Differences I noticed Between Gen4 G19 and Gen2 G19

[SGT Duffman]

I know this is probably going to ignite a flame war with the fan boys, but I'm starting to hate my G19 and lose confidence/trust in Glock. I have a Glock 21SF that I love, so I bought the G19 Gen4 a while back (with the intent of it being my everyday carry gun to replace my Kahr P45) when they were still being made with the "03" springs. At the time I bought it they were still fairly new and I wasn't able to find anyone saying bad thing about them. I figured hey a Glock is a Glock, it's a 19 they're the standard for a compact 9mm. After debating with myself for a month between a proven Gen 3 and the new Gen 4. After handling them a half dozen times I decided on the Gen 4. It pointed naturally and had the bigger mag release, my only gripes with the Gen 3. Despite the G21SF's full size, I have no problems holding it and for some reason it also points naturally, despite the larger grip circumference. For whatever reason the Gen 3 19's point high for me. The honeymoon ended when I took it for "break in".

There are some manufacturers and theories that say you need to fire a minimum of 500 rds through a carry gun to break it in and make sure it's reliable with your chosen ammo. That, and it's just good practice. While I agree it's good for piece of mind to know your pistol will function, and I do the 500 rd "break in", it's never really been necessary. I have/have had: a USP 40 Compact with ~700rds through it, Sig P229R 9mm w/~800rds, Kahr P45 w/~1100rds, Springfield Mil Spec 1911 .45 w/~700 rds, Colt XSE 1911 .45 w/~600rds, and the Glock 21SF 45 w/~700rds. None have ever had any issues with varieties of ammunition through them using factory magazines. The Sig had 2 failures to eject one day with some cheapo magazines but never anything with the Sig magazines. The ammo was been WWB, Remington UMC FMJ & HP, Blazer, Hornady TAP, Hornady XTP, Magtech, Federal, Georgia Arms, Reloads, never any issues.

Then came the G19. The only ammo that has been fired through it is Winchester White Box 115gr FMJ. Stove piped halfway through it's second magazine. 3 malfunctions in its first 100rds. The slide releases when I slap a magazine in. I thought maybe I was touching the slide release. Nope. It doesn't do it every time, but it does it most of the time.

Since the first 100 rds I haven't had any more failures, but I still don't trust it. Between the first 100 rounds and the next 338 I locked the slide back for 2 weeks and put it back in the safe. The fact that it HAS failed make it the least reliable defensive pistol I have ever owned. It also has extremely sloppy ejection. Some cases barely make it out of the slide. Some fly forward, some hit me in the face, some go over my left shoulder (I'm right handed), others just kind of fall out the side of the gun. The cases are also being damaged at some point during cycling. Triangle shaped areas are being ground off on the front of the case and the grinds are running in the direction of the circumference of the case neck so I think it must be happening as the case is being ejected. If it was occurring in the chamber I would expect the scratches to run top to bottom not side to side, the case would have to be sideways for this to happen. At first I thought it was damage from the case hitting the ground, but it's on every case and always in the same place. As of yesterday the pistol has 438rds through it, all WWB.

I've called Glock 5 times about this. The first time I called was May 9, 2011. I had a very curt conversation and the man I talked to in Technical Services seemed aware of some problems with the Gen4 Glock 19 and said they'd send me an "04" spring right out. It is my understanding the current manufacture pistol use this spring form the factory. He also said the pistol was designed as a combat firearm and wasn't meant to fire "target" ammo. I don't know about that excuse. Sounds like the "official line" but I don't buy it. No other gun I've ever owned has had a problem with "target" ammo, to include my other Glock. I believe all factory ammo has to be made to SAAMI specifications, so I would think any commercially built firearm should be capable of firing any commercially made ammunition of the appropriate caliber.

I called them again May 23, 2011 (at 10:12PST/1:12 EST their time)trying to see if they had shipped the spring yet, then things started getting interesting. I sat on hold for 9 minutes, then just figured they were busy or at lunch so hung up and figured I'd call back. I called them again on the 23rd at 10:57PST (1:57ESt their time) and sat on hold for 25 minutes until I was hung up on or disconnected from their end. I called them 2 more times on May 25, 2011 @ 12:43PST (3:43EST their time) and 1:19PST (4:19EST their time) and was hung up on or disconnected again after 30 minutes each time. I have no idea where the spring is, or if they've ever sent it, and I can't get a hold of anybody there. So not only do I have 0 confidence in what would have been my everyday carry gun, I have 0 confidence that Glock is going to make this right.

