|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Member
Originally Posted by munch520
I've read that several people with ejection problems found relief by switching to hotter 124/147gr ammunition. Is this the actual solution, or does it just mask an underlying flaw in the firearm's design? Shouldn't a new 9mm Glock Gen3/4 be able to reliably cycle and eject any SAAMI spec 115gr ammunition?
Last edited by CrazyFingers; 11-22-11 at 08:53.
Senior Member
Those of us that have switched back to 115gr and experienced no issues would tell you that 'breaking in' with hotter ammo doesn't mask, but rather fixes, an issue. So yes, it has been a solution for me.
Last edited by munch520; 11-22-11 at 13:50.
Member
Thanks munch520, I'll keep that in mind.
Senior Member
The MIM versus "Non MIM" is wrong.
Here are some pictures of a Glock Extractor that has never been in a gun, it is part of my spare parts kit that I purchased in early 2007. Produced before the now dreaded "Dip Extractors".
Notice the 2 in the picture. (You will have to blow it up) At my armorers course, the extractor in my gun was a 13 and my brother's was an 18. Both were older extractors as well.
An embossed number like that has to either come from MIM or casting. The cost to machine that in would be ridiculous, if it were even possible. That number signifies a cavity number, most likely.
My bet is that they are MIM and set up in a multi cavity die so that you get 25 or 30 pieces per shot.
They did change tooling when they went to the new dipped design. There is probably a very small issue with one or more of the cavities that causes a tolerance stack up issue in some guns. (The parts are all in spec but some times, certain specs add up the wrong way.) Root Sum Squares tolerancing will give you a good idea, but your process might not reflect the statisical bias in that calculation. That is most likely why they are keen on getting the guns back to do the changes at Smyrna. Most likely they want to measure all the dimensions on those particular guns and see if a pattern emerges. Once they have the pattern, they will know what they need to fix. Something like slides with X cavity extractor, with Y angle Ejector, Z spring rate RSA throws brass at 1 o'clock.
Unfortunately it probably isn't as simple as "go back to the old design". That tool was probably worn out and they had to change to new tooling, or maybe they upgraded to a new system to put out more parts and the tooling won't fit any more. That is just the extractors, who knows what all has changed on other components.
Manufacturing is alot more complicated than some people understand, it isn't just A+B=C (Fortunately for me, keeps me in a job.)
Some of you guys would walk every where you went if you knew what really went into making your cars.....
Member
Extractor still hasn't shipped yet lol.
Last edited by Bowser; 11-30-11 at 23:22.
Member
Thanks for the links, but I think those are the older 90-degree ones. Anyway, I was able to track down a 15-degree non-LCI extractor (and SLB) at a local shop this morning. Getting ready to head out of town for the holiday, but will definitely be trying out the new setup when we come back.
Senior Member
Ahh gotcha, sorry. Let me know how it all works out! Happy Thanksgiving!
Senior Member
My springs are replaced with the ones Glock just mailed me, hopefully I won't be having any of these extractor issues mentioned... I guess I'll find out this Sunday at the range. I'll be shooting a new G19 & G17, both gen 4's, using 9mm Blazer ammo so I should be looking out for stovepipes and ejections to my forehead? Super. Anything else?
Member
Can someone explain to me what and where is this "dip" in the extractor is. is it on side side that protrudes when there is a round in the chamber?
Member
There's a picture of the "dip" in the Glock extractor near the top of page two in this thread.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks