Current Glock 17s

[k1dude]

I have a gen 4 G26 that had constant problems with not going into battery right from the start. After a few hundred frustrating rounds, I had narrowed it down to being a recoil-spring/guide-rod problem. When I got ahold of Glock, the guy was gruff and rude and said I was clueless and it was me, not the gun. I asked him to send me a new guide rod and he refused. Fortunately, I'd read online it was a known problem and told him that. He said it was NOT a known problem and wouldn't budge until I started reading off the multitudes of reviews that said it was. He finally relented and sent me a new guide rod. I installed it and it solved the problem immediately.

Out of curiosity a few years ago, I re-installed the original guide rod, and sure enough, the out-of-battery malfunctions started right up again. It was definitely bad recoil springs and/or a faulty rod.

[static2126]

Historically glocks have not needed breaking (9mm double stack).

I have a g19 on 70k rounds hasn't been cleaned in at least 40k. Just new recoil springs and lube. No issues

That said issues from new glocks (all stock) last 6 months. All gen 5. All standard capacity mags.

Won't consistently go into battery:

7 - g17
8 - g19
2 - g26
3 - g43x

Extractor tension won't consistently eject or pick up rims

4 - g26

Dead trigger at times

2 - g19


Don't get me started on glock performance trigger issues.

Feel like they are having a bad qc run

Happens to everyone. Purchased a p365xl that had a dead trigger out of the box. Trigger would break but striker wouldnt engage. I carry a p365xl daily.

Vet your equipment.

[lexo98]

Limp wrist?

[G-forceJunkie]

People love shooting low power 115 grain because its cheap, but if you look in the early Glock Armorers manuals (maybe the new ones as well, haven't seen one), they have specifications for minimum ammo power. Most 115 grain range ammo doesn't meet it. Glocks were designed around NAO spec 124 grain which is relatively hot. And they were not designed to have heavy optics bolted to the slides. Maybe they changed slide weight and or recoil spring weight on the MOS guns, I don't know. Also, Glock 17s were not designed for the 10 round mags, they are a forced change that was never factored in during the design process. Anytime you have to modify something for reason other than making it better, you usually get something worse. They have NEVER been as reliable as the 17 round mags they were designed to use. My point, I guess Glock has dicked around and made so many changes to their guns over the decades it hard to compare or expect a current gun to be the same as a 1990's era gun.

[static2126]

People love shooting low power 115 grain because its cheap, but if you look in the early Glock Armorers manuals (maybe the new ones as well, haven't seen one), they have specifications for minimum ammo power. Most 115 grain range ammo doesn't meet it. Glocks were designed around NAO spec 124 grain which is relatively hot. And they were not designed to have heavy optics bolted to the slides. Maybe they changed slide weight and or recoil spring weight on the MOS guns, I don't know. Also, Glock 17s were not designed for the 10 round mags, they are a forced change that was never factored in during the design process. Anytime you have to modify something for reason other than making it better, you usually get something worse. They have NEVER been as reliable as the 17 round mags they were designed to use. My point, I guess Glock has dicked around and made so many changes to their guns over the decades it hard to compare or expect a current gun to be the same as a 1990's era gun.

Most gun companies have also figured out the average gun is shot less than 1k rounds lifetime