View Full Version : Glock 26 Gen 4 Reports?
digitalid99
03-10-11, 21:56
Regarding the gen 4 Glock 26: I'm interested any available range reports, round counts, failures, ammo used, other issues, etc. Opinions are welcome, but a general consensus about reliability is the main focus.
I realize it's pretty early for this question...
Thanks in advance.
I got one a few weeks back from Buds Gun Shop in Lexington, KY. It was a blue label with factory night sights. I've got around 500rds. through it now without a single issue, boring Glock reliability. Ammo used so far is Federal 115gr. JHP (9BP), Federal Champion 115gr. FMJ, Winchester white box 115gr. FMJ, Winchester M882 124gr. FMJ NATO (both the white box and Ranger versions), Speer Gold Dot 124gr.+P and 147gr. JHP, and Federal 147gr. JHP HST.
I'm also using no backstrap insert and have used 26, 19, and 17 mags with and without factory +2 basepads.
we have been testing one for the last few weeks. buy last count we were up to 3000 + rds. with no issues at all. we did install the NY+ trigger in the gun which makes the trigger fell like 20 lbs. but other than the shitty trigger she runs and shoots fine. hope this helps.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=70583
I haven't fired very many additional rounds as I currently train with and carry a G27G4 as a back up to my issued G22. When I retire in a few years, I plan on selling the G27G4 and going with a G19 and G26G4.
Bulldog7972
03-13-11, 14:52
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=70583
I haven't fired very many additional rounds as I currently train with and carry a G27G4 as a back up to my issued G22. When I retire in a few years, I plan on selling the G27G4 and going with a G19 and G26G4.
May I ask why? Why not keep the 27 and just get a 23?
May I ask why? Why not keep the 27 and just get a 23?
Yeah, I'm curious to hear your reason as well.
I'm finding that I'm digging my G23 more and more these days and plan to buy a new Gen4 G23 and G22 in the near future. Hell, I might even pick up a Gen4 G27 too :p
Littlelebowski
03-13-11, 17:55
Is the recoil spring setup different than the Gen3 g26s?
willowofwisp
03-13-11, 17:57
Is the recoil spring setup different than the Gen3 g26s?
its the same dual setup
Littlelebowski
03-13-11, 18:07
Then, it sounds like the Gen4 G26 shouldn't have any of the reliability issues that have hit the Gen4 17s and 19s.
May I ask why? Why not keep the 27 and just get a 23?
Not to speak for SWAT Lt, but I'm assuming that it is because Glocks in .40 S&W don't have the best track record in the world. We will see what the long term assessment is on the Gen4 .40 Glock is, but there are several SMEs that have long established the problems with Glocks in calibers other than 9mm.
I carry a G23 as my primary weapon for my job, and it is certainly reliable. If given the choice, I would flush it down the toilet if I could have a G19. A G19 is demonstrably easier to shoot than the G23. The G23 is manageable, but I feel the G19 is significantly easier to shoot. Sorry for the derail, my goal is not to turn this in to 9 vs 40 thread.
Detmongo, will the 4th gens be authorized for duty/off duty?
Not to speak for SWAT Lt, but I'm assuming that it is because Glocks in .40 S&W don't have the best track record in the world. We will see what the long term assessment is on the Gen4 .40 Glock is, but there are several SMEs that have long established the problems with Glocks in calibers other than 9mm.
I carry a G23 as my primary weapon for my job, and it is certainly reliable. If given the choice, I would flush it down the toilet if I could have a G19. A G19 is demonstrably easier to shoot than the G23. The G23 is manageable, but I feel the G19 is significantly easier to shoot. Sorry for the derail, my goal is not to turn this in to 9 vs 40 thread.
That makes sense.
I bought one last week. 200 rounds so far, just as boring as my Gen 3 19. Been running cheap wal-mart UMC.
S.Kelly
don't know if it is going to be. right now we are just testing it. so far no plans to test the 4th.gen 19's don't know why.
May I ask why? Why not keep the 27 and just get a 23?
I actually have a G23 Gen4 that I like that I currently carry as an off duty gun. I leave G22 mags in my vehicle which will work with any of my pistols in a pinch.
I will be transitioning to the 9mm upon retirement for several reasons. I will no longer be actively hunting bad guys, but will be CCDW in case they find me. I feel the liklihood of having to shoot through a windshield/barrier will be greatly reduced. I believe the Glocks are best (most reliable, most durable) in 9mm. I shoot the 9mm better, especially one handed, and find it more controllable and enjoyable to shoot than the .40. Narrowing calibers and platforms makes logistics easier. And last but not least, I will be paying for all of my own ammo.
I believe the 9mm with good ammo works well and have no worries about it's ability to stop a threat. Some folks are members here whose agencies issue 9mms with good ammo and they seem happy with its' performance in OISs.
Then, it sounds like the Gen4 G26 shouldn't have any of the reliability issues that have hit the Gen4 17s and 19s.
I was going to come in here and post the same thing, but I see I'm late to the party. :D
I actually have a G23 Gen4 that I like that I currently carry as an off duty gun. I leave G22 mags in my vehicle which will work with any of my pistols in a pinch.
I will be transitioning to the 9mm upon retirement for several reasons. I will no longer be actively hunting bad guys, but will be CCDW in case they find me. I feel the liklihood of having to shoot through a windshield/barrier will be greatly reduced. I believe the Glocks are best (most reliable, most durable) in 9mm. I shoot the 9mm better, especially one handed, and find it more controllable and enjoyable to shoot than the .40. Narrowing calibers and platforms makes logistics easier. And last but not least, I will be paying for all of my own ammo.
I believe the 9mm with good ammo works well and have no worries about it's ability to stop a threat. Some folks are members here whose agencies issue 9mms with good ammo and they seem happy with its' performance in OISs.
