Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Glocking' started by Raleigh Glocker, Oct 7, 2012.
What about the shooters grip, lol.........
*Tagged for Future Reference*
This has me mildly concerned about my Gen3 G17 coming in this week.... I've held off on the Gen4 Plunge b/c of threads like this one. We Glockers are hoping and praying Glock FIXES this issue instead of trying to bandage it. I own all Gen3 Glocks with no major problems.
It almost seems that Glocks have gone the way of the classic W.German/Exeter discussion about Sig Quality.... Lets hope this is NOT THE CASE!!
I'm still uploading a "Brass Not To Face" video showing my Gen 4 G23 from the same day. I honestly set out to make only ONE such video detailing the awesome ejection of both my Gen 4s, but that didn't work out.
I made a slow motion comparison of the ejection of both guns from that day at the range, and it reveals something I think is very interesting. Check it out.
ETA: You'll notice the spring loaded bearing is installed correctly in both guns.
We've known this for a while. It seems to be a "timing" issue with the ejection. Looks like the ejector puts too much spin on the case and the extractor is not letting go on time causing the case to over spin and hit the back of the slide.
How do you solve the problem? Who knows. It's probably an extractor design issue.
A range report from somebody with 100 rounds through one individual gun is supposed to prove what point exactly? Sure, in this case his wife's grip caused issues, but it would be ridiculous for you to assume that this is the case for everybody else who has experienced issues.
Yep. And this goes back to my earlier stated theory, that Glock doesn't care that much because they are still selling guns.
And for what it's worth, I had my first BTF with my G20SF during my last range session which was right around the 1000 round mark for this pistol. More testing is in order, but I am hoping this is an anomaly.
I agree with Raleigh Glocker in that Glock should be (again) made aware this issue still exists with their guns. The videos I believe are helpful. Though I think Arc Angel may be right, in that it may take a large police or military contract to threaten to scrap their Glocks before the upper management at Glock takes a serious look at the issue.
The bounce explains the inconsistent ejection pattern since movement of the shooter differs between shots. Sometimes they are holding firm other times they are moving. Each of those movements affects when and where the case bounces.
I'd bet that if you put the pistol in a vice, it would eject perfectly because the pistol is static (that may GLOCK's method of testing by the way). Use the pistol in an dynamic way, and you'll end up with odd bounces.
My take is that the extractor is not holding the case tightly enough so that the case tries to drop out, being held only by the next round. As best I can measure, the case can drop about 1/32 inch before the next round stops it. This means the ejector is hitting higher on the case than intended, destroying much of the uplift.
Secondly, because the extractor isn't holding tightly when the ejector hits, the extractor doesn't hold tightly enough to be a proper "hinge" to help the ejector kick the round to the right.
It would be very interesting (to me, at least) to see if your G23 will eject when there is no magazine present.
Hilarious brother, 100 rounds........
And if that is you in the previous youtube video with the M&P 9C, you have absolutely NOTHING else to add here, because you can't even hold your pistol the right way......
Many people I know don't start to experience erratic ejection issues until the pistol has at least 500 rounds through it.
In all appearances the more the pistol is shot the more the issue surfaces.
That is your rebuttal? Hell do you think Obama won the debate too?
You seem to like to troll... Is that you- 1 post just to start a thread about how it ejected fine for him yet his wife limp-wristed it to get BTF.
That is a very interesting analysis.
As with bump firing, I wonder if an astute shooter can get it to consistantly eject in a certain pattern.
No surprise, but Glock won't send me parts because I'm not a certified armorer. Though Arc Angel won't approve )), I will be sending this off for them to examine on their dime.
FWIW, the tech was polite but very neutral on the issue. He very quickly said he'd email me a return label without giving me any sense about how often he's had to deal with this.
'Arc Angel' doesn't mind! I just don't regard the cost of shipping to be money well spent. (Especially when I already know that nothing significant - or genuinely remedial - is going to happen.)
As I said, they're sending me a return label, and I didn't even have to ask. This is no cost to me except time away from my G17, which isn't much fun to shoot right now, anyway.
Really! You don't think somebody at the factory is reading GT; do you?
I called the factory too, my friend. There was no prepaid label for me! Hell, the service rep wouldn't even send me two lousy parts in order to attempt a simple extractor removal and repair on my own. He wanted me to be a certified armorer before he'd give the parts to me. I told him that's fine; but I'd pass. (I didn't want to give up the I.Q. points in order to become certified.)