PDA

View Full Version : Glock KABOOM!! ... Kind of


wrightb
04-24-2010, 11:02 PM
I was sitting at home throwing some 9mm into a new magazine I picked up, slapped it into my Glock and next thing I know..

KABOOM! Rounds were dropping out of the bottom of the magazine all over the floor. It was over before I even realized what was going on. Once I gathered myself, I picked up all the rounds and started searching for the missing magazine pieces. Found the follower with the bullets, a spring and baseplate about halfway across the room.

Never seen one in pieces, but since there were only 3 (as far as I can tell) I got it back together pretty easily. I noticed a little give in the bottom plate, a forward and back motion can be achieved pretty easily with it currently. So, is this magazine done? Chalk it up as a loss, send it in to glock, or can I order a part for it that may fix it? As far as I can tell nothing is broken, no chipped plastic or flaws anywhere on it. Threw a few rounds in today, seemed ok, but I dont trust it yet.

xibunkrlilkidsx
04-24-2010, 11:19 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v301/GimpyVision/Guns%20and%20knives/howaglockworks.gif

advocatusdiaboli
04-24-2010, 11:43 PM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

Glock-matic
04-24-2010, 11:45 PM
You should have a tube, a spring, a follower, and two pieces to the base. If you are missing the base piece that has the locking button on it, you can expect your magazine to puke more often.

Glock-matic
04-24-2010, 11:56 PM
I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.


Nice stunning endorsement for a pistol that someone has owned for less than a day! I will give kudos for the Sigs, nice pistol, but not worth 2 glocks. Let us know when you have 10k + rounds in your Sig.

Unsupported chambers are nothing new. If you have heard of a "throat" job, that is the term for relieving the area between the feed ramp and chamber. I think a FTF in a defensive situation is more likely in a competitor pistol than a KB is in the glock.

NorCalMama
04-25-2010, 12:02 AM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

:rolleyes: :yawn:

For the rare "horror story" about Glocks, there are 1000 or more very happy people who have had no trouble with their gun (myself included). What you call cheap, I prefer to think of as economical. Glocks aren't meant to be complicated or pretty, they are durable, affordable, and work for their intended purpose.

And an interesting point, you note that the Glock has German engineering, I'll let Vince (at 0:24) address that point-
QwRISkyV_B8&feature=related

I'd be curious to know, how do Glocks have German engineering when they're from Austria?

nn3453
04-25-2010, 7:16 AM
I left my Glock on the bench at the range the other day. When I was not looking, it loaded itself and then proceeded to Kb, without me ever having touched it. Yes, Glocks suck.

Notice how these Glocks suck threads bring out the best in people with limited handgunning experience?

Greg-Dawg
04-25-2010, 7:23 AM
It wasn't a kaboom, it was a kablah.

evidens83
04-25-2010, 8:53 AM
Magazine base plate wasn't secured. No kaboom just blahh...

B Strong
04-25-2010, 9:05 AM
I once had an aftermarket +2 baseplate fail on my G35 while practicing - fired, and while the pistol was in recoil the baseplate broke right off, depositing the remaining rounds at my feet.

The left side of the base plate had broken away.

Lesson learned: stick with factory baseplates.

The "lack" of an external hammer or de-cocker is not a safety issue.

wilit
04-25-2010, 9:11 AM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering:

That'd probably be true if they were German. Aren't they Austrian?

Grumpyoldretiredcop
04-25-2010, 9:14 AM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

:rolleyes:

Rock_Islander
04-25-2010, 9:16 AM
Bottom line:

Sounds like a magazine issue. Not a gun or Glock issue.

Before you lose all faith, mess with the magazine some more, whilst some snap caps are loaded in it and see what you get! There's always a certain point where you'll feel safe using it again.

I'm a through and through 1911 guy to my bones. But I can't knock Glocks, I like them a lot. I always find myself talking smack about how they're "plastic guns that feel like toys and look like kaka" but my buddy's got three Glocks and whenever I shoot them with him at the range I'm ALWAYS impressed.

Forums are just great for hearing people constantly rip your gun(s) for their flaws arent they? But the real owners and users seem to know better whether their guns are loveable or not.

I've heard numerous things about "Don't buy your Rock Island 1911, it's a Philippine gun, yada yada yada." But since I've bought it, I loved it so much I customized the heck out of it, and I recently bought another one this past Monday. Inexpensive, durable, accurate, accurate, accurate, 100% reliable with both factory ball and hollow points, and now I've personalized it to one of the most beautiful 1911s I've ever laid my eyes and hands on. Obviously I love it so much also, that you can just take a look at my username and see how much I support "said" 1911.

Good luck with your Glock, don't lose an ounce of confidence in it.