Thanks for the info man.
digitalid99
03-14-11, 19:40
Finally had a chance to test out a gen 4 26 this past weekend. Roughly 180 rounds with no issues. The majority was cheap white box, also had around 40 rounds of various JHP. I wasn't sure I would like the mag release, but it was quick and efficient.
...oddly enough, the reason I asked about the reliability is I'm considering making the change from my gen 3 27/23 carry setup to a G26. Still haven't decided on that, but I think the gen 4 will be my GSSF grab for this year...
And thanks for the input as well folks...
Since the Gen 3 G26 already had a dual recoil spring setup, it wouldn't seem that there would have been any reason for Glock to change anything on the Gen 4 G26, other than the GRIP.
So it stands to reason that the Gen 4 G26 should have the same reliability as a Gen 3 G26. And the reports seem to be bearing that out. Sweet! :dance3:
digitalid99
03-14-11, 21:16
I haven't verified this personally, but have read that the trigger housing and trigger bar are different from the Gen 3.
Bulldog7972
03-15-11, 09:11
I actually have a G23 Gen4 that I like that I currently carry as an off duty gun. I leave G22 mags in my vehicle which will work with any of my pistols in a pinch.
I will be transitioning to the 9mm upon retirement for several reasons. I will no longer be actively hunting bad guys, but will be CCDW in case they find me. I feel the liklihood of having to shoot through a windshield/barrier will be greatly reduced. I believe the Glocks are best (most reliable, most durable) in 9mm. I shoot the 9mm better, especially one handed, and find it more controllable and enjoyable to shoot than the .40. Narrowing calibers and platforms makes logistics easier. And last but not least, I will be paying for all of my own ammo.
I believe the 9mm with good ammo works well and have no worries about it's ability to stop a threat. Some folks are members here whose agencies issue 9mms with good ammo and they seem happy with its' performance in OISs.
Thanks for the info. Like you, I too will be retiring soon. I forget that at times and that when I do, I also will no longer be hunting the beast. Because I forget, I am always looking for a better tool, and was thinking about switching from my 9mm Sigs to my first Glock which would have been a G23. Perhaps I will re-think that and stick with what I already have and have been very successful with.
Bulldog,
Nothing wrong with trying something new or buying a new gun and, as I said, I like my G23 Gen4. You have to decide that, at this stage of your life, if you want to stick with what you know best and have the most training, experience, and confidence with. Or, do you want to invest the time and money training up on a new weapon, along with buying the new support gear necessary to accommodate it. It's up to you and is certainly a nice "problem" to have.
I enjoy shooting various guns and have a fair amount of time behind Berettas, S&Ws, and SIGs. I much prefer the Glock for LE/SD and, fortunately, that is what I have the most training and experience with. I also already have the support gear (mags, holsters, parts, etc.) I need in place.
It just makes sense for me, for someone else maybe not. Good luck with your decision!
Fellas-
Sorry to "necropost", I believe that is the term, but I didnt want to start an entire new thread and this is what the search pulled up.
So to my question... Now that the Gen4 Glock 26's have been out for a while is anyone seeing any issues like we are with the 19/17's? I ask this question as it appears that the 26 recieved the least amount of internal changes from its Gen3 configuration.
I have close to about 1000 rounds through my Gen4 26 without any issue thus far (knock on wood).
How is everyone else with this pistol doing? Any problems and what are your round counts to date?
Thanks in advance!
-Drew
parishioner
06-21-11, 21:35
I plan on hitting the range Friday morning to try out my new gen4 g26. I'll report back back when I'm through.
Cool, be sure to keep us up to date!
Bought a Gen4 26 a few weeks ago. Put a couple of hundred rounds through it. Mostly Tula 115 gr FMJ and one box of Federal 9BPLE.
Worked flawlessly. Also, trigger is better then my Gen4 17s was out of the box. This is my new carry gun which replaces my Walther PPS which is having reliability issues.
BufordTJustice
06-22-11, 17:30
I got my G26 gen4 on May to replace a broken SIG P228.
I'm 250rds deep. After my initial research, I did the $.25 trigger job and installed a LWD machined LCI extractor in lieu of my MIM factory job.
I'm waiting (It just shipped) on a white sound defense extractor depressor assembly to complete the package.
For the rounds so far, all round extracted properly...with some coming out a little soft......that was actually alleviated by lubing the interfacing surfaces of the recoil spring assembly. Slide now rolls like its on ball bearings. Extraction became more consistent. I'm hoping the WSD depressor assembly perfects the package.
I'll post in that thread when I get it in and test it out.
I really prefer the Gen4....I use the large backstrap because it feels a LOT like my duty G21. I dig the grip texture (I have sweaty hands). I can buy a new extractor...I can't buy a grip extension for a gen3.
There's my $.02.
parishioner
06-22-11, 18:29
Have the extractors always been MIM or is this new for the gen4?
Bought a Gen4 26 a few weeks ago. Put a couple of hundred rounds through it. Mostly Tula 115 gr FMJ and one box of Federal 9BPLE.
Worked flawlessly. Also, trigger is better then my Gen4 17s was out of the box. This is my new carry gun which replaces my Walther PPS which is having reliability issues.
If you ever break down the slide assembly - it would be interesting to know what connector is in it. Esp if it has the new "minus dot" connector that may or not have been developed to improve the Gen 4 triggers.
BufordTJustice
06-22-11, 19:51
Have the extractors always been MIM or is this new for the gen4?
It is found in all gen4's and recent production gen3 guns. You'd have to ask around to find hard dates for the transition in gen3 models to MIM extractors.
The extractors used to be machined from billet steel (my G21 is like this). If you have a gen4, it's a guarantee that you're extractor is MIM, unless somebody in the factory made a mistake.
Lone Wolf Dist sells a machined extractor that is damn-near-identical to the original design for $14.95.
