Glocks and things like kabooms, firing out of battery, etc...

[TGO David]

I know what you're thinking...

You're thinking "Great here's another thread bashing Glocks" but that might not be the case. Actually, I just got done reading a FAQ of sorts that addresses a lot of the things that are used to malign these handguns.

Perhaps a little known fact is that I've owned two Glocks personally. A G27 and a G23. I've never owned a 9mm version but confess that the G19 has tempted me on more than one occasion as has the new 21SF. Not because either of them are particularly revolutionary, but because I do collect firearms (even if I don't keep them all) and Glock did transform the firearms industry in the 1980's.

Anyway, here's the article in question. Feel free to read it and then post up your own thoughts.

http://f-r-i.com/glock/FAQ/FAQ-casefailure.htm

[molonlabetn]

Any gun can fail, for sure... but it's understandably easier to be more critical of those which fail, even though were marketed as 'perfection'.

I would be surprised if Glocks were more proliferated than 1911s (having been around longer, and in more variations), for example... and I don't hear of nearly as many catastrophic failures among that platform (and it's arguable that more people have and do reload for their 1911s than most Glock shooters).

[TGO David]

Not many 1911s are chambered in .40SW except for those popular among USPSA Open competitors, though, and the .40SW seems to be the cartridge that is most prolific among cases of Glock failures. Of those competitors who do use the .40SW in a 1911 platform, I'd wager that many of them are very experienced reloaders or use rounds provided to them by very experienced reloaders.

Suffice it to say, then, that the kaboom problem does appear to be restricted mainly to those Glocks that are chambered to shoot rounds with high case pressures.

[Marswolf]

Just another Glock religionist trying to ignore the gun's obvious faults and deny reality.

[saintsfanbrian]

I reject your reality and will substitute my own.

Thanks for playing. By the way, I shoot 9mm.

[molonlabetn]

Things is, though... the author's point about the Glocks chambered in .357sig was correct. There have been few if any kBs in those platforms, and the .357sig is much higher pressure than .40s&w (40Kpsi vs. 35Kpsi). The contributing factor is the chamber tolerance (and possibly the thicker webbing of the sig brass).

If there was a car on the market which might explode if you fill it with 87 octane and floor the gas pedal, even if it was very reliable otherwise, would you trust your life to it?

Hell no. Give me a vehicle which is not so sensitive to the power lever to which it is pushed, or the quality of what it is fed with... even if it's more expensive.

Critical sensitivity to tolerances of ammunition components which literally cost pennies wouldn't be acceptable in any other make of firearm, regardless of its other potentially-redeeming qualities.

[Marswolf]

What you have is a weapons system with components from different manufacturers. In this case, the handgun is made by one manufacturer and the ammunition by another. There are certain standards for both components, but it isn't the responsibility of either manufacturer to police the manufacturing process of the other supplier. But guns and ammo being potentially dangerous stuff, you try to engineer your part of the system so poor QC or design of the other doesn't lead to catastrophic failure.

For a cartridge manufacturer, that means that if you load hot, you might increase the thickness of your case. For a gun manufacturer, that means you fully support the round in the chamber.

My contention is that there are better guns on the market than Glocks. Those other designs are reliable, accurate and...safe. So why settle for a gun with a poor design?

[Urse]

Glocks Suck:rolleyes:

[Marswolf]

I knew you'd come around Urse.

[molonlabetn]

Glocks Suck:rolleyes:

Yeah!!!

[Guest Steelharp]

Ok, help a guy out that has, admittedly, way less knowledge about these things than any of y'all. ANY handgun is as inherently safe/unsafe as another. If you keep things away from the trigger, none are going to go off by themselves. Carelessness (and sometimes over familiarity) with one is what causes the problems. As far as design goes; the Glock started out as a 9mm platform, the 1911 as a .45. One started out with a smaller round, the other bigger. I know of no kabooms with the 9mm platform. Not that their hasn't been one, I just haven't heard of it. Now, taking a basic design up to a larger round has caused problems in other manufacturers, I believe. Taking a basic design DOWN a size or two hasn't. Wouldn't this be because the basic design was made to handle more anyway, so less is easier?

[TGO David]

I haven't heard of any kabooms with the 9mm either. And yes, the firearms that were originally designed for a larger caliber and then down-sized to accommodate the smaller calibers generally is a more robust design.

[Mark@Sea]

The detonation of the round should be contained by the chamber and breechface, controlled by the locking system. If the design depends on the strength of the cartridge case to contain the detonation, it is deficient.

I've never been one for tupperware parties.

[Marswolf]

The detonation of the round should be contained by the chamber and breechface, controlled by the locking system. If the design depends on the strength of the cartridge case to contain the detonation, it is deficient.

Exactly my conclusion.

[Guest Steelharp]

So, what guns do not contain the detonation in the chamber and breechface? Wouldn't the chamber have to be oversized to the round for the casing to have to attempt to contain it?

[DaveTN]

My contention is that there are better guns on the market than Glocks. Those other designs are reliable, accurate and...safe. So why settle for a gun with a poor design?

Because most of those guns weren’t around when Glock came on the scene. And Glock’s were cheap compared to quality handguns. You can justify anything if it is cheap enough; just ask anyone that has a 9mm for self defense.

There is no reason today to settle for something questionable. Take a look at the M&P; far superior to a Glock and it’s cheap and safe.

[TGO David]

So, what guns do not contain the detonation in the chamber and breechface? Wouldn't the chamber have to be oversized to the round for the casing to have to attempt to contain it?

That article linked in the original post of this thread indicates that Glock chambers are oversized slightly.

[The Rabbi]

Ok, help a guy out that has, admittedly, way less knowledge about these things than any of y'all. ANY handgun is as inherently safe/unsafe as another. If you keep things away from the trigger, none are going to go off by themselves. Carelessness (and sometimes over familiarity) with one is what causes the problems. As far as design goes; the Glock started out as a 9mm platform, the 1911 as a .45. One started out with a smaller round, the other bigger. I know of no kabooms with the 9mm platform. Not that their hasn't been one, I just haven't heard of it. Now, taking a basic design up to a larger round has caused problems in other manufacturers, I believe. Taking a basic design DOWN a size or two hasn't. Wouldn't this be because the basic design was made to handle more anyway, so less is easier?

The .45acp is a relatively low pressure cartridge. Even so there have been reported KBs because the original 1911 design had an unsupported chamber.

When you go to the .40 (and even more so the .357SIG) pressures increase dramatically. So I could see a firearm designed for 9mm having troubles with .40.

There were problems with hot .357mag rounds out of k-frame Smiths as well. Which is why Smith started the L-frame.

Does that mean "Glocks are unreliable" or "Glocks are trash"? No, plenty of people carry them and use them daily. I personally don't find them appealing but I wouldnt feel naked carrying one either.

[DaveTN]

So, what guns do not contain the detonation in the chamber and breechface? Wouldn't the chamber have to be oversized to the round for the casing to have to attempt to contain it?

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb-faq.html

[Guest Mugster]

Not many 1911s are chambered in .40SW except for those popular among USPSA Open competitors, though, and the .40SW seems to be the cartridge that is most prolific among cases of Glock failures. Of those competitors who do use the .40SW in a 1911 platform, I'd wager that many of them are very experienced reloaders or use rounds provided to them by very experienced reloaders.

Suffice it to say, then, that the kaboom problem does appear to be restricted mainly to those Glocks that are chambered to shoot rounds with high case pressures.

Well, remember the old .38 super has been around for awhile. I'd have to look in a book to see if its pressure matches a .40S&W or .357 sig, but I'd guess it must be pretty close.

Also, a browning hi-power or a .45 weigh in at 35-40 ounces. I don't know what glocks weigh in at, but they are not as heavily built. Anytime you engineer for light weight, you are going to accept a shorter product life. My guess is, an old single action auto based on the browning design can handle more reloading foul-ups than any modern pistol of 3/4ers or half the weight. Plus they make a dandy head knocker if you run out of ammo. I don't know that pressure per say is much of the issue, is my point.

[Urse]

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb-faq.html

Yeah Glocks Suck and all but, the last gun pictured in that link is a H&K USP 40 and it sure does look blown all to heck. 40S&W.....hmmmmmm.

[DaveTN]

Yeah Glocks Suck and all but the last gun pictured in that link is a H&K USP 40 and it sure does look blown all to heck. 40S&W.....hmmmmmm.

You design a weapon for a specific cartridge; the engineering is done around that cartridge.

But I guess you could design a weapon and then say “Let’s shoot .40 S&W’s in it and see what happens.”

[Marswolf]

Yeah it's possible to blow up anything, even a USP, if you get stupid enough. How many pictures have you seen of a USP kaboom? How many of a Glock?

[Urse]

I am not gonna put a dog in this fight again. I managed to shoot a H&K P2000 and a Sig P229 this weekend and while both were nice, neither shot any better than my Glocks and none of them(including the Glocks) blew up. Whew I must have gotten lucky.

[Guest triggertime]

No Urse, you didn't get lucky, you just have common sense. Glocks only blow up

when the shooter lacks common sense...