Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54

Thread: Glock ejection and brass to the face

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    136
    Feedback Score
    0
    I still don't know why they had to change the ejector on the G19s. I have some erratic ejection with my 2014 Gen 4 but no brass marks on the slide and no BTF. My wife has a 2009 G19 with the 336 ejector and it has consistent extraction. I can load each pistol with a round chambered and take the magazine out. I can then rack the slide and both of them will spit the round out the side around 3:00 or so. Perfect ejection.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Houston, TX, USA
    Posts
    4,050
    Feedback Score
    0
    I guess Glock hired the ex-managers from Coca Cola that gave us the "new Coke" back in the 80s! LOL

    Companies get a good thing going then start trying to "improve" on it and ruin the very thing they created.

    Why they do this...I do not know.

    -brickboy240

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,116
    Feedback Score
    31 (100%)
    I still don't know why they had to change the ejector on the G19s. I have some erratic ejection with my 2014 Gen 4 but no brass marks on the slide and no BTF. My wife has a 2009 G19 with the 336 ejector and it has consistent extraction. I can load each pistol with a round chambered and take the magazine out. I can then rack the slide and both of them will spit the round out the side around 3:00 or so. Perfect ejection.

    They will always do this with a loaded round. The bullet keeps the cartridge trapped in the chamber until the ejector hits it.

    Do the same thing with a fired case. It will often just fall out the bottom of the magazine well because there is nothing holding it up.

    It will slip out of the grip of the extractor before it hits the ejector without a magazine being there to support the case as it extracts.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    2,740
    Feedback Score
    52 (98%)
    Quote Originally Posted by brickboy240 View Post
    You could always buy a used 3rd gen G19 or G17...they are out there. The earlier 3rd gen 9mm Glocks were rock solid.

    -brickboy240

    Not really. The worst ejecting Glock I owned was a 2-pin third gen 17.

    Glocks have always had somewhat erratic ejection. They just get worse with every improvement.

    The whole point of Glock's existence is to be a cheap, reliable pistol.

    If they're going to be this kind of a PITA, then why bother?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Patron State of Shooting
    Posts
    4,396
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I got lucky that an $8 part fixed mine.
    The obedient always think of themselves as virtuous rather than the cowards they really are.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    8
    Feedback Score
    0
    Gen.3 Glock 19----BTF,top of head,forward, left,right forearm.
    Polished extractor----no change
    Replaced extractor--- no change
    New plunger spring--- no change
    New extractor at GSSF match---no change

    30274 ejector----- BIG CHANGE!!!! But not 100%
    Spring Loaded Bearing--- replaced the LCI with a NON-LCI one----- Now 100 % for several thousand rds. and almost all brass 4 ft. right rear

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    136
    Feedback Score
    0
    I don't know why I didn't think of doing it with fired brass so just now I did that. I did this on the 2009 era G19 and my 2014 Gen 4 G19. I used the same mag and did it with another fired brass in the mag, empty mag, and no mag. Everytime the brass ejected to the side and once each pistol it spit the brass at the 2 o'clock. Maybe its just me or the fact that I rack the slide with some force to more closely simulate firing but even with no mag it still ejected the brass out of the ejection post. The brass never went through the mag well.
    The difference between socialism and communism, they both have their boot on your neck but the communist is holding a gun.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    12,145
    Feedback Score
    43 (100%)
    Hey guys. 26 Inf has a view that if you are getting brass to face it is because your fundamentals are wrong.

    Maybe he will share it with us.

    Quote Originally Posted by 26 Inf View Post
    Funny, we never had issues with the vast majority of our students, either. If they were bouncing spent cases off their face/bill of cap it was because of issues in fundamentals that we were generally able to correct.

    I didn't know it was a thing until I read about it on the internet. I can imagine the convo between the Glock engineers - 'Hans, Gott im Himmel, what are we going to do so those limp-wristed Americans won't have BTF'

    Assuming it does exist, I wonder if the reason we didn't have troubles was because we shot 147gr spec'ed to Federal HydroShock, and most recently, 124gr.