My Gen 4 G26 was purchased last week. Slightly over 100 rounds 115gr WWB & Federal from WalMart, & 147 gr Winchester Personal Protection with no malfunctions. Ejected cases approx 3'-4' to the right and slightly behind the ejection port.
Trvlngnrs
I recently got a G26 gen 4. 1500 rounds with boring reliability. Recently took it to GSSF and scored better (like by 30 seconds)than w my G17 gen 3. I dont understand how or why. In fact, i can't shake not being able to understand this given my large hands.
I am just shy of 2000 rounds on my Gen4 Glock 26 purchased new this May. Other than the occasional erratic ejection, I have not had any stoppages or malfs that I did not intentionally cause. (knock on wood...)
Drew
ldunnmobile
06-23-11, 08:23
Couple hundred rounds through my G26 with no malfunctions whatsoever. Runs like a top so far.
parishioner
06-23-11, 09:43
I recently got a G26 gen 4. 1500 rounds with boring reliability. Recently took it to GSSF and scored better (like by 30 seconds)than w my G17 gen 3. I dont understand how or why. In fact, i can't shake not being able to understand this given my large hands.
You're not alone.
My fastest runs on the plates at GSSF matches are with a G26.
Usually in the 3 sec. range with a G17 or G19. I've had a few 2.5 sec. runs with the G26.
Nephrology
06-23-11, 16:20
It is found in all gen4's and recent production gen3 guns. You'd have to ask around to find hard dates for the transition in gen3 models to MIM extractors.
The extractors used to be machined from billet steel (my G21 is like this). If you have a gen4, it's a guarantee that you're extractor is MIM, unless somebody in the factory made a mistake.
Lone Wolf Dist sells a machined extractor that is damn-near-identical to the original design for $14.95.
How do you know it is MIM?
I got my Glock 26 a few months back and have put around 800 rounds through it without a single incident, with various types of ammo, cheapo Russian included.
Works fine for me.
BufordTJustice
06-23-11, 17:03
How do you know it is MIM?
I can see the 'mold' marks that are left on the extractor that are indicative of MIM manufacturing processes. Machined parts do not have these marks; neither my gen3 G21 nor the LWD have these 'mold' marks. You can search glocktalk for several threads with pix of this.
I can see the 'mold' marks that are left on the extractor that are indicative of MIM manufacturing processes. Machined parts do not have these marks; neither my gen3 G21 nor the LWD have these 'mold' marks. You can search glocktalk for several threads with pix of this.
This obsession with MIM is rather silly, no?
Modern MIM processes are reliable, period.
Is it possible to get over the MIM debate? Guess not.
Are MIM manufactured parts as durable long term as their machined counter parts?
I have heard that MIM parts are rather soft once you get past the hardening?
BufordTJustice
06-25-11, 04:26
This obsession with MIM is rather silly, no?
Modern MIM processes are reliable, period.
Is it possible to get over the MIM debate? Guess not.
There is no 'MIM debate'. It's an inferior manufacturing method for a part that was designed to be machined from bar stock in the first place....just as making something from bar stock is overkill for a part that was designed to function as an MIM part.
You sound ignorant. Read the 8 pages over at Glocktalk of people replacing their late gen3 and gen4 MIM'd extractors with glock machined or LWD machined parts...their problems disappear. It's almost magical!:jester:
The process of MIM in mass production, as implemented by Glock (and Kimber, for that matter) is reliably imprecise.
Guess where the wear points show up on the MIM'd extractors?
If you guessed RIGHT ON THE RAISED MOLD MARKS (that aren't present on the machined parts).......winner winner chicken dinner!!!!!!!!!!
Show me the upside of less consistent production, increased friction, and a weaker overall part. Clue: aside from cost, there is no upside.
I've got no issues w/ MIM as a manufacturing process...I DO have an issue with it being employed in a less-than-optimal role like this one for no other reason than cost savings.
Can you point us to objective scientific tests and analysis proving that MIM parts in a Glock are resulting in inferior products?
If so, that would be helpful.
If not, you are just spreading the same kind of MIM silliness that we can read everywhere.
Update....was out at the range yesterday and put another couple hundred rounds through the G26, Gen 4.
Again: not a single jam, malfunction, etc. Was shooting both cheapo Russian and brass. No issues.
In fact, I was shooting at one of our large steel plate targets from 35-40 yards out....was getting a nice satisfying "gong!!!" nearly every shot.
Works for me....for what it is worth.
parishioner
06-25-11, 09:24
Does anyone sell non-MIM glock OEM extractors?
Do we have some objective testing and results available that would help us reach an informed opinion about the MIM ejector?
I don't mean to be beating a dead horse, but it seems that much of the MIM discussions I read on various fora comes down more to speculation rather than hard evidence and facts.
I'm serious about this MIM issue. I've read a lot of near-panic stricken comments about MIM but I'm not finding much evidence to justify them.
I read this elsewhere about MIM:
Metal Injection Molding or MIM, also called Powder Injection Molding or PIM, is a net-shape process for producing solid metal parts that combines the design freedom of plastic injection molding with material properties near that of wrought metals. With its inherent design flexibility, MIM is capable of producing an almost limitless array of highly complex geometries in many different alloys ranging from stainless steels, alloy steels, and soft magnetic materials, controlled expansion materials (low CTE), and custom alloys. Design and economic limitations of traditional metalworking technologies, such as machining and casting, can be readily overcome by MIM.
Today, MIM is serving critical performance applications in a wide range of industries and products including, automotive, aerospace and defense, cellular telephones, dental instruments, electronic heat sinks and hermetic packages, electrical connector hardware, industrial tools, fiber optic connectors, fluid spray systems, hard disk drives, pharmaceutical devices, power hand-tools, surgical instruments, and sporting equipment.
Do we have any objective test results that we can evaluate to see if the dire warnings we hear about MIM are really legit?
Littlelebowski
06-25-11, 09:41
I guess you're going to be feel pretty silly when you realize Glock has been using MIM for a very long time, eh?
