Differences I noticed Between Gen4 G19 and Gen2 G19
- Thread starter SGT Duffman
- Start date
- Status
I really dislike the new finish on Glocks, I think it looks uglier and I know for a fact that it wears much faster. I was unfortunate enough to have a Gen 3 Glock 19 with the new finish, and although it is about 2 years younger than my G26 and 17 it has much more wear marks, even though it saw the least usage and was used in the same holsters. The new finish is grippier, but the old one is plenty grippy enough.
I'm not jumping on the Gen 4 bandwagon anytime soon. They may have interfered with Glock perfection a bit.
SGT, I say sell it and get a Gen 3, or even better a S&W M&P.
I'm not jumping on the Gen 4 bandwagon anytime soon. They may have interfered with Glock perfection a bit.
SGT, I say sell it and get a Gen 3, or even better a S&W M&P.
SGT Duffman
Member
JCMGI, no PM received, I think it might make you wait a bit to send them or something.
Ben,
I would ditch it but there is no difference with the new Gen 3. They're made the same. They're having the same issues. I'd bet money the problem stems from when they did the extractor "upgrade" this last time and switched the manufacturing process to MIM. They screwed the pooch or got an out of spec order. Now they're stuck with who knows how many out of spec crappy MIM extractors, and they're not just in Gen 4 guns, they're in everything (not necessarily all glock models, but all of the new production models that use that size and model of extractor). It's not the recoil spring assembly doing this, or at least not JUST the recoil spring assembly (which should have never been changed).
As far as the Gen 3 goes, I prefer the magazine release, texture, and grip of the Gen 4, that was the whole reason I got it. My mistake was assuming (you know what they say) it would be OK, because it was Glock, I would get Glock reliability. Ultimately I've learned a lesson I already knew, don't buy the first iteration of anything. There are always kinks to work out. Problem is Glock doesn't work them out (no kinks, just "Glock perfection"), they just ignore you, they already got your money, what are you gonna do? Sell it? So what, they still got your money.
I started trying to train for the eventuality of ditching the Gen 4 for Gen 3, but it didn't work. I tried doing a bunch of drawing drills and stuff around the house with the middle back strap installed on an empty gun for safety and it wasn't the same. With no back strap I'm dead on, it just sits right, in 2 weeks of doing it with the middle strap I never got used to it. It's kind of weird, I'm dead on with the 21SF and the grip is far larger than the 19 but it's fine, it points naturally too, but not the gen 4 with the middle "Gen 3" back strap. Make no mistake, I have and still do seriously consider dumping this piece of crap for a Gen 3, but what will it really accomplish? I give them more money for a gun made the same way, with the same defective part, a poor finish, and get ergonomics that don't work for me?
I'm pretty meticulous about researching thing before I buy them, and I kept coming back to the G19 because it had long been held as the standard for a "compact" high capacity 9mm. No one else is quite as small, or light, or narrow, with the same accessory market, "reliability", etc. It always came back to G19. Never had issues with the other Glock I own, or the several I have shot, and at the time I got it, the Gen 4 had just come out. There were none of these negative reviews or reports you see all over like you do now. It took me a while, probably over a year to get around to shooting it because I was busy with life, moved a couple times and had other things going on. I figured I had the Kahr for carry so it was no big deal. I finally got settled in, 45 got expensive, and selling the Kahr started sounding alright, so I made some time, got some rounds, and finally got around to using the Glock to make sure it would be good for carry. It's not. I've been dealing with this mess ever since.
Everyone rants and raves about M&Ps and XDs, I'm sure there's a reason, but I don't care for either. I won't touch S&W, they are not and never will be forgiven. No matter how bad I wanted to replace that crappy Taurus M94 with a 617 in .22lr.
Ben,
I would ditch it but there is no difference with the new Gen 3. They're made the same. They're having the same issues. I'd bet money the problem stems from when they did the extractor "upgrade" this last time and switched the manufacturing process to MIM. They screwed the pooch or got an out of spec order. Now they're stuck with who knows how many out of spec crappy MIM extractors, and they're not just in Gen 4 guns, they're in everything (not necessarily all glock models, but all of the new production models that use that size and model of extractor). It's not the recoil spring assembly doing this, or at least not JUST the recoil spring assembly (which should have never been changed).
As far as the Gen 3 goes, I prefer the magazine release, texture, and grip of the Gen 4, that was the whole reason I got it. My mistake was assuming (you know what they say) it would be OK, because it was Glock, I would get Glock reliability. Ultimately I've learned a lesson I already knew, don't buy the first iteration of anything. There are always kinks to work out. Problem is Glock doesn't work them out (no kinks, just "Glock perfection"), they just ignore you, they already got your money, what are you gonna do? Sell it? So what, they still got your money.
I started trying to train for the eventuality of ditching the Gen 4 for Gen 3, but it didn't work. I tried doing a bunch of drawing drills and stuff around the house with the middle back strap installed on an empty gun for safety and it wasn't the same. With no back strap I'm dead on, it just sits right, in 2 weeks of doing it with the middle strap I never got used to it. It's kind of weird, I'm dead on with the 21SF and the grip is far larger than the 19 but it's fine, it points naturally too, but not the gen 4 with the middle "Gen 3" back strap. Make no mistake, I have and still do seriously consider dumping this piece of crap for a Gen 3, but what will it really accomplish? I give them more money for a gun made the same way, with the same defective part, a poor finish, and get ergonomics that don't work for me?
I'm pretty meticulous about researching thing before I buy them, and I kept coming back to the G19 because it had long been held as the standard for a "compact" high capacity 9mm. No one else is quite as small, or light, or narrow, with the same accessory market, "reliability", etc. It always came back to G19. Never had issues with the other Glock I own, or the several I have shot, and at the time I got it, the Gen 4 had just come out. There were none of these negative reviews or reports you see all over like you do now. It took me a while, probably over a year to get around to shooting it because I was busy with life, moved a couple times and had other things going on. I figured I had the Kahr for carry so it was no big deal. I finally got settled in, 45 got expensive, and selling the Kahr started sounding alright, so I made some time, got some rounds, and finally got around to using the Glock to make sure it would be good for carry. It's not. I've been dealing with this mess ever since.