I'll try to attach some pictures of differences between the Gen 2 G19 a friend of mine has compared to the Gen4 G19 I bought. I think the problems run deeper than just the recoil spring setup they changed. Sorry for the long post.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

the "0-4-1" spring is the latest one for the g19 gen4. first was the 03, then 04, now 0-4-1.

also, you very well could have a bad extractor. i changed two out of spec ones in my gen3 and gen4 glocks. they no longer machine them, and they're are now either cast or MIM (i think they're cast). i had crazy erratic ejection, and failure to ejects that instantly were resolved with new extractors.

many gen4's problems have been resolved by switching out the extractor.

don't expect sterling service from glock. love their guns, but not so much their CS lol

 

[SGT Duffman]

In picture #1 the top frame is the Gen 2, the bottom the Gen 4. Number 1 and 2 are the differences in the frame where the new recoil assembly sits. There is considerably less material and the front cup like portion has been removed to make room for the larger recoil spring assembly hole in the bottom of the slide under the barrel bushing. Numbers 3 and 4 are the differences in the take down spring and some sort of frame reinforcing ring. That may still be in the new ones, it just may not be exposed. 5 and 6 are the difference in the locking block. In the previous generations it was set into the pistol surrounded by polymer, now it is larger and more exposed, running all the way to the frame rails. 7 and 8 show the dimple they press into the new trigger bars. It is supposed to center the trigger bar on the firing pin safety. The older one had a tendency to run around the edges of the disconnect, these run across the center. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The news ones always make the trigger pull about 6.5 lbs instead of 5.5lbs. 9 and 10 show the rear frame rails, the old ones were much larger. 11 and 12 show the striker release, the old ones were bent and ramped upwards, the new ones go up a bit too, but no nearly as much. 13 and 14 show a hole next to the trigger mechanism housing, I have no idea what it's for.

In picture #2, 1 and 2 show the difference between the ramping on the slide, the Gen 2 is on the left and it’s flatter than the Gen 4. 3 and 4 show the different profiles between the barrel lugs, the new one is more tapered. 4 and 6 show the difference between the recoil spring “cup”. The Gen4 on the right doesn’t even look like a clean cut. It’s chamfered, I don’t know how the hell the spring is supposed to stay in there.

In picture #3, the Gen 2 is on top, the gen4 on bottom. A and B show the difference in the cutouts at the front of the slide, I don’t know why it’s been changed. I also have no idea if or how it might affect function. I don’t see how it could. C and D show the different recoil spring assemblies. The new one I guess is causing all kinds of problem for some people. Others have no problems. It is a big enough problem Glock redesigned the spring though and they are now installing the 04 spring from the factory instead of the 03 spring they started with. Ignore E and F, looking at the picture I thought the Gen4 wasn’t cut out like the Gen2, but it is. G and H are different profiles on the front of the barrel lug, the newer ones have more material removed making the angles wider, again I don’t know how or if this does anything. I and J there are different angle cut above the lug Gen 2 on top has basically a 90 degree cut immediately above, the Gen4 has a beveled cut, again, don’t know what this might do. K and L show the difference between the ramping on the slide, it will be more apparent in one of the other pictures. This is what strips the next round from the magazine and forces it up the feed ramp.

In picture #4, Gen2 is in the front, Gen4 in the back. 1 and 2 are the difference between the rear frame rails. 3 and 4 are the difference between the trigger bars. The new one adds about a lb to the trigger pull. It also makes reassembly more difficult. 5 and 6 are the difference in the locking blocks. The metal is exposed in the Gen4. 7 and 8 are the differences in the trigger pins, and with the Gen 4 locking block pin.

In picture #5, the Gen2 is on top, Gen4 on bottom. A and B are the differences between the barrel lug profiles. The older ones were more squared off and very angular. The newer ones have beveled edges and they seem more rounded. 1 and 2 show some extra rail on the new one, 3 and 4 between the circles show a difference in the top part of the lug cut, the new ones have a dome shaped cut instead of a flat cut.

In picture #6 it shows the difference between Gen 2 on top and Gen 4 on bottom. They beveled the front of the chamber on the new ones. If it aint broke, don’t fix it.

Picture #7 shows what is being done to all the brass. I can only assume this is happening during ejection. As the case is being pulled from the chamber it must be rubbing across something before or immediately following ejection. All of the grinds run in the direction of the case diameter though. I have no idea what’s doing this.

Pictures #8, 9, and 10 show calls to Glock to get this sorted out. Only the 2 minute call from May 9 (pic #8) was successful at reaching someone. The others were follow ups where I was hung up on or disconnected after various amounts of time. I had full signal so it wasn’t a dropped call.

Picture #11 shows the differences between Gen2 top and Gen4 bottom. A and B are small projections on the top of the trigger bar, the one is longer but I don’t think it does anything. C and D are the ejectors. They have the same part number but the old one seems to have a sharper angled bend in it, but it may just appear they way. E and F show a difference in the trigger mechanism housing. The new one has a rail cut in it.

http://s1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/

 

[SGT Duffman]

Apocalypse Now,

Thanks for the quick reply. Any idea what's going on with them parts wise? I figured the part would of been out in a week or two. That was 3 weeks ago. Granted it hasn't been forever, but still. It's not much of a carry gun sitting in the safe and not working. Kind of a bummer. If it was anything but shooting I'd say it's a waste of money to have to do "break in" all over again with a "new" spring. Still expensive though.