    My load for GSSF is so light brass just dribbles out of my 19X, still functions every time, though.
    See the thread here:

    https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...22#post2777222

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    911
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurodriver View Post
    Hey guys. 26 Inf has a view that if you are getting brass to face it is because your fundamentals are wrong.

    Maybe he will share it with us.



    See the thread here:

    https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread...22#post2777222
    I wish Glock were so perfect. Perhaps there are some folks who have a problem, but that doesn’t mean the issue isn’t real.

    If it were my “fundamentals” I guess the hundreds of training hours I’ve had, and all my Glocks that work fine, when suddenly I get one that throws brass in my face was suddenly with that particular gun I sucked, then I pick up another Glock and everything is fine again.

    Then the problem goes away once I replace crummy Glock ejectors and extractors with other parts then the gun works fine all a sudden.

    Most of my guns are Glocks, but I’m no fanboy and certainly not a Glock apologist. I can’t imagine if we had the same attitude we collectively have to guns with other consumer products.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    9,931
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Hi guys!

    Let me explain my perspective on this.

    I was one of the primary firearms instructors at the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center from 1980 to 2016. KLETC is the central academy for the state of Kansas and we trained between 300 - 350 new officers each year. Additionally, we conducted firearms instructor classes as well as in-service training classes. During my tenure I developed and conducted more of these classes than any of my co-workers.

    By the very early 1990's, Glock had become pretty well entrenched in LE, when we used to run the records it seemed that over 60% of our shooters were using Glocks. Early on we standardized on a 9mm 147gr FMJ loaded @ 990 (PF=145). We shot that round for most of my career. With the advent of the .40 S&W we began using a 180gr FMJ loaded @ 890 (PF= 160). For .45 we always used a 230gr FMJ @ 825 (PF= 189).

    The reason that I detail the ammunition used for training is because in any in-depth discussion of brass-to-face I do mention that perhaps one reason I'm not familiar with the phenomenon is that we used heavier, slower ammunition.

    While I feel that needs to be pointed out in order to be fair, I don't think that is the reason we never saw BTF as a problem. I think the real reason we never saw BTF as an issue is that we were firearms instructors not firearms watchers. By that I mean firearms training at our facility was not 16 shooters on line with a guy running the line and two instructors (or less) as is common at many of the high-speed courses folks love to attend. Rather we tried, and almost always succeeded in getting a 2 shooter to one instructor ratio. Our staff instructors were definitely inter-active and our guest instructors that weren't interactive enough, or not able to give good instruction, generally weren't invited back. BTW, our firearms instructor course required officers to do an 'internship' by coaching during one of our classes.

    What I'm trying to point out is that by the time shooters fired their first live round, their draw stroke, grip and finger placement on the trigger had been analyzed and corrected during dry-fire drills - in the classroom and on the range. During range exercises they were closely monitored and coached.

    I'm not saying we never had a shooter eating brass. We did. But it was corrected without pistol modifications.

    That is where I'm coming from with my perspective.

    Now, I'm going to go out on the sandiest road I can find, snuggle my PSA mid-length M4ish clone into the sand and run over it with my Dodge Ram.

    Good enough?

    ETA: Out of fairness, just thought of another reason I may not have seen a lot of BTF. Generally our Glock reps furnished us with parts so we were able to armorer service and upgrades on all Glocks that came through our basic classes, Sig pretty much did the same thing. I think it largely depends on the relationship you have with your reps.
    Last edited by 26 Inf; 10-18-19 at 17:02.
    Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President... - Theodore Roosevelt, Lincoln and Free Speech, Metropolitan Magazine, Volume 47, Number 6, May 1918.

    Every Communist must grasp the truth. Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party Mao Zedong, 6 November, 1938 - speech to the Communist Patry of China's sixth Central Committee

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •