Gadget use?

[Trukinjp13]

How many of you guys are running the gadget? And how do you like it? Thinking about getting back to Glock and this lil fellar really interests me.

[Josh Runkle]

There is a large, pre-existing thread on this topic:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?712-The-Gadget-REVEALED&p=10782#post10782

The creators/developers/designers, Tom Jones and Todd Green only recently (in that thread) officially released the testers to share their thoughts (we had previously been bound by a non-disclosure agreement).

My thoughts: it's solid. It works. I have had one for about two years. I will be buying one for every GLOCK I own, and buying extra to give to friends I care about. It should come standard on every GLOCK.

[voodoo_man]

I dont have one but would like to do a torture test on it...one day...

Having seen one in action over the weekend I have a feeling it'll be a "must have" once its out.

[JV_]

I've been using one since 2011, it does the job well.

[Trukinjp13]

Thanks for the link. My search skills must suck. I knew there was a thread but could not find it.

[Jay Cunningham]

I have one on a Gen 4 Glock 19, which is the gun I carry and shoot the most. Its very simple and effective, and adds a solid layer of risk mitigation.

[LittleLebowski]

It is so deceivingly simple and well engineered that I couldn't imagine it failing. I've been using it since 2011 no problems. High round count classes, USPSA, carry, no issues.

[David S.]

I was generously given the opportunity to test it and used it for a few weeks before changing platforms from Glock to SIG. It's simple and works as advertised. I personally consider it a must-have and would definitely install them in every Glock pistol in my carry rotation.

[LittleLebowski]

I personally consider it a must-have and would definitely install them in every Glock pistol in my carry rotation.

Concur.

[StraitR]

It's only been like six years in the making. Don't worry, this thread doesn't pick at any scabs though, not at all. :p

[M2CattleCo]

I've been running a Beretta really well while waiting on mine since August 16th. :D

[Josh Runkle]

It is so deceivingly simple and well engineered that I couldn't imagine it failing.

I don't remember how far other testers discussed it in the other thread, because I know a few might not discuss where/how they tested it for operational security reasons for the few people with actual jobs that require shooting people in the face (definitely not me), but I know it has been used in extremely hot, dusty, dirty temperatures as well as freezing cold, wet, icy, snowy temperatures. It's been used in force on force and been on the ground getting scraped up and filled with dirt and mud, and my understanding is that it has performed damn near flawlessly (don't know about every single early prototype. No data available to me).

I have run it on a GLOCK 21 and a GLOCK 17 FTX with low round counts on both without any failures. I have mostly run it on a gen 4 GLOCK 19, and it has gone 25,000+ rounds on that without a single failure. That gun has not been cleaned or lubed during my entire test, though I have switched out barrels for a threaded barrel to run it suppressed occasionally. (For full disclosure: I ran the suppressor dry the entire time, though, which could effect stoppages without cleaning had I run high round counts with wet suppressors)

I make no financial gain by affirming: yes. It works. It's been tested in various parts of the world under extreme conditions, to my knowledge: without failing. Small, cheap, crazy easy to install. Makes an amazing gun slightly less hazardous during reholstering. I could foresee them being on every FBI gun 25 years from now when we have Gen 6 Glocks or something. You get to keep the low bore axis and striker fired function along with the reholstering safety of a gun with a hammer. What's not to like?

[Josh Runkle]

Also, another random comment to add: I have recently found that I do use it slightly differently than I would do reholstering with a gun with a hammer. With a hammer, I use the proximal portion of the palmar surface of the distal phalanx of my thumb while reholstering, but I find that I tend to use the distal tip of that same digit to reholster with the gadget and get a much better result.

I'm sure there's some pseudo-science debate to be had about how we all don't know what we are talking about when discussing fine vs gross motor skills...regardless...for me, the hammer guns are more of a "mashing" while reholstering, while the gadget is more of a refined skill using the end of my finger. You can still "mash" the gadget, but I personally get better results with the end of my thumb to create a really solid lock out.

