Odd Glock Experience

[rvb]

It couuld be two separate problems....

on the feeding.... it may be the glock doesn't like the length of your rounds, but the CZ does. I had some 147 ball rounds I had loaded that ran 100% in my beretta but if they were at the max of the +/-.003" tollerance in my load length they would jam up the glocks. They fit in the mag fine, chamber gauged fine, etc, but they hit the rifling too soon and choked up the gun. Look for rifling marks on the bullets that won't feed. If it ran fine w/ factory ammo then don't blame the gun's finish, imo.

on the extraction, is this a gen 3 or gen 4? I fought week ejection on 3 different gen 3s. Seemed a gen 4 ejector and stronger extractor spring curred them pretty consistently.

-rvb

 

[88E30M50]

I agree that it's the coating combined with a recoil spring that's a touch too heavy for the lighter reloads I was firing. I did another range trip yesterday after going over the gun and polishing all contact points. This time, I was shooting a new set of reloads that has 6.5g of AA#5 under a 115g Powerbond bullet with a magnum primer. I had only one ftf in a box of 50. I also ran a couple of mags of Hornady Critical Duty +P through it, which all ran flawlessly.

With the 19 using the same recoil spring as the 23, it follows that either one is over sprung or the other is under sprung. Since we don't hear of folks complaining about cracked frames on a 23, and since it's easy to induce FTF failures in a 19, I think the 19 is over sprung. I've ordered a Wolff guide rod and reduced power spring to see what happens. Factory is either 16 or 17 lbs and I've ordered a #14 and #15 spring for use with reloads. For carry, I'll still use the stock spring with the +P loads though.

I'll update this thread with the results after the reduced power spring.

 

[rvb]

The round does not chamber, but gets a FTF instead. Odd, I thought. Must be a bad round. I drop the mag and dump the round and the second does the same thing. I clear that and the third chambers. First round stovepipes. Second round fails to extract. Third round stovepipes. Fourth round FTF.

With the 19 using the same recoil spring as the 23, it follows that either one is over sprung or the other is under sprung. Since we don't hear of folks complaining about cracked frames on a 23, and since it's easy to induce FTF failures in a 19, I think the 19 is over sprung.

You still haven't said if it's a gen 3 or gen 4. I believe in the gen4s they adressed the issue of being over sprung and changed springs in the 9mms, so they are not the same. I'm not 100%, but I believe that to be true.

Something is keeping your reloads from chambering, but factory ammo is fine. You need to figure out the difference. What velocity are you getting from your loads? Forget the chamber gauge, do your loads drop cleanly/fully in your G19 chamber? I don't understand how it can work 100% w/ factory ammo and when your reloads fail we blame the finish or spring rates? Espcially considering your first failure was when you first tried to load the gun; it wasn't even trying it's fire/extract/feed cycle.

I still don't have a clear picture of the malfunction. Is the slide grabbing the next round in the mag and trying to feed it, but it's stopping at some mid point? Is the chamber mostly closed with the round in it and just held a few thousandths or tenths from lockup? Is the slide closing fully on an empty chamber? "FTF" is too generic. A picture of the "FTF" might help.

You said you still had week ejection with factory ammo? It's logical lighter springs would help kick em out easier, and maybe it will. Depending on the problem, and especially if it's a gen 3, springs may not make a difference. I dropped 5 lb in spring weight and it made no difference in my gen 3 g34 or g19, I had to put in a gen 4 ejector to cure the weak ejection and resulting malfunctions. If your gun is a gen 3, I would have suggested putting $ on an ejector before messing with springs.

If I were in your shoes, I would issolate and solve each problem in the following order...
1. figure out why the trigger isn't reseting. Who knows, maybe a broken spring is responsible for all this... maybe somehow a broken bit could be binding things up and it's just been a happy coincidence factory ammo has worked well.
2. Figure out your ejection with factory ammo (since it's what's running 100%), whether that's lighter recoil springs or a gen 4 ejector or stronger extractor spring, etc (or all of the above).
3. Make sure you have reloads that chamber in the g19, and tune the gun to work w/ their power. recommend a chrono so you know what the loads are really doing.

-rvb

 

[rvb]

btw, is this a factory finish? or is this something you had done to the gun? If the later, did you test the gun before adding the finish?

-rvb

 

[Hohn]

This is not the first I have heard of Glocks with that finish not running reliably.

