View Full Version : hand guns with unsupported chambers

December 31, 2005, 07:22 AM
recently i purchased several handguns for christmas gifts.
naturally santa got one too!:rolleyes:
weapons purchased were:
from what i've heard the g-17 has USC which could prove hazardous.
why would a manufacturer produce such a design:confused:
i'm only trying to understand the reasoning for this design, is it to reduce weight ?

Jim Watson
December 31, 2005, 07:40 AM
You've heard a lot of malarkey. Some chambers are kind of sloppy and have a small "unsupported" area over the feed ramp, all in the name of reliability. Glock 17 is fine, reliable and safe. Glock .40 calibers have a larger feed ramp entry and are not tolerant of heavy reloads in used brass, but that is about as far as that story goes.

December 31, 2005, 07:52 AM
thanks for your reply and meaningful information.
have a great safe and enjoyable new year!:)

Hunter Customs
January 1, 2006, 10:32 AM
I would not be to concerned with the Glock 17, I've never heard or witnessed one blowing up. Now the Glock 40 is a different story I did witness two of those blow and the shooters were using factory ammo. I'm not sure what caused the problem in the two 40 guns as I did not have a chance to inspect the parts that were left.
Bob Hunter

January 1, 2006, 02:05 PM
thanks bob for your imput!:)

Tim R
January 1, 2006, 05:56 PM
I know a guy who cracked the frame of his G-17. I wonder if his ability to reload is not simular to others who have had problems with their 40's as well.

He discovered after he cracked his frame he did not change the power throw setting on his throw after switching powders.

After he blew the mag out of his G-22, I questioned him on his load. He said his reloading mentor thought published max loads where down loaded and lawyerised. Adding a grain or two was OK.

I suggested he go back to the basic's. I also suggested most of my most accuarate loads are well under max. I now understand why he was never happy with his targets and suffered from trigger jerk.