View Full Version : Any reliability issues on a Glock with an attached light?
(I'll apologize in advance; I know this has been discussed before, but over an hour of searching and I couldn't find the thread, so I thought I'd ask. I'd like to replace my Operator w/X300 with a G22 and the X300 for nightstand duty, and I want a bit more information than a post or two over at 'The Other' forum will get me. ;))
I have read some anecdotal-type stuff on a few other forums, claiming that the Glock 22 (and other models apparently?) don't like certain types of attached lights. The stories range from 'metal' lights (X200, TLR-1, etc) are the culprits, while still others said that any type of light can cause a failure, and yet others talking about magazines with a certain number of coils, combined with a light, are the true culprit.
And of course, there were posts stating there was/is no widespread issue of Glocks reliability being affected by attached lights.
So what is the skinny on this? Is this an issue at all? Model specific? (Referring to both the model of Glock and/or the model of the attached light.)
Edit to add: As of 9/26, I crossed the 1500 round mark with the G22 and an X300. My G22 is new manufacture, and the magazines are '8' marked. Ammo was mostly 180gr Wolf, with some RA40T mixed in. No malfuctions so far...
John_Wayne777
09-12-08, 07:30
The .40 cal Glocks do indeed have an issue with rail mounted lights like the X200/X300.
If there's a 100% guaranteed solution, I'm unaware of it. (Then again, I am unaware of a lot of things in this world...) To the best of my knowledge a number of different solutions have been tried from different mag springs to different recoil springs and different ammo in an attempt to solve the problem but some folks still had problems after trying those fixes.
Robb Jensen
09-12-08, 07:34
If using a light on a G22/31 it's best to make sure that you do have the newer 11 coil mag springs (they've been in the factory mags for a few years now).
Or better yet upgrade to the extra power Wolff or ISMI mag springs and/or slightly heavier rate recoil springs (not factory Glock endorsed).
In the glossy printed material that came with my X300, Surefire indicates that if you are going to use their light on a Glock, that you should test it for reliability after installation.
If Surefire is confident enough to have glossy literature printed up to that effect, I would assume that there is a quantifiable issue that needs to be vetted by each end user.
Glock .40s + metal lights.
Has there been any issues reported with G19 and X200/300 series lights?
I've been using a G21 with a X200 mounted for a little over a year now and have not had a single malfunction. I used this setup in VTAC class where I shot around 1,400 rounds, have put at least 2,500 rounds downrange in regular training and carry the gun on daily patrol.
I also have never heard of a 9mm Glock malfing with this setup. This isn't to say it hasn't happened, but I'm not aware of it.
The 40 S&W Glocks seem to be very malfunction prone with the light attached. Some people attribute this to the frame being unable to flex enough and others attribute it to the magazine and recoil spring combos.
Make sure you put plenty of rounds downrange before you decide to try and carry any gun with a light attached.
Has there been any issues reported with G19 and X200/300 series lights?
As I said, I think it would probably be best that you test, test, test to be sure you are not the first issue. Especially if you rely on that combo for potentially saving your life.
G34Shooter
09-12-08, 13:26
No issues with my G34 TLR-1 setup...
John_Wayne777
09-12-08, 13:52
Has there been any issues reported with G19 and X200/300 series lights?
I don't recall seeing any with the 9mm Glocks.
30 cal slut
09-12-08, 13:53
i recall ken hackathorn mentioning (May 2008) that some .40 S&W glock models had weird frame flex issues with some lights.
Seeing that a lot of these reports are of X2/300s, would something like an M3 (or another polymer-bodied light) be a 'fix' as well?
And thanks for the info so far!
Seeing that a lot of these reports are of X2/300s, would something like an M3 (or another polymer-bodied light) be a 'fix' as well?
And thanks for the info so far!
No, it is not the light, it is the .40 Glocks.
I remember there being some issue with the G23's and Surefire X200's. I have a Glock 22 among others and it is fitted with an X200 and I have had ZERO malfunctions with it. Maybe I got lucky.
Lagadelphia
09-13-08, 00:23
I have a G-35 with a TRL-1 with no malfunctions after about 150 rounds attached. I also havea stainless steel guide rod with a 22lb spring on it. Don't know if that has any effect on it.
Awhile back, at my former employment, we ran G22 with Streamlight M3's with little if any reliability problems, BUT we ran training ammo, white box, red box etc almost exclusively, including duty.
When we got tired of the M3 light shitting the bed regularly, TLR1 were purchased, we also switched to Ranger ammo for duty and quals. And the problems started. Failures to feed with the round nosediving into the frame/feedramp.
The armorers, academy armorers(we used their range) and a Glock rep all couldn't figure it out.
Mag springs and followers were switched and ammo was changed to Hydra-shok(lower recoil then Ranger, I think), and the problems lessened, but never really went away.
