View Single Post
Old October 15, 2012, 08:31 AM   #13
Junior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2012
Posts: 14
Update and thanks after a Week!

Firstly, I’d really like to thank the people who have taken the time to offer their personal comments on their experience with the Glock 27, Gen 4. I now feel that there is hope for keeping the little pistol and enjoying it! I will post the outcome of my experience with the Glock factory with this problem. I won’t dignify it by referring to it as an issue, - it’s a real problem.

This morning I decided to clean my Colt 45 ACP. What a labor or love and something that I really enjoy doing. Unsurprisingly, I found the recoil spring right in its normal position in the gun. (Only joking, please don’t get excited.) Just for fun, I decided to take my little Ruger .380 LCP apart and clean it. The little polymer frame is surviving unscathed and the recoil spring was found resting in place comfortably against the recoil lug on the barrel. I know that they are entirely different designs from the pistols from Glock, but the recoil spring and the method of retention is much more similar than dissimilar.

I really hope that my problem is resolved and that I get to keep Gaston’s little Baby G27. As I said, it’s pretty accurate for such a short barrel. I’m 70 years old and a very very average shooter. I don’t shoot steel plates and have never shot ISPC or anything like that, but I have shot a LOT. When growing up, it was NORMAL for me to shoot a 1,000 rounds of standard velocity .22 Long Rifle ammo a week for many years of my life.

I’ve attached my first two targets (Actually Magazines) from my new malfunctioning Glock 27 from a week ago. It’s not up to what I would like to show my friends, but simply an honest example of a new gun in the hands of a seventy-year old guy.

When I hear back from Glock manufacturing, I will post more photos of the gun, frame, and recoil spring assembly. Thanks!
JohnnieBush is offline  
Page generated in 0.03122 seconds with 7 queries