Information for Glock users

[DRYHUMOR]

What generation? 1 or 2

@ 25K rounds plus it may have been fatigue. I would like to see some pics of the break points.

 

[Texshooter]

Almost every excuse except ----

Obviously your officers were limp wristing.

My gosh, other officers saw it. The man is laying out all the facts.

And still the drinkers are in denial that anything could have gone wrong with this teutonic perfection.

 

[GLOOB]

What excuses?

You'd think the manufacturer would be proactive about identifying whether this is an issue common to a specific run of these older G-23s.

A useful way to investigate this would have been to offer Subsailor688 -the PD armorer- to replace all of their G-23s with current models. And buy several cases of the PDs training ammo for separate and concurrent testing.

Then Glock could run the whole bunch of these 10 year-old / +25,000 round guns through non-destructive testing. Gather the data, then test fire them to the point of failure. Glock would then know whether this is an anomaly related to ammo, or that PD's internal practices, or whether a nation-wide safety recall is necessary because of metallurgical problems.

I had a Honda Civic that blew a crankshaft and threw a piston through the engine block at 170k miles. Not only did Honda refuse to replace every '95 Civic ever sold with a brand new car so they could hire workers to drive them around the country until they failed, they didn't even replace my car with so much as a refurb. How could I trust a Honda to get me to work ever again?

 

[noob_shooter]

Reminds me of windows vs Ubuntu. While nothing is perfect, we quickly blamed the product right away....

pictures please..

GLOOB,

Still better than a FORD. Buying a ford is like buying a hipoint pistol.

 

[punkndisorderly]

Seems odd that no problems were noted prior to this particular range session, then two have the same major failure at roughly the same time. Makes me think the ammo used at that range session may be to blame.

Were it just simple fatigue, I would expect the failures to be sporadic. When they happen at the same time, I would expect it to be something that changed during that session. Another example would be if a group of pistols had no malfunctions, then started jamming at the same time new magazines were issued, I'd look at the new magazines rather than the pistols.

 

[HippieMagic]

This isn't a matter of us drinking from the koolaid.... it just seems too fishy to blame the gun. I mean first of all it is over 10 years old... I generally don't trust anything over 10 years old to get the job done... people included. Most 10+ year machines need repaired, upgraded, or fixed at some point in those 10 years anyway. I would have to agree on ammo as well. That ammo is more than likely from the same batch... factor in the wear on the guns and more than likely poor maintenance and you are pretty much just asking for a failure... regardless of the manufacturer.... Lets face it if it doesn't happen once in 10+ years then happens twice on one day... it probably isn't the gun's fault.

 

[JohnBT]

Twice on one day? You didn't read the man's post, did you?

Were you too busy drinking the kool-aid?

"The failures occurred identically to two weapons (CVM460US and CVM478US) in seperate incidents approximately four months apart."

 

[GLOOB]

GLOOB,

Still better than a FORD. Buying a ford is like buying a hipoint pistol.

Well, that's not a good comparison. A Hi Point pistol in not only reliable, but it actually DOES have a lifetime replacement guarantee. The fact that a company will bend over backwards to replace something they profited on 10 years ago that DOES NOT have any explicit or implicit lifetime guarantee is apparently a conspiracy and cover-up of wrongdoing to Glock bashers.

Incidentally, I chose to replace that car by actually buying and paying for another Civic. A '95, no less.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Guess I had better retire mine. It is probably a ticking time bomb.

 

[Aka Zero]

I just bought a 26, if I put 25k rounds through it, I think I can afford a new one if it breaks......

$500 dollar gun, $5000 of ammo if it's cheap stuff, a little less if it's all reloads. More if it's the good stuff. And the only thing that broke was a barrel lug. May have been a weak barrel, but it took a long time to break.

New barrel, and I would trust those guns for another 25k rounds.

 

[GForceLizard]

I expect reliability past 25,000 rounds in a Glock. I’m not sure what you expect a manufacturer to do about a failure on two 10 year old gun barrels. I’d say run the total production numbers past the statisticians and forget about it. If you can only document 2 failures I’m still sleeping fine at night. You’re scared because your department owns the 2 that failed. It could still be a statistical anomaly.

 

[fastbolt]

Come on folks, give the gentleman from the involved agency a break. It's not all that often that things like this even surface outside of the LE field. The internet is seemingly making things like this more easily discovered than when just LE broadcasts & bulletins were being issued.

"Operator", as mentioned, is commonly used interchangeably with "shooter" & "user", too. I sometimes add the description "personally-owned" to distinguish between an agency-owned weapon versus one owned by the individual. Don't let clarification get mired down in arguments about semantics.

Now, then ...