Everyone rants and raves about M&Ps and XDs, I'm sure there's a reason, but I don't care for either. I won't touch S&W, they are not and never will be forgiven. No matter how bad I wanted to replace that crappy Taurus M94 with a 617 in .22lr.
SGT Duffman, another alternative is to trade for someone's "unperfected" Gen 3 G19. Either way I'm sure you will be able to get this Gen 4 to work for you. There is so much aftermarket support that even if Glock drops the ball this, you, perhaps with the help of a smithy, will be able to get that gun to work fine. It kind of makes me thankful mine only has a lack luster finish.
This is very true, across the board. All manufacturers included.
I'm curious why, if you feel like talking about it.
This is very true, across the board. All manufacturers included.
I'm curious why, if you feel like talking about it.
SGT Duffman
Member
JCMGI, got it now, I'll be in touch.
Ben,
I'm not comfortable with having a used gun as a primary carry. I know it's kind of silly, but I have no idea what kind of maintenance, repairs, or "upgrades" someone might have done to their guns. Something for shooting tin cans, no problem; something for carry, I would rather not. I've replaced the Glock extractor with the Lone Wolf, but I don't like that it's come to that. I would prefer that any kind of working parts be factory parts, factory installed for legal reasons. God forbid I ever have to actually use it. The courts go a long way trying to crucify gun owners, especially if they've modified the gun.
As far as S&W goes, they sold out to the Clinton administration on gun rights. They screwed over gun makers, gun dealers, and gun buyers. They weren't an American company either (not that that is something that will stop me from buying a gun), but it does go a ways towards supporting the fact they make a lot of false claims and do a lot of posturing to sell their guns. They like to pretend it's all about craftsmanship and small in house operations and that is completely the opposite of the truth. I'd wager that most people have no idea S&W is owned by a British company from the 80's through 2001, and we know how Brits feel about guns. They anti 2A crap earned them a boycott, and it taught them a lesson after they had to shutter a couple plants and find new ownership. They also rip off most of their designs. You can read some of it here:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm
or just punch "smith wesson anti gun" in google and poke around.
I also won't do business with Ruger (responsible for large, key parts of the 94-04 gun ban), Kimber (caters for CA LE agencies, makes overpriced garbage out of the cheapest materials available), or HS Precision (Lon Horiuchi as a spokesman). Colt has been tip-toeing getting on my ban list (restricted sales, research into microchipping). I don't know why I cut them any slack. I guess their misdeeds don't outweigh their contributions yet. I feel sorry for them too, they wrote a lot of the history of this country and they're basically out of business. They've been on thin ice for awhile though.
On the opposite side of things there is Barrett (Barrett refused to sell weapons or parts to any California LE agencies because the state won't allow the sale of his firearms), STI (pulled out of the CA market in response to legislation they didn't support) and Glock (big contributions to pro gun organizations).
Ben,
I'm not comfortable with having a used gun as a primary carry. I know it's kind of silly, but I have no idea what kind of maintenance, repairs, or "upgrades" someone might have done to their guns. Something for shooting tin cans, no problem; something for carry, I would rather not. I've replaced the Glock extractor with the Lone Wolf, but I don't like that it's come to that. I would prefer that any kind of working parts be factory parts, factory installed for legal reasons. God forbid I ever have to actually use it. The courts go a long way trying to crucify gun owners, especially if they've modified the gun.
As far as S&W goes, they sold out to the Clinton administration on gun rights. They screwed over gun makers, gun dealers, and gun buyers. They weren't an American company either (not that that is something that will stop me from buying a gun), but it does go a ways towards supporting the fact they make a lot of false claims and do a lot of posturing to sell their guns. They like to pretend it's all about craftsmanship and small in house operations and that is completely the opposite of the truth. I'd wager that most people have no idea S&W is owned by a British company from the 80's through 2001, and we know how Brits feel about guns. They anti 2A crap earned them a boycott, and it taught them a lesson after they had to shutter a couple plants and find new ownership. They also rip off most of their designs. You can read some of it here:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/smith-wesson_dark.htm
or just punch "smith wesson anti gun" in google and poke around.
I also won't do business with Ruger (responsible for large, key parts of the 94-04 gun ban), Kimber (caters for CA LE agencies, makes overpriced garbage out of the cheapest materials available), or HS Precision (Lon Horiuchi as a spokesman). Colt has been tip-toeing getting on my ban list (restricted sales, research into microchipping). I don't know why I cut them any slack. I guess their misdeeds don't outweigh their contributions yet. I feel sorry for them too, they wrote a lot of the history of this country and they're basically out of business. They've been on thin ice for awhile though.
On the opposite side of things there is Barrett (Barrett refused to sell weapons or parts to any California LE agencies because the state won't allow the sale of his firearms), STI (pulled out of the CA market in response to legislation they didn't support) and Glock (big contributions to pro gun organizations).
That is some interesting background info, it will make for much interesting reading. Thank you.
Personally I don't pay much attention to manufacturers political deeds, I'm more focused on what they offer and for how much. But, perhaps I should pay more attention. I definitely respect your decision to hold them all accountable.
I wouldn't be too scared of used guns. I look at it the same as I do a used car. I know how to check them out to make sure they are ok, and if I'm still covered by a warranty then I'm good. Sometimes I feel more confident in a used gun that has been proven to work. Still, I respect your position. I really hope Glock makes things right.
Personally I don't pay much attention to manufacturers political deeds, I'm more focused on what they offer and for how much. But, perhaps I should pay more attention. I definitely respect your decision to hold them all accountable.
I wouldn't be too scared of used guns. I look at it the same as I do a used car. I know how to check them out to make sure they are ok, and if I'm still covered by a warranty then I'm good. Sometimes I feel more confident in a used gun that has been proven to work. Still, I respect your position. I really hope Glock makes things right.
