# Glock no longer the King?



## Wandering Man

A friend just got his CHL, and is now looking for something to carry. He and his wife own a Glock in 9mm that is a couple of years old (more than 5, I think).

One of the big city (Corpus Christi) gun stores told him that Glock is not the most reliable gun out there. :smt119

Since when did *THAT* happen?

I'm wondering what brand the gun store was pushing this month ...

... hmmmm, maybe they wanted him to buy a 1911?

:croc:

WM


----------



## Mike Barham

The Glock is reliable, but I don't think it's any more reliable than a SIG, HK, Beretta, or one of the other heavily-tested designs. All are amply reliable for defense...unlike some 1911s. :mrgreen:


----------



## Wandering Man

Mike Barham said:


> ...unlike some 1911s. :mrgreen:


............... :smt019

WM


----------



## submoa

You'll see a lot of defensive comments on this forum when someone's favorite gun is criticized. FWIW... the credibility of the criticism and defense is proportional to the facts introduced in support. The rest is ego/whining. You'll see a lot of the latter and "well, gun X isn't that good either" unsupported opinions to come.

Glocks are often praised simply because Glock's aggressive marketing has made their brand the most issued handgun in law enforcement. And at that point most consumers look no further. But here's a sampling of the experience LE has had with Glock:

Glock quietly replaced 700 guns issued to the FBI due to a frame rail defect that could cause the handgun to break when used. No recall to consumers.

Glock recalled a limited serial number range of 26 and 27s due to defective guide rods. In 2003 NYPD banned departmental use of all E serial range 27s including those outside the recall group.

NYPD Firearms and Tactics Section has been working with Glock to resolve "Phase Three" stoppages ongoing on all model Glocks since deployed this includes 9mm models. No resolution has been announced.

Portland PD replaced all G21 with G17s and G19s when kB!s (catastrophic explosive failure of a handgun) were traced to the unsupported chamber design.​
Glock kB!s have been traced to 3 design "features"

Disconnector that allows Glocks to fire out of battery
Unsupported chamber
Thin/weak chamber walls (.40 and .357 use a bored out 9mm barrel, removal of material makes thinner chamber walls)​









In the picture above you will see that .40 chamber has been bored out to the point where walls are half as thick as 9mm and there is NO chamber support at the ramp.

Glock's response to all kB!s has been to advise owners not to use overpressure ammunition (ie. +P).

On the other hand you might never encounter a failure with your Glock. Just be an informed consumer and look behind the endorsements.



Mike Barham said:


> All are amply reliable for defense...unlike some 1911s.


Please indicate which 1911 models are unreliable and why. Not all 1911s are born equal. This is as meaningful as stating, "some Browning tilting barrel handguns are not suitable for defense."


----------



## Mike Barham

submoa said:


> Please indicate which 1911 models are unreliable. This is as meaningful as stating, "some Browning tilting barrel handguns are not suitable for defense."


And the Glock vendetta continues. :mrgreen:

Would you like me to indicate the 1911s I've fired that malfunctioned? The ones I've seen malfunction in multiple upper-level shooting courses? The ones that malfunctioned in matches? The ones owned by close friends that malfunctioned and had to go back to the factory multiple times for repair and finally replacement?

I have personally seen malfunctions from every major manufacturer of 1911s, with the exception of S&W. (To be clear, I am not talking about semi-custom, low production makers like Baer or Wilson.) My previous position at Galco also gave me the opportunity to talk to literally thousands of shooters. I talked to shooters who had reliability issues with virtually every brand of 1911. Some were able to solve the problems. Others sold their guns.

The 1911 is an excellent ergonomic design, and the easiest popular pistol to shoot fast and accurately. But it is not, on the whole, as reliable as modern designs like Glock, SIG, Beretta, HK, etc. The great 1911 ergos, weighed against the lesser reliability, may be a good trade for some people. I'm not one of them.


----------



## submoa

Post diagnosis as to reason for the 1911 failures you allege to have seen to educate us. I've already posted elsewhere on this forum re 1911: Avoid FPBs and MIM parts. The rest is proper maintenance and use of factory fresh ammo. 

The only factory 1911 I can recommend with this criteria under $1,000 is Dan Wesson. Otherwise start with a non-Series 80, non Swarz platform and replace MIM where possible. Springfields are a good start.

I can't fathom why Glock fans hate 1911. The two really aren't even in the same market. We all know which gun Jeff Cooper preferred.

As a Glock alternative, SA XD has fully supported chamber and uses billet internals. Granted, the grip safety is bullsh^t, but at least it is passive.


----------



## zhurdan

I've shot the holy living hell outta my Glock 32C .357Sig with narry a problem, and no fear that it'll blow up on me. The reason I say this is simple. Once you start fearing something, it owns you and it should most definately not be the case with a defensive firearm. That's not to say that there shouldn't be a healthy dose of respect for said firearm, but if you are afraid that it'll blow up in your hand, get rid of it. If you are afraid that it'll fail to fire at a crucial time, get rid of it. If you are scared that you cannot shoot it well with your current skill set, shoot more but don't carry it until you are satisfied you can shoot it well.

I respect the fact that some Glocks have K'd, but running a few numbers thru my head reassures me that I'd probably win the lottery prior to my Glock Kb-ing. (knocks on wood hehe).

As to 1911's, I think it's a mixed bag. I've shot other peoples 1911's and couldn't get them to run a whole mag without a problem. I've also shot my two Kimbers so much that I pretty much count on them more than any others, unless I need something a bit less pokey (printing) for concealed carry, then I go with the Glock or the Kahr based on what I'm wearing. 