R.I.

chickenfried
04-25-2010, 9:21 AM
:rofl: I'm no glock fan boy. But this guy is :nuts:. The pre-range trip endorsement is great!

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening)

CrippledPidgeon
04-25-2010, 9:32 AM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering

Too bad Glocks are Austrian.......... :43:

If it's a mag problem, throw away the mag. Mags are pretty much disposable items anyway, so if you're having problems, just chuck it and get a new one.

sd1023x
04-25-2010, 10:28 AM
Glock exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.


Wow, of all the things said about Glock, reliability is one word I do associate with Glock. So many fails in one sentence...how can you call it efficient...if it wasn't reliable, it probably wouldn't be an efficient gun right? Safety? Glock is as safe as any revolver on the market!

Sajedene
04-25-2010, 10:34 AM
Too bad Glocks are Austrian.......... :43:



:rofl:

I guess they're all under the same Iron Curtain :P and they all speak German. So clearly it's from Germany.

HK Dave
04-25-2010, 10:43 AM
I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

:rolleyes:

BHPFan
04-25-2010, 10:58 AM
:rofl:

I guess they're all under the same Iron Curtain :P and they all speak German. So clearly it's from Germany.

WOW.

It makes me wonder why our educational system is going down the toilet with the rampant ignorance.

wrightb
04-25-2010, 11:16 AM
I guess I should have chosen my words a little better.. No unsupported chambers or tradeoffs of safety, flexibility or performance because of German engineering (I don't even know what this really means)...

Lost no confidence in my Glock, just my new pieces of a magazine!

You should have a tube, a spring, a follower, and two pieces to the base. If you are missing the base piece that has the locking button on it, you can expect your magazine to puke more often.

You were spot on. I searched my room again and found a little piece of metal that cups the spring in the baseplate blending in with the carpet under some shelving in my room. It slid into some grooves of the baseplate and when I assembled it back together I heard a definite snap as it locked it. No more jiggling from front to back. Loaded it up and slapped it around a bit without a problem!

I would have found that little piece weeks from now if I hadn't known about it and wondered what the hell it was for. Thanks for the help guys!

hybridatsun350
04-25-2010, 11:19 AM
That'd probably be true if they were German. Aren't they Austrian?

Yea, that's what I was thinking. :confused:

1337Grenadier
04-25-2010, 11:27 AM
I can't believe there are still people who are on the "exploding tupperware" kick. I think that Glocks have more then proven themselves especially when you consider the price compared to Sig and HK.


<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CyZxQfIBXDc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CyZxQfIBXDc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

glockwise2000
04-25-2010, 11:38 AM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.


I wonder if Glocks are unreliable, as you were trying to imply, why does USAF use it? Doesn't the military go through a rigorous testing before they decide which one to use?:confused:

Sinixstar
04-25-2010, 11:43 AM
Can't really say this is a glock issue. This can happen in any mag if you don't put it together quite right. Had it happen in a kimber mag awhile back after cleaning. Didn't quite snap the floorplate all the way in - and proceeded to spit .45 rounds across the room.

It's just one of those things you get into the habit of checking during routine cleaning/maintenance. A lot of people focus on the gun and forget the other parts. This is why you can't forget about the 'other' parts.

DannyZRC
04-25-2010, 12:40 PM
Unsupported chambers are nothing new. If you have heard of a "throat" job, that is the term for relieving the area between the feed ramp and chamber. I think a FTF in a defensive situation is more likely in a competitor pistol than a KB is in the glock.

perhaps not true... pistols, after all, will see a lot more casual shooting than defensive use. a FTF in that specific magazine or two is not super likely (a kaboom at that time is even less likely), but if you add up the likelihood of kaboom over the sum of your range time, it's probably more likely than a FTF in a defensive encounter.

neither scenario is likely, mind you (a defensive FTF or a lifetime kaboom), but still, I thought I should voice my dissent. ;).

also: everything advocatusdiaboli said was wrong (JMHO, YMMV, only valid at participating locations), I have reasons why I won't own a glock as a carry pistol, but they have to do with human interface factors and definitely not with the mechanical/functional soundness of the design.

cmaynes
04-25-2010, 12:45 PM
I wonder if Glocks are unreliable, as you were trying to imply, why does USAF use it? Doesn't the military go through a rigorous testing before they decide which one to use?:confused:

When did the USAF start issuing Glocks? I thought GLOCK took itself out of the US military market dues to them wanting to preserve their designs....

I know some SF and other special branch folk DO use Glocks, but I didnt think the .mil was buying them for regular issue

RangemasterP226
04-25-2010, 12:50 PM
People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.


If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

WOW. This post wins this months most ignorant post! You don't have a ****ing clue about guns, Glocks, or firearm safety do you?

kozumasbullitt
04-25-2010, 1:18 PM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

Glocks are unsafe and unreliable? any documentation to back that up or are you trying to justify spending the money on your sig?