SGT Duffman
Member
Ya, you can't really see things on a used gun though, unless it's something obvious like an aftermarket barrel or spring assembly, cheap mags and the like. You would have no way of knowing the difference between the Lone Wolf extractor I put in and the Glock one unless you had a micrometer with you. If it was the Glock one, the gun wouldn't work, and even with the warranty you would be stuck in the boat I'm stuck in right now. If it was your only gun or only carry gun, youd of had a nonfunctional firearm for the last 3 months. Just looking at it would do you no good. Plus you would have to detail strip the gun to see the extractor, which you likely wouldn't be able to do before you buy it. I like to think I'm more mechanically inclined than the average person, but there's no practical or feasible way to detect or determine faults in a firearm before you buy it. You might field strip it but that isn't going to tell you much unless there's some huge obvious problem. The best you can hope to find is obvious home gun smithing where things have been scored or filed unnaturally. If my used car doesn't work, you're just late or take the bus, if a used gun doesn't work you're going to be REAL late and the bus isn't gonna help.
SGT Duffman
Member
Alright. I'm fairly certain the issues I've been having will be resolved within the next week or so. I'll post more details later on.
voyager4520
Member
Update: I finally got a chance to try the LWD extractor in my Gen3 G27. I ran 100 rounds total through it, 50 were 180gr American Eagle, 50 were 165gr American Eagle. To see my previous posts about the occasional erratic ejection I had with the factory MIM extractor and the scraped up casings it spit out, here are links to my previous posts:
1. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7362385&postcount=68
2. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7409988&postcount=83
3. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7426236&postcount=93
Good news: The gun functioned reliably with the LWD extractor.
Disappointing news: The spent casings had the same scrapes, the same gouges on the rim, and brass dust was still collecting in the same areas on the ejection port of the slide. No change.
Bad news: Ejection was MORE erratic. With the factory extractor I had the occasional casing eject straight up, bounce off the ceiling of the stall, and come right back down on top of my head. With the LWD extractor maybe 25% ejected correctly to the right, 5 casings actually ejected forward and to my left downrange, quite a few ejected over the left side of the gun, 2 casings ejected forcefully over my left shoulder and landed about 12 feet behind me, 1 casing barely bobbled out of the ejection port, and a few ejected straight up into the ceiling of the stall and came right back down onto the rear of the slide.
JBarbaresi had a similar experience when he tried the LWD extractor: http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1349059
The only other thing that comes to mind as a cause is that when I detail stripped the slides of both my G23 and G27, the extractor depressor plunger channels were different. The G23 channel had a smooth straight wall. The G27 channel had equidistant gaps where the channel changes diameter, almost like the tooling used to cut the channel was becoming dull when they did my G27 slide. My G23 works perfectly with the same ammo, no scraped casings or gouged case rims, no erratic ejection. The only other thing I can think to do is try a different brand of ammo for my G27. If the cause is the extractor depressor plunger channel, there's nothing I can do about it short of taking it to a gunsmith to try to smooth out that channel. The gun functions and that's what matters, plus if I sent it back to Glock they'd test fire it, say it works and send it back to me.
Edit: I forgot to mention, I was using a brand new factory guide rod assembly during this range trip. I thought, even though my G27 was brand new when I bought it, that perhaps the recoil springs were weak and that was affecting slide velocity. I had the same scraped casings with the new guide rod assembly.
1. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7362385&postcount=68
2. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7409988&postcount=83
3. http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=7426236&postcount=93
Good news: The gun functioned reliably with the LWD extractor.
Disappointing news: The spent casings had the same scrapes, the same gouges on the rim, and brass dust was still collecting in the same areas on the ejection port of the slide. No change.
Bad news: Ejection was MORE erratic. With the factory extractor I had the occasional casing eject straight up, bounce off the ceiling of the stall, and come right back down on top of my head. With the LWD extractor maybe 25% ejected correctly to the right, 5 casings actually ejected forward and to my left downrange, quite a few ejected over the left side of the gun, 2 casings ejected forcefully over my left shoulder and landed about 12 feet behind me, 1 casing barely bobbled out of the ejection port, and a few ejected straight up into the ceiling of the stall and came right back down onto the rear of the slide.
JBarbaresi had a similar experience when he tried the LWD extractor: http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1349059
The only other thing that comes to mind as a cause is that when I detail stripped the slides of both my G23 and G27, the extractor depressor plunger channels were different. The G23 channel had a smooth straight wall. The G27 channel had equidistant gaps where the channel changes diameter, almost like the tooling used to cut the channel was becoming dull when they did my G27 slide. My G23 works perfectly with the same ammo, no scraped casings or gouged case rims, no erratic ejection. The only other thing I can think to do is try a different brand of ammo for my G27. If the cause is the extractor depressor plunger channel, there's nothing I can do about it short of taking it to a gunsmith to try to smooth out that channel. The gun functions and that's what matters, plus if I sent it back to Glock they'd test fire it, say it works and send it back to me.
Edit: I forgot to mention, I was using a brand new factory guide rod assembly during this range trip. I thought, even though my G27 was brand new when I bought it, that perhaps the recoil springs were weak and that was affecting slide velocity. I had the same scraped casings with the new guide rod assembly.
Last edited:
jackpinesavages
member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2009
- Messages
- 809
In the first part of most years Glock is really busy filling dealer orders, putting pistols onto their shelves. The second part of the year they tend to focus production matters, etc., on these sorts of things and general production.
#1.) Do NOT believe that using aftermarket parts is a solution. Particularly Lone Wolf Dist. parts, barrels, slides, etc.. Glock will eventually stand by your purchase 100%. Sorry to hear about their lack of CS with you, so far.