I will say this about the venerable 1911, they are maintenance hogs. If they aren't relatively clean, aka lint, dust, powder residue, they will begin to fail. That being said, my 1911's are clean enough to eat off of and remain that way because of diligent inspection and cleaning. I don't mind the regimen of cleaning or the ratio of shooting to maintenance as I like the smell of Hoppes and my wife likes it too, so I just clean my guns, and put a dab of Hoppes behind each ear and carry her off to the... uh.. nevermind... anyways, you get the point. Maintain your weapon to it's needs and it will serve you well, maintain them to your wants and it'll be your worst nightmare. Unless of course your a freak like me and want to clean your guns.

Zhur


----------



## hideit

you guys are making me reconsider the beretta 92fs


----------



## Mike Barham

submoa said:


> Post diagnosis as to reason for the 1911 failures you allege to have seen to educate us.


All over the map. Here are a few:

- Rough feed ramps (Springfield, Colt, other manufacturers).
- Rough breechfaces (Springfield, Colt, other manufacturers).
- Extractors broken or out of adjustment (virtually all manufacturers).
- Broken sear (Colt).
- Shredded firing pin spring (Colt).
- Lousy OEM magazines (virtually all manufacturers).
- Broken bushing (Colt).
- Worn slide stops (multiple manufacturers).
- Multiple failures to go into battery (Kimber, went back to factory twice, finally replaced by Kimber with another 1911 _that also didn't work_.)

I am not sure I'd give the money they're asking for a Dan Wesson, since most of them (Pointman Minor, Pointman Major) are at least partially cast, rather than forged. And, yes, I am aware of the new - and very limited production - Valor.

I do agree that 1911s are better without firing pin safeties, though.


----------



## submoa

Mike Barham said:


> I am not sure I'd give the money they're asking for a Dan Wesson, since most of them (Pointman Minor, Pointman Major) are at least partially cast, rather than forged. And, yes, I am aware of the new - and very limited production - Valor.


What guns have forged frames and no MIM under $1,000?

I'll agree with you that forged frames are better than cast. If I had to compromise to meet a price threshold, a cast frame is less likely to fail than a MIM slide stop. Then again, please explain how a cast frame, in general, is less acceptable than plastic?

Street price for Pointman 7 (cast frame, forged slide & barrel, no MIM or FPB) is under $1,000. Above $1,000 there are many choices from different manufacturers...


----------



## Mike Barham

It's not really a practical exception. I just hate forking over good money for a (admittedly largely theoretically) weaker product. But since most people won't ever shoot enough for it to matter, I suppose it doesn't. Agreed that the cast frame is probably better than a ton of MIM.

Polymer frames are exceedingly durable. Glocks routinely go in excess of 100,000 round without enough frame wear to affect function. 1911s with high round counts often suffer cracked frames, usually at the slide stop cut.


----------



## submoa

Mike Barham said:


> Glocks routinely go in excess of 100,000 round without enough frame wear to affect function.


Is this a belief of yours or was this an independent test? What ammo? What maintenance was performed (springs? mags?)? And was this just ONE glock went 100k rounds?



Mike Barham said:


> 1911s with high round counts often suffer cracked frames, usually at the slide stop cut.


Can you specify which brands have these cracked frames? And if any of these cracks actually affected operation?

Up to the end of WWII, all 1911s had forged frames. Caspian frames are cast and I've yet to hear of one of their frames cracking.

1911s are high maintenance weapons. Do not expect to own one without adhering to a strict maintenance schedule. But a properly maintained, quality (no FPB or MIM) 1911 is without peer. Just ask Jeff Cooper... after your Glock kB! :mrgreen:



> The following maintenance schedule is quoted directly from the Wilson Combat 1911 Auto Maintenance Manual by Bill Wilson.
> 
> Clean and Lube, Routine:
> 
> Lead bullet use every 300-500 rounds
> Jacketed bullet use every 500-700 rounds
> Carry pistols once a month​
> Clean and Lube, Thorough:
> 
> Every 5,000 rounds and/or every 3 months your pistol should be completely disassembled, cleaned and lubricated.​
> Spring Replacement:
> 
> Recoil spring every 2,000 rounds
> Firing pin spring every 5,000 rounds
> Hammer spring every 25,000 rounds​
> Parts Replacement:
> 
> Firing pin stop: when cracked
> Slide stop: when broken
> Extractor: when hook edges become worn or fails to maintain tension​


----------



## Concealed45_1911

My HK USP .40 Cracked at the safety after about 5000 rounds or less :smt076 HK replaced the frame and charged me only for shipping.


----------



## Mosquito

submoa said:


> As a Glock alternative, SA XD has fully supported chamber and uses billet internals. Granted, the grip safety is bullsh^t, but at least it is passive.


Why is the grip safety bullshit?


----------



## submoa

Mosquito said:


> Why is the grip safety bullshit?


First all safety devices are inferior to the one between your ears.

Secondly, one word: revolver. Why do we load up semi autos with safeties and require none for revolvers? Is anyone under the illusion that revolvers are inherently safer?

Third, the grip safety is redundant with the split trigger.

Fourth, most NDs occur holstering/drawing... in both cases the grip is grasped.

Fifth, each safety device on a gun must be properly maintained otherwise you will suffer the social embarassment of a nofire when you need your gun to work. Yet another thing to go wrong.

I'd still take an XD over a Glock for the full chamber support and billet internals.


----------



## vernpriest

During a recent training course I saw three guns malfunction, two of them multiple times. The two that malfunctioned repeatedly were both Kimbers. My Glock 19 ran perfect, as it always does. I could use this experience to go on the net to every board and bash the living daylights out of Kimbers and every other 1911 like it while praising the perfection of the Glock 19. I don't because I know that Kimber makes a good weapon and my experience with their failures is very limited. However, Glock haters do this very thing all the time. I cannot count how many times I've read second and third person accounts of a Glock failure that somebody heard about and then jumps on the net to prove the Glock is a ticking timebomb.

If you don't like Glocks, DON'T BUY ONE! Just because you don't like em doesn't make them junk. I personally find the 1911 design to be impractical for SD so I don't carry one, but that doesn't mean they are junk. Lots of guys, more knowledgable than I, love them. Like it or not, 1911 pistols are much more finicky about things like ammo and maintenance than the modern designs of Glock, Sig, HK, XD etc. So buy what suits you and that you are comfortable with and allow others the same courtesy. BTW, as much as I love my Glock I carry a Kahr most of the time.


----------



## Wandering Man

Mike Barham said:


> The Glock is reliable, but I don't think it's any more reliable than a SIG, HK, Beretta, or one of the other heavily-tested designs. All are amply reliable for defense...unlike some 1911s. :mrgreen:


So, back to the original question ...

... without beating up on 1911 owners or Glock owners.

:smt062 :duel: :smt021 :smt014 :smt075 :butthead: :smtmoe :box:

Is there a new "king" for reliability?

It seems to me that pretty much any modern gun by a major manufacturer runs pretty flawlessly, unless it happens to be one of the few lemons that any factory produces from time to time.

WM


----------



## submoa

Wandering Man said:


> Is there a new "king" for reliability?


No, and yes.

Bottom line, the flawlessly reliable gun DOES NOT EXIST. You can buy guns that come close and you can spend exponentially more with each incremental improvement. *The starting place is using a little common sense and avoiding obvious features that can cause trouble *(MIM parts, poor fit, bad disconnectors, weak and unsupported chambers).

If you want a flawless gun, buy pretty much any name brand gun you can shoot well, break it in with 500 rounds of ball ammo, have a gunsmith detail strip and clean, use it for 2,000 flawless rounds, then sell it.

All guns evenutally require cleaning, lubrication, maintenance, and replacement of worn parts. Yes, you even have to replace glock recoil and mag springs regularly. If you want reliability as an average shooter, adhere to a rigourous maintenance schedule and don't keep the gun more than a handful of years.


----------



## Glockamania®

Gun store liars. The gun salesguy just pretty much insulted their intelligence, being Glock owners themselves.

I always tell people to try it themselves, rather than hear others' "opinions".


----------



## JONSCH

The german guns like Heckler Koch, walther, etc are much more reliable then the american "1911" and other cowboy guns. Even the american forces have bowed down and are using HK


----------



## submoa

JONSCH said:


> The german guns like Heckler Koch, walther, etc are much more reliable then the american "1911" and other cowboy guns. Even the american forces have bowed down and are using HK


Firstly, the primary infantry hand held weapon is, and has always been a battle rifle.

US forces are issued either M9 (Beretta) or M11 (SIG). This is not because they are 'superior' to 1911A1 but because the politicians negotiated NATO standardization on 9mm ammo (we got the Euros to use 5.56). The Joint Combat Pistol competition died stillborn in 2006, resulting in the recent flood of high cap poly .45s on the market (HK45, Taurus OSS, M&P 45, FNP45), none selected for military use.

The only US mil issue HK pistol is the HK Mk.23 (aka SOCOM). It is a total POS. It is an overweight and oversized locker queen lusted after only by wannabes. The original accessories it was designed for in the 20th century are obsolete now. Don't blame HK, they delivered on the specs that were asked for.

1st SFOD-D aka Delta have always used 1911s customized by their own armorers. Larry Vickers (former Delta) has gone on to be an icon in custom 1911 circles.

Marine Force Recon uses PISTOL, M1911A1, MEU(SOC) .45CAL built by Marine MOS 2122 gunsmiths from Springfield, Caspian, and selected vintage GI frames at Marine Corps' Precision Weapons Shop (PWS) in Quantico, Virginia.

Marine Corps Special Operations Command Detachment One (MCSOCOM Detachment One or Det 1) uses Kimber Interim Close Quarters Battle pistol (ICQB) with Surefire IMPL (Integrated Military Pistol Light), Dawson Precision Rails, Tritium Novak LoMount sights, Gemtech TRL Tactical Retention Lanyards, modified Safariland 6004 holsters, and Wilson Combat '47D' 8 round magazines. PWS was backlogged and could not produce sufficient 1911A1 MEU(SOC) in time for unit activation in 2003.


----------



## djnevoc

*Wow!*

Lotta great edu-ma-cation on this thread thanks for the info!:smt023


----------



## DJ Niner

hideit said:


> you guys are making me reconsider the beretta 92fs


You don't have to do that; the Beretta is a fine weapon. I oversaw the handgun conversion to the M9s at two different Air Force bases in the late 80s/early 90s, and personally fired one magazine through every M9 that came in at the first base. At the end of 2+ years when I left, we had never had a stoppage with a Beretta that was not shooter-induced, and had no broken weapons/parts, even on the training range guns that had 4000+ rounds each through them.

