Glock ownership???

[Marswolf]

While I don't see a reason good reloads shouldn't work with a Glock, the swelling of the cases at what I'm reasoning is the unsupported part of the chamber is measurable.

I'd mark that area and make sure the rounds are loaded into the magazine with that part of the case up, away from the ramp.

[GhostDog]

That is a good observation. Glocks do have more "generous" sized chambers in all calibers. All one has to do is compare fired brass to see this. Resizing the brass doesn't seem to affect 45ACP or 9MM nearly as much as it does 40S&W, but it does bear watching in all calibers.

[Marswolf]

This is from a project I did a couple of years ago.

The black area is the unsupported chamber area from a G30 (45 ACP).

[molonlabetn]

The problem is, since .40s&w cases have less-than-ideal webbing (whereas 9mm, 10mm, and .357sig have thick case webbing), and .40s&w is still 'rated' by SAAMI for high pressures (35k psi). This means that the .40s&w in particular relies more heavily on the strength and support of the chamber which it is fired in, for support. In pistols which have a larger gap under the rear of the case, the brass will bulge (and in some cases, rupture). This is a similar reason why some magnum rifle cartridges should not be used in semi-automatic actions with short dwell, because their pressure rating was determined with the assumption that the case webbing would be reinforced by the chamber for the duration of powder deflagration.

.45acp is similar (minimal case webbing), but is designed for lower pressures, which enhance the safety factor, and are thus more forgiving of wide chamber tolerances than .40s&w, but less forgiving than 9mm, 10mm, and .357sig.

.45super is an upgraded .45acp case, with more optimum webbing. .40s&w has no such counterpart.

.45gap has a considerably more supportive case webbing than .40s&w or .45acp... surely intentional, considering the origin.

[GhostDog]

Learning a lot here, thanks guys!

Also, molon, deflagration would be a good "Bill O'Reilly word".

[Marswolf]

That like being deflowered?

[molonlabetn]

Deflagration = controlled oxidization (burning), similar to the process in a car or aircraft engine during combustion. Has a 'soft' pressure curve.

Detonation = uncontrolled explosion, instantaneous and self-feeding combustion which causes an intense but short-lasting pressure spike.

note - those are my own definitions... The dictionary defenitions are:

- Deflagration: Vigorous burning with subsonic flame propagation

- Detonation: An exothermic chemical reaction which propagates through reactive material at supersonic speed.

Found at: http://www.fire.org.uk/glossary.htm

[molonlabetn]

That like being deflowered?

almost... quite a bit hotter, but nearly as fast

[shaftbass]

Well I'm once again a Glock owner. I bought my old 36 back from my friend today. I can't wait to shoot it again!

[molonlabetn]

Sweet... the prodigal pistol 'eh?

I have to admit, the G36 is the only Glock which seems to fit my hands... I would own one without remorse. (but, I have a reputation to uphold, as a Glock-hater... heh)

Humor aside, congrats on the reunion! There are a few I'd like to have back...

[Marswolf]

Humor aside, congrats on the reunion! There are a few I'd like to have back...

Me too - but none of them are Glocks.

[Guest GlocKingTN]

Me too - but none of them are Glocks.

Thats just wrong Mars....

[Guest Archimedes]

Well I'm once again a Glock owner. I bought my old 36 back from my friend today. I can't wait to shoot it again!

Welcome back,

Your dreams were your ticket out.

Welcome back,

To that same old place that Mars laughed about.

Well the names have all changed since you hung around,

But those dreams have remained and they're turned around.

Who'd have thought they'd lead ya (Who'd have thought they'd lead ya)

Here where we need ya (Here where we need ya)

Yeah we tease him a lot cause we've hot him on the spot, welcome back,

Welcome back, welcome back, welcome back.

[Guest Glockman]

000000

[molonlabetn]

Example of Glock 'perfection'

Enjoy!

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/hhnj.html

[Guest Len]

This lack of professional customer service on the part of Glock really ticks me off. These folks dont sell toasters. If the product fails in the field, people might die.

I am a died-in-the-wool Glock fan, and have never had any kind of failure to perform with a Glock that was not directly attributable to me, but this report from TGZ is just unacceptable.

It is just this sort of congnitive dissonance that gives me a headache so early in the morning... :mad:

[Marswolf]

That's very odd. Glocks can stovepipe from limp-wristing in an inexperienced shooter's hand. But that obviously isn't the problem here. And Glocks are famous for feeding about any factory round you want to use.

While I don't like Glocks for other reasons, these problems are out of character for the Glock.

I might add that Dean Speir, who did the writeup, is the guy who got fired from his writing job with a magazine at the "request" of Gaston Glock for writing a less than glowing review of one of his handguns. Gaston just said he would pull all his ads if Speir wasn't fired.

I've talked to Speir. He's arrogant and annoying, but does give fair reviews and reasonable comments.

[molonlabetn]

I don't doubt that the website or Mr. Speir are a bit biased... but that still does not refute the facts which are represented in the article.

Any make/model/individual firearm can fail... some are arguably more reliable than others. But, none are 'perfect'

I am wary of any company which shows such arrogance in its advertisement of 'perfection', yet provides lacking support of such for its products... even in these somewhat remote instances.

It should be noted, however, that the majority of failures pertaining to Glocks (even when they are possibly ammo-related), overwhelmingly occur in the .40s&w models. THAT is certainly a trend which would make me at least a bit hesitant to fully trust one of those specific models.