#2.) The comments about S&W are certainly 180 degrees from my experiences with them, pertaining to their Customer Service. I have bought several used 3rd gen. Smiths that they did warranty work on, for nothing; shipping labels through UPS, did warranty work + went through pistols and replaced/upgraded parts for free. All I had to do was contact them, package pistols, and deliver/pick up at UPS hub. Your comment per ..." we know how the British feel about guns..." and an English company owning S&W for a while? Their revolvers and semi-auto M&P line has been pretty sterling as well.
The differences between 2nd and 4th gen. Glocks are cavernous in parts differentiations. Give them a chance to make it right and you'll be more than satisfied. If you can't wait for that simply return the pistol where you bought it from. Got the receipt?
#1.) Do NOT believe that using aftermarket parts is a solution. Particularly Lone Wolf Dist. parts, barrels, slides, etc.. Glock will eventually stand by your purchase 100%. Sorry to hear about their lack of CS with you, so far.
#2.) The comments about S&W are certainly 180 degrees from my experiences with them, pertaining to their Customer Service. I have bought several used 3rd gen. Smiths that they did warranty work on, for nothing; shipping labels through UPS, did warranty work + went through pistols and replaced/upgraded parts for free. All I had to do was contact them, package pistols, and deliver/pick up at UPS hub. Your comment per ..." we know how the British feel about guns..." and an English company owning S&W for a while? Their revolvers and semi-auto M&P line has been pretty sterling as well.
The differences between 2nd and 4th gen. Glocks are cavernous in parts differentiations. Give them a chance to make it right and you'll be more than satisfied. If you can't wait for that simply return the pistol where you bought it from. Got the receipt?
SGT Duffman
Member
Jack,
1) I didn't want to use aftermarket parts, because it's a liability nightmare, but after unsuccessfully dealing with customer service for almost 3 months and having no parts to show for it, it became necessary to get parts through a source other than the manufacturer. However, that should be changing shortly.
2) No one said anything about S&W customer service. I said they're anti second amendment. If they don't want me to be able to buy their guns, that's fine, I won't buy them. If you don't know what I'm talking about when I said an English firm (Tomkins PLC) ran the company for 15 years you might want to look into it. That's also the time period they were making deals with the Clinton administration to make gun laws here like they are in England, or did you forget you couldn't buy something that held more than 10 rounds for a decade? That's why Smith and Wesson will never see a dollar from me. As far as I know it's in American hands again, but I don't think they've changed politically. Sure, they'll sell guns to you. They like your money, but it's more because they didn't get the contracts they wanted. M&P tells you who the guns were made to be sold to, if they had their way, those are the only people they'd be sold to. They also pretend their some small custom operation when they're one of the largest gun manufacturers in the world. $830 for a .22 revolver? No thanks.
As far as returning the Glock, the gun was purchased probably 18 months ago. I don't know of any gun dealer that is going to let you return a gun after that period of time or with ~500 rounds through it.
I believe Glock is finally making it right and I'll have more details on that shortly, probably within the next week or so. I would also say thus far, I've given them more than a fair chance of making things right. I'd say being on hold for 30 mins and then being hung up on/disconnected a half dozen times, not getting the returns instructions that were said to have been emailed twice, not getting return instructions that were said to have been snail mailed twice, not getting calls returned for 6 weeks and counting, and being told parts are on their way 4 times over almost 3 months and getting nothing, is more than a fair chance. Had this been an only gun, it wouldn't of lasted a month. All that being said, I hope and think they've made some changes.
1) I didn't want to use aftermarket parts, because it's a liability nightmare, but after unsuccessfully dealing with customer service for almost 3 months and having no parts to show for it, it became necessary to get parts through a source other than the manufacturer. However, that should be changing shortly.
2) No one said anything about S&W customer service. I said they're anti second amendment. If they don't want me to be able to buy their guns, that's fine, I won't buy them. If you don't know what I'm talking about when I said an English firm (Tomkins PLC) ran the company for 15 years you might want to look into it. That's also the time period they were making deals with the Clinton administration to make gun laws here like they are in England, or did you forget you couldn't buy something that held more than 10 rounds for a decade? That's why Smith and Wesson will never see a dollar from me. As far as I know it's in American hands again, but I don't think they've changed politically. Sure, they'll sell guns to you. They like your money, but it's more because they didn't get the contracts they wanted. M&P tells you who the guns were made to be sold to, if they had their way, those are the only people they'd be sold to. They also pretend their some small custom operation when they're one of the largest gun manufacturers in the world. $830 for a .22 revolver? No thanks.
As far as returning the Glock, the gun was purchased probably 18 months ago. I don't know of any gun dealer that is going to let you return a gun after that period of time or with ~500 rounds through it.
I believe Glock is finally making it right and I'll have more details on that shortly, probably within the next week or so. I would also say thus far, I've given them more than a fair chance of making things right. I'd say being on hold for 30 mins and then being hung up on/disconnected a half dozen times, not getting the returns instructions that were said to have been emailed twice, not getting return instructions that were said to have been snail mailed twice, not getting calls returned for 6 weeks and counting, and being told parts are on their way 4 times over almost 3 months and getting nothing, is more than a fair chance. Had this been an only gun, it wouldn't of lasted a month. All that being said, I hope and think they've made some changes.
SwampWolf
Member
So you apparently think it costs more to make a centerfire revolver than a rimfire one, everything else being equal?
SGT Duffman
Member
Ya, apparently they want you to think that. Are they building the things out of titanium or something? I mean really, it's a .22. They don't have to hit a primer, wall thickness isn't an issue, but I guess if it malfunctioned you could beat someone to death with it. I don't think there is a .22 on the market I'd pay $830 for, let alone a revolver. I'd could almost get 2 Marlin 39's for that. Maybe 2 Goldenboys and a Model 60. Maybe just a half dozen model 60s. If I didn't hate Ruger I could get 3 MK IIIs with $100 to spare, and those are great little pistols.
voyager4520
Member
I picked up a non-LCI 15 degree .40 extractor for my G27. They're not made anymore but I found a store that had some REALLY old stock from Glockmeister. So old I had to clean the surface rust off of it. 
