[fastbolt]

What part of the Glock firing pin that you want to "polish" rubs against other metal and will "benefit" from being "polished"? (Aside from the lug which engages the cruciform?) The rest of the FP assembly parts, and the channel liner & guide, pretty much cover and protect the FP from contact with anything other than the cruciform and the rear of the breech face. The inside of the FP spring? Hardly an issue.

Also, if "polishing" causes wear in the same manner of the cruciform rubbing against the FP lug during normal firing, would you expect "polishing" to similarly risk beginning to shorten the useful service life of the FP (meaning its ability to maintain proper minimum 66% engagement with the cruciform)?

The FP is a plated part. Last time I asked, the plating was Teflon Nickel. It's purpose is to help protect the carbon steel from oxidation and corrosion (and probably helps reduce friction between other plated steel parts, as well). If you "polish" and compromise the plating, you may accelerate the normal wear & tear which may eventually expose the copper sub-layer beneath the Teflon Nickel, or even wear through to the steel.

Why do this? Is the cosmetic appearance to your eye more important than the corrosion-resistance properties of the plating?

Also, if you think you're not "removing metal" with your polishing, consider that shooting will remove metal between the FP lug and cruciform, so any theoretical benefit from "polishing" is going to be removed as normal wear patterns develop between those two surfaces, and the "polished" surface of the plating is worn through.

If there was some practical benefit to "polishing" the FP, the company would probably have already done it. It's not difficult to "polish" parts via electrical/chemical process (without having to tumble them in media curing the manufacturing process, like Glock does with their slides, BTW).

For the same of trivia, once upon a time S&W used to use a sonic/chemical method to "polish" the feedramps and chamber mouth edges of their stainless steel 3rd gen pistols. We were told the barrels were placed in fixtures that dipped that part of the barrels into the solution, at an angle, where they were gently "polished". Once you knew what to look for, you could see the line separating the matte finish of the rest of the barrel from the "polished" part.

 

[jws360]

Also, if "polishing" causes wear in the same manner of the cruciform rubbing against the FP lug during normal firing, would you expect "polishing" to similarly risk beginning to shorten the useful service life of the FP (meaning its ability to maintain proper minimum 66% engagement with the cruciform)?

The FP is a plated part. Last time I asked, the plating was Teflon Nickel. It's purpose is to help protect the carbon steel from oxidation and corrosion (and probably helps reduce friction between other plated steel parts, as well). If you "polish" and compromise the plating, you may accelerate the normal wear & tear which may eventually expose the copper sub-layer beneath the Teflon Nickel, or even wear through to the steel.

Why do this? Is the cosmetic appearance to your eye more important than the corrosion-resistance properties of the plating?

It would indeed serve no purpose to polish a nickel plated part and would, in fact, be inadvisable. The pin I have is 20+ years old. I did not see what appeared to be such plating. Perhaps its on newer ones.

Excellent points nonetheless.

 

[sciolist]

Polishing the striker isn't going to make any difference in what you feel at the trigger. If could make a difference in energy delivered to the primer if you're using a very light spring, but I doubt much. Reshaping the lug can make a substantial difference in what you feel at the trigger, though.

You really need to consider the trigger as a system. Think about specifically what you are trying to accomplish, and what the best approach is. But don't just screw around with parts for no practical reason.

 

[fastbolt]

It would indeed serve no purpose to polish a nickel plated part and would, in fact, be inadvisable. The pin I have is 20+ years old. I did not see what appeared to be such plating. Perhaps its on newer ones.

Excellent points nonetheless.

The teflon nickel has always been a rather dull, matte-like finish, depending on the parts. It really only becomes noticeable that it's plated when friction between some of the parts wear through to the copper layer, revealing it, like on frame rails, the "arms" of the locking block and the cruciform/FP contact areas.

 

[jws360]

The teflon nickel has always been a rather dull, matte-like finish, depending on the parts. It really only becomes noticeable that it's plated when friction between some of the parts wear through to the copper layer, revealing it, like on frame rails, the "arms" of the locking block and the cruciform/FP contact areas.

Thank you. Yours is exactly why I post these questions. I obviously don't have all the answers. My firing pin is close to 25 years old. Wondering if they were so plated back then.

 

[fastbolt]

Thank you. Yours is exactly why I post these questions. I obviously don't have all the answers. My firing pin is close to 25 years old. Wondering if they were so plated back then.

That I don't know. My time as a Glock armorer only goes back 5 classes, to the early 2000's. Of course, something else to bear in mind is that Glock armorer instructors may not always have some of the details involved in manufacture of the guns and their parts/assemblies (like other gun company armorer instructors).

I've attended classes for other gun makers where the instructors got armorer instructor jobs after having worked in other areas of gun company manufacturing, and were thus able to bring their experience and expertise with them to armorer training. Others who didn't start off elsewhere in a gun company (like hired from LE careers) seem to gain incremental knowledge as they gain experience working as armorer instructors ... and as they're asked questions by armorers in their classes, and then go back and seek answers to those questions.

The long and short of it is that while owner/enthusiasts may be naturally curious about many production details, armorers who are just supporting, maintaining and repairing guns for agencies may not have any interest in learning anything that's not required for them to be able diagnose problems and repair guns. They just need to keep them running in optimal condition, and recognize problems that may require correction or parts replacement.

Just like all cops aren't gun enthusiasts, all LE armorers aren't necessarily enthusiasts, either.

I've met employees from stocking Glock dealers who didn't seem particularly enthusiastic about being in the class, and LE armorers who hadn't asked to attend, but had been chosen to be sent to classes.