The M9s got a black eye for reliability in the desert because of lowest-bidder replacement magazines and poor preventive maintenance, but I'd trust one under slightly less extreme conditions without thinking twice about it. I owned two 92s of my own (92FS and 92 Compact) for 5 years and had no problems at all with them.

It's just that the Glock nines are easier to shoot quickly and well, are more compact for comparable capacity, they weigh less, bounce and flip less, are easier to clean and service, and are darn near rustproof. :mrgreen:


----------



## DJ Niner

Wandering Man said:


> A friend just got his CHL, and is now looking for something to carry. He and his wife own a Glock in 9mm that is a couple of years old (more than 5, I think).
> 
> One of the big city (Corpus Christi) gun stores told him that Glock is not the most reliable gun out there. :smt119
> 
> Since when did *THAT* happen?
> 
> I'm wondering what brand the gun store was pushing this month ...
> 
> ... hmmmm, maybe they wanted him to buy a 1911?
> 
> :croc:
> 
> WM


I'm not sure how you can get "more reliable" than 100%, which is the rate two of my Glock 9mms have achieved (and over more than 5 years time and several thousand rounds, too!). Some handguns I've seen will equal that rate; in my experience, the SIG DA/SA 9mms (P226, P228), the Beretta M9/92FS, the HK P7/PSP (no ultra-lightweight bullets), the Ruger P89 9mm and P90 .45 all qualify as 100% reliable. Other folks may have had different experiences, but mine have been universally positive with these guns (and not just ones I have personally owned; include MANY other examples I've competed against in various combat-style competitions, or even observed during informal target shooting at the range). Properly maintained (or even not, sometimes), these guns simply WORK -- RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX.

I can think of NO non-custom, factory-made 1911s made in the last 15 years -- Colts, clones, or copies -- that I would put in the same category. None. Now, go back to the mid-70s, maybe early 80s; then I owned a few Colts that were 100% with everything I could feed them. But in the last 20 or so years, it seems like many manufacturers cheaped-out on parts/fitting whenever they thought they could get away with it, and quality/reliability has suffered. The vast majority of the problems I've seen were magazine-related problems; in fact, the last few 1911s I bought (Kimber, Colt, and for a short time, a high-end Springfield) all needed replacement mags before I could even start to diagnose their other problems.


----------



## DJ Niner

submoa said:


> ...
> 
> Glocks are often praised simply because Glock's aggressive marketing has made their brand the most issued handgun in law enforcement.
> 
> ...


And sometimes they are praised because they are great guns, with solid advantages that practical folks can appreciate. I shot my first Glock in 1990; bought my first in 1991. Back then, I had been shooting some local combat-type pistol matches, and a guy that I had been beating quite regularly in these competitions suddenly started beating ME. I noticed that he had switched-over to one of those new-fangled Glocks, and was telling everyone who got close enough what a great pistol it was. He let a few of us shoot it, and not too long after that, I went in with a few other guys who were doing a group buy on refurbished G17s. I kept my hopes low so I wouldn't be disappointed, but the more I shot the darn thing, the more I liked it. And with my G17, I went back to beating that guy in the matches.

It sat low in my hand, and had very little muzzle flip when fired. Accuracy was fine, even in the well-used refurb. Quick follow-up shots were easy and accurate. Reliability was perfect; that early Gen 1 G17 never jammed in over 3 years and 5000+ rounds of mixed ammo. I carried it in my part-time job, and the light weight was appreciated during a long day at work. It was super easy to strip and clean. I became so enamored of the design that I sold all my other centerfire pistols, bought a few more 9mm Glocks of varying sizes, and converted my centerfire auto collection to "all Glocks, all the time" for more than 5 years.

Eventually, I did allow myself to dabble in other centerfire autos again, but only for fun-guns; for serious purposes, a Glock got (and still gets) the nod. I tried the .40 and .45 Glocks when they were released, and came away less than impressed with the .40 cartridge, and the size of the .45 grip; I stay, to this day, with my trusty nines.

For those who approach it with an open mind, they will find many advantages in the Glock guns and system. For those who approach it with a closed mind, or a predetermined outcome in mind, they will rarely find something they like. No, it doesn't have the same grip angle as a 1911. No, the trigger is not as crisp as a bullseye gun. No, it's not very pretty (unless you find beauty in function, as I do). It is a utilitarian tool, and for those who take the time to learn to use the tool as it was made, for its intended purpose, they will be pleasantly surprised and well armed.


----------



## Ptarmigan

DJ Niner said:


