Glock magazine length

[moonshot]

I have noticed that newer Glock 26 and G19 magazines (those with two or three magazine catch cutouts) are about 1/10th inch longer than the same magazine which has just the single right side magazine catch cutout. This may be true for G23/27, and G32/G33 magazines, but I do not know for sure.

What is the reason for the extra length? The only thing I can think of would be for more positive seating on a closed slide. I called Glock in Smyrna and all I got was essentially the engineers are always changing things - it gives them something to do.

[Eurodriver]

I'm not sure what impresses me more - that you took the time to measure, let alone even notice, a 1/10" difference in mag length between the two or that you actually called Glock about it.

Maybe I'm doing this whole gun thing wrong. I load the magazine, insert the magazine in the weapon, and fire until it stops. If it stops because the magazine is empty, then my inquisitiveness is complete.

[moonshot]

Well, lets see. I began using the Xgrip extension on my G19 mags when the mags are used in my G26. I run G19 mags as both my reload as well as my in-gun magazine when I can get away with the larger G19-sized grip (late fall to early spring). The first mags I used were older ones, and I noticed a rather tight fit at the bottom of the mag well - so tight in fact I was worried about not getting a positive lock if I inserted the magazine on a closed slide. I really had to push the mag in, and I ended up running the Xgrip magazine as my in-gun mag only, and leaving my reload magazine stock.

I ran some experiments at the range and must have grabbed a few Xgrip equipped newer mags, because these seated with a resounding click. After further examination, I saw what I reported in my OP.

I then noticed the same with my G26 mags wearing GAP floorplates. Older mags seat flush, newer mags leave a gap.

Like you said - it's no big deal as long as everything works, but I am curious as to why Glock made the change. A change for the sake of changing seems a little drastic (magazine molds do cost money to make, so why change them if you don't have to?). A change to improve reliability makes sense, but I haven't noticed any reliability issues with the older ones, so what am I missing?

I want to understand the why's as well as the what's when if comes to my carry equipment.

[nate89]

I wonder is it a different magazine body, or perhaps a slightly larger baseplate? or maybe they found that by adding just a bit longer body, it made putting the last round in the magazine just a bit easier, or enhanced reliability when you fired the first round with a full magazine inserted.

[Eurodriver]

I want to understand the why's as well as the what's when if comes to my carry equipment.

That's understandable, and I'm not downing you at all. I've just never stared at my equipment that intensely so I was curious how you found out about it. Thanks for answering that.

I actually respect you for having called Glock - most people don't do any of their own causative research before asking questions here.

[mayonaise]

the engineers are always changing things - it gives them something to do.

LOL that's funny, and true of most engineers.

[Mr blasty]

I'm not sure what impresses me more - that you took the time to measure, let alone even notice, a 1/10" difference in mag length between the two or that you actually called Glock about it.

Maybe I'm doing this whole gun thing wrong. I load the magazine, insert the magazine in the weapon, and fire until it stops. If it stops because the magazine is empty, then my inquisitiveness is complete.

Myself and many others I've worked with over the years can notice the difference between 20ga and 18ga metal at a glance. I know multiple machinists that can see measurements that would require a micrometer for most. It can be second nature for those who work with it all day, just like range estimation for a sniper.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2