There is no 'MIM debate'. It's an inferior manufacturing method for a part that was designed to be machined from bar stock in the first place....just as making something from bar stock is overkill for a part that was designed to function as an MIM part.
You sound ignorant. Read the 8 pages over at Glocktalk of people replacing their late gen3 and gen4 MIM'd extractors with glock machined or LWD machined parts...their problems disappear. It's almost magical!:jester:
The process of MIM in mass production, as implemented by Glock (and Kimber, for that matter) is reliably imprecise.
Guess where the wear points show up on the MIM'd extractors?
If you guessed RIGHT ON THE RAISED MOLD MARKS (that aren't present on the machined parts).......winner winner chicken dinner!!!!!!!!!!
Show me the upside of less consistent production, increased friction, and a weaker overall part. Clue: aside from cost, there is no upside.
I've got no issues w/ MIM as a manufacturing process...I DO have an issue with it being employed in a less-than-optimal role like this one for no other reason than cost savings.
Littlelebowski
06-25-11, 09:42
It's a sad thing to see the 1911 forum style hands wringing over MIM come to a Glock discussion.
Yup.....indeed, you are correct, Dude.
BufordTJustice
06-26-11, 01:57
I guess you're going to be feel pretty silly when you realize Glock has been using MIM for a very long time, eh?
Of course they have. I don't feel silly at all.
But the parts which are MIM (you're right, there are several) were designed to function using that manufacturing technique. It's more than adequate for low-stress parts. The extractor was designed to be machined from bar stock. Deviating from that and using an alternative (and much cheaper) manufacturing process without any significant post-mold machining is a clear error.
Some low stress parts lend themselves to be switched-out for MIM parts in lieu of machined. High stress parts (barrel, slide, extractor, etc.) are not on the list of things that should be switched-out for MIM'd parts.
Due to the poor ability (inherent in MIM processes) to maintain tight tolerances with MIM without some post-mold machining/finishing, the new extractors are binding in the extractor channel. A properly made Glock extractor should drop freely during disassembly unless laden with fouling or gunk. MIM extractors do not usually drop freely during disassembly...mine required pliers and some gentle tugging to get it out. The older machined extractor in my agency G21, and the LWD machined replacement both move freely in the channel and require no effort to break down for detail cleaning.
The whole point is it's a lottery with the new part. I have 2 squadmates that have gen4 G27's with the new extractor. One guy's gun throws brass in your face like you're on candid camera. The other plays just like our agency issue guns. Same dip extractor.
BufordTJustice
06-26-11, 01:59
Does anyone sell non-MIM glock OEM extractors?
Lone Wolf Distributors does for under $15.
BufordTJustice
06-26-11, 02:42
Can you point us to objective scientific tests and analysis proving that MIM parts in a Glock are resulting in inferior products?
If so, that would be helpful.
If not, you are just spreading the same kind of MIM silliness that we can read everywhere.
You're putting words in my mouth. I never said "MIM parts in a Glock are resulting in inferior products."
MIM is a widely used manufacturing process...virtually every major gun manufacturer uses some MIM parts in their firearms.
MIM parts are prone to have air-bubbles inside the moldings, and it is very difficult to control the amount of carbon that ends up in the steel alloys that can be used with the process. I have a good friend who is an engineer. She worked with GM to start Saturn and has long since moved on to Piper Aircraft as a supervisor. She spends much time on the assembly line and has confirmed what I've stated. Low stress, small parts. But the parts that she sees being used that are MIM'd still must have some post-mold machining work done to be usable.
It appears that the Glock MIM extractor has NOT had much (if any) post mold machining done. And it also runs the risk (as with ANY MIM part) of having a void left during the molding or sintering process. Machined parts have a MUCH lower likelihood of having a void molded into the part.
MIM has it's uses...for low stress parts or for parts that are designed with MIM in mind from the git-go. Ruger uses a LOT of MIM (and investment casting, for that matter), but they design with MIM in mind.
I would ask for an explanation on why we aren't using MIM for AR15 extractors, bolts, etc....
I have no vendetta against MIM. I have a vendetta against cost cutting.
Example: show me one piece of literature about MIM that doesn't repeatedly state that it's main advantage is reduced cost. Just google MIM and you'll get tons of industry literature...all touting how much CHEAPER it is. This specific move by Glock DID save them money. That's not up for debate. I am stating that it was a poorly exectuted move on their part, and that the MIM parts lack the quality and QC of their previous machined extractors. Hence the total ****ing lottery of buying a gen4 (or late gen3). Your gun could run perfect, or it might not run very well at all. Gen3 Glocks using machined extractors were not subject to this lottery. Period.
BufordTJustice
06-26-11, 02:51
I'll end with a quote from S&W revolver extraordinaire, Grant Cunnigham:
"When the method of fabrication matches the design of the part, and the application it's used for, you will probably be good to go, but when MIM technology is simply used to duplicate an older part one shouldn't be suprised if there are problems.
I think that's a profound statement, and one that people should remember when applying a blanket condemnation (or praise) to MIM. The use of MIM in 1911 parts is a good example of a bad choice - because the parts weren't engineered for the process, and in general didn't fit the profile of the kinds of things that lend themselves to MIM production.
In the case of S&W revolvers, the parts were generally redesigned to take advantage of the technology (the major exception being the rebound slide, which seems to have fit the method well from the start.) Thats why they seem to work well in that application."
Do you have any factual objective industry statistical reports to back up your claim that buying a Glock has become a lottery?
Do you have any factual objective industry statistical reports to back up your claim that buying a Glock has become a lottery?
