Stand back folks... I'm improving on perfection here!

[TGO David]

Yes, they sent both. To date I have only installed the recoil spring. Haven't made time to install the FPS yet. I ordered mine directly from Wolff.

[Guest sling]

I couldnt tell a difference with the wolff firing pin spring. Didnt experience any light primer strikes with hard primers like Winchester either. Apparently people complain about this sometimes. I'd leave the stock pin spring in IMO because: Those two little plastic cups WILL fly across the room when you try to take the firing pin assembly apart no matter how careful you are.. and B: it didnt really make a difference as far as pull goes.

Those SS guide rods are nice arent they?

The spring squeaks against the guide rod for the first 50 rounds or so sometimes.

Edited June 30, 2008 by sling

[TGO David]

I thought about this some after I posted my last reply. I likely wouldn't install the FPS anyway since it reduces the trigger weight a little. A carry gun could actually stand a slightly higher trigger weight, in my opinion, so that spring will stay in the baggie and out of my gun.

But yeah, the spring cups are a pain to find when they go flying. I learned that lesson with my Glock 23 a few years ago.

[Guest Todd@CIS]

Yeah, I don't install the Wolff firing spring either.

I've got a bunch of them laying around...lol.

[Guest sling]

There isnt a noticeable change in trigger weight with a 15 lb firing pin spring i've found. An even lighter firing pin spring with maybe a heavier trigger spring and lighter safety plunger spring...i could see. Something i definitely look forward to when i get my 34. Just an observation.

[TGO David]

Per TopGlock.com ...

Wolff Firing Pin Spring (Striker Spring). Reduced Power. 4-pounds. Fits all Glock models.

Wolff offers a reduced power striker spring (sometimes called a firing pin spring) for Glock pistols rated at 4 pounds. The Glock Factory striker spring is rated at 5.5 pounds. This reduced power spring will help improve the trigger pull.

WARNING: This spring is for competition use ONLY - not for duty use.

[Guest sling]

Yeah, and everyone that makes a 3.5 connector says it drops the trigger pull to 3.5 lbs. We all know this isnt true.

[TGO David]

Ok. Not really looking for a debate on the matter, just reposting what information is available on the springs. Some people like a light(er) trigger on their carry guns. Others don't. I'm one of the others.

[Guest sling]

I know. I meant no offense if any was taken. The false advertising with a lot of glocks aftermarket parts just kills me.

I had one guy call me one day and ask if adding a lower power trigger spring,recoil spring, and a 3.5 connector would make his glock an automatic. *no joke!*

I basically told the guy that i had no idea where he got this information and that all that would do would make his slide slam against the frame everytime it ejected a round. Not that that had anything to do with your thread... just a point of some misinformation out there.

[TGO David]

Yep, there is a ton of it. Some of it is amusing and some of it just makes you shake your head at it.

[Marswolf]

Maybe a bit off-topic - maybe - but I think it fits into the Glock add-on market discussion.

I have a Beretta 92SB that goes back to the 80s. Absolutely the only things I have changed in all of these years is the slide spring - and that was only changed because someone gave me a new spring - and I went to thinner grips. About the only thing you will find as accessories for the 92 are grips. What else would you want to change - except the recoil spring every 20 years, just because it is there?

My point is that in a well designed gun (and I'm not picking on Glock) the parts that come with the gun are the ones you need. No point changing out sights, magazine releases, guide rods, etc. because the ones that come with the gun are proper for most purposes. And they should last the life of the gun.

In a real sense, guns that have been around for a while might be judged by how few add-ons are available, instead of how many can be purchased.

The 1911 has a lot of available parts "improvements". Hey, it was designed in 1908. Great gun for the time and for years after. But there were shortcomings and the market provided improvements.

Getting us back on topic, Glock has been here since 1989, is very popular and has tons of "flash" (a trailer sale term) available to add. But is this good, a sign of needed improvement, or just a desire to "ho up" our handguns?

[Guest SUNTZU]

If its called "hoing up" my Glock, then call me Iceberg Slim.

Have you fired the compact 92SB, Mars? I have actually been looking at getting the 92FS Inox, but would like to talk to someone with some experience with them. Maybe I should start a new thread.

Sorry about the thread derailment.

[deerslayer]

Maybe a bit off-topic - maybe - but I think it fits into the Glock add-on market discussion.

I have a Beretta 92SB that goes back to the 80s. Absolutely the only things I have changed in all of these years is the slide spring - and that was only changed because someone gave me a new spring - and I went to thinner grips. About the only thing you will find as accessories for the 92 are grips. What else would you want to change - except the recoil spring every 20 years, just because it is there?

My point is that in a well designed gun (and I'm not picking on Glock) the parts that come with the gun are the ones you need. No point changing out sights, magazine releases, guide rods, etc. because the ones that come with the gun are proper for most purposes. And they should last the life of the gun.