The failures occurred identically to two weapons (CVM460US and CVM478US) in seperate incidents approximately four months apart. Both failed during training, with the operators engaged in a combat course of fire, using Speer Lawman 155gr. TMJ. This agency issues Speer Gold-Dot 155gr. JHP for duty carry. The weapons were ten years old and have had 25k rounds through them

25,000 rounds is a lot of service usage. That's a respectable service life for a very inexpensive service pistol chambered in a hard recoiling cartridge.

.40 S&W 155gr loads are commonly acknowledged to produce increased recoils forces, and potentially be a bit harder on guns, than the 180gr & 165gr loads.

How often have the recoil spring assemblies been changed throughout the service life of the involved guns, anyway? Do you really think Glock has started advising armorers to replace recoil spring assemblies every 3,000 rounds just because they want to sell more parts? These models have been out in LE use long enough for Glock to have received a lot of LE user feedback at this point.

FWIW, I went back and looked at my notes from my last Glock armorer class and saw that I noted the instructor kept saying to replace the recoil springs every 2,000 - 3,000 rounds, even though the class material only said every 3,000 rounds.

Then, again, I remember a LE rep I knew specifically saying a while back that he was quietly recommending to his LE customer agencies that they start replacing the recoil springs on their standard & compact .40 guns every 2,500 rounds, or even annually. (This was coincidentally after the DHS testing.)

The barrel lugs have to withstand a lot of impact force against the locking block during unlocking.

I'm also not surprised if locking blocks and locking block pins (and trigger pins, for that matter) don't exhibit occasional signs of wear & tear or even damage in the harder recoiling guns. Those are relatively inexpensive parts to replace, though.

Remember that when the military was using Colt .45 pistols that they considered the slides and barrels to be parts which might require replacement during the service life of the weapon (meaning the frame, it seems).

Most people, especially in a non-LE capacity (and especially where they have to foot the bill for their own ammunition ) will ever see a fraction of the amount of such usage. Not a lot of cops will likely do that much shooting, either, but some will.

I had one issued 9mm pistol for a few years through which I ran what I finally estimated to have been approx 45,000 rounds through it. I remember in a conversation with a factory technician about an extractor where he said that back when that gun was originally being built that they never expected anyone would ever shoot that much through one of those guns. Sure, they tested them to extreme round counts, but that was when it was still expected that 5,000 to maybe 10,000 rounds was a full service life. Times change, it seems.

I have a G27 through which I've fired not quite 10,000 rounds. Mostly a mix of 165gr & 180gr loads, but some lighter loads, as well. I prefer the 165gr & 180gr loads, given my choice.

I'll be pleased if that G27 makes it to 25,000 rounds, although now that I'm retired I doubt I'll shoot another 10,000 rounds through it, so I doubt I'll see the limit of that particular gun's service life. I replace my recoil spring assembly every 2,000-3,000 rounds, and some of the other springs periodically, too.

If we're lucky and folks don't denigrate the gentleman who has the firsthand info, maybe he'll post some eventual follow up info.

Just my thoughts.

 

[KBintheSLC]

Anything can break after prolonged use. I am not too worried about it. I can't even afford to dump 25k rounds down my Glock, so I am even less concerned. If I was a cop, then my department would buy the ammo... they would also buy me a new Glock if the need arises. I think their range guns lived a good long life, and they got their $$$ worth.

 

[HippieMagic]

Twice on one day? You didn't read the man's post, did you?

Were you too busy drinking the kool-aid?

"The failures occurred identically to two weapons (CVM460US and CVM478US) in seperate incidents approximately four months apart."

I did but it was a while ago i was replying to other posts here still 4 months apart could be the same ammo batch

 

[Subsailor688]

Thanks for the intro, Fastbolt.

First, let me thank everyone on this forum for their input and interest.

At this point, I have received reports from more than 25 agencies and individual armorers regarding issues with the G22/23. Most of the issues reported were related to the old-style slide-stop spring, which I'm sure you're all familiar with. I think all of us can recall the good times, watching slides leap off the frames and propel downrange.

Of greater concern to me is the large numbers of reports involving broken locking blocks and bent/sheared/broken locking-block pins. These issues, I believe, directly relate to the cause of my barrel-lug failures, in that the same recoil forces are at work on these components as are on the lug. Incidentally, one agency (a small federal agency) reported that they broke 4 barrel lugs, among 175 guns (G23s). Interestingly, they were using the same Speer 155gr. ammunition as is used by this agency. In fact, most of the agencies reporting locking-block issues have since moved to 165 or 180 grain loads and are reporting far fewer failures (and no further broken barrel lugs). Also, our weapons did not receive new recoil springs until last year, so the weapons in question were fed a steady diet of a very hot round, without the benefit of a stiffer spring to mitigate the shock. We are now moving to re-spring (completely) all of our agency's weapons, and will work as quickly as budgets allow to replace the older series of weapons, which may be irredeemably compromised, at this point.

