# I stayed with the stock slide spring



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Many upgrades to the Glock might not be a mechanical benefit. 
I think the Glock needs some flexibility, especially around the nose ring and frame. Maybe, I'm not sure.

https://gfycat.com/rareterriblehermitcrab-guns


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

I want to think the reason for the Gen 3 G-22 issues with a light attached is too much flexibility in the recoil rod and frame, coupled with the fact most if not all serious competitors run steel rods or tungsten(perhaps for the weight) as opposed to the stock plastic guide rod.

Ala, Gen 4's have a reinforced or more rigid frame than Gen 3's, I've heard and I believe S&W M&P's have some steel reinforcement in their frames up front for this reason.

One of Glock's main claims to fame is it's lite weight, especially it's frame.

I want to think any semi-auto works better with rigidity not flexibility in the cycle. Too much flexibility in a recoil rod and frame and a limp wrist is a sure way to get a stovepipe if you ask me.

I might be wrong, but I don't believe flexibility in a recoil rod improves or is better at cycling a firearm than a rigid steel one.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

denner said:


> I want to think the reason for the Gen 3 G-22 issues with a light attached is too much flexibility in the recoil rod and frame, coupled with the fact most if not all serious competitors run steel rods or tungsten(perhaps for the weight) as opposed to the stock plastic guide rod.
> 
> Ala, Gen 4's have a reinforced or more rigid frame than Gen 3's, I've heard and I believe S&W M&P's have some steel reinforcement in their frames up front for this reason.
> 
> ...


I understand,
Do you think if we eliminate a designed, maybe it's not designed, a slight flexibility , something will have to absorb that extra energy, maybe creating stress in another area. I was focused on the nose ring of the Glock not being as beefy as other slides .

Hickok broke the nose ring , but it was an automatic.
If that automatic had a tungsten rod instead of a stock rod, I believe the failure would have occurred much sooner.

Of course I'm only speculating,

It's just a topic of opinion I thought might bring other views.

Anything can break at any given time I realize that.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

. Hickok


pic said:


> Of course I'm only speculating,


Keep in mind that the age of the G18 was unclear.
Hickok speculated that it was a late 1980s build, but that was not verified.
If the gun was in fact thirty plus years old, who knows how many rounds it has sent down range?


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

pic said:


> I understand,
> Do you think if we eliminate a designed, maybe it's not designed, a slight flexibility , something will have to absorb that extra energy, maybe creating stress in another area. I was focused on the nose ring of the Glock not being as beefy as other slides .
> 
> Hickok broke the nose ring , but it was an automatic.
> ...


Good observation, I saw the same video. It looked like the recoil rod/ spring was a stock plastic rod. /s Probably worn or perhaps had many rounds on it. I'd want to think if Hickok had a new 18 or 19 pound spring with a steel guide-rod, the ole G22 slide may have fared better. I'd think the recoil spring round count and spring poundage would be more of a factor than what the rod was made out of, but who knows. Full auto would reak havoc on any pistol over the long haul.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Goldwing said:


> Good observation, I saw the same video. It looked like the recoil rod/ spring was a stock plastic rod. /s Probably worn or perhaps had many rounds on it. I'd want to think if Hickok had a new 18 or 19 pound spring with a steel guide-rod, the ole G22 slide may have fared better. I'd think the recoil spring round count and spring poundage would be more of a factor than what the rod was made out of, but who knows. Full auto would reak havoc on any pistol over the long haul.


I thought the video showed the slides nose ring broke and not the spring assembly.
My thinking is the slight flex with the plastic rod will absorb some of the energy instead of delivering the full load to the nose ring.

A stronger spring I thought was more prevalent against the block ,where the energy is created by the explosive round itself.

It would also create a stronger return of the rod against the slides nose ring.
I'm thinking of all the rivet busters, and jack hammers, chipping guns I've used during my demolition days and fixing carpenter screw ups . 
Lol,


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

I don't think it's a major Glock issue, just heard the question being asked while searching the web ,
Never really noticed how thin the Glocks slide ring was. I was surprised but it doesn't seem to be a major issue.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

pic said:


> My thinking is the slight flex with the plastic rod will absorb some of the energy instead of delivering the full load to the nose ring.


I'm thinking the only time the nose ring receives any substantial energy is on the slide return? I want to think it was a metallurgy issue or just fatigued steel after a high round count? Like Goldwing said, who knows how many rounds were through that Glock, especially being that it was full auto?

That being said, pistols such as the SiG P226 and Beretta 92FS have worked a long, long, round count with a steel guide rod with no ill effect to the frame or parts. I religiously change my recoil spring on proper service intervals, which I think is the key.

Beretta's 92R is their machine pistol but the pistol design is much different than a Glock and I don't know how they hold up after high round counts?

I run a steel guiderod in my Gen3 G22 with a 20# flat spring.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

denner said:


> I want to think the reason for the Gen 3 G-22 issues with a light attached is too much flexibility in the recoil rod and frame, coupled with the fact most if not all serious competitors run steel rods or tungsten(perhaps for the weight) as opposed to the stock plastic guide rod.
> 
> Ala, Gen 4's have a reinforced or more rigid frame than Gen 3's, I've heard and I believe S&W M&P's have some steel reinforcement in their frames up front for this reason.
> 
> ...


All the recoil rod does is keep the spring from buckling. Regardless, myself I can't stand plastic guide rods and always replace them with stainless steel.

However Glocks run fine with the stock captured guide rod/spring assembly.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

desertman said:


> All the recoil rod does is keep the spring from buckling. Regardless, myself I can't stand plastic guide rods and always replace them with stainless steel.
> 
> However Glocks run fine with the stock captured guide rod/spring assembly.


Yep, what he said.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

pic said:


> I understand,
> Do you think if we eliminate a designed, maybe it's not designed, a slight flexibility , something will have to absorb that extra energy, maybe creating stress in another area. I was focused on the nose ring of the Glock not being as beefy as other slides .
> 
> *Hickok broke the nose ring , but it was an automatic.*
> ...


Exactly. It's like if you frequently take your vehicle out and drag race it. Something's gonna' break probably sooner rather than later.

I don't think that the type of guide rod/recoil spring assembly had anything to do with it? Glock probably used the same slide blanks for the G18 and G17 except they machine them differently. They probably didn't take into consideration how little metal there is at the nose ring to accommodate full auto fire.

Not only that but because of their size I don't think that your average semi auto pistols were designed for full auto fire? Unless it's a Mac 10, MAC 11/9, mini Uzi or something similar. You're not gonna' break one of those that's for sure. Those f'n things are pretty heavy to begin with.


----------