Sajedene
04-25-2010, 1:28 PM
WOW.

It makes me wonder why our educational system is going down the toilet with the rampant ignorance.

I hope that comment wasn't directed towards me. I was being completely sarcastic. :cool:

Noobert
04-25-2010, 1:29 PM
I gotta ask, why are you loading live rounds at home?

fullspeed1
04-25-2010, 1:37 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v301/GimpyVision/Guns%20and%20knives/howaglockworks.gif

And here we go.......................

sirgiles
04-25-2010, 1:49 PM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

please read this about unsupported barrels before spreading misinformation.
http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=55944

Standard 1911 barrels and many others have "unsupported" chambers. This just refers to the mouth of the chamber that extends from the feed ramp leaving a short length of case head brass exposed instead of giving it 100% support as an integral ramp barrel will do. There is a good set of photos of it here for a .38 Super showing supported and unsupported chambers. If you load to high enough pressure or if you have extraction that is not adequately delayed by the lockup, you will see a bulge form at the unsupported location, as it is the weakest point and pressure tends to expand things at the point of least resistance.

as for using barsto, jarvis or any other after market fully supported barrel, this will not protect you from a kaboom if you over-charge a round.

1911su16b870
04-25-2010, 1:50 PM
Glocks work...

every firearm has the potential to go kaboom, it is inherent in the nature of the physics involved with using rapid pressure to expell a projectile.

vintagearms
04-25-2010, 2:02 PM
Ill leave the Glock bashing to those who have never used them or just cant shoot straight.....Send your Glock magazine, even in pieces, to Glock with a letter telling them what happened. Doesnt matter if pre ban or not. They will send you another magazine free of charge.

Glock-matic
04-25-2010, 3:46 PM
perhaps not true... pistols, after all, will see a lot more casual shooting than defensive use. a FTF in that specific magazine or two is not super likely (a kaboom at that time is even less likely), but if you add up the likelihood of kaboom over the sum of your range time, it's probably more likely than a FTF in a defensive encounter.

neither scenario is likely, mind you (a defensive FTF or a lifetime kaboom), but still, I thought I should voice my dissent. ;).

also: everything advocatusdiaboli said was wrong (JMHO, YMMV, only valid at participating locations), I have reasons why I won't own a glock as a carry pistol, but they have to do with human interface factors and definitely not with the mechanical/functional soundness of the design.


My point was you are more likely to have a FTF in an unthroated (fully supported chamber) than a KB in an unsupported chamber. In a defensive situation, a FTF might as well be a KB. The Glock chamber design was not taken lightly, the ability to feed out of spec ammo, hollow points, and other difficult to feed projectiles outweighed the ability to shoot resized cases. The pistols were designed to be as close to 100% as they could make.

KB's in factory bbls, although spectacular gossip and fanfare, are really rare. Most can be attributed to bad ammo.

As for the likeliness of a FTF on an aftermarket bbl, it is significantly more likely than a factory bbl. On a comp gun, no biggie, cycle and shoot on, lose a second or two on the score.

Glock-matic
04-25-2010, 3:50 PM
I guess I should have chosen my words a little better.. No unsupported chambers or tradeoffs of safety, flexibility or performance because of German engineering (I don't even know what this really means)...

Lost no confidence in my Glock, just my new pieces of a magazine!



You were spot on. I searched my room again and found a little piece of metal that cups the spring in the baseplate blending in with the carpet under some shelving in my room. It slid into some grooves of the baseplate and when I assembled it back together I heard a definite snap as it locked it. No more jiggling from front to back. Loaded it up and slapped it around a bit without a problem!


I would have found that little piece weeks from now if I hadn't known about it and wondered what the hell it was for. Thanks for the help guys!


Glad you found it! Sounds like you may have had one that was improperly assembled. I've seen a few magazine pukes, some of them are funnier than others. I watched a competitor drop 15 rounds of 38 Super into the dirt after he pulled the trigger because the baseplate wasn't attached correctly. It looked like the bomb-bay doors on a b29 with all that brass heading towards the deck.

arfan66
04-25-2010, 3:55 PM
I wonder if Glocks are unreliable, as you were trying to imply, why does USAF use it? Doesn't the military go through a rigorous testing before they decide which one to use?:confused:

Dude, I last I checked we still issue Beretta M9's. Hmmmm...:confused: Don't succumb to the fud!:cool:

ETA: I remember something on the Glock website stating "many USAF pilots trust Glock for use as an emergency weapon" (I'm paraphrasing, don't know the exact quote) but that doesn't mean that they are issued to everyone. BTW, I love my G19 and thought maybe the OP's issue was a baseplate problem. Glad you figured it out!

DannyZRC
04-25-2010, 4:04 PM
My point was you are more likely to have a FTF in an unthroated (fully supported chamber) than a KB in an unsupported chamber. In a defensive situation, a FTF might as well be a KB. The Glock chamber design was not taken lightly, the ability to feed out of spec ammo, hollow points, and other difficult to feed projectiles outweighed the ability to shoot resized cases. The pistols were designed to be as close to 100% as they could make.

KB's in factory bbls, although spectacular gossip and fanfare, are really rare. Most can be attributed to bad ammo.

As for the likeliness of a FTF on an aftermarket bbl, it is significantly more likely than a factory bbl. On a comp gun, no biggie, cycle and shoot on, lose a second or two on the score.

in a defensive situation, an FTF is certainly not a kaboom, that's ridiculous.

and when you're practicing at the range, a kaboom is very serious and an FTF isn't.

I never said KBs were common, in fact I said they were rare, but I'll stand by my assessment that a FTF _during a defensive encounter_ is less likely than a KB _over the lifetime of the pistol_.

edit: TY, <3.

supersonic
04-25-2010, 4:11 PM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering:


You are wrong.

People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.


Wrong again! Glocks have the highest reliability reputation of any S/A pistol in the world. And SAFETY? "It's NOT safe. It's a GUN!"

In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure.


WOW, 3 times is a charm! You should probably not discuss this subject any further until you either know the facts, or have some real-world experience (say, "up-close & personal" time with some different Glock models). Glocks are, in fact, one of the FEW semi-auto pistols that can handle the pressure & hammering of the magnum-powered 10mm. I have over 10,000 rounds (the majority of which were my own FULL-POWERED 200-gr. loads) through my G-20, and it still looks and shoots as if it were just broken in. I love & own SIG's, too, but I'd love to see an Equinox after the same punishment.;)

NorCalMama
04-25-2010, 4:12 PM
:rofl:

I guess they're all under the same Iron Curtain :P and they all speak German. So clearly it's from Germany.

Well yeah! lol

Glock-matic
04-25-2010, 5:25 PM
in a defensive situation, an FTF is certainly not a kaboom, that's ridiculous.

In a defensive situation, a FTF might as well be a KB.

and when you're practicing at the range, a kaboom is very serious and an FTF isn't.

And when you are not at the range? For the record, nobody has come forward with injuries related to a Glock KB other than minor cuts and bruising. How do you think you would fair in a shootout with a jammed pistol?

I never said KBs were common, in fact I said they were rare, but I'll stand by my assessment that a FTF _during a defensive encounter_ is less likely than a KB _over the lifetime of the pistol_.

Kind of a petty argument. The odds of a FTF are the same in either scenario, as are the odds of a KB. Trying to say that the odds of the two combined make it statistically insignificant isn't all that valid. For example if your pistol failed to feed 1/2 times, and your odds of being a defensive scenario is 1 in 2 million, you could argue you only have a 1 in 4 million chance of having a FTF in a defensive scenario. While this is technically correct, it is deceptive statistical practice. In reality, you should say that if you are in a defensive scenario, your pistol will FTF 1 out of 2 times. I stand by the argument that the benefit of having an unsupported chamber far outweigh the liabilities of a KB. Don't take my word for it, glock, HKs, and, let the hellfire rain, even some sigs.

tacticalcity
04-25-2010, 5:44 PM
That is hardly a Glock specific problem. Depending on the age of the magazine and the amount of abuse it has seen you should not be overly surprised that a magazine could fail. Unlike the rest of your gun, they are not expected to last forever.

Like it or not, magazines are disposable. You need to examine them constantly to see if they are still "servicable" - to use the military vernacular. Any cracking, distortion in the shape, or damage to the feed lips and it should be tossed. If it routinely misfeeds or fails to seat properly it is time to just toss it.

They take a lot of abuse. They get SLAMMED into the gun. Every time the wrack the slide or fire a round of they suffer a lot of violent friction and shear forces accross the top of them. If you train properly you are constantly ripping them out of your gun and slamming them on the ground when you practice clearing malfunctions and doing tactical reloads. That is a more abuse than any other part of the gun gets, and they are a lot smaller, thin, and just not designed to last forever.

This is were people post how they have never had to throw away a magazine in 20+ years. Great for them. They've either been lucky or they just don't train very hard.

If you are not routinely examining your magazines to make sure they are still good after use, then you are asking for something to go wrong.

If you expect magazines to last for ever, or anywhere near as long as the gun can...they most likely won't...and you'll be frustrated. If you accept that the most likely will need to replaced during the life of the gun, you won't be.

That is NOT brand or weapon system specific advice.

BHPFan
04-25-2010, 7:11 PM
I hope that comment wasn't directed towards me. I was being completely sarcastic. :cool:

What if I am and I am being completely sardonic? ;)

Sajedene
04-25-2010, 8:01 PM
What if I am and I am being completely sardonic? ;)

With the way our education system is? I don't blame ya. :P

SixPointEight
04-25-2010, 8:10 PM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

You sir, know so little, that you don't even know how much you don't know.

"SIG Sauer is the United States representative of Swiss/German manufacturing firm Swiss Arms AG,"

Glock is Austrian. Oh yea...and find me 5 examples of Glock 9mm KB'ing. We're all waiting...

You read and believe too much of what is on the internet.

nrakid88
04-25-2010, 8:12 PM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between .


If Glocks are made in Germany... why does mine say Austria on the slide?

DannyZRC
04-25-2010, 8:37 PM
Kind of a petty argument. The odds of a FTF are the same in either scenario, as are the odds of a KB. Trying to say that the odds of the two combined make it statistically insignificant isn't all that valid. For example if your pistol failed to feed 1/2 times, and your odds of being a defensive scenario is 1 in 2 million, you could argue you only have a 1 in 4 million chance of having a FTF in a defensive scenario. While this is technically correct, it is deceptive statistical practice. In reality, you should say that if you are in a defensive scenario, your pistol will FTF 1 out of 2 times. I stand by the argument that the benefit of having an unsupported chamber far outweigh the liabilities of a KB. Don't take my word for it, glock, HKs, and, let the hellfire rain, even some sigs.

nothing deceptive about my statistical practices, a FTF is usually (not always, usually) a tap-rack-bang from fixed. a KB has permanently destroyed many operating mechanisms that then need to be replaced, perhaps the whole pistol, and even possibly given you a serious injury.

more importantly, the consequences of suffering a KB are *always* present. the consequences of an FTF are highly situational.

I'm not saying that glock has made a poor choice, either choice of optimization is a defensible and reasonable course of action.

and as to your 1/2 FTF example, well.. if the chances of having an FTF in a defensive scenario work out to 1 in 4 million (per whatever unit time), and the chances over that same measure of time of a KB are 1 in 3 million in a pistol with, for arguments sake, a 0 chance of FTF... which pistol would you choose?

I know where the smart actuarial money is. ;).

wrightb
04-25-2010, 9:46 PM
I gotta ask, why are you loading live rounds at home?

Its loaded for home defense. I could load snap caps, but they're a lot less intimidating. Maybe if they're flying out the bottom it would be a pretty good distraction, possibly a hazard if stepped on.

Its very well possible I had too much forward pressure on the base of the magazine as I inserted it, and maybe it just wasn't pieced together quite right. Seems perfect now. Sorry to spark the Kaboom debate, just thought the glock owners might like it!

LB21
04-26-2010, 7:18 AM
Its loaded for home defense. I could load snap caps, but they're a lot less intimidating. Maybe if they're flying out the bottom it would be a pretty good distraction, possibly a hazard if stepped on.

Its very well possible I had too much forward pressure on the base of the magazine as I inserted it, and maybe it just wasn't pieced together quite right. Seems perfect now. Sorry to spark the Kaboom debate, just thought the glock owners might like it!

So its not a kaboom (gun fired possible out of battery discharge, gun breaks up) right? Just the mag falling apart when you slapped it in there?

VictorFranko
04-26-2010, 7:42 AM
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

You are so knowledgeable about Glocks (sarcasm), I'm surprised you didn't pick up on the fact the newbie doesn't know the difference between a Kaboom and the base plate not being secure and popping off due to the spring pressure.
And you know the top three reasons people love their Glocks, very impressive!

CrippledPidgeon
04-26-2010, 3:54 PM
Glock is Austrian. Oh yea...and find me 5 examples of Glock 9mm KB'ing.

More like Glocks KB'ing on factory ammo, not Joe-Bubba's reloads.

wrightb
04-26-2010, 4:09 PM
So its not a kaboom (gun fired possible out of battery discharge, gun breaks up) right? Just the mag falling apart when you slapped it in there?

Yep! Sorry for the choice of words, I thought it was pretty funny at the time..

I honestly think I might have tucked it into my leg a little too hard as I loaded it up, possibly loosening the base that may have already been loose. Its solid as a rock now, I can't get it apart on purpose now. I've marked it to differentiate from my other mags just so I can keep an eye on it, but I don't foresee any problems.

tacticalcity
04-26-2010, 4:10 PM
Originally Posted by advocatusdiaboli
Glocks exemplify the efficient elegance of German engineering: they are an efficient and optimized perfect balance of tradeoffs between safety, flexibility, performance, and cost governed by a low cost filter. People love them because they are simple, efficient, and cheap--but it comes for a price: reliability and safety.

I'll take my Sig Sauer P229 .40 S&W Equinox (which I finally picked up after my 10--day wait last evening) over any Glock in that caliber in price/performance. I've owned H&K USPs and a Glock 27 (unsupported chamber,tiny gun, 40 S&W--sold it). I won't buy any Glock bigger than 9mm again but in 9mm they have their place at the front of the pack neck and neck. In bigger calibers, in my opinion, they stretched their original 9mm design past its safety parameters to market bigger calibers for cost savings knowing the unsupported chamber made the operator vulnerable to brass failure. I won't take their bet and that risk but that's my personal choice. Your mileage may vary and it's your life.

If I did own ANY Glock bigger than 9mm, I'd buy an after-market barrel (Bar-sto and others) with a fully supported chamber (doesn't fix the lack of de-cocking and visible hammer for safety) but it prevents it from blowing up in your hand. Risk is a personal choice. Good luck with your choice.

I am very curious to know what your training level is. If you have attend a 4 Day Defensive Handgun course where you are shooting your Sig side-by-side with others shooting Glocks (at the same skill level as you) it will become very apparent that the decocker and external hammer you love so much about your Sig are actually Cons and not Pros.

You have a Double Action/Single Action trigger that is extremely slow and difficult to master compared to that of a Glock that has a medium 5.5lbs trigger pull for every shot, The decocker and external hammer are design features added as Sigs answer to the DA/SA action - so they go hand in hand. Other companies have tried safeties that double as decockers, and there are even different verions of those. Point being, what you like about your gun is that it is DA/SA, and I would like to point out that the DA/SA handgun has some major flaws.

A common problem with Sigs (or any DA/SA handgun you cannot carry cocked and locked) is that you end up not pulling hard enough on the first pull and too hard on the second, lighter pull. After a day of training or after a skills test you typically end up with one high grouping and one low grouping. With lots of time and effort you can train through that and get one grouping where you were aiming, but under the stress of a firefight there is a good chance that you will revert back to pulling too hard or too light and miss your attacker.

With a Glock, because the trigger pull is the same every single time, you do not need to master those two different trigger pulls. You only have one to worry about. So you get one grouping right from the start. How tight that grouping is, or whether or not it is where you are aiming is improved with training.

Bear in mind, if you are taking all day between shots you will never see this problem. Its only when you train realistically that you see it. By that I mean drawing from concealment, from a holster and shooting a center mass controlled pair in under a second at varying distances from 5 to 15 yards. Once you add the time element in there, the difficulty of mastering a DA/SA handgun becomes very clear. That is where a Glock shines. Without the time/stress element, the difference is obscured.

You have to carry your Sig decocked in order to carry safely. Which means from the holster, you will always have to contend with a very stiff and long Double Action first trigger pull, followed by a very short and light follow up pull. At least with an H&K USP (another popular DA/SA handgun) you could carry cocked and locked and bypass the DA pull all together. But the Sig will not allow that. With a Glock on the other hand, the trigger pull will be the same every single time, and there is no safety to fight with. You simply draw, point in and fire, fire...and if needed keep firing. No additional steps in between, and the 5.5lbs trigger is simple to master.

External hammers have a major flaw that if something gets caught in between them, the gun will not fire. On a range that is not much of an issue. But in real life, clothing, twigs, and other debris could theoretically get in there and become a problem. Its not a huge concern, but it is something to think about when suggesting it is superior to an internal hammer.

For a safe queen, or the home defense gun for somebody who does not train regularly or to a level of proficiency where they would be safe regardless of the weapon system, then a gun with a Safety would be ideal. But your Sig does not have a safety, it has a decocker, so it will fire if pull the trigger hard enough - which in my mind is no safer than a Glocks trigger safety. The downside is crystal clear, the upside not so much - at least not as much as other DA/SA handguns. The H&K USP for example would be much better suited for that purpose because it actually has a safety.

For a primary self defense weapon of someone who carries for a living, and trains extensively, it is a seriously flawed option when compared to a Glock. The only safety you should need is your finger/brain. Anything else can get you killed, because it WILL slow you down in a gun fight.

Political entities love the DA/SA trigger because that long first pull gives you time to change your mind. After several shootings of children playing with fake guns, politicians thought the DA/SA action would help prevent such incidents from happening. So you'll hear stories about departments switching from Glocks to Sigs, and that is pretty much the reason why. The downside is a lot of officers have been killed because they are equipped with a slower weapon system they never fully mastered. Politicians would rather loose an officer than have an accidental shooting of an innocent civilian. Civilians sew for millions, an officer gets a set pension which in comparison is much smaller. So when people talk about how much safer a DA/SA handgun is, they mean from an organizational liability standpoint. Not from a practical standpoint of a trained shooter.