The Gen 4s have only been out four a couple of years. Unlike medicine and automotives, the types of scientific reports that you reference are rarely published in the firearms industry and the ones that are done take years. When they do get published, it is usually after a large .gov agency solicits a RFP. There are no indipendent or regulatory agencies such as Consumer Reports, FDA, NIH, etc. to fund these types of studies in the firearms industry, so it usually takes market pressure to make a manufacturer change its production methods. Very often, a manufacturer simply issues a warranty recall or upgrade. For example, Glock has already created multiple iterations of the Gen 4 G17 guide rod NOT due to some published study, but because of significant market pressure from dissatisfied customers with poorly functioning weapons out of the box. I expect that Glock will change the manufacturing process for their extractors if problems continue, but this may take longer than the guide rod switch if problems with the extractors take a few thousand rounds to manifest.
So, in other words, what we have here are speculations based on nothing more than anecdotal comments posted on gun forums.
Some call it seculation. Others call it collective experience. Do you have any scientific evidence that Glock's manufacturing changes resulted in a more reliable platform? If not, than speculation and collective experience will exert market pressure when the consumer notices a decline in quality.
Again, like I said...no facts, just speculation.
As long as we are clear on that.
Again, like I said...no facts, just speculation.
As long as we are clear on that.
I think that you are confusing facts and scientific evidence since you seem to use the two interchangeably. The truth is, I not aware of a single study in the firearms industry designed to make any statistical comparison regarding the failure rates of small parts. Even large agency solitations are not powered to do this type of subgroup analysis. Fortunately, we rarely need a randomized control trial to establish facts. In the case of Glocks, there are a few facts to support the speculation that the Gen 4 guns were not well vetted prior to release. These include the multiple iterations of guide rods needed to bring the Gen 4 17/19 up to par (fact). Now, SME's report a spike in extractor problems in Gen 4 and some late Gen 3 guns using Gen 4 style extractors (another fact). While these SME's observations are not scientific proof that the Gen 4 extractors are a problem, it is a legit topic of discussion given their collective experience across the industry. Whether this spike is due to a switch in the manufacturing process is curretly a matter speculation and probably not a reason to write off the Gen 4 platform at this point. If the extractors are bad, it will likely never be brought to light in a peer reviewed industry journal (there are none), and the closest we will come to scientific evidence is if Glock stops using MIM extractors.
You have links to these SME reports?
Or is this just more passing along Internet chatter?
BufordTJustice
06-26-11, 20:24
You have links to these SME reports?
Or is this just more passing along Internet chatter?
You're comitting a serious logical fallacy here. I'll break it down for you....FROM WORK.
There was a known-reliable design (the Glock gen3 platform) that did not have the above mentioned extraction and reliability issues.
THEN, Glock changed the design.
I'm in favor of the status quo; you endorse the change.
So, you need to support YOUR POSITION with some factual documentation. The burden of proof is on you since you're the one wanting to deviate from the previous status quo.
You can argue about sample size and what-not. Glock has made MANY changes to their guns throughout the years...see the copious amounts of data over at thegunzone. Page after page of design changes...some reliable...some to fix known issues. And none of it can be found in any industry journal.
Furthermore, go ahead and google GT for the dozens of pages of people who are experiencing the above listed issues. Explain yourself, sir.
The burden is on you since you endorse the change from a known-good setup.
Go ahead.....I'm waiting.
P.S.- How about you explain to me about how my buddy's G27, which was consistently unreliable (enough to get it temporarily yanked from his agency approved weapon list), magically became 100% reliable once he installed a Glock machined extractor that was cannibalized from an old agency gen3? I'd like to hear your reasoning on this. I'm sure he would be interested as well.
I'm not gonna waste my time endorsing your intellectual laziness; you can do the legwork to support your position. I refuse to accept your statements as prima facia fact. Prove your assertions. It's up to you to discount the many dozens of reported issues with these new extractors. Explain them away if you wish; I refuse to enter into a discussion where I'm forced to prove that the sky is, in fact, blue.
And your Moving-the-goalposts (Raising the bar) fallacy is total BS. You've rejected the numerous incidents from a variety of memebers on this board and others, and you've further demanded hard data that simply cannot be collected .
Example: Using your argument would be tantamount to me asking how many drug dealers are in my area.....there are a shitload, but I'll never know exactly how many there. Not knowing the exact number does not serve as proof that my area does not, in fact, have a drug-dealer problem.
You can demand more 'evidence' till the cows come home. Keep burying your head in the sand, it doesn't hurt me one bit. But spreading your fallacious arguments around here hurts the board and the genuine knowledge base that is being accumulated here. Some members are having problems with gen4 guns. I'm here to try and diagnose and fix the problem. You're here espousing that THERE IS NO PROBLEM.
I'm a Glock lover and I LOVE my G26 gen4; it's my primary off-duty concealed carry gun...I also have no issue with MIM when it is properly implemented; it makes quality guns more affordable. MIM is all over the place. I have an issue with poorly made/substitued parts with poor (or non-existent) QC.
Still waiting for you to produce any documentation for any of your assertions. I guess I have a long wait.
Here is a quote from Dr. Roberts in another thread:
Folks, OPD has been trying to find solutions for their problematic 3rd gen G22's for several years. This is not a new issue, as documented by many other agencies. Recently another large Northern CA LE agency has reported similar problems and has done detailed diagnostic tests. After performing all the upgrades and maintenance that Glock recommended, the problems persisted--up to 40% of the agency's 3rd gen G22's were exhibiting malfunctions when shooting Win 180 gr RA40T--not exactly an exotic or unusual ammunition choice. There are longstanding problems with 3rd gen G22's, there are clearly problems with the 4th gen Glocks, and now people are beginning to find problems with recent 3rd gen 9mm Glocks that have been shipped from the factory with some of the new 4th gen parts.
The major thread on this forum discussing this issue is here:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=81862
-notice the comments of Dr. Roberts
You can also check out Todd Green's (another SME) forum to get his thoughts on the issue here: http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?571-Gen4-19-The-problems-have-started-....