 

[SGT Duffman]

After having some of these problems I started doing some research and I'd heard some of the extractors are too long. I don't know what's going on with the damaged brass though. Hitting and dragging along the ejection port as the round impacts the ejector and turns out to be ejected but before the extractor releases it maybe? I don't know.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

^^yeah a lot of folks are still waiting for them, and others get them immediately.

this has been my experience with getting parts from glock: they either send the wrong ones, take forever to send the right ones, or never send them at all. lol they're notorious for that.

also, the updated springs are in short supply, since everyone's calling for them.

i would call them back and order the latest 0-4-1 spring. should be no break in with that one, i've actually not read of any issues whatsoever with it.

if that doesn't solve all your issues, i would bet the farm it's a bad extractor, which is no more than $13



also, my gen4 23 smacks the brass pretty good and have brass marks on the outside of my ejection port. i asked glock techs about it who said it happens. also researched it. some glocks do it, some don't, no big deal.

 

[REAPER4206969]

Another satisfied customer.

also, you very well could have a bad extractor. i changed two out of spec ones in my gen3 and gen4 glocks. they no longer machine them, and they're are now either cast or MIM (i think they're cast).

Word on the 'net is that the locking block, extractor and firing pin are now MIM.

The locking block certainly is; look at the straight mold lines and obvious sprue mark on the bridge. They were previously investment cast.



http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=13&t=111756

 

[SGT Duffman]

^ Great... I just put up a video of the slide releasing without me touching it. I don’t know that Glock designed them to do this, but I guess it’s possible. I’ve never had it happen on anything else though. I usually go with the ole slingshot method. I don’t use the slide release. Now apparently I don’t need to do anything. I would prefer it not do that. I want to be certain the magazine is fully and completely seated before releasing the slide, so I know a round is being chambered. The one time this will do that and not pull off a round will be the one time I need it to.

I suppose I could learn to not so vigorously reload a magazine, but old habits die hard, and I like to know they're seated.

I'm sure I could go get the parts and fix it but I'm hesitant to have anything but factory work done for liability reasons and I don't think I should have to pay to fix something that should of worked in the first place. On the other hand I don't want to wait for Glock and how would anyone really know the difference between a Glock extractor installed by Glock and a Glock extractor installed by me.

 

[SGT Duffman]

Reaper,

How'd you know MIM was my nemesis? The whole reason I got a Colt for my first 1911 is because it had as few MIM parts as I could find in a production gun. I hate when companies cut corners to save a couple bucks. It's not like they didn't already have the means to machine the old ones. What's the point? You have the capability to make the part already, how much is really saved by setting up some whole new process and getting more equipment, or purchasing from outside vendors to get a part that is less robust and reliable than the old one. If they were just starting the company or just making the new part I could see maybe doing that, but it's the same part made in a different less reliable way. I called Kimber's Custom shop to see if they made anything without MIM parts, he said not to worry about it, if a MIm part was going to break it would break rights away. I hung up and never called or looked at a Kimber again.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

Word on the 'net is that the locking block, extractor and firing pin are now MIM.

The locking block certainly is; look at the straight mold lines and obvious sprue mark on the bridge. They were previously investment cast.

yep, the locking block is now obviously MIM, but was cast previously.

my extractors though, they have no sprue marks, just "casting lines".


the strikers on mine don't look MIM either, but glock has been changing parts quite a lot recently, so i wouldn't be surprised if folks found MIM strikers in their recent purchases.

 

[REAPER4206969]

Well, a properly done MIM part is fine and an improper one will fail quickly. However investment casting is superior, IMO.

 

[REAPER4206969]

Also, the GEN1/2 Glock's had machined frame rails, later models having stamped. The bevel on the barrel hood was added to the 9mm models in the mid 90's.