In a real sense, guns that have been around for a while might be judged by how few add-ons are available, instead of how many can be purchased.

The 1911 has a lot of available parts "improvements". Hey, it was designed in 1908. Great gun for the time and for years after. But there were shortcomings and the market provided improvements.

Getting us back on topic, Glock has been here since 1989, is very popular and has tons of "flash" (a trailer sale term) available to add. But is this good, a sign of needed improvement, or just a desire to "ho up" our handguns?

I would say the Glock aftermarket is the result of people wanting to personalize their guns for their purposes, not necessarily to improve reliability or overcome design flaws, etc. The only thing I feel the need to change on them is the sights, but I would change the sights on almost any handgun I bought. The one major fault of the Glock is the craptastic plastic sights. However, Glocks can be ordered with steel sights (tritium or non-tritium), so one could argue that no mods are necessary.

[Guest mikedwood]

Maybe a bit off-topic - maybe - but I think it fits into the Glock add-on market discussion.

I have a Beretta 92SB that goes back to the 80s. Absolutely the only things I have changed in all of these years is the slide spring - and that was only changed because someone gave me a new spring - and I went to thinner grips. About the only thing you will find as accessories for the 92 are grips. What else would you want to change - except the recoil spring every 20 years, just because it is there?

My point is that in a well designed gun (and I'm not picking on Glock) the parts that come with the gun are the ones you need. No point changing out sights, magazine releases, guide rods, etc. because the ones that come with the gun are proper for most purposes. And they should last the life of the gun.

In a real sense, guns that have been around for a while might be judged by how few add-ons are available, instead of how many can be purchased.

The 1911 has a lot of available parts "improvements". Hey, it was designed in 1908. Great gun for the time and for years after. But there were shortcomings and the market provided improvements.

Getting us back on topic, Glock has been here since 1989, is very popular and has tons of "flash" (a trailer sale term) available to add. But is this good, a sign of needed improvement, or just a desire to "ho up" our handguns?

I think a lot of it has to do with you can't shake a stick at a gunshop without hitting something that has to do with Glock. I can go into about any medium size gun store and almost every style of holster they will have one that fits the G19, try that with my CZ and they might can fit it in something, maybe you will have to try it.

Mags everywhere, parts all over the internet, crimson trace and laser max. Glocks are everywhere. Hats, range bags, spings, pins armours tools. It can all be had.

I think it has to do with a Glock is pretty much a Glock. Many parts interchange between the guns and so forth. The style doesn't change much if any and they are very popular. Usually I don't go for popular but in the case of Glock I like the fact that you can get something for it everywhere you go. And it being perfect deserves everything you can get it and more.

See the Glock itself is perfect, the human is imperfect and doesn't understand perfection so the human thinks his Glock must be tinkered with. The Glock is so perfect that it realizes the human problem and doesn't care and just keeps firing away.

[Marswolf]

I have to admit I "hoed up" my G23. The sights were changed, of course. The G26 I had came with Glock's idea of upgrade sights - adjustable and all. They still sucked. Should have changed them rather than add a LaserMax - another bad idea that at least I didn't duplicate in the G23.

The G23 also was modified with an extended magazine...errr...clip release that just hindered holstering without dropping the magazine. It did help in magazine changing though, intended or not. Also had the butt plug with the two pins that allowed you to completely disassemble the gun in the field - as if you would ever need to do that - and even a "recoil buffer" that basically limited slide travel. Yet another terrible idea.

I also added a gun lock built in to the slide assembly. At the time I was doing reenacting and the loaded gun sometimes stayed in my tent while a bunch of drunks wandered in and out. A locked gun with the key on a chain around my neck seemed like a good idea.

Then of course there were the fuzzy dice, but I never actually installed them.

I think that in the case of Glocks, manufacturers know that if they make add-on junk, people will come and buy them.

[Guest db99wj]

I have to admit I "hoed up" my G23. The sights were changed, of course. The G26 I had came with Glock's idea of upgrade sights - adjustable and all. They still sucked. Should have changed them rather than add a LaserMax - another bad idea that at least I didn't duplicate in the G23.

The G23 also was modified with an extended magazine...errr...clip release that just hindered holstering without dropping the magazine. It did help in magazine changing though, intended or not. Also had the butt plug with the two pins that allowed you to completely disassemble the gun in the field - as if you would ever need to do that - and even a "recoil buffer" that basically limited slide travel. Yet another terrible idea.

I also added a gun lock built in to the slide assembly. At the time I was doing reenacting and the loaded gun sometimes stayed in my tent while a bunch of drunks wandered in and out. A locked gun with the key on a chain around my neck seemed like a good idea.

Then of course there were the fuzzy dice, but I never actually installed them.

I think that in the case of Glocks, manufacturers know that if they make add-on junk, people will come and buy them.

Hey, they make wings for ricer cars and most of them don't come close to needing them, but people buy them!