[StraitR]

In addition to Todd and I wanting to very throughly test the device and get a rock solid patent in place, there are a couple of other threads on PF (one started just last week) that allude to some of issues we've had to contend with during that six years that may or may not help folks to understand why it's taken so long.

All I can say is that absolutely no one wants the people interested in the Gadget to have one (or a dozen) more than myself.

Tom, I'm simply making light of it. This is twice that my comments on the Gadget have solicited the bold comment above, verbatim. I want you to know explicitly that I am perfectly content waiting another six years if you determine that's what it takes to get them produced to your satisfaction. We're talking about an operational part that will go on a tool which, God willing, I will never have to use to defend my family or myself. That being said, my standing order of two is a testament to the confidence I have in you (and TLG, RIP) and your quest for absolute perfection given the task at hand.

My sincere apologies if my words ever led you to believe anything to the contrary.

[Tamara]

There's one on my carry gun. I'm planning on buying a couple more so I can have one on any Glock I'm likely to holster up.

[StraitR]

I know. :)



Really, verbatim? I'm simultaneously shocked and pleased by my consistency. :)



I understand, and I want you to know that your post didn't offend me or bother me or make me feel pressured in any way. PF gets a little over a million pageviews a month currently. About 45% of those are from people who aren't regular or registered users of the forum. I was just adding context for the large percentage of people who may read this thread but that aren't "one of us" and don't know everything that goes on around here. :cool:


Tracking. And ok, looking back, mostly verbatim, if that were a thing. :p

A million page views a month? Impressive, yet a little. bit. scary.

[CS Tactical]

I've been using one since mid 2014, I'll have one on every Glock once they are available :cool:

[11B10]

After finally finding out what the gadget was (yesterday) - and then today dry-firing a Gen4G19 today, you guys are killing me with this Glock/9mm stuff! But it all seems so...right.

[StraitR]

VDM uses a similar maintenance program.

[voodoo_man]

VDM uses a similar maintenance program.

If it works...

[Trukinjp13]

I am pumped for these to come available. I have been excited since I heard about it. Todd pretty much had me all in and this is the reason I am getting back to Glock. I did not mean for anyone to think I was questioning reliability with it. I was more wondering how people liked using it. How intuitive it was. I am used to thumbing my hammer and assumed it was a quick study. I wish more people would think about one of these. Most every ad I have heard of is while holstering.

[StraitR]

If it works...

Oh the irony. :p

6657

[cosine]

This reminds me, I've moved since I ordered. Off to go update my shipping address in Indiegogo...

[MichaelD]

The Gadget has me, a confirmed M&P fanboy, seriously considering the purchase of a pair of Glock 19's to replace my trusty M&P9c and M&P fullsize as my EDC guns. This is big... just ask SecondsCount.

[voodoo_man]

Oh the irony. :p

6657

*more often than not...

[LittleLebowski]

Oh the irony. :p

6657

:D

https://media.giphy.com/media/14ceV8wMLIGO6Q/giphy.gif

[Josh Runkle]

I know Glocks are impressively tolerant of neglect, but 25K+ without lube? Really?

Have you documented this anywhere? I bet it would be an interesting read. Also, got any pictures? :cool:


Well, I've documented it in a place that you can read it whenever you request it and I'll mail it to you. ;) I can upload some photos in a few minutes.

[Josh Runkle]

Well, I've documented it in a place that you can read it whenever you request it and I'll mail it to you. ;) I can upload some photos in a few minutes.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/4ed71aab52f693041da0f713a8b2c152.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/ce60401f4e915cc5b0db208f2a604d8e.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/9390520fab31396f46ce92af97c667c1.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/0430fb43327c837f5b87c801576ebce6.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/b032a06b0591572d5176accf30bb61f8.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/1d1f8dcf2c3d74fbea0f8e75d26c75d8.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/14ae9f71729b7d5d2b2bcb52246fca4b.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/baeeecf90cdd3ade3a4578196a5435aa.jpg
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/5400ad617249d8f676e0d00d185c8d62.jpg

Haven't taken it down further since I started the test; fairly certain the firing pin is broken (from the sound), but it's still chugging along fine. I'm gonna keep going until I have another malfunction. (I had some before the test began)

The threaded barrel looks much worse, even though it was used less, but is not stored here at home, so I can't get a pic of that yet.

