Improving accuracy on Glock 19

[M4arc]

My experience with metal guide rods are just the opposite. On two separate occasions at the Sunday matches at BW va_dinger and I have seen one Glock with a busted plastic guide rod continue to run and one with a metal one lock up.

My theory is this; if your gun came with a metal guide rod run a metal guide rod. If it came with a plastic guide rod run a plastic guide rod.

My current G19 guide rod has over 7000 through it and the one in my G17 has over 5000 through it. I'm not worried.

Now, if you want to dick around with spring weights and stuff then run a metal one but usually those folks don't carry and rely on it to save their ass.

[Magic_Salad0892]

''Don't think so. It has to do with how the barrel locks up with the slide. I replaced the barrel in my M&P and noticed a difference. According to S&W, their barrels shoot better with +P ammo. I don't shoot that ammo''

Match Grade Slide Lock.

I have one. It works. 100% reliable.

Leave the stock barrel in.

[C4IGrant]

C4IGrant, while we've never met, I suspect that your skill level is a bit higher than the average, and I suspect also that you have more than enough experience and expertise to know the right components/modifications to do with your Glocks for them to meet your personal needs while remaining operationally uncompromised.

You over estimate my knowledge and ability.

On the other hand, I suspect that the average Glock user is far more likely to screw up a guide rod assembly by improperly installing it, and is far more likely to run into operational problems by swapping out OEM components with aftermarket ones, then they are to break the OEM guide rod by dropping the pistol.

You could be right, but DAMN. How hard is it to install a guide rod??? IMHO, if you cannot field strip your gun, change out parts and maintain it, you shouldn't be allowed to own it.

Interestingly enough, the military encountered reoccurring problems with the Beretta M9's metal guide rod being rendered inoperable when dropped (presumably when attached to the pistol), and requested the component be changed to a fluted polymer one...

Interesting. I don't follow the M9/92 at all. I just know that I don't care for it.

Please don't get me wrong; I'm not in the least questioning your veracity-I don't doubt that what you described was as it occurred, I just think that in the overall spectrum of things Glock, the average user is far better off just leaving things alone regarding the guide rod/guide rod assembly, and conversely, is far more likely to experience/induce problems if the OEM guide rod is switched out for an aftermarket one.

Best, Jon

They could be. I also understand that gun manufacturers attempt extract EVERY penny they can from the weapon. Knowing this, I find some corners that are cut a no go and will replace those items that are lacking.

Being more an AR guy than a pistol guy, the stuff that these pistol manufacturers pull to squeeze as much money out of as possible would NEVER fly with an AR manufacturer. They would be called on it, and it would be all over the net as not producing a quality product.

The equivalent to Glock using plastic sights, plastic guide rod, etc is an AR that comes with a commercial receiver extension, 4140 barrel steel (1/9 twist with a .223 chamber) and a polymer upper receiver.

Glock is not the only one guilty of cutting corners on their pistols. They all do it.



C4

[C4IGrant]

My experience with metal guide rods are just the opposite. On two separate occasions at the Sunday matches at BW va_dinger and I have seen one Glock with a busted plastic guide rod continue to run and one with a metal one lock up.

My theory is this; if your gun came with a metal guide rod run a metal guide rod. If it came with a plastic guide rod run a plastic guide rod.

My current G19 guide rod has over 7000 through it and the one in my G17 has over 5000 through it. I'm not worried.

Now, if you want to dick around with spring weights and stuff then run a metal one but usually those folks don't carry and rely on it to save their ass.

So you saw another Guide rod break huh. Interesting. I was reading on GT about them breaking, but I always have to take what I read on that forum with a grain of salt.

There are a bunch of metal guide rods out there. Some of them are so complex that they might as well have a computer on them. I am not a fan of these. Something simple that allows me to change the springs out when they become worn out.


Edited to add, Glocks (GEN 4) DO come with a metal guide rod. So if we look at the GEN 4's as an enhancement to the product, then we can say that Glock realized that plastic guide rods weren't the best idea and changed them out to a metal one??? I gotta think that if they were such a great idea, they would have kept them. They were for certain a cheaper option than the metal ones they went too and since manufacturers are after saving as much money as possible when making pistol's I have to think they realized that they were a shortcoming with the gun.