> And sometimes they are praised because they are great guns, with solid advantages that practical folks can appreciate. I shot my first Glock in 1990; bought my first in 1991. Back then, I had been shooting some local combat-type pistol matches, and a guy that I had been beating quite regularly in these competitions suddenly started beating ME. I noticed that he had switched-over to one of those new-fangled Glocks, and was telling everyone who got close enough what a great pistol it was. He let a few of us shoot it, and not too long after that, I went in with a few other guys who were doing a group buy on refurbished G17s. I kept my hopes low so I wouldn't be disappointed, but the more I shot the darn thing, the more I liked it. And with my G17, I went back to beating that guy in the matches.
> 
> It sat low in my hand, and had very little muzzle flip when fired. Accuracy was fine, even in the well-used refurb. Quick follow-up shots were easy and accurate. Reliability was perfect; that early Gen 1 G17 never jammed in over 3 years and 5000+ rounds of mixed ammo. I carried it in my part-time job, and the light weight was appreciated during a long day at work. It was super easy to strip and clean. I became so enamored of the design that I sold all my other centerfire pistols, bought a few more 9mm Glocks of varying sizes, and converted my centerfire auto collection to "all Glocks, all the time" for more than 5 years.
> 
> Eventually, I did allow myself to dabble in other centerfire autos again, but only for fun-guns; for serious purposes, a Glock got (and still gets) the nod. I tried the .40 and .45 Glocks when they were released, and came away less than impressed with the .40 cartridge, and the size of the .45 grip; I stay, to this day, with my trusty nines.
> 
> For those who approach it with an open mind, they will find many advantages in the Glock guns and system. For those who approach it with a closed mind, or a predetermined outcome in mind, they will rarely find something they like. No, it doesn't have the same grip angle as a 1911. No, the trigger is not as crisp as a bullseye gun. No, it's not very pretty (unless you find beauty in function, as I do). It is a utilitarian tool, and for those who take the time to learn to use the tool as it was made, for its intended purpose, they will be pleasantly surprised and well armed.


Great posting! :smt023


----------



## Spartan

Copied from me, from another thread:

My G19 had a stovepipe last weekend. 

When I originally bought my G31, brand new in box, the mags weren't locking the slide on the last shot, and even weren't loading the next round a few times. Took it back to where I bought it and they put stiffer mag springs in... same problem. They still weren't working. Took it back again and they gave me two new G22 mags. So far so good with those, but I rarely shoot the thing because of the cost of 357sig ammo so who knows really.

Odd enough, for all the praises Glock gets for being so reliable and built to survive anything, of my seven pistols bigger than 22, the only two I have EVER experienced any sort of malfunctions/ failures with are my two Glocks. Berettas - flawless; HK - flawless; Steyr - flawless; XD - flawless. All of those mentioned have 1k rounds or more.

Oh well, I ain't bitchin'. I still love my Glocks and would take them anywhere.


----------



## Night Gunner

*Glocks*

they are a good gun, like anything else you have to practice.


----------



## Ram Rod

> Glock no longer the King?


That's a ridiculous notion.


----------



## DogRanger

Ok, lets make a montain out of a mole hill. :blah:
Know your weapon and practice.I have Glock 19 and 1911 Springfield compact 45 and XDc 45 in D.E. All are good guns but if I could only Have one;GLOCK19.........


----------



## Magicmanmb

If you notice nearly every KB that has been reported in the last few years has been associated with the .40caliber round. True Glock has an unsupported chamber. The only reason I'm even considering purchasing a new one over another XD is because Springfield won't sell replacement parts such as extractors springs etc... has to be shipped back at $50.00 bucks a time and with the anti's looking to gain more ground I want spare parts. I'd go the 1911 route but I have never had one that wouldn't jam at least several times a session no matter hor cleaned & lubed they were.


----------



## submoa

Magicmanmb said:


> If you notice nearly every KB that has been reported in the last few years has been associated with the .40caliber round.


.45 ACP G21 kB!s experienced by Portland Police Bureau was diagnosed to unsupported chamber and resulted in replacement with G17 and G19. You can see bulging from lack of chamber support in expended cases fired from G21 below.












Magicmanmb said:


> The only reason I'm even considering purchasing a new one over another XD is because Springfield won't sell replacement parts such as extractors springs etc... has to be shipped back at $50.00 bucks a time and with the anti's looking to gain more ground I want spare parts.


XD (same as HS-2000) parts available at

http://www.shop.xd-hs2000.com/main.sc
http://www.gunnersupply.com/category.sc?categoryId=4
http://www.midwayusa.com/ebrowse.ex...12833&categorystring=10636***10560***10405***
http://www.pistolgear.com/products.php?id=8
http://tjofsugarland.blogspot.com/2005/08/springfield-armory-xd.html

DIY instructions avail at http://www.xd-hs2000.com

Glock fully supported barrels are available aftermarket from 
Briley Manufacturing 
Jarvis Precision 
Wilson Combat


----------



## DJ Niner

submoa said:


> .45 ACP G21 kB!s experienced by Portland Police Bureau was diagnosed to unsupported chamber and resulted in replacement with G17 and G19.


There are some .PDFs of various letters/reports made by HP White labs (where Portland sent the destroyed guns for analysis) floating around the web. If these did originate with HP White, and can be believed, then you should know one of them (referring to the fisrt tested pistol) states "Clearly, the cause of the damage to the pistol was firing a cartridge that produced catastrophically high pressure." Also included was "There can be no question that the pistol submitted (Serial Number EDN811US) was damaged by firing a single cartridge that produced extremely high pressures -- well beyond any industry standards. There is no evidence of a specific defect or malfunction in the pistol."

When the Portland PD called and asked some questions, HP White responded in another letter, which summarized their questions and provided an answer to each, including this one: 
"4. Does the design of the barrel, in particular the amount of unsupported case, contribute to case failures in the unsupported area? -- Any self-loading pistol needs a feed ramp to get the cartridges smoothly from the magazine into the chamber. For all conventional pistols the feed ramp results in some portion of the case being unsupported. The longer the feed ramp, the greater the unsupported area. The Glock 21 probably has a somewhat longer feed ramp that other caliber .45 pistols, but that did not contrubute to your incident."

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/ppb.html (bottom of page)

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/9419-01a.pdf

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/9419-02a.pdf


----------



## submoa

DJ Niner said:


> If these did originate with HP White, and can be believed, then you should know one of them (referring to the fisrt tested pistol) states "Clearly, the cause of the damage to the pistol was firing a cartridge that produced catastrophically high pressure."