The only part of the frame that is worn down is the middle knuckle (ring finger) area.

[GRV]

Wait...that sounds weird. Why would the firing pin break? That's not an area that gets lube...

[Josh Runkle]

Wait...that sounds weird. Why would the firing pin break? That's not an area that gets lube...

Usage?

[Josh Runkle]

Wait...that sounds weird. Why would the firing pin break? That's not an area that gets lube...

The gun has 40k rounds through it. It has 25k+ with a gadget.

My log is stored with the rest of my gear which is not at my home. I haven't checked it or shot since December, since I was recently (December) diagnosed with a Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndrome: ARVD/C (Arrthymogenic Right Ventricular Dysplasia/Cardiomyopathy). I am still recovering from about a month of time in the hospital, and dealing with the long term effects of having a terminal illness, but I just got cleared to shoot again about two weeks ago, but haven't had the time or strength to go.

I can give specific numbers on the gun whenever I go check my log at some point.

[GRV]

The striker is a lifetime part. I'd expect the breechface to crack before the striker breaks. The last time a broken firing pin came up here it was quickly revealed that it was aftermarket. Admittedly, I'm not qualified to speak to high-volume Glock failures, hopefully someone else will chime in, but it failed the proverbial smell test for me. In particular, as unlikely as I know it is to be a causal relationship, it stood out that the modification to this gun was adding a Gadget, which notably interacts with the firing pin.... When you do take it apart, please post pictures. I'm very curious where the break is.


Very sorry to hear about the diagnosis...:(

[Josh Runkle]

The striker is a lifetime part. I'd expect the breechface to crack before the striker breaks. The last time a broken firing pin came up here it was quickly revealed that it was aftermarket. Admittedly, I'm not qualified to speak to high-volume Glock failures, hopefully someone else will chime in, but it failed the proverbial smell test for me. In particular, as unlikely as I know it is to be a causal relationship, it stood out that the modification to this gun was adding a Gadget, which notably interacts with the firing pin.... When you do take it apart, please post pictures. I'm very curious where the break is.


Very sorry to hear about the diagnosis...:(

You are correct. http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/51f21df597732efe5c94bd6a22b18d9d.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/26fe76c24ee7644134cc1b5973667985.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160322/835f4e4cfc206b50bbdcd0f45685597c.jpg

What is strangest is that after I removed it and reinstalled, the rattling noise is gone. Very odd. Any suggestions for why this might be? (I haven't taken a GLOCK armorer class since about 2010)

[GRV]

First of all, I hope I didn't come off as implying that you should be thinking or worrying about anything as petty as gun gear right now...


Alright, that's what I expected (not actually broken). Fits expectations much better. As for the rattling, it really depends on the nature. Very hard to tell over the web. There is of course the very good rattling sound of a uncocked striker. There is also the occasional ammo rattle associated with loaded Glocks. Beyond that, I've noticed an occasional rattle once in a blue moon with Glocks that can't always be explained and doesn't stick around. I think it has something to do with the looseness of Glocks. However, I, like you, prefer to get down to the bottom of such things whenever possible.

[GRV]

Worth noting, although your striker doesn't look broken, if I were personally looking to confirm that I'd fully disassemble the striker assembly and examine the striker alone. However, if you haven't done it before and especially if you're lacking manual strength/dexterity right now, it can be frustrating...particularly when reassembling.

