View Full Version : Question: Recently Manufactured Glock 17
Would a 3rd generation Glock 17 manufactured on 4-5-2012 be good to go?
Have all of the extraction and ejection issues been "cured" in this latest edition?
Thanks
What is the serial number,I know that with the serial number many on here will be able to tell you.
No
And try the search option
Would a 3rd generation Glock 17 manufactured on 4-5-2012 be good to go?
Have all of the extraction and ejection issues been "cured" in this latest edition?
Thanks
No. Every Glock made after sometime in 2010 is a crap shoot (no matter if it is a GEN 3 or GEN 4).
C4
Grant just made the accurate point the other day that Glocks have always been pretty erratic ejection wise. I think the standard many are looking for never existed.
If it doesn't stone you in the face/forehead and it cycles - that's probably close to the legend of Glock in this department. Perfection right? LOL
I need to get to Vegas and play craps cause I've come up sevens on 8 Gen 4 9mms and four new Gen 3's. :D
April manufacture is as good as you'll find unless you want to look for older used guns out of concern that the 10's of thousands of guns they've sold per year, these past few years aren't working. ;)
willowofwisp
04-20-12, 15:13
I have a gen3 17 that was produced in February 2012, the gun has roughly 2,000 rounds through it now and it has had zero issues, but just incase I had purchased a new ejector/extractor from Glock.
Grant just made the accurate point the other day that Glocks have always been pretty erratic ejection wise. I think the standard many are looking for never existed.
If it doesn't stone you in the face/forehead and it cycles - that's probably close to the legend of Glock in this department. Perfection right? LOL
I need to get to Vegas and play craps cause I've come up sevens on 8 Gen 4 9mms and four new Gen 3's. :D
April manufacture is as good as you'll find unless you want to look for older used guns out of concern that the 10's of thousands of guns they've sold per year, these past few years aren't working. ;)
True True.
A Glock would NEVER pass the tests that a 1911 has to in order to be considered "built right."
C4
No. Every Glock made prior to sometime in 2010 is a crap shoot (no matter if it is a GEN 3 or GEN 4).
C4
Before 2010? I thought it was after.
True True.
A Glock would NEVER pass the tests that a 1911 has to in order to be considered "built right."
C4
All it had to do was function and be accurate right? But those old fudd's might have had a "drop the empties into a coffee can" test too. :D (which I only write because I'm confident they're all dead and won't shoot me in the face with one of the originals)
Before 2010? I thought it was after.
I believe Grant meant _after_. I have 3 Gen3 G19's and 1 G26 early 2009 purchases that have a combined total of 10,000 rounds through them with only one rearward ejection.
All it had to do was function and be accurate right? But those old fudd's might have had a "drop the empties into a coffee can" test too. :D (which I only write because I'm confident they're all dead and won't shoot me in the face with one of the originals)
LOL, little more to it than that.
C4
Before 2010? I thought it was after.
The more "reliable" Glocks ended some time at the end of the 2010.
C4
Every Glock pistol I own ejects erratically, the worst of the lot is a gen3 G17 that was born last summer, it is currently back to Smyrna for proper repairs.
Also, I no longer shoot any .45 caliber Glocks,(21, 21SF, 30, 30SF)regardless of generation. I consider them flawed designs, .45 ACP brass consistently ejecting right between your eyes is a very very bad thing...
Confed-rifleman
04-21-12, 01:00
My G22 Gen 3 manufactured late 1999-early 2000 ejects consistantly at around 4 o'clock. My G34 Gen 3 maufactured 1/12 is a diffent story. Took it back to the shop I bought it from and explained the problem. The salesman picked it up without saying a word, took it into the range fired 10 rounds came back and said there's nothing wrong. After 10 rounds he decided it had to be me gripping the pistol wrong. He proceded to tell me how to properly grip a Glock and about how he is a Glock armorer and there is nothing wrong with the new Glocks. I told him the ejection was erratic and didn't always hit me in the face or on top of my head, but he was able to tell me how wrong I was after 10 F@#*ING ROUNDS!!!
Straight Shooter
04-21-12, 04:30
My G21, purchased in 2006, has many many thousands of rounds on it and never once has a piece of brass hit me in the face.
Ive been really wanting a G17 latelty, but damn, all this talk about
bad extractors/ recoil springs has cause me to pause a bit.
What I cannot understand is..Glock 9mm's were so thoroughly wrung
out for years..people were shooting 100,000 + rounds thru them, shooting them out of cannons, burying them for years, freezing them, ect ect and still they worked.
WHY in the everloving hell did they change the mechanical aspects
like the extractor and recoil spring assy to the latest fiasco when it was working fine?
Cosmetic changes, I understand those. And, when its been proven now without doubt..why not just admit it was a bad idea and change back to what worked?
I would seriously like an answer to these questions if anyone knows.