The Glocks which were fully designed around a specific cartridge (such as the 9mm, .45gap, and 10mm) seem to do just fine... I would have no qualms about owning one, if they didn't feel like gripping a 2x4, that is.

[Marswolf]

I don't doubt that the website or Mr. Speir are a bit biased... but that still does not refute the facts which are represented in the article.

While I think that Speir probably feels a bit too much glee over Glock problems, I also have always found his reports to be substantiated well.

It should be noted, however, that the majority of failures pertaining to Glocks (even when they are possibly ammo-related), overwhelmingly occur in the .40s&w models. THAT is certainly a trend which would make me at least a bit hesitant to fully trust one of those specific models.

Could be. The G22 is a converted G17.

[Guest GlocKingTN]

Why the .40 cal?

[GhostDog]

If you followed the back-and-forth between Mars and myself in other threads, you know already that I am a Glock fan. There are a few things that folks should know about the Glocks:

1) Glock factory barrels do not like lead bullets, don't use them.

2) Glocks have "generous" (large) chambers. This aids reliability and causes no problems in most calibers. 40S&W is the exception to this. Due to the nature of the caliber (not the most robust brass) and the fact that Glock factory barrels do not fully support the chamber, there have been problems in 40S&W Glock pistols (more than other makes). Mostly these problems were ammo related (especially reloads) but not in all cases.

These are the characteristics of the pistols. Choose to use the guns or choose not to, but don't blame the gun if you knowingly ignore these characteristics.

Having said that, I will not defend Glock when it comes to some of their customer service problems. For example:

1) The frame "recall"; At first they denied there was a problem blaming the usual suspects (bad ammo). Finally they admitted the problem and did the right thing by replacing the frames but it took a while (a looooong while). It turns out that they changed some of the dimensions of the frame rails (why? only they know) and this led to the problems. They switched back and the problems disappeared. It was poorly handled from the start.

2) NYPD G19 malfunction problem; The usual story w/ Glock. They dragged out the usual suspects and would not admit that there was a gun problem. Eventually they changed some of the feed ramp/magazine follower dimensions and fixed the problems. Took a looooong time.

3) Feeding problems w/ G22 and G27 (a recent development). This is just speculation on my part, but I would guess that this will turn out just like the frame and NYPD problems. Don't know if we'll ever know the whole story, but that's my opinion. It's worth what you paid for it.

When it comes to dealing w/ John Q Public, they are great. If you have a problem, send it in and they fix it (usually free). However, when it comes to a problem w/ an agency or a modification (made by Glock) to one of the pistols that causes problems, they stick their heads in the sand and pretend it will go away. Don't know why they do this. It makes no sense, but that's what I have observed.

I love the guns. They are extremely reliable, tough, easy to use/maintain, and combat accurate. Like anything else, do your homework before you buy. I wouldn't buy a G22 or G27 right now. I would wait until the current nonsense is resolved. On the other hand, if any of you have a G17 or G19 (regardless of when it was made) that you don't want, send it to me for a good home.

[Marswolf]

1) The frame "recall"; At first they denied there was a problem blaming the usual suspects (bad ammo). Finally they admitted the problem and did the right thing by replacing the frames but it took a while (a looooong while). It turns out that they changed some of the dimensions of the frame rails (why? only they know) and this led to the problems. They switched back and the problems disappeared. It was poorly handled from the start.

I got a slightly different story about the cracked frame rail problem. As i understand it, they had one CNC machine that turned out all the bad rails. Glocks bookkeeping is good enough that when they discovered the cause of the problem, they were able to determine which individual guns had the bad rails. But Glock did not, and never has, issued a recall. If you call them and give your serial number, they will tell you whether to return the handgun. If you don't call, there is no way to find out.

No point in beating a dead horse, but I'm deadly serious. There is no way I would buy another Glock. They have some good features but also some serious design problems. I won't trust my life to one.

[GhostDog]

About the frame problem. That's the problem, we never really got the whole story about what caused the original problem. Also, that's why is put recall in quotation marks, it was the "recall" that... wasn't. Glock inc handled the whole thing very badly from start to finish, no defense from me on that one.

However, we still disagree about the guns (surprise, surprise!). I don't think they have design problems. What they have is serious "how we deal w/ problems when they crop up" problems. The basic design is very sound or the guns wouldn't sell and work as well as they have. Just because one doesn't like the design, doesn't mean that the design is bad.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

[molonlabetn]

I'll elaborate...

Glocks are not a 'bad' design, as GhostDog stated.

But, I don't think it is possible to argue that they are an especially refined design, either...

Some people prefer their tools to be more basic, it could certainly be argued that there are benefits to low-cost and simplicity.

To be perfectly honest, however, if simplicity was the only driving factor in a weapons' effectiveness, or desireability; every world-wide military and LE agency would be armed with Glocks and AKs... In reality, the only ones which do, are the ones which can only afford to aquire or maintain those weapons.

[Marswolf]

I did notice that "recall" was in quotation marks. Figured you knew that story but that other readers might not.

Gentlemen, we'll just have to disagree about the Glock's design. It's faults are overlooked because of some good features and good agency pricing. If they are now having a reliability problem on some models and can't (or won't) fix it, that's just one more reason to pass on them.

I still claim they are a not unreasonable common duty weapon if they are reliable. They are pretty accurate, function under real-world conditions of mud, holster lint and other officer abuse, and do not have a safety to get in the way in case you actually need to fire. But they do have their faults, and for a bit more you can buy a superior handgun that is suitable for those who know they actually will have to fire their weapons, not just that they might have to do so.