HP White does not specify what the 'catastrophically high pressure' was. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this alarming phrase is that the ammo pressure was higher than the threshold that would cause a catastrophy. HP White also fails to indicate what pressure this threshold would be at. For all we know, the ammo could have been within maximum SAAMI specs.

From the same webpage you quote from, PPD had excluded ammunition as cause prior to the HP White tests. As the ammo lots used in the kB! were normal Federal loads:



GunZone said:


> According to PPB's Sergeant Mike Lee in a 31 March 2004 telephone interview, their con*clusion that the Glock Models 21 were the cause of the catastrophic failures as opposed to the ammunition, came as a result of intensive examination of the Federal High-Shok rounds from the two different lots involved. This included, but was not limited to, deconstruction of numerous cartridges from each lot, careful weighing of the propellant charges, and measurements of the brass, with particular attention to the thickness of the caseweb areas.
> 
> Sergeant Lee further advises that PPB had already excluded the ammunition as the "likely suspect" well before TGZ's Glock pages had been brought to the department's attention. He also stated that Portland Police Bureau was attempting to set up a joint meeting with Glock and Federal to discuss and perhaps resolve the matter.


Without introducing facts not in evidence, there are 3 conclusions available:


Federal's manufacturing variances of High-Shok ammunition is sloppy to the point where excessive propellant can be loaded in a few rounds of a single production lot. No other complaints for this ammo can be found for other guns on a Google search.

Glock G21 chambers do not provide sufficient support for standard ammo pressures. PPD's conclusion, resulting in switch to G17 and G19.

Federal High-Shok ammunition should not be used in Glock G21s. In which case, Glock should responsibly be providing all customers a list of ammo incompatible with their products.

If Federal ammo is to blame for PPD's experience, then there should be some sort of Glock/Federal controversy on the scale of the Ford/Firestone argument with Explorers. The fact that no such argument exists suggests Glock already knows the answer.


----------



## DJ Niner

The "fact" that the PD inspected the remaining rounds and found nothing wrong tells us nothing about the round that blew-up the gun(s). In my experience, almost ALL factory ammo defects are one-offs; it's VERY rare to find more than one defect of ANY type in the same box, or even full case, of factory ammo. Nevertheless, I've managed to collect some samples of defective factory rounds over the years, so it DOES happen.

Federal redesigned their .40 casings in the late 90s, as they had received many reports of blown case heads without any evidence of excessive pressure (unlike the Portland PD guns/ammo). The "New! Improved!" thicker .40 caliber brass was a virtual admission that their product was inferior to others in the same caliber. Most any long-term reloader will tell you that in many instances, Federal brass is thinner and/or softer than other, similar products from other companies.

If you reviewed the report, you must have seen the details on the fired casing's expanded primer pocket. There are darn few things that can make a primer pocket expand to that extent, and a supposedly "unsupported chamber" ain't one of them. The lab also noted that a double-charged test round produced almost exactly the same expansion of the primer pocket that was observed in the round that blew-up the gun.


----------



## submoa

DJ Niner said:


> Most any long-term reloader will tell you that in many instances, Federal brass is thinner and/or softer than other, similar products from other companies.


It states in the Glock owners manual NOT to use reloaded ammo. You are supposed to use ONLY commercial ammo.



DJ Niner said:


> If you reviewed the report...


The HP White report was issued in *2004*.

Florin Pirv, the PPD officer injured in the second kB! filed suit against Glock in Oregon Federal District Court *February, 2006*. http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-ordce/case_no-3:2006cv00145/case_id-77017/

The City of Portland also filed suit against Glock in Oregon Federal District Court *March, 2006*. http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-ordce/case_no-3:2006cv00287/case_id-77394/

These cases are still pending. Doubtless HP White will be used in Glocks defense. Doubtless Priv and Portland's attorneys know this. Meanwhile, no one's talking with a suit pending and Portland Police Bureau does NOT use G21.


----------



## AdamSean

The gun store owner was trying to sell them that new gold plated slide with the diamond studded mag release that is guaranteed to put down the BGs with one shot. PFFFT! My Glock 26 (9mm), 27 (.40 S&W), 36 (.45 auto), and 39 (.45 G.A.P.) have performed flawlessly. I plan to soon add a G23 (.40 S&W) very soon. Does this answer the question as to how well I trust Glock pistols?


----------



## JONSCH

submoa said:


> Firstly, the primary infantry hand held weapon is, and has always been a battle rifle.
> 
> US forces are issued either M9 (Beretta) or M11 (SIG). This is not because they are 'superior' to 1911A1 but because the politicians negotiated NATO standardization on 9mm ammo (we got the Euros to use 5.56). The Joint Combat Pistol competition died stillborn in 2006, resulting in the recent flood of high cap poly .45s on the market (HK45, Taurus OSS, M&P 45, FNP45), none selected for military use.
> 
> The only US mil issue HK pistol is the HK Mk.23 (aka SOCOM). It is a total POS. It is an overweight and oversized locker queen lusted after only by wannabes. The original accessories it was designed for in the 20th century are obsolete now. Don't blame HK, they delivered on the specs that were asked for.
> 
> 1st SFOD-D aka Delta have always used 1911s customized by their own armorers. Larry Vickers (former Delta) has gone on to be an icon in custom 1911 circles.
> 
> Marine Force Recon uses PISTOL, M1911A1, MEU(SOC) .45CAL built by Marine MOS 2122 gunsmiths from Springfield, Caspian, and selected vintage GI frames at Marine Corps' Precision Weapons Shop (PWS) in Quantico, Virginia.
> 
> Marine Corps Special Operations Command Detachment One (MCSOCOM Detachment One or Det 1) uses Kimber Interim Close Quarters Battle pistol (ICQB) with Surefire IMPL (Integrated Military Pistol Light), Dawson Precision Rails, Tritium Novak LoMount sights, Gemtech TRL Tactical Retention Lanyards, modified Safariland 6004 holsters, and Wilson Combat '47D' 8 round magazines. PWS was backlogged and could not produce sufficient 1911A1 MEU(SOC) in time for unit activation in 2003.


I guess this is why america is losing the war in Iraq. You are the kind of guy that says people who drive Mercedes are the wannabees and people in Chevrolet are the real deal, aren't you?


----------



## zhurdan

JONSCH said:


> I guess this is why america is losing the war in Iraq. You are the kind of guy that says people who drive Mercedes are the wannabees and people in Chevrolet are the real deal, aren't you?


Wow, where did you see that in his post?

America isn't going to win or lose a war based on the pistol that they are carrying. I think what Submoa was getting at is that if confronted with a fight, the single best weapon to return fire with is their rifle, not a pistol, regardless of caliber or make.

The other problem with firearms used in the military is that it has little to do with what people want on the ground or how much we think they should have a brand new wizz bang pistol. The types of pistols and their unwillingness to change to another pistol have much more to do with contract negotiations and supply line issues. If they seriously tried to undertake the deployment of a new pistol to all troops while at war, it'd be one hell of an undertaking. It's not like you or I running down to the local gun shop and buying a different gun because we are tired of the last one.

Zhur


----------



## Zaakir*Abdullah

Mike Barham said:


> The Glock is reliable, but I don't think it's any more reliable than a SIG, HK, Beretta, or one of the other heavily-tested designs.


Amen, after dealing with the fanboys on GlockTalk for the last few months, its refreshing to see someone actually post that. :smt1099


----------



## Zaakir*Abdullah

Wow, what a little pissing match Ive stumbled upon here. :smt082
What the hell, heres my $0.02

I like Glock, but only in 9mm (Larry Vickers shares the same sentiment). I love my G19. Im a die hard sig fan at heart though. My only problem with Glocks are the fanboys. The jerks who think Glocks are the infallible holy grail of handguns.


----------



## Wandering Man

Zaakir*Abdullah said:


> http://rockoutwithmyglockout.blogspot.com


Nice homepage.

WM


----------



## big rob

For my 2 cents. the glock has a lot going for it. I own more glocks than any other brand of handgun. With that said all of my glocks have never given me a problem. If I am buying a new gun it's probally going to be a glock.I can shoot a glock more consistently than any other make. It's realy up to you , it is your gun after all.


----------



## Zaakir*Abdullah

Wandering Man said:


> Nice homepage.
> 
> WM


Hey thanks s lot my friend, appreciate it. :smt023

I'd update it more if I wasn't so lazy. Im gonna review the Glock 19 next.


----------



## Desertrat

I can only report what I know to be fact with my own Glocks.....none of them have ever FTE or FTF in thousands of rounds. I have no complaint with the company.


----------



## Dredd

Zaakir*Abdullah said:


> Wow, what a little pissing match Ive stumbled upon here. :smt082
> What the hell, heres my $0.02
> 
> I like Glock, but only in 9mm (Larry Vickers shares the same sentiment). I love my G19. Im a die hard sig fan at heart though. My only problem with Glocks are the fanboys. The jerks who think Glocks are the infallible holy grail of handguns.


I agree fully. I love my G19 and use it daily as a CCW gun. I have an affinity to my HKs though, and find them to be just as reliable but of a finer quality in craftsmanship. Glock = tool I can beatup and HK is too expensive for me to afford that type of abuse. Not that it can't take it, I know it can. In my mind though, it's $900 vs $500.



> The only US mil issue HK pistol is the HK Mk.23 (aka SOCOM). It is a total POS. It is an overweight and oversized locker queen lusted after only by wannabes. The original accessories it was designed for in the 20th century are obsolete now. Don't blame HK, they delivered on the specs that were asked for.


Actually I know that there are USP models in usage for certain situations by special operations teams. Namely the Seals. They have a SIG P226 as standard, but they do have an arsenal available to them if they deem it more effective for the situation. USP is included in this as are likely a couple of custom 1911s. For the most part these weapons would sit and the SIG would be strapped on simply because the pistol is the backup or last resort. Nobody storms a building with a pistol in front of them, that's why they issue M4s and various combat shotguns. Not even the contractors would use a pistol and many of them have Glocks as well as the other various options including the M9.


----------



## DevilsJohnson

Well.everyone knows I"m a huge 1911 fan. I carry one and trust my life t it. I've owned about everything at one time or another including Glocks and they are very reliable. That being said if I had to pick one gun to take out with me and be out a good while knowing I wouldn't be able to maintain a normal cleaning routine I'll pick up a Sig Sauer. AS "modern" combat pistols go I've seen nothing that can take as much abuse and still be spot on target. I own two and plan to get more. Heh..I own several 1911's and they will always be my fav but truth is truth. No 1911 and I don't care who makes it could boast the Sig "To Hell and Back Reliability" I can get a few of my 1811's pretty nasty and they will still function as well as they always do but I don't think I'd want to drop it over a hundred feet and let it bounce off the pavement and go target shooting with it.

Glock fans..You all have a really nice gun..I liked the ones I had but I wanted to limit my "non 1911's" some and it was between them and my Sigs to what was gonna go. It wasn't a long think. . The Sig *TO ME* was the better gun. I've had a 17,19,23,21, and 33. All pretty good shooters with the 19 being the most accurate I had.

I look at a pistol as a work of art as much as the tools I use them for. a well made, well designed gun is as beautiful an object to me as anything you'll see in a museum. I look as form as much as function. That's what brought me to the 1911. I see it as the most perfect blend of form and function that I've seen. I would have no reason to have more than one if I thought otherwise. The Sig Sauer has a fantastic design. Function as well as any pistol as be expected to in adverse conditions. And they have the one thing a Glock does not...A hammer. This provides options that a Glock cannot. Also to me a Glock while functions really well just don't do it for me the way they look. If I wanted a pistol just as a tool and function was my only desire then a Glock would fit the bill great.

BTW..I'd not heard about the Glock KB so much with the 40 and never with a 9mm but the 45 ACP and GAP I had read some about. I would have to admit with all the Glocks out there in the hands of LEO along with everyone else the KB issue don't look as bad when you see the total number of guns out there.


----------



## Magicmanmb

I know this thread is old but I have found a 9mm Charles Daly hi power copy that I just shot point of aim out of the box, and 1500 rounds w/o a malfunction. If you run across one at a gun show the sight takes a little getting used to but for the $$$ it fires better than my G17 or my 5906. Only reason I stopped was I was to tired to continue.


----------



## wjh2657

"Marine Force Recon uses PISTOL, M1911A1, MEU(SOC) .45CAL built by Marine MOS 2122 gunsmiths from Springfield, Caspian, and selected vintage GI frames at Marine Corps' Precision Weapons Shop (PWS) in Quantico, Virginia. "

The major reason they used modified 1911s, parts are already available for them as well as trained armorers and reference materials.

There are already Government specifications and precedent contract protocols in place for purchase of 1911 parts.

Yes, the gun is reliable and keeping gun clean and maintenanced is not an issue; Marines are taught how to take care of their weapons.

"We all know which gun Jeff Cooper preferred."

First, I am a Gunsite graduate (and several other schools. ) I respect the memory of the man as a fellow Marine. But he wasn't GOD or even JC, he was a man with some good techniques and was a fine teacher. But his words and choices are not Gospel. I have had to deviate from a lot that I learned from him because it just hasn't proved workable in real life. Yes, he liked the 1911, but that doesn't give it any more credence as the "only" gun just because he liked it.

"Glock's response to all kB!s has been to advise owners not to use overpressure ammunition (ie. +P). "

I don't use +P in any of my guns, including .38 revolvers. I am of the FBI "Penetration and multiple impacts" school and I don't need to stress any of my guns in hope of having a "1 shot kill", 30-06s and .308s are for that type of duty. I also no longer handload (arthritis in hands and wrists) so I don't shoot lead. Problem was pretty much quietly corrected in Third Generation .40 S&W Glocks with beefed up ramp and chamber area. My barrel in my 3rd Gen G23 has more metal than the BARSTO in my 2d Gen G22.

The 1911, properly maintained as all weapons should be, is a fine combat weapon. I carried one in the USMC for over two decades. My motor skills have decreased with age and I no longer carry a single action auto. I have two autos: a G23 and a BERSA. The BERSA was "deal you can't refuse" and I don't ccw it. I have just added a NY1 trigger to the Glock so it will be many range trips before it has proven itself worth of dependence as a CCW. I carry DAO revolvers. The Glock was purchased and the NY1 put in to give me the same basic trigger as my revolvers. I need 8#+ to be safe anymore! There are many fine pistols out there, each has its strengths and weaknesses, I really think it is futile to say any one of them is the "best."

MGySgt of Marines


----------



## GSRevs

XD or bust.


----------



## StatesRights

Wandering Man said:


> So, back to the original question ...
> 
> ... without beating up on 1911 owners or Glock owners.
> 
> :smt062 :duel: :smt021 :smt014 :smt075 :butthead: :smtmoe :box:
> 
> Is there a new "king" for reliability?
> 
> It seems to me that pretty much any modern gun by a major manufacturer runs pretty flawlessly, unless it happens to be one of the few lemons that any factory produces from time to time.
> 
> WM


Its called the Springfield Armory XD...... http://springfield-armory.primediaoutdoors.com/SPstory11.php


----------



## StatesRights

Wandering Man said:


> A friend just got his CHL, and is now looking for something to carry. He and his wife own a Glock in 9mm that is a couple of years old (more than 5, I think).
> 
> One of the big city (Corpus Christi) gun stores told him that Glock is not the most reliable gun out there. :smt119
> 
> Since when did *THAT* happen?
> 
> I'm wondering what brand the gun store was pushing this month ...
> 
> ... hmmmm, maybe they wanted him to buy a 1911?
> 
> :croc:
> 
> WM


This is when it happened..
http://www.americanhandgunner.com/Lasermax.html


----------



## Steve2112

StatesRights said:


> This is when it happened..
> http://www.americanhandgunner.com/Lasermax.html


Wow, that is some serious torture right there. It makes me want a Sig now. Guess it will be even longer before the next gun purchase, since now I want to save up for a Sig.


----------