Yes there are people who are very, very fast with a Sig. I would argue they would be much faster if they had invested that training time in a Glock. The mechanics of the Glock simply lend themselves to being faster and more accurate under stress.

Ding126
04-26-2010, 4:16 PM
Hello, My name is Mike and I am a Glock20 owner who lives on the edge of personal destruction. I use Double Tap ammo with 1400 & 1600 fps loads.
I am a Glock user.

Havoc70
04-26-2010, 4:19 PM
Having owned and shot both a Glock and a Sig (Glock model 24P .40 S&W, Sig P226 .40 S&W), I love my Sig. However, that's because ergonomically it fits my hand better. But I loved shooting my Glock, and I fed well over 15,000 rounds through it.

Glocks are fine :).

tacticalcity
04-26-2010, 4:48 PM
Sigs definitely feel nicer in the hand. I will give you that. I just don't trust the DA/SA action for the reasons stated above, especially in a Sig that cannot be carried cocked and locked.

They are an amazingly well made, good looking, comfortable handgun. They are just too darn difficult to master, and even if you do there is no guarantee that under stress you will keep that level of mastery.

If I were to put comfort over speed but still wanted high round count in my magazines I would rather have an HK USP that can be carried cocked and locked. Yes, I would have to fight a safety, but at least when carried cocked and locked I would only have to worry about a light SA trigger pull. So I would get a consistent grouping. The other downside to the HK USP is the magazine release is a bit awkward to use. In time you could master it, but with the additional problem of having to flick off a safety, its just too slow compared to a Glock...though easier to master than a Sig.

The trigger safety, the light and consistent 5.5lbs trigger pull, and very short trigger reset of a Glock really shine in self defense applications.

I would like to get some more trigger time on the Walther PPS and the Smith & Wesson M&P. The Walther PPS is easier to conceal, and the S&W M&P is more ergonomic. They supposedly have a Glock like trigger. I have yet to compare them side by side to see if in my mind their actions are as good.

I had high hopes for the Springfield XD. It feels better in the hand, but the trigger reset is much longer than a Glocks. Between comfort and a shorter reset, I choose shorter reset every single time.

A handgun is not like a pair of shoes. I don't have to feel the grip 18 hours a day. But I do need to know that if I have to use it I can get the metal to where it needs to be as fast as humanly possible. So while the Glock is not the most comfortable gun for my hand, I am much more confident in my ability to use it than I would be with a different weapon system.

Havoc70
04-26-2010, 5:16 PM
I do see where you're coming from on the DA/SA thing, the initial 8.5 pound pull then the incredibly light pull is still taking some adjusting to. I've always wanted a Sig, and I don't regret getting a Sig, but when I move to LA (not L.A.) I'm probably going to get a Glock for carry, I'll have to check out the M&P as well.

Though the 24P trigger pull felt heavier than the DA pull on the Sig, but then again, I sold that gun ages ago so I could be mis-remembering. But one thing I do remember on the 24P, was the reset was also pretty long. I don't know if it was particular to that model, or not.

Katana
04-26-2010, 6:30 PM
Hello, My name is Mike and I am a Glock20 owner who lives on the edge of personal destruction. I use Double Tap ammo with 1400 & 1600 fps loads.
I am a Glock user.

You forgot to mention the Ding Dongs! :nono:

wilit
04-26-2010, 6:43 PM
Me thinks we've seen the only post by advocatusdiaboli in this thread. LOL.

Glock-matic
04-26-2010, 7:50 PM
Me thinks we've seen the only post by advocatusdiaboli in this thread. LOL.

Hopefully he learned something...

Bukowski
04-26-2010, 8:43 PM
Just get a revolver.

Problem solved :p

advocatusdiaboli
04-26-2010, 9:45 PM
External hammers have a major flaw that if something gets caught in between them

Well, while I find your full post very well-reasoned and compelling in some aspects (I still won't use a Glock with an unsupported chamber so that means 9mm only nothing bigger) but I'd consider them in 9mm. But then you need to talk to the public safety officers who all use Sig and 1911s very effectively time and time again without hammer issues.