Keep in mind, this place had no preventive maintenance in place, so they had no idea how many rounds had been put through the gun and recoil spring. They had just had the frames switched by Glock recently, though.
My new employer, apparently had the same problems, when they tried lights on the gun, their answer was to issue SureFire 6Z's to everyone:rolleyes:
Basically what happens, is the light stiffens the frame, there by making the slide run faster, and the mag can't keep up. IIRC the 40 uses the same recoil spring as the 9, that can't be good. It may work at first, but as springs, recoil and mag, start to ware, problems arise.
In the other thread mentioned a Fed has seen no problems at all with the 40 glock and lights.
I think it comes down to a combination of ammo both profile and recoil, the light, the mags, and the recoil spring.
Bob
Bob,
I believe that you are correct. It is a combination of light(s) types, ammo and mags, etc...
Awhile back, at my former employment, we ran G22 with Streamlight M3's with little if any reliability problems, BUT we ran training ammo, white box, red box etc almost exclusively, including duty.
When we got tired of the M3 light shitting the bed regularly, TLR1 were purchased, we also switched to Ranger ammo for duty and quals. And the problems started. Failures to feed with the round nosediving into the frame/feedramp.
The armorers, academy armorers(we used their range) and a Glock rep all couldn't figure it out.
Mag springs and followers were switched and ammo was changed to Hydra-shok(lower recoil then Ranger, I think), and the problems lessened, but never really went away.
Keep in mind, this place had no preventive maintenance in place, so they had no idea how many rounds had been put through the gun and recoil spring. They had just had the frames switched by Glock recently, though.
My new employer, apparently had the same problems, when they tried lights on the gun, their answer was to issue SureFire 6Z's to everyone:rolleyes:
Basically what happens, is the light stiffens the frame, there by making the slide run faster, and the mag can't keep up. IIRC the 40 uses the same recoil spring as the 9, that can't be good. It may work at first, but as springs, recoil and mag, start to ware, problems arise.
In the other thread mentioned a Fed has seen no problems at all with the 40 glock and lights.
I think it comes down to a combination of ammo both profile and recoil, the light, the mags, and the recoil spring.
Bob
Master_of_Sparks
09-13-08, 12:50
I have 2) X300's mounted on Glocks. A 19 and 21. No problems.
I had an X200 on a 23, and it was not uncommon to stovepipe during rapid dumps with the light mounted.
Preface; I am not a certified gunsmith or Glock armorer. YMMV.
After staring the mechanical down, during slow hand cycling, I decided to dremel a very, very slight amount of material from dust guard with a barrel sand disk to increase the clearance around the slide end and down the length of the slide rail. So little, that you can't tell its been modified and there is no noticeable gap. There was a slight upsweep on the dust guard that appeared to cause grabbing and friction between the dust cover and the slide, right at the end of the slide. I kept the plastic guide rod but smoothed the head with sandpaper.
It may be a coincidence, but no more malfs afterward.
I have checked my other Glocks, and 8 have the same upsweep bow, and 2 do not. I probably could have used a "rail boil" to accomplish the same thing. I did that on a 19 to see if it would work, but it was not to correct a malf. I was just killing time.
I have no theory why the G23s have this problem, other than the reduced clearance of the .40 barrel used in the same sized slide and frame as the smaller 9mm.
G35 with an X300. Brand new mags (#8 follower), over 500 rounds without a malfunction. This was with Speer Lawman training ammo, I still need to test the duty ammo (Speer gold dot 165)
Theres a pretty good thread over at 10-8 about this. The malfunction is usually a Failure to feed, not a stovepipe.
Perhaps you had some interferance from the dust cover causing the stovepipes, and sanding helped it, but usually the light causes to fast of a slide.
Its generally only found in the Glock .40's. A fresh recoil and mag spring probably mask the problem to a degree, along with softer shooting ammo. See what happens long term, with an older springs set, and heavyier shooting ammo.
Theres alos been internet rumor, that Glock IDed the problem and solved it, but who knows, maybe they just mean the new follower and 11 coil springs?
Bob
G17, 19, 20, 21, 34 = no problems.
G22, 23, 35 = problems with all lights, including the Glock lights.
As another posted stated, there are some good threads on this at 10-8, which I followed with great interest, and contributed to.
In my experience with a G22 and a G35 (and I've done a LOT of testing), here's what it takes for a G22 to work with a X300:
Newest gen G22 mags, springs, and followers; AND 20# recoil spring with Lone Wolf Dist steel guiderod.
The G35 needed the newest gen G22 mags, springs, and followers; AND a new stock recoil spring.
Based on my experience with G22s, I will not own another .40 cal Glock.
All my Glocks are G19s.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.