This should give you a little more evidence and there is more out there if you want to check out Brian Enos Forum, 10-8, etc. Sorry that I made you wait - I try not to sit in front of the computer too much or the wife gets pissed
BufordTJustice
06-26-11, 23:14
Still waiting for you to produce any documentation for any of your assertions. I guess I have a long wait.
Alright, here's your crow:
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1351066
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1329029
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1349189
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1346797
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1351075
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1346797&page=11
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1344070
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1349469
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1336574
Oh, and you could always google 'gen4 problems' for countless threads from dozens of different forums. Lemme know when you're done diggin through that pile.
I guess you could email every memebr at GT and epxlain to them how their problem is statistically insiginificant because they haven't given you any hard, empirical data. I'm sure they'd be pleased to hear from you.
I still haven't seen one single item of evidentiary value to support your assertions from your lazy ass.....:rolleyes:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not ready to write off Glocks which are the backbone of my hand gun armory. I own 2 Gen 4 guns (22 and 17) that are doing well at about the 1500-2000 round mark, and several reliable Gen 3 19's which are my main carry weapons.
However, I've been in the market for a G26 for some time and was conflicted over a Gen 4 vs Gen 3 with the EXO Package since the weapon is going to get moist next to my body in a Smart Carry Holster for when I'm in hospital scrubs or gym shorts. This extractor issue has pushed me further toward the Gen 3 EXO, but not necessarily away from the entire platform. Provided that they have the guide rod issue put to rest (probably never an issue for the 26), it is still relatively inexpensive to replace or upgrade an extractor. Contrast this to the $100 that I spend on Apex parts to get my M&P's to a reasonable level.
BufordTJustice
06-27-11, 01:01
Still waiting for you to produce any documentation for any of your assertions. I guess I have a long wait.
For you, honey:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts
"Moving the goalposts, also known as raising the bar, is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded. In other words, after an attempt has been made to score a goal, the goalposts are moved to exclude the attempt. This attempts to leave the impression that an argument had a fair hearing while actually reaching a preordained conclusion."
BufordTJustice
06-27-11, 01:11
Don't get me wrong, I'm not ready to write off Glocks which are the backbone of my hand gun armory. I own 2 Gen 4 guns (22 and 17) that are doing well at about the 1500-2000 round mark, and several reliable Gen 3 19's which are my main carry weapons.
However, I've been in the market for a G26 for some time and was conflicted over a Gen 4 vs Gen 3 with the EXO Package since the weapon is going to get moist next to my body in a Smart Carry Holster for when I'm in hospital scrubs or gym shorts. This extractor issue has pushed me further toward the Gen 3 EXO, but not necessarily away from the entire platform. Provided that they have the guide rod issue put to rest (probably never an issue for the 26), it is still relatively inexpensive to replace or upgrade an extractor. Contrast this to the $100 that I spend on Apex parts to get my M&P's to a reasonable level.
I love my G26 gen4 and it's been 100% reliable after replacing the extractor w/ an LWD unit. Runs like a raped ape. :)
I'm already looking at a G17/G19 gen4 for my wife. It's only $15 to turn it into a 100% reliable weapon. I'll pay that all day long for a gen4.
I have already put 2 of my buddies in new gen4 G26's. Both had erratic ejection (eye protection= mandatory). Two LWD extractorslater, they run perfect. I'm confident in the gen4 platform...just not in these little cheapy cost-saving measures. But, like you said, it's easily fixable.
BufordTJustice
06-27-11, 20:44
More evidence of running changes to gen4 Glocks from GearScout.
http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/06/24/glock-introduces-the-connector-5-for-gen4-pistols/
ptmccain, I feel an I-told-you-so coming on REAL strong right about now.
Well, I am going to throw mine away, now that you posted that link. And, thanks for all the hard work quoting gunsite chatter. Great evidence. But hey, everyone has to have a hobby. Who am I to question why you are wasting your time posting stupid things?
:rolleyes:
BufordTJustice
06-27-11, 20:59
Well, I am going to throw mine away, now that you posted that link. And, thanks for all the hard work quoting gunsite chatter. Great evidence. But hey, everyone has to have a hobby. Who am I to question why you are wasting your time posting stupid things?
:rolleyes:
Haha. I'm done with our little exchanges, as i have nothing to add to the issues brought up by the OP.
But, just so you know, I arrested an asshole last night for domestic battery who spoke in a tone identical to yours.
Thanks for adding zero info to the thread; you're a credit to our online community. :rolleyes:
Oh, and don't throw your gen4 away...give it to me. I'll fix it with a new extractor. ;)
Wow, you are such a gunsmith. I am sure nobody could ever figure out how to replace an extractor.
I'm sorry they gave you a badge and a gun.
:rolleyes:
BufordTJustice
06-27-11, 21:04
I'm sorry they gave you a badge and a gun.
:rolleyes:
Haha. The guy I arrested said THE EXACT SAME THING! Who knew?!?! ;)
Still waiting for you to produce any documentation for any of your assertions. I guess I have a long wait.
You come across as an idiot, sir. A serious idiot, but still an idiot.
Here's some documentation. Since 1990, I have only owned 9mm Glocks -- either the Glock 19 and later the Glock 26. Sometimes one at a time, sometimes both.
Before 1990, I owned other brands of guns, but since then I've seen no need. I have also shot many other brands of guns over the years, and rented and shot many other calibers of Glocks (specifically .40 and .45 ACP) but the 9mm Glocks are what I seem to prefer.
Right now I own a Gen3 Glock 19 and a Gen4 Glock 26. I sold my Gen3 Glock 26 to the buy Gen4 Glock 26 -- and intended to do the same for the Gen3 Glock 19, replacing it with Gen4 Glock 19 as I like the new grip. But those plans are on hold due to the jamming, extraction problems with the new Gen4 Glock 26. :(
Yes, that's right. My new Gen4 Glock 26 which I want to love is a jamming mess. Over the 300 rounds I put through it so far, I've have at least 4 stovepipes, jams, FTEs where the gun could not fuction until I cleared that jam. That's not counting the two jams a friend of mine had, because I'm talking direct evidence I experienced. I've been shooting Glocks for two decades and I don't limp wrist.
