The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 3, 2018, 12:28 PM   #26
hogwiley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 277
Aesthetics dont matter to me, id happily trade some external slide or frame imperfection for this. My glock 23 had scratches on the slide when i bought it and i didnt care.
hogwiley is offline  
Old July 3, 2018, 01:17 PM   #27
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
But still this point you don't know that the flaw is more than aesthetic. You've hypothesized that it might cause issues. You could test that hypothesis.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old July 3, 2018, 05:13 PM   #28
hogwiley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by TunnelRat View Post
But still this point you don't know that the flaw is more than aesthetic. You've hypothesized that it might cause issues. You could test that hypothesis.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Look, I don't want to make more out of this than there is. Its obviously not that big a deal. I started this thread and emailed glock mostly out of curiosity, and yes partly out of annoyance.

As for simply shooting it to determine whether this is purely aesthetic. Here's an analogy that explains my view. A feed ramp is supposed to be smooth, right? Now, if you had a new glock with a feed ramp that had some slight tooling marks, there is a very good chance it would still reliably feed everything you put in it. Most glocks probably don't NEED a perfectly smooth and polished feed ramp. However, if you bought a new glock youd probably be annoyed if it wasn't smooth, especially if you had unresolved problems with a previous glock, and a limited budget. Regardless of whether the gun initially appeared to function fine, feeding problems could pop up.

Its not a perfect analogy. I doubt this part of the slide is as crucial to the gun's functioning as the feed ramp, but it also isn't as easy to correct, and I'm doubtful the reason its perfectly smooth in the vast majority of Glocks is simply due to aesthetics. I don't like playing the QC gun lottery with my money after rolling a snake eyes on my last glock.
hogwiley is offline  
Old July 3, 2018, 05:18 PM   #29
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
Like I said, I get being angry. But again, you don't know until you shoot it. That's the reality. If Glock won't take it back I don't what else to say. You have to deal with the reality you find yourself in. The only other option I see is you could sell it and given you bought it at Blue Label pricing you wouldn't lose much. I'm not saying any of this is good, I'm saying how to deal with it. As for your last Glock, we already discussed that in the last thread and I don't think I need to repeat what I said there. In the future don't buy Glocks?

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old July 3, 2018, 06:57 PM   #30
cslinger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 14, 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,045
Quote:
As for your last Glock, we already discussed that in the last thread and I don't think I need to repeat what I said there. In the future don't buy Glocks?
I have bought my last Glock......5 times. .
__________________
"Is there anyway I can write my local gun store off on my taxes as dependents?"
cslinger is offline  
Old July 3, 2018, 07:27 PM   #31
hogwiley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 277
I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm angry about it. A little annoyed is all.

I did get the blue label pricing so there is that, although to be honest if it wasn't for that discount I would have just bought a used Sig or even cheaper Glock police trade in. I also bought my previous glocks without blue label pricing even though I was apparently eligible for it all that time.
hogwiley is offline  
Old July 4, 2018, 12:08 AM   #32
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,928
Quote:
The thing that bothers me is the fact on other glocks i looked at this part was smooth as glass, almost polished looking, which is what youd obviously want in a part that rides over the nose of the bullet.
Most of the Glocks I've looked at have a very smooth surface in that area. I have seen one that had similar marks to what shows in your picture, but not nearly as pronounced. My guess is that they don't always finish that rail to the same smoothness and once in awhile a rough one slips through.

I have seen other types of pistols with roughness in that area. One was so bad that it was actually hard to rack manually. Worked just fine when shooting though.
Quote:
Aesthetics dont matter to me, id happily trade some external slide or frame imperfection for this.
For all practical purposes, this is a discussion about aesthetics. From a theoretical standpoint, under extreme conditions, it is possible that this could cause functioning issues. From a practical standpoint, had you not taken the time to look at the rail carefully, you would never have known about it--because it's never going to cause any troubles.

Shoot the gun. I seriously doubt it's going to malfunction, and I feel quite confident in asserting that if it DOES malfunction it won't be because the rail is rough.

Once you've verified for yourself that the gun functions just fine, then you will have the same confidence I do that this is an aesthetic issue and it will no longer matter to you.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old July 14, 2018, 07:05 AM   #33
RSKENT
Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Location: Land of Blue Sky and Sunshine
Posts: 38
Quote:
Shoot the gun. I seriously doubt it's going to malfunction, and I feel quite confident in asserting that if it DOES malfunction it won't be because the rail is rough.
And if it does cause a problem, at that point Glock would pretty much have to repair the gun.
RSKENT is offline  
Old July 18, 2018, 01:46 PM   #34
hogwiley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 277
I have another question about this gun that maybe someone that owns a glock 22 or 17 can answer.

When I drop the barrel into the slide before putting the recoil spring in place, I notice that there is a lot of play. I can literally slide the barrel back and forth maybe 1/16th of an inch and hear it clank each time. I checked on my glock 23 and this isn't the case at all, there is zero play and it locks up tightly when I drop the barrel in.

Is this something that's common in full size glocks? I don't have another one to compare it to, so I'm curious if its another example of sloppy machining/tolerance and QC, or if its normal.
hogwiley is offline  
Old July 18, 2018, 02:23 PM   #35
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,928
It is normal for there to be some play--some is necessary to insure proper function. However too much is not a good thing.

Disclaimer: I do NOT have a factory spec for the measurement discussed below. The numbers are provided based on measurements I've done on a number of Glocks including, as I recall, at least one of each the following models: 17, 19, 23, 20.

If you are going to try to measure this so you have reasonably accurate numbers that will compare with the measurements I provide, you will need a set of feeler gauges that go down to at least 0.003". This is not something you can eyeball, measure with a ruler, or even with a caliper.

You will need to insure that the ejection port of the gun and the barrel are clean--especially in the areas where the barrel and the ejection port fit together.

Do not force feeler gauges into gaps. They are fragile and can eaily be worn/abraded. The goal isn't to see if you can jam one in, the goal is to measure the gap and only relatively light pressure is needed for that.

To do the measurement, remove the slide, remove the recoil spring assembly but leave the barrel in the slide. With the barrel fully seated into the slide, push it backward as far as it will go against the breech (toward the shooter if the gun were being held in a firing position) and hold it there firmly. Insert the feeler gauge down into gap between the front of the barrel and the front of the ejection port. The red line shows where the gap is.



The gauge will only push in a very small distance even if it fits, but you will easily be able to tell if it slides in or not.

A 0.003" gauge will fit into all the Glocks I have measured. A 0.004" will fit into most (but not all) of them but it's often a tight fit. Out of the half-dozen or so I've checked, none will accept a 0.005" gauge.

One more thing. Let's say that your gun takes a 0.007" gauge. Does that mean that your gun is screwed up? Not necessarily. As I said, my measurements, taken from a relatively small sample of pistols and should not be viewed as a factory specification. Failure to conform to them doesn't necessarily imply any sort of a problem or unsafe condition.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Barrel&Slide.jpg (17.3 KB, 82 views)
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old July 18, 2018, 03:04 PM   #36
RSKENT
Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Location: Land of Blue Sky and Sunshine
Posts: 38
Quote:
Is this something that's common in full size glocks? I don't have another one to compare it to, so I'm curious if its another example of sloppy machining/tolerance and QC, or if its normal.
Have you shot the thing yet or what?
RSKENT is offline  
Old July 18, 2018, 03:15 PM   #37
hogwiley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Posts: 277
No I haven't shot it, I injured my shoulder recently so I'm sort of out of commission for a while unless I shoot with my off hand. I'm asking since I'm contemplating just selling it, or sending it in to glock to have them inspect it.

They said I'm welcome to send it in to be inspected, but that if no defect is found they would simply send it back as is. I figure Id ask about the barrel since that was another thing I noticed about the gun, although it didn't annoy or concern me as much as the tool marks, since I know glocks have loose tolerances. Its more out of curiosity im asking since my glock 23 has zero play.
hogwiley is offline  
Old July 18, 2018, 03:51 PM   #38
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
I've had different Glocks with different amounts of play. I've had older Gen 3s that had noticeably less play than one dated 2012 (I have feeler gauges too and didn't take them out, I always forget about them). In fact for that pistol I bought one of the drop in barrels from KKM, not the ones that require fitting, and it was significantly tighter in the slide than the stock barrel. The thing is unless I shot them off a rest it was near impossible to identify which barrel I was using without looking at the barrel itself. While standing I as the shooter was introducing more variation than the barrels.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.07655 seconds with 9 queries