[Josh Runkle]

Worth noting, although your striker doesn't look broken, if I were personally looking to confirm that I'd fully disassemble the striker assembly and examine the striker alone. However, if you haven't done it before and especially if you're lacking manual strength/dexterity right now, it can be frustrating...particularly when reassembling.

It's very easy to do, however, I'm trying not to disturb the results of the test. My hands were black and covered in silver sparkles when I pulled the striker assembly out. Meaning, I'm removing fouling and crap that would bind up the channel, just by removing it (because it's coming off on my hands). I'm trying to leave everything alone to keep it unbiased, so that the gun functions as if it truly is not being cleaned.

[GRV]

It's very easy to do, however, I'm trying not to disturb the results of the test. My hands were black and covered in silver sparkles when I pulled the striker assembly out. Meaning, I'm removing fouling and crap that would bind up the channel, just by removing it (because it's coming off on my hands). I'm trying to leave everything alone to keep it unbiased, so that the gun functions as if it truly is not being cleaned.

Got it.

[Tamara]

My hands were black and covered in silver sparkles...

There's a Twilight joke in there somewhere, but I'm not reaching in after it.

[Josh Runkle]

There's a Twilight joke in there somewhere, but I'm not reaching in after it.

Allergic to sunlight? Check.

Creature of the night? Check.

Like my steaks on the rare side? Check. Carpaccio? What's not to like? I prefer it.

Shit. I oughta pay you a doctor's bill, because you might've just diagnosed me to be a vampire.

I'm game for the Seattle weather too. Leave out the CW teen-hearthrob-style drama and I'm down.

[11B10]

It's literally probably the most crucial lubrication point in a Glock, Tam. And until fairly recently, Glock's Owners Manual did a singularly poor job of successfully illustrating it. The best way to lubricate the two components is to do a detailed disassembly of one's Glock(s) at least annually, and use a non-migrating cream-type grease on the portions where the components interface (I prefer TW25B, but there's certainly plenty of good stuff out there). Essentially, the triggerbar and connector mesh against each other and move during the operating cycle. If not lubricated, the action can cause metal galling of the two components, and lead to the components seizing up, making the gun inoperable.NJ

Alternatively, you can place a drop of lubricant periodically at the top of the two components as accessible when field-stripped, but you'll need to use a more liquid lubricant to ensure that it migrates down-and concurrently, such a lubricant will pretty much by definition be more susceptible for also migrating away the components, or evaporating-so you'll need to re-lubricate more frequently.

Best, Jon


Isn't Donald Trump going to take care of all the migration issues?

[JFK]

I have swapped mine from a Gen 4 19 and 17. Combined about 13k rounds and only one issue. I am waiting for more to come out to not have to swap it...

[Josh Runkle]

Josh, fair enough. Thanks for responding. And while I agree that a well lubed, well inspected and maintained firearm can malfunction, by performing proper maintenance you're likely to significantly remove a potential causal factor(s) contributing to malfunctions.


Completely agree, and this is typically my attitude as well when it comes to guns that I trust my life to.

[Jeep]

And don't get me wrong-I'm not suggesting that one's firearm needs to be cleaned and lubricated to drill sergeant inspection standards . . .

* * * *

If your life potentially depends on a tool, why not spend the few minutes necessary to maintain the tool?



That, of course, is the real purpose behind drill sergeant standards. And overall--despite some cases of over cleaning leading to problems with muzzle crowns etc--those standards serve the intended purpose.

[GRV]

2004 G34, 40-50 thousand rounds, 2-3 years of 30 min dryfire daily. Most dryfire with gun out of battery but still a lot of in battery trigger presses.

Interesting, thanks.

[LittleLebowski]

Anyhow, let's let this thread drift back to the topic of The Gadget, okay? :)


Mods here are shit.

[JonInWA]

Sure, Jeep-I can see that. But the nice thing about this forum is that we've got a significant number of participants who are far beyond the "buy it and put it in the sock drawer" state of ownership; who actually do use their pistols significantly and intelligently.