You say you have had no problems and I say I have. Either you are a liar or acccording to statistical evidence, between the two of us 50% of the the Gen4 Glocks are seriously flawed. Half! Because of course, yours and my guns are the only two in existance, right? ;)
My experience is just as valid as yours.
And when I called you an idiot, maybe I meant just ignorant. But willfully ignorant. A private company like Glock is not going to trumpet their failures and issue press releases, publish statistical analysis of flaws. For you to repeatedly call for such evidence shows you really are not that bright. I'm sorry, but it's true.
In my 21 years of owning/shooting Glocks, I've never had a gun like my Gen4 glock 26 which has failed like this.
But let's look at the Gen4s in general. Glock is now on the FIFTH redesign of their spring on the 9mm model -- 0-4-2 for the Glock 19 model. Glock is now issuing the FIFTH different spring since launching their Gen4. So, SOMETHING is wrong with the 9mm Gen4 Glocks. FIFTH design in SIX MONTHS! :eek: And no, Glock has not issued a press release on that, nor published statistical reports. You just have to talk to Glock customer service. There's also pictures of the new design, as people are sent them.
http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt176/jbarbaresi/Guns/IMG_0143.jpg
WHY is Glock on their FIFTH dual recoil spring design? :confused: Because of jams, stovepipes, FTE. In the beginning, Glock tried to blame "weak U.S. market ammo" which was bull. Any reputable gun should be able to fire factory SAAMI spec ammo. Period. Winchester white box is loaded to SAMMI specs. If Glock can't fire that, it's Glock's fault. So, Glock is up to 0-4-2 springs on the Gen4 Glock 19. All new Glock 19s now leaving Smyrna, GA will have that. No, that's no published anywhere, but you call Glock customer service and ask them. And there's the picture of one a customer received, free of charge.
With these admitted problems, besides Glock has also blamed their extractors.... Glock told customer they had a batch of "out of spec" extractors. Is it that or a bad design? or does the new method of manufacture (MIM -- metal injection molding) allow shoddy, out of spec extractors? :confused: Again, no press release on the bad batch of extractors, instead just talking to customers directly, who then post the gist of their conversations on forum boards.
So, we have established that Glock customers -- not Glock management -- is the reliable source of information. If you deny that, you are not such a high IQ person, are you? I have just laid out the chain of evidence. Glock does not publish bad news. Never have, never will. There have been no press releases on the first FOUR flawed spring designs nor the poor-quality control extractors. Glock only communicates directly with customers.
Here's why the "bad batch" of extractors are relevant. Since the Gen4 Baby Glocks did not change springs, the one thing that did change between my Gen3 Glock 26 and the new Gen4 Glock 26 was the extractors. They changed right before the Gen4s were launched, and the new extractor design is also being used on Gen3s still being sold. So, if the Gen4 Glock 26s are failing (mine is and I have no reason to believe you, so in my scenario perhaps ALL are failing :p) then it's not the springs, it's the extractors.
Whether it's the new design or whether it's the new method of manufacture (MIM), SOMETHING has changed that Glock has enough failures and complaints they are trying to fix the problems.
All the people who are focusing on the extractors are saying is, maybe it's not the springs, maybe it's the OTHER element that got changed around the same time the springs (in most 9mm models) were changed. Since the Baby Glock springs were not changed, when my new Gen4 Glock 26 jammed, the extractor issue looks very valid.
Someone on another forum posted this, which has direct observational evidence:
After speaking with Glock customer service yesterday, he recommended I take some fine steel wool to my Gen4 extractor to smooth out the finish a bit and see if that would improve the fit.
I did as he suggested, but during the process, received my Lone Wolf 9mm extractor. While the steel wool DID improve the fit of the Gen4 extractor, I noticed some small, yet OBVIOUS differences between the Lone Wolf version and the Glock version. In fact, the Lone Wolf extractor looked and fit EXACTLY like the extractor in my older Gen3 G19. The Gen4 Glock extractor has the obvious dip that others have mentioned as well as some extra ridges that don't exist on the older Gen3 extractor and the Lone Wolf version.
http://i1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/GlockandLoneWolfExtractors.jpg
http://i1193.photobucket.com/albums/aa348/SGTDuffman/CastingMarks.jpg
The Lone Wolf extractor performed brilliantly. NO malfunctions at all and NO brass to the face, even with the 115gr Remington UMC.
============
Again I am a major Glock fan, but I'm not a mindless fanboi who cannot admit that Glock screwed something up here and are trying to fix it. At least 5 spring designs shows Glock knows something is amiss, so fanbois should also. Just keepng saying nothing is wrong shows either ignorance of the facts or low IQ. :rolleyes:
Again, 5 spring redesigns in six months? Also, "weak" ammo is a not the reason for any of these failures in spite of what Glock or fanbois say. SAAMI spec factory ammo should fire reliably in ANY production pistol. If it doesn't, it's a failure of the pistol design -- not a failure of the SAAMI spec ammo.
I like the new grip design, which is why I sold my Gen3 Glock 26 and replaced it with Gen4 Glock 26. I had planned to also sell my Gen3 Glock 19 and replace with Gen4 Glock 19, but now I am going to wait a year on that until Glock sorts everything out.
I'm also going to order a Lone Wolf extractor and see if that fixes my Gen4 Glock 26 FTEs.
My wife would agree with you that I'm an idiot.
In spite of all your huffing/puffing/blustering, I still don't see any hard evidence. only a lot of whining and complaining on chat forums.
I have a Gen4 Glock 26. I've put now over 1,000 rounds through it. No problems. Not. A.One.
