Different Glock GEN5 Ejectors for 17 and 34.5/19X...

[JSGlock34]

Just discovered that my 17.5 and 34.5 have different ejectors. Researching further, discovered different part numbers for the trigger housing/ejector for the G17/19 (47208) and the G19X/26/34.5 (33854). Apparently the G17 comes with the 30274 ejector, and the 19X/26/34 with the 47021 ejector. This was surprising to me, considering the 17/19X/34 share a (mostly) common frame, and Glock's usual desire to use common parts.

[CDFIII]

The last Glock rep I spoke to about this looked at me like I was smoking something. I literally had to break some guns down and prove to them the parts are different numbers. Never did hear anything back from them. My guess is the change in parts on the 19X is what makes the triggers feel better than Gen. 5 19/17's?

[Redhat]

The last Glock rep I spoke to about this looked at me like I was smoking something. I literally had to break some guns down and prove to them the parts are different numbers. Never did hear anything back from them. My guess is the change in parts on the 19X is what makes the triggers feel better than Gen. 5 19/17's?

Could you tell they were different just by looking? If so, how?

[CDFIII]

Could you tell they were different just by looking? If so, how?

Only reason I knew was by comparing part numbers from my personally owned 19/17 and 19X pistols.

[Redhat]

Only reason I knew was by comparing part numbers from my personally owned 19/17 and 19X pistols.

That's interesting. Wonder what makes them different?

[CDFIII]

That's interesting. Wonder what makes them different?
Not sure.. My guess is that most Glock employees probably are unaware there are any parts differences. The 19X also has maritime spring cups as well. Hopefully someone with greater Glock knowledge than myself will come along and have an answer. Possibly Tom_Jones or GJM have more info?

[JSGlock34]

I seem to recall there was early speculation that the 19X would come with the coated internals (trigger bar, connector) of the MHS submission and the 17M/19M, but I don't believe that is the case with the commercial guns The ejector shouldn't affect trigger pull. That said, I've found Glocks of all generations, including Ms and GEN5s, can have a range of trigger pulls. I've shot GEN5 guns with great triggers and M guns with mediocre triggers, and vice versa. I think M/GEN5 is better and more consistent than previous Glock generations (certainly a marked improvement over the GEN4), but my 17.5 with a dot connector seems to have a smoother and lighter pull than my 34.5 with a '-' connector. Go figure.

[GJM]

It must not be a complete secret, as JohnnyGlocks triggers lists different model for the G5 17/19 vs G5 26/19X/34.

https://johnnyglocks.com/products/johnny-glocks-edc-trigger-kit

[EVP]

Could I ask a favor of someone..?

Could someone check and see if when inserting a loaded magazine into the frame(without slide) that the rounds contacts the ejector on a 19x/26/34? I don’t have other gen 5 guns to compare.

It seems that my 19x ejector makes contact with the top round differently and earlier then previous generation guns.

[JBP55]

Could I ask a favor of someone..?

Could someone check and see if when inserting a loaded magazine into the frame(without slide) that the rounds contacts the ejector on a 19x/26/34? I don’t have other gen 5 guns to compare.

It seems that my 19x ejector makes contact with the top round differently and earlier then previous generation guns.

All Gen 5 Glocks.

Appears to be same light contact on ejector near forward end on six new Glocks G26/G19/ G19X/G19X/G17/G34.

[EVP]

Thanks JBP55!

[PensFan]

I have no idea, but PensFan might be able to shed some light.

If I get a chance I’ll pull apart some guns this weekend and see what I can see.

Functionally the Gen5 trigger is the same as the 19X. Same trigger housing, connector, trigger spring assembly, trigger bar. Different spring cups and ejector. And the G19X ejector is also standard in the Gen5 26 and 34.

My experience is that the consistency of trigger pull has improved a lot over the years. Tighter tolerances among parts. Improved coatings, etc.

CDFlll thanks for the chuckle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JHC]

Functionally the Gen5 trigger is the same as the 19X. Same trigger housing, connector, trigger spring assembly, trigger bar. Different spring cups and ejector. And the G19X ejector is also standard in the Gen5 26 and 34.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Super interesting. Any idea why those 3 models would warrant a different ejector? As in a functional reason in those or maybe just those 3 models got heavily tested with that one so leave it at that?

