one of my Glocks would show visible wear that I could photograph; this G35 is still a bit dirty (I know, I'm a baaaaaad Glocker to have a dirty pistol in the safe, but...) so the marks show up a bit better. This is a Gen 3 G35, with about 3500-4000 total rounds through it (click to enlarge):

On some of my Glocks, this is barely visible (those are the ones that usually get fired one or two boxes of ammo and then get cleaned right away). The pistols that get shot a lot when dirty are the Glocks I use in IDPA and other competitions, and many of those have non-standard parts (so not fair to use those for examples). The G35 is completely stock, hasn't been fired much when really filthy dirty, and yet you can still clearly see the marks on the barrel and the matching shiny spots on the top of the locking block when they rub during (some) firing.

This overlapping area is the same area that supports the barrel when the RSA is removed and the pistol reassembled. You can feel this support if you use your thumb to press down on the top of the chamber when the slide is closed and locked into battery. Yes, it will move down a bit before it hits the locking block (if your pistol is clean), but it still gets some support here when certain shots are fired.

 

[OttoLoader]

Hardware is the problem sometime.
The only new gun that I bought that would not group was a S&W 60-14 purchased in 2009.
I shoot revolvers since the 70s and never had a problem once I developed my fundamentals.
This particular 60 on a bench rest and sandbag in single action would not group.
Even at 5 yds the target looked like a shotgun pattern. About 5 in random pattern.
But jframes are hard to shoot they say.
The real problem was that the barrel was not finished. It had fine barely visible rough rifling and crown, but still shiny to the naked eye and the flaw was only detected with a magnifying glass and light.
S&W changed out a new barrel on it under warranty.
When I tested it at the range at the same 5 yd distance same lane, double action two hand standing put a 5 rnd clover leaf group dead center in double action mode.
Thus gun shoots very well almost ten years later.
Was it the gun or it was it the placebo effect?
It was the unsatisfactory barrel. Not a placebo.

 

[WeeWilly]

Remove the slide/barrel assembly from the frame. Remove the RSA. Reinstall the slide and barrel (you'll have to invert the frame to do so, or the barrel will fall out), and push it forward into the locked position. The rear of the barrel is still supported in firing position, even without the RSA installed in the pistol.

I understand the spring provides tension to hold the barrel in the highest possible position when locked, and when the pistol is perfectly clean and lubed there is enough clearance that what you say is true. But to say it isn't touching the top of the locking block at all (as in EVER), I think is a bit misleading.

Does the bottom of the feed ramp portion of your barrel have any rub marks on it, especially at or near the front 20% or front corners? Mine do. Those marks are from the top of the locking block, and if the gun gets dirty enough, or if you get some questionable cartridges (long seated bullet, high primers, glob of primer sealant, crud buildup at the front of the chamber; anything that binds the cartridge between the chamber and the breech-face as the slide closes and the barrel locks), the spring by itself WILL NOT be able to overcome the additional friction to push the barrel high into the slide cutout to get it off the LB. When the slide closes on that round and it is fired, the bottom of the ramp WILL be touching the locking block. That's where the rub marks come from.

You'll get the same thing when the pistol gets very dirty. I see this more often on the "C" model Glocks, as they get more firing residue between the slide and barrel, and slide assembly and the frame (you get a lot of hot/dirty powder gasses swirling around in that area on the "C" models).

The condition you are describing (where the barrel doesn't completely return to its fully in battery state) and the barrel could actually be touching the locking block does happen, although certainly isn't a normal function of the gun. In this slight out of battery condition the gun can indeed fire, it can be simulated by pressing down on the barrel hood (with a clean gun) while firing. This results in off center primer strikes and usually some percentage of failures to fire (due to the blank space in the anvil of the primer, when the firing pin hits that area from the off center strike).

While this slight OOB condition can allow a slight barrel/slide misalignment the only misalignment possible is in elevation and in fact the changed POI would be UP (not the low and left all of the proponents of new LW locking blocks I have ever read, proclaim).

During the final leg of the return to battery function, the barrel hood is captured between the cutouts of the slide and no appreciable lateral movement is possible. Hence sight, slide and barrel alignment is fixed laterally, even if the OOB condition you are describing occurs. So again, the "left shooting Glock that is fixed with a new locking block" is again, nonsense.

Let's look at the gun again and take into account what would have to happen to see say a 1" POI change to the left at 7 yds with a Glock 17 in the condition you are describing. To accomplish a 1" misalignment of sights and barrel on a 7 yd target, you would need roughly .020" of barrel misalignment between the barrel and sights (i.e. the slide). How is the barrel touching the locking block in the state you are describing, going to induce that .020" misalignment of the barrel and slide? There simply isn't .020" slop between the barrel hood and the barrel in any OOB state where any Glock will fire.

In the end, none of that is going to affect POI laterally, hence, a new locking block from LW or Glock or any other company isn't going to change a thing when it comes to the lateral POI.

The bottom line is when the shot breaks, the bullet goes laterally where the sights say it is going to go.

 

[DJ Niner]

The condition you are describing (where the barrel doesn't completely return to its fully in battery state) and the barrel could actually be touching the locking block does happen, although certainly isn't a normal function of the gun. In this slight out of battery condition the gun can indeed fire, it can be simulated by pressing down on the barrel hood (with a clean gun) while firing. This results in off center primer strikes and usually some percentage of failures to fire (due to the blank space in the anvil of the primer, when the firing pin hits that area from the off center strike).

While this slight OOB condition can allow a slight barrel/slide misalignment the only misalignment possible is in elevation and in fact the changed POI would be UP (not the low and left all of the proponents of new LW locking blocks I have ever read, proclaim).

During the final leg of the return to battery function, the barrel hood is captured between the cutouts of the slide and no appreciable lateral movement is possible. Hence sight, slide and barrel alignment is fixed laterally, even if the OOB condition you are describing occurs. So again, the "left shooting Glock that is fixed with a new locking block" is again, nonsense.

Let's look at the gun again and take into account what would have to happen to see say a 1" POI change to the left at 7 yds with a Glock 17 in the condition you are describing. To accomplish a 1" misalignment of sights and barrel on a 7 yd target, you would need roughly .020" of barrel misalignment between the barrel and sights (i.e. the slide). How is the barrel touching the locking block in the state you are describing, going to induce that .020" misalignment of the barrel and slide? There simply isn't .020" slop between the barrel hood and the barrel in any OOB state where any Glock will fire.

In the end, none of that is going to affect POI laterally, hence, a new locking block from LW or Glock or any other company isn't going to change a thing when it comes to the lateral POI.

The bottom line is when the shot breaks, the bullet goes laterally where the sights say it is going to go.

I can't (and won't) argue about the lateral dispersion being caused by the LB, as I think you're right about that. I didn't really claim otherwise, I was just caught off-guard by your claim that the RSA was "supporting" the barrel during firing. I'd probably have used the word "positioning", as "support" seems to imply a level of strength that the RSA does not (and cannot) exert.

I can't say the same about the support of the LB being termed "out of battery". This is only about .020" from fully-up-locked, and the chamber block is still engaged and safely locked to the slide cutout at this amount of drop, in my view (barrel CANNOT move away from the breech-face). The only off-center hits I've seen that failed to fire, were FAR more than .020" off-center, which means the barrel had not risen to the point of getting over the top of the locking block. That could result in an OOB (unlocked, or barely-locked) firing (if the round had fired), but it would depend on the tolerance of that particular pistol's parts. Usually, if the barrel is high enough in relation to the slide to allow ANY hit on JUST the primer (doesn't catch the edge of the primer pocket in the case), the barrel and slide are locked enough to safely contain the pressures (although as you noted above, the bullet from that round may end up a bit off-center, high on the target). I believe the Glock was designed this way, as most pistols have one or more fail-safes built into their designs to prevent OOB firing (disconnectors, firing pin safeties, etc.). Tolerance stack being what it is, this is almost certainly not true of every Glock, just like it is not true of every other pistol ever made.

I will note that many pistolsmiths use tightening the barrel-to-slide vertical fit (as these aftermarket LBs seem to imply they do) as one of the more important parts of an accuracy job on most semi-auto pistols (especially 1911s). Whether or not a service-grade Glock (which usually shoots surprisingly well, if you find the load it "likes" and test it with a good shooter) could benefit from such a vertical tightening, as a standalone improvement, would be an interesting project. But you're right, I don't see it fixing any multiple-inches-at-7-yards lateral offset.

 

[WeeWilly]

I can't (and won't) argue about the lateral dispersion being caused by the LB, as I think you're right about that. I didn't really claim otherwise, I was just caught off-guard by your claim that the RSA was "supporting" the barrel during firing. I'd probably have used the word "positioning", as "support" seems to imply a level of strength that the RSA does not (and cannot) exert.

I can't say the same about the support of the LB being termed "out of battery". This is only about .020" from fully-up-locked, and the chamber block is still engaged and safely locked to the slide cutout at this amount of drop, in my view (barrel CANNOT move away from the breech-face). The only off-center hits I've seen that failed to fire, were FAR more than .020" off-center, which means the barrel had not risen to the point of getting over the top of the locking block. That could result in an OOB (unlocked, or barely-locked) firing (if the round had fired), but it would depend on the tolerance of that particular pistol's parts. Usually, if the barrel is high enough in relation to the slide to allow ANY hit on JUST the primer (doesn't catch the edge of the primer pocket in the case), the barrel and slide are locked enough to safely contain the pressures (although as you noted above, the bullet from that round may end up a bit off-center, high on the target). I believe the Glock was designed this way, as most pistols have one or more fail-safes built into their designs to prevent OOB firing (disconnectors, firing pin safeties, etc.). Tolerance stack being what it is, this is almost certainly not true of every Glock, just like it is not true of every other pistol ever made.

I will note that many pistolsmiths use tightening the barrel-to-slide vertical fit (as these aftermarket LBs seem to imply they do) as one of the more important parts of an accuracy job on most semi-auto pistols (especially 1911s). Whether or not a service-grade Glock (which usually shoots surprisingly well, if you find the load it "likes" and test it with a good shooter) could benefit from such a vertical tightening, as a standalone improvement, would be an interesting project. But you're right, I don't see it fixing any multiple-inches-at-7-yards lateral offset.

I frankly can't follow what you just posted. I am certain the limitation is mine.

I am a little unclear what you meant by the RSA not supporting the barrel during firing, but in a properly functioning Glock, the RSA most certainly is charged with returning the slide to its fully forward position which also assures the barrel moves all the way up vertically into lockup (hood flush with the top of the slide). It is a cam action between the barrel hood and the breech face that sets this relationship.

You can see the reciprocal of what if am describing by pressing down on the top of the hood when your gun is in battery. As the barrel moves down against the spring pressure of the RSA, the slide moves rearward (the top square edge of the barrel hood cams the slide rearward). When you release pressure on the top of the hood, the slide moves forward and the barrel back up vertically into full battery, the RSA spring is performing this function.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

To muddy the waters a little more, how do gunsmith fit barrels (barsto) achieve greater accuracy with their oversized dimensions? I know they add extra material to that bottom barrel lug, which has to be painstakingly removed for the pistol to go into battery. Is the barrel touching the locking block in those instances? I keep toying with the idea of getting a gunsmith fit barrel.