Glock Guys- Rebuilding Gen 2, 2.5, and 3 17 Mags ?

[zenmastar]

A few of my Glock 17 mags are failing. One, a gen 3, is cracking between a column of dots that indicate round count, two others are no longer feeding reliably. Those are gen 2 and 2.5.

My question is whether rebuilding by replace the tube with the newer general tube would work? I know there were also changes to the followers, base plate and insert (mine do not have any inserts).

Is it worth it to try and rebuild with the newer tubes, or just pay the money for used gen 2 and 3 tubes?

I am guessing it is worth paying more for the gen2 and gen3 just to avoid legal troubles. Any truth to this?

Thanks.

[Quiet]

It's legal to use the current production parts to rebuild your old magazines.

[zenmastar]

Don't think I can retain any old part but perhaps the spring. These are u-shaped or NFML magazines.

I would like to hear from those who repaired their NFML magazines.

[hayaku]

you can buy a full rebuild kit (ie from exilemachine.com) and throw your old broken mags away.

[motorwerks]

you can buy a full rebuild kit (ie from exilemachine.com) and throw your old broken mags away.

Sort of, he legally has to keep a part form the old one. But after that yeas the old crap can be thrown out.

[morfeeis]

Sort of, he legally has to keep a part form the old one. But after that yeas the old crap can be thrown out.

Not true, you can rebuild your old magazine and not end up with any of the old parts.

[vintagearms]

Sort of, he legally has to keep a part form the old one. But after that yeas the old crap can be thrown out.

It is suggested but not legally required.

OP, you can send your old magazines directly to Glock and they will replace them with all new parts. Yes, it is legal and usually they do it without a fee. OR, you can do what Hayaku suggested as Exile is a great place to buy from.

[Turo]

It is perfectly legal to rebuild your large-capacity magazines with all new parts. Just make sure you don't end up with more large-capacity magazines than you started with.

[Oceanbob]

Sort of, he legally has to keep a part form the old one. But after that yeas the old crap can be thrown out.

LOL...and why would you think that..?.

Rebuild is rebuild. Perfectly legal to replace every part, including the tube.

Be well, Bob

[zenmastar]

Thanks for the replies. I thought to post a follow on what I've found for others with pre-ban, NFML or U notched G17 mags. I wanted to fly under the radar of sorts by using pre-ban parts in the rebuild to be obvious.

That appears to be darn near impossible:

1- The followers on my pre-ban are a different shape and do not match the contour of the feed lips on post-bans. Once you compare the followers or the feed lips, you can see the differences readily. I did try to assemble using a post-ban tube with my pre-ban follower. I did not like the feel when pushing down the follower with my finger. I would be hesitant to rely on this while shooting. So, this is a NOGO for me. If you need to replace the tube with a post-ban, you should update the follower to a post ban as well, imo.

2- My baseplates are all one piece with no insert. All post-ban tubes use two pieces. So the baseplate has a hole to accommodate the pin on the insert. I did try to fit one of my pre-ban baseplates on a post-ban tube and it appeared to work. I did not test fire it at the range, but I was uncomfortable with the tight fit and the probable extra wear on both.

3- The springs appear to be identical. So I ended up with a post-ban tube, follower, insert and baseplate, but with my pre-ban spring. This functioned fine but I did not accomplish my goal as it is not readily apparent that I have one pre-ban part.

I started out frustrated with Glock because of all the changes they've made to their magazines, but then realized it was wrongly placed. My frustrated settled on the politicians who author these ridiculous laws, and the people who re-elect them.

[zenmastar]

Thanks for the replies. I thought to post a follow on what I've found for others with pre-ban, NFML or U notched G17 mags. I wanted to fly under the radar of sorts by using pre-ban parts in the rebuild to be obvious.

That appears to be darn near impossible:

1- The followers on my pre-ban are a different shape and do not match the contour of the feed lips on post-bans. Once you compare the followers or the feed lips, you can see the differences readily. I did try to assemble using a post-ban tube with my pre-ban follower. I did not like the feel when pushing down the follower with my finger. I would be hesitant to rely on this while shooting. So, this is a NOGO for me. If you need to replace the tube with a post-ban, you should update the follower to a post ban as well, imo.

2- My baseplates are all one piece with no insert. All post-ban tubes use two pieces. So the baseplate has a hole to accommodate the pin on the insert. I did try to fit one of my pre-ban baseplates on a post-ban tube and it appeared to work. I did not test fire it at the range, but I was uncomfortable with the tight fit and the probable extra wear on both.

3- The springs appear to be identical. So I ended up with a post-ban tube, follower, insert and baseplate, but with my pre-ban spring. This functioned fine but I did not accomplish my goal as it is not readily apparent that I have one pre-ban part.

I started out frustrated with Glock because of all the changes they've made to their magazines, but then realized it was wrongly placed. My frustrated settled on the politicians who author these ridiculous laws, and the people who re-elect them.