If/when I have the kind of horrible problems you describe, I may pick up a Wolf extractor.
Finally, if Glocks are so unreliable, go buy a Sig or HK or Ruger or Springfield. Don't fret so much.
ptmccain, your logic just makes no sense.
My wife would agree with you that I'm an idiot.
In spite of all your huffing/puffing/blustering, I still don't see any hard evidence. only a lot of whining and complaining on chat forums.
I have a Gen4 Glock 26. I've put now over 1,000 rounds through it. No problems. Not. A.One.
If/when I have the kind of horrible problems you describe, I may pick up a Wolf extractor.
Finally, if Glocks are so unreliable, go buy a Sig or HK or Ruger or Springfield. Don't fret so much.
The hard evidence is Glocks FIVE spring designs for their 9mm Glocks. You think their engineers don't know how to design springs? So, let's consider something else -- the extractor. Either the new extractor design or the method of manufacturing.
The other piece of hard evidence is 4 or more FTEs on my new Gen4 Glock 26, which has same springs as Gen3 Glock 26. Only thing different? The extractor. That is direct observation.
Now Glock ADMITS -- no, not in a press release -- that they had a batch of "out of spec" extractors. So, even they are admitting an extractor problem. How BIG a "batch" were these supposedly "out of spec" extractors? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? :confused: Other than admitting to customers they exist and were installed on guns sold, Glock has not said anything else. No, it's not going to be in a press release. :rolleyes:
But I think we are getting at the real problem. It's not the springs, so Glock perhaps wasted engineering time there. FIVE redesigns? :rolleyes: And maybe it's not just a "bad batch" of extractors... maybe it's the new design. (What was wrong with the old design?) Or perhaps it's the new, less expensive method of manufacturing those extractors,(metal injection molding -- MIM (http://www.gknsintermetals.com/technology/mimprocess.htm), which had not been used for this part before).
If you do MIM, you better do it right. :rolleyes: Look carefully at the picture above. Note that with MIM, tighter tolerances require secondary machining or grinding operations. Looks like Glock contracted this out to the lowest bidder and it got screwed up? :mad:
If you want a tried-and-true Gen3 extractor, you cannot get it from Glock. They only sell the new ones. You can get one from Lone Wolf, but note that Lone Wolf sells two models of extractors. They re-sell the current official Glock Gen4 extractor (which is also being installed on new Gen3 guns by Glock) -- and Lone Wolf sells their own manufactured extractor, based on Glock's old Gen3 design (www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=155971&CAT=3681). < THAT Lone Wolf extractor is the one that has solved people's Gen4 FTE problems.
In conclusion, Glock admits SOMETHING is wrong. Hence, FIVE designs of the Glock 19 dual recoil spring in SIX months. But they are focusing on the springs when that may not be the issue -- or at least all the issue. Glock has even admitted some of the problem may be the extractor -- but they blamed a bad batch. Many people think Glock should examine the extractor issue further, as either the new design of the extractor or the new, cheaper method of manufacturing (MIM) the extractor is to blame.
Glock will eventually fix this, I'm sure, but it's not helpful for fanbois to DENY there's a problem. :rolleyes: I realize I repeated myself a little, but you have to do that sometimes when people don't seem to be able to grasp concepts and facts. :p
ChazzMatt, just let it slide. He's a troll and will never agree.
ChazzMatt, just let it slide. He's a troll
Well put sir.
polymorpheous
07-31-11, 09:20
Can we get back on topic please?
Purse swinging over MIM should be reserved to it's own dedicated thread.
CCW recently passed in WI.
I'm here to learn about the reliability of the GEN4 G26s.
Period.
I don't want to wade through a bunch of internet egos to get solid information based on ACTUAL USE.
Weel then let's try this on for size...
Gen 4 glock 26: first 1000 rds shitty, inconsistent extraction. Dribbling out, tons of brass to face, left ejections, ect... But NOT one stoppage. Called glock and they sent me a new extractor.
Bam-prob solved. She runs perfectly now with great ejection patterns.
Btw-new gen 4's are shipping with dot connectors
Drew
DeltaSierra
07-31-11, 10:03
Can we get back on topic please?
Purse swinging over MIM should be reserved to it's own dedicated thread.
CCW recently passed in WI.
I'm here to learn about the reliability of the GEN4 G26s.
Period.
I don't want to wade through a bunch of internet egos to get solid information based on ACTUAL USE.
I don't have much trigger time on the new Glocks, but my Gen. 3 Glock 19 with a Gen. 4 extractor has functioned just about perfectly.
I bought the pistol, put a few rounds through it to verify that it would function, and then took it to a two day training course where I put about one thousand rounds through it with only one failure, and that failure was due to limp-wristing the weapon.
Over the past year since the course, I have tested various loads, and I have not had other issues with the weapon.
This Glock is now my carry gun...
If I had any negative experiences with this weapon, I would be pretty annoyed, as prior to owning this weapon, I was quite leery of a "plastic pistol", but this Glock was so impressive in its performance, that it now has a couple of brothers to keep it company....
Having said that...
I am NOT impressed that Glock is messing with a design that was one of the best available, and the MIM is a real issue that needs discussion.
My suggestion, based on my personal experiences, would be to suggest that you buy a Gen. 3 Glock, and shoot it... If it has a Gen. 4 extractor, then replace it if you have any issues, or feel the need to for your own peace of mind.
polymorpheous
07-31-11, 10:13
I've got an older GEN3 G17.
Great pistol. Definite workhorse.
What I'm really looking for is a G26 w/ OD frame.
Hard to find though.
So right now I'm weighing my options.
I'd rather not have a black gun for CCW.
The more subdued the better in my mind.
Gen4 26
800rds 124gr PMC
500 Winchester 147gr RA9T
No problems, a few kicks of brass to the sniffer early on. None post 200 rds.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.