I don't doubt that the manufacturer builds in a significant margin of operability to account for limited or negligent maintenance. But I've read enough (and experienced enough in life) to prefer to take my version of a common-sense approach-to generally see the value in following the manufacturer's guidelines, which in the case of a Glock (and, for that matter, most polymer-framed pistols) are really pretty minimalist, not significantly time-consuming, and easy to perform.

And through the years, when credible individuals in knowledgeable positions regarding the product and it's operating and maintenance protocols continuously recommend certain things to me, I consider that to be a clue. And since I value my stuff (and have to go through a incredibly intensive vetting program known as the Wifely Review Board for any replacements, off-site repairs, or increases ) you betcher ass I'm gonna take a more conservative approach to maintenance.

I'm all for those (like Josh) who really are willing to run a test sample to exhaustion in the interest of science (and I'm seriously not being sarcastic here-I appreciate what he and others similarly choose to selectively do); but Josh clearly stated that the gun he subjected the zero maintenance treatment to was not a carry/self-defense gun, and that his defensive/carry fleet guns are maintained far differently). But a zero maintenance protocol is not in my interest or paradigm when it comes to my weapons-all of mine I at least potentially view as being utilized as defensive weapons, so if there'a glimmering of a perception that my, or other's live(s) may depend upon it, my path is pretty crystal-clear. And that's just common-sense for me-before we start meandering through the potential legal (and emotional) ramifications that can fall out from an inadequate maintenance protocol.

To me, it makes more sense to properly maintain a basic weapon than to substitute interesting hardware solutions to mitigate against the lack of maintenance. For instance, I'm interested in The Gadget-I think it makes a huge amount of sense, particularly to those wishing to carry a Glock appendix-style. But I'm very skeptical of those in the school of "It's a Glock-I don't, and shouldn't need to do anything other than run ammunition through it." It's an offshoot mentality of what I call The Lazy Gunwriter Syndrome that seemed to lurch into popularity in the early 1990s, where it was the seemingly macho thing of the day to take a brand-new gun through its paces literally right out of it's box, with no operator applied lubrication whatsoever-conveniently ignoring both common sense and organizational protocols. Hey, it sounded manly, and gave more time for other pursuits-and the guns were usually lent to them by market exposure seeking manufacturers, as opposed to being actually owned and depended upon by said writers. (and as deplorably fallacious as certain Gun Tests reviews and articles have been over the years, one of the reasons that I continue to subscribe to it over the years is that they at least seem to genuinely go about acquiring their subjects to in a consumer-similar manner, and strive to be objective in their reviews, as wincingly flawed and quirky as they can be from time-to-time).

Judiciously applied hardware solutions (i.e., The Gadget) can make eminent sense-but should be applied in conjunction with proper maintenance, to not just get the best from the platform, but also to truly assess the viability of the platform itself and any ancillary add-ons or modifications. Once that's been established, then might be the time for more extreme out-of-the-norm testing to gauge the reliability and durability in extreme conditions. The risk factor, of course, is that such testing may well have an adverse effect on said platform/devices....and for the results to be more meaningful, they are best applied in a truly scientific methodology, with verifiable results-and in sufficient protocol/statistical numbers to be significantly meaningful. Of course, a bad design, flawed materials, or a flawed manufacturing technique may quickly rear its head (the Caracel comes to mind...), and the data collection of empirical experiences via the internet can be a great indicator. I'd imagine that all of the above probably played into The Gadget's limited beta deployment to certain members here, with some specifically designed requirements and criteria, prior to commencing into full production.

Best, Jon

[Tamara]

I'll start a fresh thread, Jon, for you and maybe one or two others here.

ETA: New thread regarding cruciform/connector lubrication is up (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?19801-Lubrication-of-connector-cruciform-contact-point-on-Glocks), if there's any hope left of getting the OP's thread back on the OP's topic.