NiB-X Glock 19 - Problems - YouTube

That's where I was going to go.

Almost every Glock with problems is not stock.

My guesses are the the re-fin has drastically increased the slide friction under recoil, making the gun act like it is way oversprung or the slide is too heavy.

I'm guessing that a good de-grease to get the oil out, followed by VERY sparse application of anti-seize to the four rails, the barrel, and the part of the slide that slides over the barrel would set you up for success.

The gun may need a very thorough break-in using hot ammo.

It sounds to me like the thing is barely cycling.


I'm not a betting man, but if I was, my money is on the finish being the culprit.

 

[88E30M50]

This is a Gen 3 Glock 19 sold as factory new. My understanding is that Glock produced the pistol and then had a sub contractor do the finish on it. I think the issue was a combination of things that just came together poorly in this gun. The finish seems to have a history of causing problems initially in G19s. That is based on what I've seen reported on the net. Factory stock, the G19 seems to be over sprung in Gen 3 pistols. I base this on the fact that the same spring is used in both the G23 where it works perfectly fine, and the G19 where it has a reputation of weak ejection. Also, when the gun did cycle with commercial ammo, it was very weak, with most cases falling on my wrists or on the gun itself. Add to this, a reload that is mild for 9mm and I think the results were a gun that, out of the box, would not cycle mid-spec 9mm ammo. Take a look at the video posted above from MAC. My experience was exactly the same, right down to the failure to chamber the first round in a mag when the slide release was pressed. They were using Remington ammo which was the same ammo I was using when the gun ran well.

What I have done so far is to polish all trigger contact points (not related to this issue, but just wanted to clean up the pull), polish the barrels and slide contact points and hand cycle it many, many times. It seems to be making a difference. The gun feels much smoother now and on the last trip, only had one FTF. The ejection was still not great with the exception of the +P ammo. That seemed to eject the normal 5 feet to my right and slightly aft.

I found a half box of the same ammo that would not cycle in my range bag and am holding that to test with a lighter recoil spring. If the gun cycles that with the lighter spring, then I'll call it fixed for range use. I have not chrono'd the new load yet, so don't know what the velocity is. Per QuickLoad, it should be running around 1160fps vs. 1030 for the old 9mm load. That older load has worked well for me for several years and runs fine in a variety of CZ 75 pistols, an AR-24, FM Hi Power, Bersa 9HC and PF9. A G19 should have had no issues with it once the gun is broken in. I am guessing that once this G19 is broken in and properly sprung, it will cycle it fine if I go back to that load in the future.

 

[longbarrel]

Is it a gen 4? The new 19, that is

 

[88E30M50]

Is it a gen 4? The new 19, that is

I only have the one G19 and it's a Gen 3. The only Gen 4 I have is my G27. All other Glocks in my safe are Gen 3.

 

[88E30M50]

Another range trip and things are getting better with it. Still, all is not well though. After 50 more rounds of the 115g reload recipe, I had no FTF, FTE or stove pipe issues. Ejection was about 2 feet back, with more force. Unfortunately, the cases that were landing on my wrists before and now hitting me in the face. The only serious issue was one shot where the trigger did not reset. The gun ejected normally and chambered the next round normally, but the trigger did not reset.

I did get the Wolff guide rod and reduced power springs today, but they came after the range trip. I'll post an update on what, if any difference a reduce power spring has.

 

[88E30M50]

Follow up: I think the gun just needed broken in. Today was the first range trip where the gun was perfect. I even ran a handful of the exact same ammo that would fail before through it with both lighter springs as well as with the stock spring and it now handles it just fine. I don't know if I'll go back to that particular load as I think it's on the light side, but it's good to know the gun will work with it if I do.

In the end, I think it was an issue with the gun needing broken in coupled with Glocks use of a heavier than necessary RSA while running a lighter than normal load. It's ejection is still nothing to write home about, but it's not dropping them on my wrists either. The light reloads work well on a broken in gun but seem to have issues on a gun that needs broken in.

The gun feels really good now. Last weekend, I had Charlie Company install a set of XS Big Dot night sights sourced from US Defense Solutions in Greenwood and I'm happy with how the gun has come together. Please don't let anyone tell you that Glocks don't need broken in. Like any item, tolerance stacking can work against you on a Glock and you just don't know how well it will run until you run it.