Dry firing a Glock

I've been dry-firing my G17 since 1989. No problems.

Yes you can dry-fire your Glock until you have blisters on your fingers.

...and you can lube it with anything from Space Station oil to nasal mucous.

Or you can just not lube it at all, provided that you keep it some semblance of clean.

If you can't dry fire a gun, I don't buy it.

mgmorden said:

Not just Glocks, but virtually any and every modern centerfire handgun can be dry fired as much as you want with no real damage.

Click to expand...

Not true. Both my NAA Guardian in .32 ACP and my Freedom Arms Model 83 specifically state in the owners manuals NOT to dry fire since there is a risk of damage to the firing pin.

Dan

Not true. Both my NAA Guardian in .32 ACP and my Freedom Arms Model 83 specifically state in the owners manuals NOT to dry fire since there is a risk of damage to the firing pin.

Dan

Click to expand...

"Virtually" covers an occasional exception . I'd almost be willing to bet though that it won't actually hurt it. Similarly, Glock (and a number of other makers) say in their manual not to use reloads because they might damage the gun. That doesn't mean its unsafe - its just lawyer talk to CYA.

If you own a handgun and want to dry fire it check the manual or go to the manufacturer's website. Most modern firearms allow dry firing with no problems but a few discourage it. Best to be sure.

I would not dry fire a SA revolver with a traditional firing pin... ie carried hammer-down on empty chamber such as SAA and Freedom Arms. Rugers, Colt Cowboys, Beretta Stampede will be fine.

In 2011 my G34 saw about 12,000 live rounds (all reloads, in the stock barrel ), and best guess would be about 24,000 dry fires.

Lube was whatever CLP was left after cleaning. Original striker and striker spring.

The internet doesn't approve, but my Glock works fine.

Yes, you can dry fire a Glock, as you can dry fire just about all pistols.

Some words of caution....

Use some form of snap cap. I know Glock originally said that snap caps were not required on their pistols. Having destroyed a Gen2 G19 slide from excessive dry firing w/out snap caps, I always use some form of snap cap to dry fire.

If you do a little searching on the subject, you'll see some examples of this...


Basically, the breach wall weakens over time from the firing pin/striker bashing the inside repeatedly. After a while, the metal fatigues to the point where the striker punches through the breach. By using snap caps, the striker hit is softened.

I'd say the use of snap caps is a lot more likely to cause some kind of damage that looks like that vs. not using one... are you saying that a striker moving through the channel internal to the slide can somehow cause scratches several mm away from the firing pin hole?

Rauchman-

I have seen that picture (or one like it) before. Has it been verified that the failure shown was due to dry firing, or from some other cause?

I find the fact that the failure traces the outline of the shell case to be evidence that the failure might be due to fatigue from actually firing the gun.

Thanks!

Bob

Gtscotty said:

Dry firing (safely) is considered by many pistol shooters to be one of the best ways to develop proper sight picture and trigger squeeze techniques. Dry firing definitely does not hurt Glocks, or, I believe, any other modern pistol design. In fact, only type of firearm that dry firing is inherently damaging to is rim-fires. This is because the firing pin is situated at the edge of the chamber, and when there is no relatively soft brass rim to crush, the firing pin can be damaged on impact with the steel barrel face.

Click to expand...

I agree with this answer in theory. Having said that, I'm not a big fan of dry firing weapons as I worry about something breaking.

If I got serious about dry firing, in all honesty I'd likley purchase a pistol specifically for dry fire and extensive range practice. I'm a 45 ACP fan. At one point, I purchased 9 mm pistol of same make and saved enough in ammo cost differences so that pistol is esentially free. If I were dry firing, I would use the 9 mm instead of the 45.

Also, there is a lot of work you can still do at home with either a blue or orange plastic gun without dry firing. Yes, you coudl substitue your real pistol for this but I tend to be paranoid about a ND.

Also, there is a lot of work you can still do at home with either a blue or orange plastic gun without dry firing. Yes, you coudl substitue your real pistol for this but I tend to be paranoid about a ND.

Click to expand...

Dry firing is about mastering a trigger pull - which isn't possible with a blue/orange prop gun. Before you start, just make sure the chamber is empty.

People have gotten so weird about guns lately that they think that there's a magic pixie slipping rounds into guns magically at random intervals. The first rule make much more sense when it's fleshed out to a reasonable level of common sense - ie "Treat all guns as if loaded until you have personally verified otherwise. Any time the weapon leaves your hands unloaded status must be rechecked."