DannyZRC
04-26-2010, 10:30 PM
Well, while I find your full post very well-reasoned and compelling in some aspects (I still won't use a Glock with an unsupported chamber so that means 9mm only nothing bigger) but I'd consider them in 9mm. But then you need to talk to the public safety officers who all use Sig and 1911s very effectively time and time again without hammer issues.

if you're gonna bring up glock kabooms, you are discussing astronomically unlikely edge case occurences, it's almost purely academic.

criticizing a hammer fired weapon because of hammer snag and interference issues is _every single bit_ as valid as criticizing a glock for kabooming.

they are both instances of insanely unlikely edge-case behavior, and are nigh completely academic.

to put it another way......
http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/e5hansej/1208060712814.jpg

Katana
04-26-2010, 10:37 PM
˙˙˙

glock21fan
04-26-2010, 10:58 PM
Well, while I find your full post very well-reasoned and compelling in some aspects (I still won't use a Glock with an unsupported chamber so that means 9mm only nothing bigger) but I'd consider them in 9mm. But then you need to talk to the public safety officers who all use Sig and 1911s very effectively time and time again without hammer issues.

i strongly feel your mistaken! I know of a few officers who have shot them selves in the rear end while holstered by making contact with a 1911 hammer also one case of a sig. havent heard of any AD involving a glock other then neglegence! my first glock was a 21 .45 acp and ive recently picked up a 17 9mm....I have about 6k through my g21 and about 1000 through my 17 i train regularly and as said at front sight any gun will do if you do!
good luck with your sig when you need it the most i hope for your sake you train..:7::7:

Grumpyoldretiredcop
04-26-2010, 11:18 PM
and the chances over that same measure of time of a KB are 1 in 3 million in a pistol with, for arguments sake, a 0 chance of FTF... which pistol would you choose?

I know where the smart actuarial money is. ;).

Please, let me know when you find that pistol... I'll buy it whatever the cost. That, my friend, is why you practice malfunction drills. I know where the smart actuarial money is... and it isn't on betting that your pistol will never malfunction, it's on betting that it will. Anything else is just wishful thinking.

DannyZRC
04-27-2010, 12:27 AM
Please, let me know when you find that pistol... I'll buy it whatever the cost. That, my friend, is why you practice malfunction drills. I know where the smart actuarial money is... and it isn't on betting that your pistol will never malfunction, it's on betting that it will. Anything else is just wishful thinking.

really really missing the point man, well and truly.

also, I never advocated against malfunction drills.

LB21
04-27-2010, 6:33 AM
Yep! Sorry for the choice of words, I thought it was pretty funny at the time..

I honestly think I might have tucked it into my leg a little too hard as I loaded it up, possibly loosening the base that may have already been loose. Its solid as a rock now, I can't get it apart on purpose now. I've marked it to differentiate from my other mags just so I can keep an eye on it, but I don't foresee any problems.

You see all the trouble a bad choice of words makes! This thread is hilarious! :rofl2: If you want some real fun your next thread should be..."1911 Kaboom...what a piece of garbage!" LOL

As for your mag problem, that's probably it or you did something else to loosen it up before loading. I used to have a 26 with a bunch of factory and aftermarket mags. Never once had the problem you had, even after disassembling for cleaning.

Grumpyoldretiredcop
04-27-2010, 11:31 AM
really really missing the point man, well and truly.

also, I never advocated against malfunction drills.

No, I got both your and Glock-matic's points. What you're both ignoring is that there are many factors that go into weapons malfunctions other than weapons design. Both of your analyses are far too simplistic for real-world conditions.

I trained, and train others, to plan for the possibility of failure, simply because Murphy's Law says that your weapon will fail when you need it most. I expect my weapon to fail, no matter whether it has a supported chamber or not, whether it's a Glock, S&W, SIG, H&K, or whatever, and am prepared to deal with it accordingly. Simply put, the chance that my weapon will fail simply because the chamber is not fully supported is so small that it is unimportant. In over two decades of law enforcement training, encompassing many thousands of rounds fired from a variety of handguns and hundreds of varied weapons failures, I have never seen a weapons failure ("KB") due to an unsupported chamber. Not once. A better statistical argument might be had from an analysis of all those other factors - but I wouldn't want to be the one trying to accomplish it.

Of course, I'm not saying that you advocated against malfunction drills. Sorry if you read my post that way, it wasn't meant to say that.

DannyZRC
04-27-2010, 12:39 PM
my analysis was just meant to compare and contrast the odds of a defensive FTF to a lifetime kaboom, and to specifically point out that a kaboom always has significance but an FTF does not. it's a specific comparison along a single design axis, chamber throating, and I stated my position that both design directions are equally defensible and valid, it's just a matter of priority.

you really shouldn't generalize it any more than my saying that both throated and unthroated chambers are A-Ok. ;).

(side note, I'm specifically not the person advocating throated chambers because then they'll never jam.)

stormy_clothing
04-27-2010, 1:50 PM
Anyone who criticizes Glocks have whats know as an innie, I know I've probably only put 50,000 rounds or so through numerous glocks so as still to be a noob. But of the 10 billion glocks maybe 5 have had issues and those 5 people feel the need to talk alot and convince everyone that 10 billion other people are wrong.

That's mainly the the truth with some exaggeration since I've probably put 100,000 rounds through glocks of different calibers before.

Never had one blow up