Does the G45 share that ejector with the 19X?

[feudist]

There was a thread, on ARFcom of all places, where a poster tested 3 or 4 different ejectors. This included the newest iteration. His conclusion was that the newest version gave him closer to 90 degree ejection, more uniform, and with no BTF. I believe this thread was early last summer.

[PensFan]

Super interesting. Any idea why those 3 models would warrant a different ejector? As in a functional reason in those or maybe just those 3 models got heavily tested with that one so leave it at that?

Does the G45 share that ejector with the 19X?

Same ejector.

[JBP55]

There was a thread, on ARFcom of all places, where a poster tested 3 or 4 different ejectors. This included the newest iteration. His conclusion was that the newest version gave him closer to 90 degree ejection, more uniform, and with no BTF. I believe this thread was early last summer.

If it was on a new G45 or G19MOS it may have been due to the design change to the breech face on the latest Gen 5 Glocks which appears to hold the case better than the older designs.

[HCM]

Just picked up a Gen 5 17 MOS. it has the 47021 ejector.

[STI]

I put the G19x trigger housing/ejector assy p/n 47208 in an otherwise stock G17G5. I just function tested it including 1911 no magazine testing. I used 147 HST and 115 Sellier & Bellot brass range ammo (asked for the weakest).

Doing 1911 test (no magazine firing) I tried everything from normal shooting to two finger limp grip WHO with both rounds and could not create a stoppage or (fall out the) magwell ejection. Also, magazines with the two rounds randomly interleaved fed and functioned normally. Ejection was straight out the side and the angle didn't change noticeably with different grip strengths, just the ejection distance. Weak WHO ejection was still at least 3 feet.

[PensFan]

Doing 1911 test.

:rolleyes:

Why is this even a thing?

[JBP55]

:rolleyes:

Why is this even a thing?

What he said.

[STI]

:rolleyes:

Why is this even a thing?


What he said.

Some confidence that the brass stays in it's correct position, repeatedly, on the breech face until the ejector does its job, without falling down or moving to some other location, without the magazine follower assisting the process. I fully understand that the test doesn't reflect any condition I'd ever be operating the pistol in.

To be devil's advocate - does me running this test cause a problem?

I don't know about you but I function test all my firearms with the weakest and strongest loads I run, at angles all the way from normal upright shooting to upside down and everything in between. Also with the firearm brought to snow temps, with snow/mud in the mags, limp wristing WHO, all combinations I can think of. I don't have a large firearm collection but I don't put one on "forget" mode until I've done all this.

[JBP55]

Some confidence that the brass stays in it's correct position, repeatedly, on the breech face until the ejector does its job, without falling down or moving to some other location, without the magazine follower assisting the process. I fully understand that the test doesn't reflect any condition I'd ever be operating the pistol in.

To be devil's advocate - does me running this test cause a problem?

I don't know about you but I function test all my firearms with the weakest and strongest loads I run, at angles all the way from normal upright shooting to upside down and everything in between. Also with the firearm brought to snow temps, with snow/mud in the mags, limp wristing WHO, all combinations I can think of. I don't have a large firearm collection but I don't put one on "forget" mode until I've done all this.

Over 100,000 rounds from Glocks and never had that issue. Think it must be a 1911 thing.

[PensFan]

The 1911 thing was IMO always about tuning the extractor on a 1911. Done with the slide dismounted from the frame a properly tuned extractor had to hold a live round in position to test proper tension. How this became a Glock thing I don't know.

[Wayne Dobbs]

That extractor isolation test tells you whether the extractor is holding the case in position for ejection after extraction. LOTS of Glocks ain't doing that and are using the top round in the mag as the de facto ejector. Glock is aware of it and has supposedly made an engineering change on the breechface to remedy the issue on the Gen 5 pistols. About time...

[STI]

Thanks Wayne. Sometimes I feel like I'm crazy, caring about ejection :/

I will add that taking out the stock early G17G5 ejector (same as Gen 4) and replacing it with the new G19X/G26G5 ejector changed my pistol's consistent auto-forwarding on reloads. It's intermittent and random and depending on magazine now. I put the original ejector back in.