Once that's done - dry fire to your heart's content. Virtually all competition shooters who are any good at it dry fire quite extensively - many try to do so for several hours of practice per week. Not only does it help their game, but it also does virtually nothing bad to the guns. Those same guns get used in matches every weekend with no ill effects.

tuj said:

Centerfire guns almost always ok to dry-fire. The firing pin isn't striking anything, so the only contact is coming at what holds the firing pin. In a 1911, this can mushroom the firing pin head after very repeated dry-firing, but is still unlikely to affect the function of the gun.

SOME rimfires are ok to dry-fire, but make sure you know first if they are. Otherwise use a drywall anchor.

Dry-firing a rimfire has the firing pin impacting into the chamber face. This can eventually peen the chamber and cause all sorts of nasty issues like doubling or difficulty feeding. It can also wear down the firing pin. Some rimfires have mechanisms to prevent the firing pin from striking the chamber face; the Ruger MK-series is an example of this; they have a pin that prevents the firing pin from contacting the chamber face. HOWEVER, enough dry-firing of a MK-series pistol and you may eventually deform this pin.

Click to expand...

Fishbed77 said:

Ruger Mark I/II/III rimfire pistols have to be dry-fired for dissassembly.

Click to expand...

True dat. The old Rugers' firing pins won't contact the end of the chamber - unless the firing pin's retaining pin bends/wears, or the slot in the pin gets wallowed out.

When you field strip, it ain't hard to check these parts.

Now, to get us back onto the Glock topic... I'd expect with all the parts for these guns out there, any pieces that take wear from dry firing would probably be easily replaced. Hopefully fairly affordably, too. Now, how do you check your Glock that dry firing hasn't worn some component(s) out.

-Bill

It doesn't hurt it. In fact, it's required for field strip. I generally don't dry fire 1911s and never DF a .22 rimfire. Won't hurt the rest.

Click to expand...

That's kinda funny, as I do the opposite (sort of) both of my 1911s I dry fire, and one of those is a 22. The Kimber manual says it is ok to dry fire because of the floating firing pin, and so far after six years I see absolutely no marks on the face of the barrel from it. Being able to dry fire makes it a better training pistol and, because the slide is aluminium (or maybe it was just cheaper to make the mags this way) it doesn't lock open on empty, so unless you are really good at counting, you're going to dry fire it a considerable amount whilst shooting, over its lifetime. It is good for loading random amounts and mixing the mags up and fire until it goes click, sure is a good / quick way of learning to not flinch.

I don't know of another 22 design that I would dry-fire, however, and I don't sit down with the 22 for a session of dry-fire practice, may as well use the 9mm as it is the same frame and the firing pin is definitely not hitting anything in a centrefire.

My 686 I dry-fire. I used to use snap-caps in all three of my guns, but don't bother any more. The snap-caps are good for loading / clearing training though.

Is it okay to dry fire the Springfield XDm9?

"No grease on a Glock.!...6 drops of oil only."

The Glock Armorer's Manual shows 5, with one drop used to lubricate all three barrel lubrication points.

These are cheap and good insurance:

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=247/Product/DELUXE-SNAP-CAP

This is still a question....really??? Whoever invented snap-caps will tell you that you shouldn't dry fire a any handgun.

Owners of Glocks (me along with 1000's of other owners) will tell you that it's ok.

You choose who to believe.

I'd say the use of snap caps is a lot more likely to cause some kind of damage that looks like that vs. not using one... are you saying that a striker moving through the channel internal to the slide can somehow cause scratches several mm away from the firing pin hole?

Click to expand...

Are you kidding?

In case you aren't, Glock strikers impact against the rear of the breechface when dry fired. They impact against a snap cap when one is chambered. How in the world would a snap cap cause any sort of damage?

Snap caps rapidly develop sharp edges on the "case rim" from repeated use.

I wouldn't worry about using or not using snap caps, but if I was going to pick one of the two to worry about, I'd be more "worried" that my breechface would get scratched by these sharp edges than by dry firing.

Personally I use snap caps only for dry slidelock reloading practice since it gives you something to chamber when inserting the new mag. I don't use them for general dryfire since they wear fast, and are expensive.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=92986

I thought that thread was interesting.