 

[SGT Duffman]

I suspect a well done MIM part probably cost as much as a machined or investment cast part. All the extra steps and QC taken to ensure there would be no voids or gas pockets can't be cheap. They may get better, but I always envision a Matchbox car when I hear MIM. That cheap powdery metal that cracks under pressure. In a gun? No thanks. I've become a curmudgeony old man in my young age, longing for years and techniques gone by. I'd rather pay the extra for have something that lasts forever than save a couple bucks up front and have to buy a new item in a few years, it's cheaper in the long run to get it done right the first time.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

^^opposite. MIM is much cheaper than machined, and a little cheaper than cast

there's no way to tell if an MIM part is bad until it actually breaks, but defective ones fail early on.

glock would never change parts manufacturing processes to a more expensive one lol

 

[SGT Duffman]

I should probably go to bed. After every post I make, I read it and find some terrible typo or grammatical error. Sleeping 6 hours a night for the last few days seems to be catching up with me. We'll see what happens when and if I can ever get a hold of someone at Glock. If I can't get this thing running like a Glock should I may see about having them replace it with a Gen 3 or something, but I hope it doesn't come to that. I really like the ergonomics of this one when compared to the Gen 3 and it's a natural pointer, for me anyways. That said, I'd rather retrain myself to shoot the Gen 3 that doesn't feel as good (and after this, hopefully will never have to have any interaction with Glock customer service), than hold onto and put my life on the line with a gun I don't trust.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

that fancy glock thread on arfcom's got the reaper all riled LOL

 

[SGT Duffman]

I thought they could do testing procedures to check for voids, but I'm sure it incredibly expensive. Some sort of radar scanning maybe. More batch checks? I know MIM is cheapest, but to do it right and check the parts would negate the savings. So no one does it. They may have already changed to a system that's more expensive. If they have to replace a bunch of broken parts or do a recall, their savings are lost. I doubt it will come to that though, that would be some pretty extreme MIMitis, but I hate it none the less.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

yeah MIM's unavoidable nowadays, unless you get a supergrade wilson 1911 full of bulletproof bar stock parts for $3,600 lol

 

[SGT Duffman]

Ya I know it's unavoidable, but I don't have to like it. I think Colt and Sig still use a lot of bar stock in their 1911's. I wanted a Rock River but they don't make them anymore. Why does Glock have to jump on the short bus. It seems to be a recent change. So why? Got sick of building good guns? Figured what the hell it was a good run, lets get into the replacement parts business.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

I think Colt and Sig still use a lot of bar stock in their 1911's

they use tool steel, along with cast and MIM. also plastic. many colts come with plastic MSH's and triggers.

even the fancy (and expensive) DW valors don't use barstock, although many mistakenly believe they do because they advertise "no MIM" on the cz website. it's actually tool steel.



i fit barstock parts (wilson, ed brown) to my 1911's whenever i change a part. i just do it because 'smthing is fun, not because i'm worried about the MIM parts failing. and if i'm going to spend a bunch of time fitting a new part, might as well get top of the line lol

Springfield armory makes quality MIM. it's all about the quality

 

[SGT Duffman]

As far as I know, the Colt XSE I bought only has 3 MIM parts. The sear, disconnector, and magazine catch. Then the thumb and grip safeties are cast, the slide, barrel, receiver, and slide stop are forged and everything else is machined from bar stock. Then the grips are wood and the mainspring housing is plastic. Bar stock isn't any particular type of steel. It's just steel billet, literally a bar of steel stock that can me smashed, mashed, milled, machined, etc. Tool steel can be any of several types of steel too. Sig I think did something similar when they first started making the GSR's but I don't know if they still do. Those are the 2 production companies I had it narrowed down to when I was avoiding MIM 1911's. It's tragically probably not true of either anymore.

 

[PO2Hammer]

This isn't going to start a flame war, but I don't like the term 'fan boy'.

 

[SGT Duffman]

Anyone have any secret tricks for getting a hold of Glock? An extension or name to someone who took care of them in the past maybe? I keep getting transferred to Technical Services then hung up on. Any idea if someone stocks older Glock extractors? I don't want to put aftermarket parts on the gun for liability reasons, as it will be a carry gun. I'm sure Lone Wolf or somebody has something but I'd like to keep the parts OEM. For the recoil spring assembly I'm stuck dealing with Glock.

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

^^yep, that's glock's version of CS LOL

glock won't send you a new extractor unless you're a certified armorer. you have to seek one out, then hope and pray glock actually sends the (right) part lol (i've been there done that several times)

rather than deal with glock again, i found my replacements extractors in local shops that employ certified armorers. they had older extractors in stock (glock may very well send you another bad one lol)

 

[SGT Duffman]

Ya I might have to call Brownells or something and ask them to send me the oldest "new style" extractor they have. Give me the one from the back of the shelf. Hopefully it isn't MIM. I have to drive about 40 miles south to deal with decent people. The local shop here is the shadiest gun store I've ever been to, I went in once and won't go back. They charge $200 over what anyone else charges and their FFL fee is 3 times the norm. Then when you don't buy anything they won't buzz you out. They make you stand there until someone else leaves.

They wanted $729 for a Remington 700 SPS Tactical, went down south, it was $569 new. Their FFL fee is like $70 too. I don't think so. Told them there's no way I'd pay that much for that gun or their FFL, so they belittled me about not supporting local businesses and going with cheaper alternatives who don't have to maintain storefront's etc etc. The place down south has a storefront and they manage to sell the same things for 25% less.