I am continuing my research regarding the relationship between the 155gr. loads and the G22/23 platform. I will share the results when I have something of value to report.

Thanks again for your input.

SS688

 

[Subsailor688]

BTW: The ammunition used in the two incidents were from seperate batches. We use all of our ammo supply within the fiscal year. The incidents straddled two fiscal years- and the second incident was the first shoot with the new ammo purchase.

 

[Dobe]

Please keep us informed.

 

[GForceLizard]

So your agency had 2 failures and you know of another where 4 out of 175 guns had the same failure. None are shooting any lead or reloaded ammo. One possibility is that Speer has some QC issues and the bullets are seated deeper than they should be causing high pressures. Another possibility is that Glock has QC issues with the barrels on this gun. In eather case that's way too many failures in a sample of guns that small. I can't believe that Glock could allow this to go with an investigation.

 

[Howard B]

I think Fastbolt covered the critical aspects at work. High slide velocity, numerous repetitions over a lengthy period of time. This equates to fatigue. It happens in other metal and non-metal products. We frequently overlook that the small frame guns were designed around the 9mm and it's operating specs. We know the 40 recoils harder and as sharply as the 9, likely if measured the 23 slide recoils a tad faster than the 22 slide. If the 155 is the sharpest recoil of the 40s that would add more stress. The recoil spring may or may not have been changed as often as desirable. You could select some other barrels from the same batch and have the magnafluxed to check for hairline cracks. That may give answers or lessen the grumble factor. Otherwise accept that ya'll got your money's worth from them and retire/replace the guns in that series, send samples of the ammo from each lot back to CCI/Speer and move on.

My department (750 sworn) has had a long standing policy of replacing standard duty guns after 10 years. We qualify 4x per yr total about 250 rds for the average officer. Typically they are still a good buy when traded in. SWAT types a bit sooner 'cause they get to shoot more. Until our transition to Glocks we had mostly alloy frame S&W autos. A couple of the really old 39 series guns suffered cracked frames with no ill result. We kept them well beyond 10 years for folks with smaller hands.

Now, if someone can provide me with a way to successfully convince my helo drivers not to put what look to me to be perfectly good blades in the box just cause they have a certain number of hours on them ........

For whatever it may or may not be worth. Please keep us posted.

Be alert and as safe as prevailing conditions will allow.

 

[fastbolt]

Of greater concern to me is the large numbers of reports involving broken locking blocks and bent/sheared/broken locking-block pins. These issues, I believe, directly relate to the cause of my barrel-lug failures, in that the same recoil forces are at work on these components as are on the lug. Incidentally, one agency (a small federal agency) reported that they broke 4 barrel lugs, among 175 guns (G23s). Interestingly, they were using the same Speer 155gr. ammunition as is used by this agency. In fact, most of the agencies reporting locking-block issues have since moved to 165 or 180 grain loads and are reporting far fewer failures (and no further broken barrel lugs). Also, our weapons did not receive new recoil springs until last year, so the weapons in question were fed a steady diet of a very hot round, without the benefit of a stiffer spring to mitigate the shock. We are now moving to re-spring (completely) all of our agency's weapons, and will work as quickly as budgets allow to replace the older series of weapons, which may be irredeemably compromised, at this point.

Yeah, that probably pretty much says it in a nutshell, I'd think.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's eventually determined to be a combination of the hot 155gr ammunition being used and the need for more frequent recoil spring assembly replacement in the way of preventive maintenance. That, as well as considering how long of a practical service life someone really expects out of a gun chambered in a hard-recoiling caliber (and using one of the harder recoiling available loads for the caliber in the first place).

I remember when the CHP submitted their weapon evaluation and recommendation for new weapons in 2006 as their existing inventory of 4006's were reaching the end of their original projected service life of 20,000 rounds. They were starting to see cracked slides, barrels and frames, as I recall. I liked one of the observations offered within the memorandum, "Though the S&W 4006 will fire 20,000 plus rounds, as with any mechanical device, the longer it is in service, the more maintenance it will require and the more susceptible it becomes to malfunctions." Pretty basic, huh?

That was with the standard 180gr load used in a steel gun, too, albeit the original design/model pistol. Their testing of the recommended replacement model, the 4006TSW, indicated that it would have a projected service life of 30,000 rounds (because of improvements in the design).

The 155gr loads really are harder on guns, it seems. (Big surprise, right?) I remember listening to an observer describe some of the issues which surfaced in some testing when one of the fed agencies was using the Beretta 96's with their preferred 155gr load. According to what I was told the load was just harder on the guns than the standard 180gr load.

Locking block pins have been revised in the last few years, primarily because of the G22, as I recall being told. Supposedly the hardening treatment was changed.

Changes like this are generally made for basic reasons. The manufacturer has either changed vendors, discovered a more cost-effective way to have parts produced or has perceived a need for a revision of specs and improvement in response to enough customer feedback. This is common among manufacturers. I've heard of enough other firearms companies doing the same thing.