Until I can get a grip on what to look for in a new G17..I aint buying
one. I did see the info above on the extractor and recoil spring numbers... is that ALL I need to look for?
Was gonna pop on a G17 in 3-4 days, but Ill wait a bit to study more
here.
My G21, purchased in 2006, has many many thousands of rounds on it and never once has a piece of brass hit me in the face.
Ive been really wanting a G17 latelty, but damn, all this talk about
bad extractors/ recoil springs has cause me to pause a bit.
What I cannot understand is..Glock 9mm's were so thoroughly wrung
out for years..people were shooting 100,000 + rounds thru them, shooting them out of cannons, burying them for years, freezing them, ect ect and still they worked.
WHY in the everloving hell did they change the mechanical aspects
like the extractor and recoil spring assy to the latest fiasco when it was working fine?
Cosmetic changes, I understand those. And, when its been proven now without doubt..why not just admit it was a bad idea and change back to what worked?
I would seriously like an answer to these questions if anyone knows.
Until I can get a grip on what to look for in a new G17..I aint buying
one. I did see the info above on the extractor and recoil spring numbers... is that ALL I need to look for?
Was gonna pop on a G17 in 3-4 days, but Ill wait a bit to study more
here.
Just so I'm not misleading about my own experience - more than 12 years of observing erratic ejection "in general" compared to a well tuned 1911 - erratic that it might have gone far or fell close or went to 3:00 or went to 5:00 etc but did NOT hit anybody in the face.
Nor do our new guns for that matter.
The answer to "how do I know" is similiar to how does one know they're buying an M&P 9mm that will shoot 3" groups at 25 yards or an HK with TDA trigger than won't develop hammer follow after a thousand rounds? The HK is a long shot but I've seen a couple shooters report it; as well as one individual that had difficulty getting HK to fix it (and I'm sure this was a once in a universe event ;) ).
Could someone explain why there is an assumption that with a properly running gun every round will be ejected into nearly the same place? A 1911 with a tuned, custom fit extractor doesn't exactly fit into the same category in my mind. Having a gun that both doesn't malfunction and can be self-plumbed to swap worn springs or broken parts to me is an evolution of gun design, not to take anything away from Browning.
So what is the unwritten rule or standard of proper ejection? Just that it does it every time or that it does with the same force and angle?
Could someone explain why there is an assumption that with a properly running gun every round will be ejected into nearly the same place? A 1911 with a tuned, custom fit extractor doesn't exactly fit into the same category in my mind. Having a gun that both doesn't malfunction and can be self-plumbed to swap worn springs or broken parts to me is an evolution of gun design, not to take anything away from Browning.
So what is the unwritten rule or standard of proper ejection? Just that it does it every time or that it does with the same force and angle?
If you are BUILDING a 1911 and it is ejecting from 1-6 O'clock then that is unacceptable and you would need to fix it. If you load a round into the gun (with no mag) and it did not properly extract and eject the case, that would be a problem and need fixed.
A gun that ejects rounds all over the place is a symptom of the extractor grabbing the cartridge in a DIFFERENT location every time. This of course not a good thing and is why companies like SIG put in "pockets" in their breech face to locate the case in the same place every time.
C4
Could someone explain why there is an assumption that with a properly running gun every round will be ejected into nearly the same place? A 1911 with a tuned, custom fit extractor doesn't exactly fit into the same category in my mind. Having a gun that both doesn't malfunction and can be self-plumbed to swap worn springs or broken parts to me is an evolution of gun design, not to take anything away from Browning.
So what is the unwritten rule or standard of proper ejection? Just that it does it every time or that it does with the same force and angle?
All I care about it is the gun cycles 99+% of the time across tens-hundreds of thousands of rounds. I don't save the 9mm brass so I don't care how it spreads. My Glocks have done their part for me.
I have bought several gen 3 glocks lately including 2 FDEs. They have all been flawless. Still don't trust the 4th gens.
.........................
I have bought several gen 3 glocks lately including 2 FDEs. They have all been flawless. Still don't trust the 4th gens.
I got a new gen 4 and it has been better than my 2010 gen 3. my gen 3 hits me in the face with brass almost every magazine. my gen 4 (Jan 2012 test fire date) does it much less (maybe once every 50 rounds)
some of you say the ejection pattern doesn't bug you, but when it happens so often like in my gen 3, I notice that I flinch sometimes in anticipation of getting hit in the face.
Please post what you know about, "Hk's struggle to get it right."
Member on PF sent his back mutliple times w/o successful resolution.
Member on PF sent his back mutliple times w/o successful resolution.
That's the dumbest thing I have heard about H&K's so called "struggle to get it right..." I'm sorry but the odds are not in your favor on this one.
.........................
If you are BUILDING a 1911 and it is ejecting from 1-6 O'clock then that is unacceptable and you would need to fix it. If you load a round into the gun (with no mag) and it did not properly extract and eject the case, that would be a problem and need fixed.
A gun that ejects rounds all over the place is a symptom of the extractor grabbing the cartridge in a DIFFERENT location every time. This of course not a good thing and is why companies like SIG put in "pockets" in their breech face to locate the case in the same place every time.
C4
:confused: Why would inserting a round manually into the chamber be a build test when that will destroy the 1911 extractor?
I guess for me if I wanted a gun to run like a 1911 I wouldn't buy a glock and I wouldn't plan on doing any of my own gun plumbing. For the trouble of getting a casing thrown in my general direction every couple hundred rounds I will save myself trips to the gunsmith to tune a new extractor every year.
That's the dumbest thing I have heard about H&K's so called "struggle to get it right..." I'm sorry but the odds are not in your favor on this one.
If you think 100% of HK pistols are guaranteed 100% rock on. It would only take yellow belt Google-Fu to learn this on HK forums or on PF or even right here on M4C. ;)
Do they appear to be more solid based on their much lower sales volume? It appears so. Are they all without flaws? "The odds are not in your favor on that one." :D
Not trying to be confrontational, but I have read that thread and that is one example. Hardly a struggle.
That's cool. I thought that guy's experience was a freakin' obscenity for a $900 polymer pistol. Considering his attempts to resolve.
Did you see the recent note on PF or on TLGs blog (???) about the two HK TDA pistols going down at the same range outing? Both for hammer following after 1000+ rds of good function? I'm not sayin' they aren't fine pistols. They are. So are M&Ps, so are Glocks, so are PPQs it appears. I'm sayin' the chase for perfection (marketing hooks notwithstanding) is folly. Pick a solid platform, run it, and plan for eventual shit happening.
:confused: Why would inserting a round manually into the chamber be a build test when that will destroy the 1911 extractor?
You don't. You load it from the magazine and then remove the magazine.
I guess for me if I wanted a gun to run like a 1911 I wouldn't buy a glock and I wouldn't plan on doing any of my own gun plumbing. For the trouble of getting a casing thrown in my general direction every couple hundred rounds I will save myself trips to the gunsmith to tune a new extractor every year.
I am not sure which 1911's you have personal experience with, but I have been shooting a WC CQB since 2004. I have never had to adjust the extractor tension.
C4
If you load a round into the gun (with no mag) and it did not properly extract and eject the case, that would be a problem and need fixed.
C4
You don't. You load it from the magazine and then remove the magazine.C4
I didn't think you would advocate that, but these two procedures are clearly not the same. I'm honestly not sure this has to do with the topic. I don't know that I care what happens to that casing if there isn't even a mag in the gun. Grant, is this an extraction/ejection test that gunsmiths and armorers perform for function testing--something in the vein of putting a BCG on end to check the gas rings?
Do Glocks fail this test more than other types of pistols?
I sold my 1911 to pursue shooting rather than gun owning around 2k. I was referring to Hilton Yam's advice for preventive maintenance at 5k.
I didn't think you would advocate that, but these two procedures are clearly not the same. I'm honestly not sure this has to do with the topic. I don't know that I care what happens to that casing if there isn't even a mag in the gun. Grant, is this an extraction/ejection test that gunsmiths and armorers perform for function testing--something in the vein of putting a BCG on end to check the gas rings?
Do Glocks fail this test more than other types of pistols?
I sold my 1911 to pursue shooting rather than gun owning around 2k. I was referring to Hilton Yam's advice for preventive maintenance at 5k.
I just didn't word the first one properly. It should have read; "load a round into the gun and then remove the magazine."
You should care how the gun ejects without the mag (as this will tell you a lot about your extractor)!
Glock is one of the few (if not the only) combat pistols that fail this test. M&P's HK's, SIG's, M9's, HP's, etc all pass it.
Most all guns (include modern day polymers) require PM's between 3-5K.
C4
That's cool. I thought that guy's experience was a freakin' obscenity for a $900 polymer pistol. Considering his attempts to resolve.
Did you see the recent note on PF or on TLGs blog (???) about the two HK TDA pistols going down at the same range outing? Both for hammer following after 1000+ rds of good function? I'm not sayin' they aren't fine pistols. They are. So are M&Ps, so are Glocks, so are PPQs it appears. I'm sayin' the chase for perfection (marketing hooks notwithstanding) is folly. Pick a solid platform, run it, and plan for eventual shit happening.
So you are saying you have ZERO first hand experience with H&K pistols that do not work properly?
So you are saying you have ZERO first hand experience with H&K pistols that do not work properly?
Yup. :D
I've shot a couple and they're swell and all. But equipping a household of shooters with training guns and carry guns/spares is a lot easier at $500 a pop. And then shooting them as well as we do, and having them run as well as they do; just hasn't generated the need to pay HK prices. How many would you figure I'd have to buy to hit one that had a problem?
I have no problem with folks dogging Glock. They earned it. I obviously have no problem uttering the unspeakable - that some HKs have problems too. :eek:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.