Now I just need to order a non-LCI spring loaded bearing, get some ammo other than American Eagle, and I'll be ready for my next attempt at fixing the erratic ejection and scraped brass I get out of this gun. I plan to try this extractor, one box of American Eagle, and one box of another brand. If it's not being caused by the extractor or the ammo, this range trip should tell me that.
They're not made anymore but I found a store that had some REALLY old stock from Glockmeister. So old I had to clean the surface rust off of it. Now I just need to order a non-LCI spring loaded bearing, get some ammo other than American Eagle, and I'll be ready for my next attempt at fixing the erratic ejection and scraped brass I get out of this gun. I plan to try this extractor, one box of American Eagle, and one box of another brand. If it's not being caused by the extractor or the ammo, this range trip should tell me that.
SGT Duffman
Member
Alright. Here’s the deal, about a week and a half ago Chad Mathis, Glock’s VP, contacted me on here through a PM. Don’t ask me how he stumbled across the thread, because I don’t know. I did jokingly say maybe next time I called I should try talking to him instead of Technical services, and then went on to say it would never happen. Well, it did. I called him and we talked for about 10 minutes, he apologized for what I'd dealt with and asked me what I wanted to do, I told him I’d like to get a new recoil spring assembly and a new extractor. The extractor is an armorer only part so he couldn’t send me that directly but arranged for me to get one. So I now have a new recoil spring assembly and a new Glock extractor that I promptly inspected for differences.
The long and short of it is that they are now on recoil spring assembly 0-4-3, which by my count marks the 5th iteration of recoil spring assemblies (the original 03, 0-4, 0-4-1, 0-4-2, and now 0-4-3), it is noticeably different than the old 03 mine has had on it since I bought it. I know the 03 is old, that’s why I was trying to replace it months ago, I guess it could be a mixed blessing I didn’t. I appear to have the latest and greatest one, and hopefully it stays that way (meaning I hope this one fixes the problems and that Glock has figured it out). There is also a metal spring cup on the front and overall the spring seems to be held on straighter and doesn’t bind up as much. It definitely feels smoother just cycling the gun.
The extractor I have now is also noticeably different than the stock version. It looks like a hybrid between the original Glock and the Lone Wolf. It still looks cast from some of the lines, but there are no depressions or sprue marks on it, and overall it looks a lot better made than the previous one. There are different measurements as well, some of which might be from wear on the original (if one measurement was off by a couple thousandths I didn’t worry about it); others I think are different enough to be a change. Some of the geometries match the original in some locations; others more closely match the Lone Wolf. It also drops free from the extractor channel (like the Lone Wolf) unlike the original. I will also post pictures of the extractor. I ran the calipers around in the extractor channel while the extractor was out to see if it was cut weird or anything like that and it seemed OK. I don’t know what the measurements should be but its parallel, so I think it’ll be fine. As a side note I noticed there was some wear on the extractor depressor plunger. It was pitted and scored around about half of the front circumference and worn where the extractor contacts it. This might be normal (maybe someone can chime in), but I thought it was worth mentioning. The 21SF has a little bit of the same on it in the same places, but nowhere near as severe. It’s got maybe 1/6th as much wear and almost twice as many rounds fired as the 19.
I really do want Glock to figure this out, and I hope they have, because I love my other Glock, and Glock is a good company for gun owners. They do right, as far as supporting pro 2nd amendment causes and they’re good to the troops. There’s no doubt I had a terrible run with customer service though, and I think Mr. Mathis is doing what he can to sort that out so that no one else will have to do what I did. I appreciate that he went out of his way to help me, and if I was him, I’d be pissed that I had to intervene and do customer services’ job for them. Now all I gotta do is go shoot this thing some more and make sure it works.
Pictures are up here:
http://s1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/Glock Fixes/
The long and short of it is that they are now on recoil spring assembly 0-4-3, which by my count marks the 5th iteration of recoil spring assemblies (the original 03, 0-4, 0-4-1, 0-4-2, and now 0-4-3), it is noticeably different than the old 03 mine has had on it since I bought it. I know the 03 is old, that’s why I was trying to replace it months ago, I guess it could be a mixed blessing I didn’t. I appear to have the latest and greatest one, and hopefully it stays that way (meaning I hope this one fixes the problems and that Glock has figured it out). There is also a metal spring cup on the front and overall the spring seems to be held on straighter and doesn’t bind up as much. It definitely feels smoother just cycling the gun.
The extractor I have now is also noticeably different than the stock version. It looks like a hybrid between the original Glock and the Lone Wolf. It still looks cast from some of the lines, but there are no depressions or sprue marks on it, and overall it looks a lot better made than the previous one. There are different measurements as well, some of which might be from wear on the original (if one measurement was off by a couple thousandths I didn’t worry about it); others I think are different enough to be a change. Some of the geometries match the original in some locations; others more closely match the Lone Wolf. It also drops free from the extractor channel (like the Lone Wolf) unlike the original. I will also post pictures of the extractor. I ran the calipers around in the extractor channel while the extractor was out to see if it was cut weird or anything like that and it seemed OK. I don’t know what the measurements should be but its parallel, so I think it’ll be fine. As a side note I noticed there was some wear on the extractor depressor plunger. It was pitted and scored around about half of the front circumference and worn where the extractor contacts it. This might be normal (maybe someone can chime in), but I thought it was worth mentioning. The 21SF has a little bit of the same on it in the same places, but nowhere near as severe. It’s got maybe 1/6th as much wear and almost twice as many rounds fired as the 19.
I really do want Glock to figure this out, and I hope they have, because I love my other Glock, and Glock is a good company for gun owners. They do right, as far as supporting pro 2nd amendment causes and they’re good to the troops. There’s no doubt I had a terrible run with customer service though, and I think Mr. Mathis is doing what he can to sort that out so that no one else will have to do what I did. I appreciate that he went out of his way to help me, and if I was him, I’d be pissed that I had to intervene and do customer services’ job for them. Now all I gotta do is go shoot this thing some more and make sure it works.
Pictures are up here:
http://s1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/Glock Fixes/
voyager4520
Member
^ Thank you for the pictures!
The new extractor looks exactly like an LCI extractor made before Glock started using the MIM extractors. I hope that means that Glock has gone back to using their old extractors, but it's possible that yours is a unique case in which Glock gave you an old pre-MIM extractor.
The 0-4-1 and 0-4-2 recoil assemblies did not have that metal collar at the muzzle end. To my eye there was no difference between the two, so whatever difference there was must've been minor. Here's a thread with pictures showing the 0-4-2 assembly: http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1355671
The new extractor looks exactly like an LCI extractor made before Glock started using the MIM extractors. I hope that means that Glock has gone back to using their old extractors, but it's possible that yours is a unique case in which Glock gave you an old pre-MIM extractor.
The 0-4-1 and 0-4-2 recoil assemblies did not have that metal collar at the muzzle end. To my eye there was no difference between the two, so whatever difference there was must've been minor. Here's a thread with pictures showing the 0-4-2 assembly: http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1355671
Last edited:
Most ( but not all) firing cycle problems with the Glock 9mm`s are caused by using underpowered ammo. Most commercial USA made _non LE_ and non +p or +p+ ammo is significantly under-loaded by the makers past their published specs, due to liability issues that may result from use in the very old WW II military 9mm`s around.
The Glock 19 was derived from the G 17, which was designed from the outset to function as a military service pistol, firing the 124 Gr. FMJ military loading, which in both US and foreign loads is much hotter ( close to 124 Gr. +P if not +p+ ) then the standard 124 Gr. loads and certainly the cheap 115 Gr. ball, which IMHO are the root cause of many firing issues in the 9mm`s.
Completely Incorrect, there are significant parts differences, past the recoil spring and cosmetic changes, between the 4`s and "new" Gen 3`s( most of which have been in the pipeline or at distributors for a year + ) therefore not so "new".
I think you have generally made an articulate, well documented and helpful presentation here., and I thank you for that.
SGT Duffman
Member
I know there are differences in design, but I've taken the stance that the extractor is the problem, and those 2 parts are the same regardless whether you buy a current production gen 3 or gen 4. The recoil spring assembly may also be part of the problem, but I don't know. I think that specific part is getting a lot of press for being a problem child because it's new and easily identifiable by anyone who can field strip the gun. If Glock is going to invest the time, money, and effort into redesigning and fielding it 5 times, maybe it's a bigger contributor than I think it is to the reliability issues. The subcompacts have had that spring setup for years without issues though. So maybe the changes are just to placate the public and show them that things are being done. I don't know that though, just my opinion on the springs.
As far as the ammo, I understand Glock was designed as a service pistol, and for that reason I believe it should function with any commercially produced and available ammunition, which they state themselves. Previous production runs have had absolutely no problem doing this, so why are there issues now? To say only premium self defense rounds or hot loaded ammo is what it is designed for is ridiculous and contrary to what Glock themselves say in their manual. Straight from pg 15 of your manual, "Only use high quality commercially manufactured ammunition, in excellent condition and in the caliber of your pistol. Glock does not recommend the use of unjacketed lead ammunition. The use of reloaded ammunition will void the Glock warranty, due to the unpredictability of the standards (SAMI/NATO) adhered to, since reloads of poor quality ammunition may not meet (SAMI/NATO) specifications, may exceed limits, and therefore may be unsafe." They've worked with all commercial ammo for almost 30 years, why stop now. Sounds to me like it was designed to function with any commercially available ammunition manufactured to SAAMI/NATO specifications, which actually means that +p+ may not be safe to shoot according to Glock, because those rounds often exceed SAAMI pressures (max avg for 9mm is 38,500psi, +p+ are generally around 42,000psi, all of this of course varies by manufacturer). I guess high quality commercial ammunition is open to debate, but I'd say just about anything that's new manufacture, in a brass case, and from a large name manufacturer is quality ammunition from a commercial source.
As far as the ammo, I understand Glock was designed as a service pistol, and for that reason I believe it should function with any commercially produced and available ammunition, which they state themselves. Previous production runs have had absolutely no problem doing this, so why are there issues now? To say only premium self defense rounds or hot loaded ammo is what it is designed for is ridiculous and contrary to what Glock themselves say in their manual. Straight from pg 15 of your manual, "Only use high quality commercially manufactured ammunition, in excellent condition and in the caliber of your pistol. Glock does not recommend the use of unjacketed lead ammunition. The use of reloaded ammunition will void the Glock warranty, due to the unpredictability of the standards (SAMI/NATO) adhered to, since reloads of poor quality ammunition may not meet (SAMI/NATO) specifications, may exceed limits, and therefore may be unsafe." They've worked with all commercial ammo for almost 30 years, why stop now. Sounds to me like it was designed to function with any commercially available ammunition manufactured to SAAMI/NATO specifications, which actually means that +p+ may not be safe to shoot according to Glock, because those rounds often exceed SAAMI pressures (max avg for 9mm is 38,500psi, +p+ are generally around 42,000psi, all of this of course varies by manufacturer). I guess high quality commercial ammunition is open to debate, but I'd say just about anything that's new manufacture, in a brass case, and from a large name manufacturer is quality ammunition from a commercial source.
SGT Duffman
Member
I'm gonna put about 250 rds of assorted ammo through the 19 this weekend to see if recoil spring assembly 0-4-3 and the new different Glock extractor have fixed the problem. Rounds for the weekend are:
100rds Remington UMC 115gr FMJ
50rds Sellier & Bellot 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester NATO 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester "Personal Protection" 147gr JHP
I'll keep updating this as things progress along with number and types of rounds fired and what happened.
After this the rounds left will be:
162rds Winchester White Box 115gr FMJ
150rds Remington UMC 115gr FMJ
150rds American Eagle 115gr FMJ
100rds American Eagle 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester "Personal Protection" 147gr JHP
For a total of 862rds, I also have 100 reloads sitting around but I don't want to shoot those until I've gotten at least a grand through this thing, assuming it chews through the 862 other rounds first. Don't want a crappy reload on my parts screwing up the numbers or something.
100rds Remington UMC 115gr FMJ
50rds Sellier & Bellot 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester NATO 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester "Personal Protection" 147gr JHP
I'll keep updating this as things progress along with number and types of rounds fired and what happened.
After this the rounds left will be:
162rds Winchester White Box 115gr FMJ
150rds Remington UMC 115gr FMJ
150rds American Eagle 115gr FMJ
100rds American Eagle 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester "Personal Protection" 147gr JHP
For a total of 862rds, I also have 100 reloads sitting around but I don't want to shoot those until I've gotten at least a grand through this thing, assuming it chews through the 862 other rounds first. Don't want a crappy reload on my parts screwing up the numbers or something.
SGT Duffman
Member
Well, good news and bad. The good news first. I fired off 350 rounds this afternoon. I shot the first list from the previous post, but I decided last minute to take one box of each of the American Eagle, so the total is:
100rds Remington UMC 115gr FMJ
50rds Sellier & Bellot 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester NATO 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester "Personal Protection" 147gr JHP
50rds American Eagle 115gr FMJ
50rds American Eagle 124gr FMJ.
The bad news is, the new Glock extractor and recoil spring assembly 0-4-3 didn't fix the sloppy weak ejection. The ejection problems continued across all loads of ammo, so the excuse that it's because I was shooting Winchester White Box is no longer valid, if it ever was. That's 788 rounds now. 438 rounds of WWB 115gr FMJ, 100 rounds of Remington UMC 115gr FMJ, 50 rounds each of American Eagle 115gr FMJ, American Eagle 124gr FMJ, Winchester NATO 124gr FMJ, Winchester "Personal Defense" 147gr JHP, Sellier and Bellot 124gr FMJ. So 7 different kinds of ammo, in 3 different weights, with 2 different recoil spring assemblies and 3 different extractors, and there is no appreciable difference. Recoil and cycling seems smoother with the 0-4-3 RSA, but functioning is the same. So, unless I just have the best luck ever, and 3 out of 3 extractors are bad, I would say the extractor isn't the problem.
Looks like it's time to get a different extractor plunger assembly. Most likely the one made by White Sound Defense to see if that is the culprit. I had 2 consecutive rounds land on my right thumb, and I'm right handed, what's that tell you about the strength and direction of extraction? They JUST barely made it out of the ejection port.....to the left.... Beyond that I'm not sure what to do. If this can't fix these issues it is probably ejector related and there's nothing I can do about that. Someone might be getting a target gun here soon if this doesn't work.
This will be the next try.
http://www.whitesounddefense.com/products/H.R.E.D.-9mm.html
100rds Remington UMC 115gr FMJ
50rds Sellier & Bellot 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester NATO 124gr FMJ
50rds Winchester "Personal Protection" 147gr JHP
50rds American Eagle 115gr FMJ
50rds American Eagle 124gr FMJ.
The bad news is, the new Glock extractor and recoil spring assembly 0-4-3 didn't fix the sloppy weak ejection. The ejection problems continued across all loads of ammo, so the excuse that it's because I was shooting Winchester White Box is no longer valid, if it ever was. That's 788 rounds now. 438 rounds of WWB 115gr FMJ, 100 rounds of Remington UMC 115gr FMJ, 50 rounds each of American Eagle 115gr FMJ, American Eagle 124gr FMJ, Winchester NATO 124gr FMJ, Winchester "Personal Defense" 147gr JHP, Sellier and Bellot 124gr FMJ. So 7 different kinds of ammo, in 3 different weights, with 2 different recoil spring assemblies and 3 different extractors, and there is no appreciable difference. Recoil and cycling seems smoother with the 0-4-3 RSA, but functioning is the same. So, unless I just have the best luck ever, and 3 out of 3 extractors are bad, I would say the extractor isn't the problem.
Looks like it's time to get a different extractor plunger assembly. Most likely the one made by White Sound Defense to see if that is the culprit. I had 2 consecutive rounds land on my right thumb, and I'm right handed, what's that tell you about the strength and direction of extraction? They JUST barely made it out of the ejection port.....to the left.... Beyond that I'm not sure what to do. If this can't fix these issues it is probably ejector related and there's nothing I can do about that. Someone might be getting a target gun here soon if this doesn't work.
This will be the next try.
http://www.whitesounddefense.com/products/H.R.E.D.-9mm.html
SGT Duffman
Member
I posted up some pics and videos of some things I noticed too when cleaning the gun. The extractor plunger wear I mentioned last time has gotten worse, and the trigger bar has at some point also cut into a plastic ramp in the rear. That won't allow the trigger to be reset with the gun disassembled but it doesn't seem to affect anything when the gun is assembled. The brass is also still catching quite a beating.
http://s1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/Glock Fixes/7-31-11 Trip/
http://s1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/Glock Fixes/7-31-11 Trip/
voyager4520
Member
Here's something I noticed between my G23 that ejects fine, and my G27 that has erratic ejection and beat up spent casings. The extractor depressor plunger channels in the slides of each seem different. The G23 channel is straight and smooth, while the G27 channel has equidistant gaps where the channel changes diameter, almost like the tooling used to cut the channel was becoming dull when they did my G27 slide.
I first noticed it when cleaning them, I'd strip most of the cotton off of a q-tip and run it through that channel. It ran smooth through the channel of my G23 slide. It hesitated at several points when going through the channel of my G27 slide.
Maybe that has something to do with it.
Edit: I just got done detail strip cleaning the slide of my G27. I tried to get pictures of the extractor depressor plunger channel but I'm a noob with cameras and I couldn't get it to focus properly.
Upon inspecting the extractor depressor plunger, it has the same abnormal wear around the larger end toward the muzzle. My G23 plunger does not have this wear. The EDP channel of the G27 slide looks like it was cut with dull tooling, as does the firing pin channel. Both channels in my G23 slide are smooth.
I also noticed that the firing pin safety had a little abnormal wear, as did the number on the LWD extractor. Apparently LoneWolf put the number in such a place that it rubs against the firing pin safety until that part of the number wears down.
I first noticed it when cleaning them, I'd strip most of the cotton off of a q-tip and run it through that channel. It ran smooth through the channel of my G23 slide. It hesitated at several points when going through the channel of my G27 slide.
Maybe that has something to do with it.
Edit: I just got done detail strip cleaning the slide of my G27. I tried to get pictures of the extractor depressor plunger channel but I'm a noob with cameras and I couldn't get it to focus properly.
Upon inspecting the extractor depressor plunger, it has the same abnormal wear around the larger end toward the muzzle. My G23 plunger does not have this wear. The EDP channel of the G27 slide looks like it was cut with dull tooling, as does the firing pin channel. Both channels in my G23 slide are smooth.
I also noticed that the firing pin safety had a little abnormal wear, as did the number on the LWD extractor. Apparently LoneWolf put the number in such a place that it rubs against the firing pin safety until that part of the number wears down.
Last edited:
OMG you really got a lemon. My Glock 19 ejects about 3 to 6 feet to the right depending on how hot the load is. My Glocks are also some of the easiest guns on the chambered cartridges. My PM9 scratches them all up, but with Glocks I can barely tell they've been chambered.
Tell Glock they need to take the gun back and not send it back to you until it is fixed. You sound like someone who loves to do things yourself, but you shouldn't have to go through this crap after dropping $500 on a gun. Tell Glock to fix your dang gun.
Tell Glock they need to take the gun back and not send it back to you until it is fixed. You sound like someone who loves to do things yourself, but you shouldn't have to go through this crap after dropping $500 on a gun. Tell Glock to fix your dang gun.
SGT Duffman
Member
Voyager,
I detail stripped the 19 and the 21 tonight to look in the extractor plunger channels to see if there were any tooling marks or anything and they both looked the same, so I don't know if that applies in my case, but it was worth looking into. I'm not really sure what could be causing such wear on the ends of the extractor plunger assembly, but the 19 is definitely getting a lot more beat up than the 21 for having pretty comparable round counts now. I don't know if the new extractor plungers are a softer metal or just plated with something or what, but it's much worse for wear. We'll see what the White Sound HRED does.
Ben,
If this different extractor plunger assembly does nothing they most likely will be getting it back. The only other thing I can think to try beyond this is a new ejector, which would mean buying a different trigger mechanism housing, which is like $8. Which I would say is no big deal, but it's not just $8, it's also all of the ammo, time, and effort to go back and retry everything again to see if it's fixed, then if it's not, repeating the whole process again.
Parts wise so far I've got maybe $40 into this thing ($20 LW extractor that didn't help, $20 HRED extractor plunger that's in the mail), if you count ammo it's probably another $250 for the 788 rounds that have thus far gotten me nowhere. I'd like to try these "fixes" incrementally too, so I can try to pinpoint the problem. That way if I figure out what it is I can tell everyone. If I just send it back, no one gets to know what the problem or the solution is. At this point I suspect it will most likely end up being something outside of my control to fix and Glock will be getting it back.
On a side note Glock called me today trying to get my serial number so they could send me the recoil spring assembly I requested. I called them back and told them Mr. Mathis already walked the part through and I don't need it unless there is some version newer than the 0-4-3. I'd also given them my serial number before, I believe the 3rd time they said they were going to send the part. In any case it's nice to know they're taking steps to be more proactive with customer service stuff. I believe Mr. Mathis got on them. I'm not really sure how he knew to call me though unless I had already appeared in the system as having requested the part at a prior date though, which should have meant he'd already have all the information, but I'm not privy to how they log all that data so I can't really say for sure. Either way it's nice to know they're stepping the customer service up a bit over there and taking steps to avoid having people slip through the cracks.
I detail stripped the 19 and the 21 tonight to look in the extractor plunger channels to see if there were any tooling marks or anything and they both looked the same, so I don't know if that applies in my case, but it was worth looking into. I'm not really sure what could be causing such wear on the ends of the extractor plunger assembly, but the 19 is definitely getting a lot more beat up than the 21 for having pretty comparable round counts now. I don't know if the new extractor plungers are a softer metal or just plated with something or what, but it's much worse for wear. We'll see what the White Sound HRED does.
Ben,
If this different extractor plunger assembly does nothing they most likely will be getting it back. The only other thing I can think to try beyond this is a new ejector, which would mean buying a different trigger mechanism housing, which is like $8. Which I would say is no big deal, but it's not just $8, it's also all of the ammo, time, and effort to go back and retry everything again to see if it's fixed, then if it's not, repeating the whole process again.
Parts wise so far I've got maybe $40 into this thing ($20 LW extractor that didn't help, $20 HRED extractor plunger that's in the mail), if you count ammo it's probably another $250 for the 788 rounds that have thus far gotten me nowhere. I'd like to try these "fixes" incrementally too, so I can try to pinpoint the problem. That way if I figure out what it is I can tell everyone. If I just send it back, no one gets to know what the problem or the solution is. At this point I suspect it will most likely end up being something outside of my control to fix and Glock will be getting it back.
On a side note Glock called me today trying to get my serial number so they could send me the recoil spring assembly I requested. I called them back and told them Mr. Mathis already walked the part through and I don't need it unless there is some version newer than the 0-4-3. I'd also given them my serial number before, I believe the 3rd time they said they were going to send the part. In any case it's nice to know they're taking steps to be more proactive with customer service stuff. I believe Mr. Mathis got on them. I'm not really sure how he knew to call me though unless I had already appeared in the system as having requested the part at a prior date though, which should have meant he'd already have all the information, but I'm not privy to how they log all that data so I can't really say for sure. Either way it's nice to know they're stepping the customer service up a bit over there and taking steps to avoid having people slip through the cracks.
Last edited:
- Status