There's a lot of force being exerted between the barrels, locking blocks and locking block pins, especially in .40/.357 models.

I remember the not-so-subtle reminder in my last Glock class when the instructor kept reminding us that if we're seeing broken locking blocks, locking block pins and/or trigger pins that we aren't changing recoil springs often enough and the guns are being battered. Guess which caliber received honorable mention in this regard?

Since barrels are more expensive than locking blocks, it would make sense to mitigate the potential for a broken barrel lug to the extent possible with more frequent spring changes.

Dunno about the ammunition selection. Some folks can be downright set on a specific bullet weight, though. Not only for 'ballistic performance results' but in regard to obtaining optimal functioning with the gun, as well. My former agency has used both 165gr & 180gr loads in .40 S&W, both of which are usually described as being easier on guns.

I know what it's like to ask for money for more than a handful of parts, though. You start telling folks that you need to change some springs and they think it's no big deal. Once you tell them that it involves all the guns, and what it'll cost, and then the "whoa switch" gets tripped and they start asking if maybe you can't get a little more use out of the original parts. I remember the initial response I received when I needed the money to re-spring (recoil & mag) just a few hundred guns and gave the accounting folks the estimate.

I've seen and used pistols which had been in service for almost 18 years. That's a very long time. They were chambered in 9mm, though.

Considering what we expect of working guns I'd say we generally receive our money's worth all things considered.

Sure, I've driven Crown Vics for work with 130,000 - 160,000 miles on the clock, but they don't seem to take the daily stresses quite as well as newer cars of more recent vintage and they seem to require more maintenance and parts replacement as the mileage climbs. Would we expect differently, really? They're just machines.

Hope it works out well for your agency. Just one of those things, perhaps.

 

[JAN]

Yes I too would be interested in finding out the way Glock handles this. First place to start is with the LE Rep.
I just recently took my first armorers course. Phil mentioned that changing a recoil spring a little bit more often than what the manual says. he only problem I have ever had was with a G22 that had the rails sheared off at about 3000 rounds.
Jan

 

[Baneblade]

Fastbolt, you beat me too it. I oversee maintenance for my agencies Glocks and more-or-less every problem we have comes down to two parts: recoil spring, magazine spring. My first question for Sub (which he already answered) is how often do you replace the recoil spring assemblies. If they haven't been replaced in 25K rounds, I am very impressed at how long the gun held up.

Any 1911 shooters out there who run 25K hot loads through their gun without changing the recoil spring?

Sub, please let us know if Glock ever says what the problem was. They have always had excellent service with out warranty repairs. Most of our guns are also mid 90's with high round counts... and some of them still have original recoil springs. Budget keeps us from replacing everything as well.

 

[Zerodefect]

nothing lasts forever.

Some parts will need replaced eventually. Slide stop and spring, slide lock and spring, locking block, recoil spring, barrel, mag springs, trigger pin, block pin, firing pin spring, etc.

all real cheap parts




I think some like to emphasize any kind of Glock failure. For ex:" See, looky. Glocks fail to. I feel so much better knowing that theyre only 3 times more reliable than my favorite toy, not 4 times."

 

[pbearperry]

Any firearm that waits to fall apart until after 25,000 rounds is not a failure as far as I am concerned.This must be the only Police Dept. in the USA that shoots that much.I would venture to guess that in 10 years,my old Dept. Glocks prob. have had 4-5000 rounds put through them at best.

 

[lordmorgul]

"To clarify, the locking block/locking lug you do indeed mean the entire top of the chamber that locks in to the slide during firing?"

No. The "Barrel Lug" that I, and Glock, refer to is the portion of the milled barrel that is below the chamber and engages the locking block. The recoil-spring guide is seated against the front face of the lug in it's installed state.

Guys, I've been a cop for 19 years and a firearms instructor/armorer for ten years. I'm a Glock armorer and I personally own several Glock pistols. I believe in the product, but I've got an issue that I'm trying to find a resolution for: i.e. half of my police force has lost confidence in their sidearm. If you have something constructive to offer, please do so. If you have questions regarding the failures I've outlined, I'll happily answer them. Otherwise, I'll post any developments here and to anyone who sends an email. If you're just here to throw bombs, I simply don't have the time.

Thanks in advance for any useful contributions.

If you have not resolved this issue suitably for the confidence of your department to be unshaken, I would suggest taking these barrels to the nearest university with a Materials Engineering department. Discuss this with one of the professors in metallurgy. Generally speaking... any materials engineering student who has taken a class in failure analysis will be able to help you determine if this purely was a fatigue related incident or caused by other factors. Looking at the torn area of the metal gives all the information needed (plus actually knowing what the metal composition is, which can be determined very easily these days without damaging the barrel at all).