C4

[Littlelebowski]

Grant, I don't agree with your reasoning at all. As far as I can see your analogy about the AR and the Glock doesn't hold up except for the plastic sights because the Glock barrels are fine and the build of the pistol while of cheap materials is durable and reliable for not that much money. Would you rather Glock frames be hand carved out of one block of steel/polymer/unobtanium? Yeah, Glocks are made cheaply. Does that mean they're not worth the money or are you just complaining about their price point since Glocks have proven themselves countless times over.

And you're implying that Glock realized that plastic guide rods were not durable hence the Gen4 metal units. You know better than that but I'll rehash it: Glock brought those guiderods with integrated springs to directly address G22 reliability issues. The design being what it is, plastic wouldn't work for the metal sheath and integrated springs in one unit. Glock being Glock decided to use the same unit on both 9mm and .40 Glocks, hence the issues with brand new Gen4 9mms and weaker ammo (my issues went away as the spring unit broke in).

You should not confuse the facts like that to support your contention that the plastic guide rods are actually a reliability issue. Show us some statistical data.

[M4arc]

So you saw another Guide rod break huh. Interesting.

No, the one that va_dinger and I saw was a result of some guy dicking around with the stock one, trying to change the spring on an OEM guide rod.

When he realized he screwed up he jammed it back in there and shot the match.

[Littlelebowski]

So much for the "they got rid of the plastic guide rod for durability issues" argument.

[Robb Jensen]

I think their logic is that basically the slides would be 95% the same. Only real differences being the breach face cuts. And having to only make 1 recoil spring that fits both 9mm and .40 pistols. No one really knows what went on at Glock other than from what we can tell they did vastly improve the .40 Glock 22. Who knows what he decision makers wanted or did with the data from the engineers. People always doubt and 2nd guess the engineers. My best guess is that they probably figured that Units/Agencies who are using 9mm Glocks are most likely using +P or NATO pressure 9mm ammo and won't have any problems with the newer stiffer recoil spring.

I think Glock was getting so much bad press with Units/Agencies running Glock 22s and having problems and losing contracts (to the M&P40 and SIG P229s) that the main goal was to make the .40 cal Glock 22 thing work. I think 99% work was to fix the .40 and make it work and I think this eclipsed the 9mm. There's lot of LEOs using .40 Glocks and a lot fewer using 9mm Glocks. I think 9mm was an after thought, the Glock 17 Gen 3 ran and yes I agree they should have left the Gen 3 alone. Once agencies go larger in the case of going from 9mm to .357 SIG or .40 they will very likely never go back smaller.

I've currently switched my 9mm carry loads from the Winchester Ranger 127gr+P+ JHP to the Winchester PDX1 147gr JHP BONDED (a standard pressure ammo). My .40 carry load is the current FBI load the Winchester Ranger 180gr JHP, my .45 ACP carry load is the Winchester PDX1 230gr JHP BONDED (was the Winchester Ranger 230gr SXT and 230gr+P SXT, the new PDX1 is standard pressure).
My carry guns are a Glock 17 Gen 1 and Gen 2, a Glock 19 Gen 2, a Glock 22 Gen 4 and a S&W M&P45. These run on the new rounds better, more accurately and are more controllable with the standard pressure rounds.

FWIW I'm finding that the multiple recoil springs of the Gen 4s help the pistol with accuracy. My Gen 4 22 is just as accurate as my $3K plus Limited STI pistol. My Gen 4 22 is the most accurate Glock .40 cal pistol I've ever shot. My theory is that the gun locks up better and stays locked longer. I find this to be true with Glock 26s, 27s and 33s as well.

BTW the FBI is now going to be issued G23s instead of G22s. The 22s for them didn't make any friggin' sense to begin with but I digress.

I need to weigh the Glock 22 Gen 4 slide and a Glock 17 Gen 4 slide. There is a difference in the Gen 3 between 9mm and .40 and even .357SIG.

[C4IGrant]

I would agree with what you have said Robb and will take your word on the accuracy improvement.


C4

[Littlelebowski]

It sure is a noticeable difference when shooting a Gen3 and then a Gen4 back to back when doing any sort of rapid fire.