Glock 19 Gen 5 MOS Cycling/Ejection Issue?

[alex]

Hi,

I've noticed an oddity with my new Gen 5 19 MOS. I've tested the following method with a Gen 3 19, Gen 4 26, G43, Gen 5 19, 19X, and Gen 5 19 MOS. The new Gen 5 MOS seems to cause a strange extraction/ejection issue. To all Gen 5/Gen 5 MOS users, please try the following and post your findings.

The Test: Load a round into the chamber and then slowly pull the slide back to extract/eject the round. Try this with and without the magazine inserted. When I do this with the Gen 5 MOS, the round gets hung up and will not be ejected with ease, it just stays attached to the extractor. The only way to eject the round is to cycle the slide with force. I noticed this issue when I was dry firing and tried clearing the chamber and the round would not eject.

When I do this with every other Glock, the round is pulled out by the extractor and glides right over the ejector causing the round to fall out very easily. Using my current sample size, I imagine this is considered proper ejection and extraction for the pistols. Also, I've never had a single failure with any of these pistols that exhibit this behavior.

This is where I request the help of PF. I swapped out the extractor and ejector with my older Gen 5 19 thinking that would solve the problem, but it did absolutely nothing. The older 19 uses the 30274 ejector and the new MOS uses the 47021 (as does the 19X). I then placed the MOS slide on the older Gen 5 frame and the issue remained. I placed the older Gen 5 slide on the newer frame and the gun cycled perfectly. Using this data, I believe I've narrowed the issue down to the slide. Is it safe to say my slide is out of spec or is this considered proper function?

[dfeder530]

I had the same hangup with ejecting a round by hand when I pull the slide back slowly on my Gen 5 MOS, but zero issues with the 500 rounds fired so far. Compared to my older Gen 4 Glocks, I assumed the Gen 5 hangup was due to the stronger extractor spring holding the round in the slide tighter. Provided the Gen 5 MOS doesn't have issues ejecting during live fire I wouldn't worry about it.

[alex]

I had the same hangup with ejecting a round by hand when I pull the slide back slowly on my Gen 5 MOS, but zero issues with the 500 rounds fired so far. Compared to my older Gen 4 Glocks, I assumed the Gen 5 hangup was due to the stronger extractor spring holding the round in the slide tighter. Provided the Gen 5 MOS doesn't have issues ejecting during live fire I wouldn't worry about it.

Thank you for taking the time to test this.

[Beat Trash]

I noticed this with my Glock 45. They made a slight grove cut in the slide, opposite of the extractor. This causes this deresistance you feel. On the plus side, it helps hold the case in place so that the ejector hits the empty case with authority. My Glock 45 ejects the empty 9mm cases farther than any 9mm handgun I’ve used over the last 30 years.

I was told that Glock has included this change into the entire Gen5 line going forward.

[alex]

I noticed this with my Glock 45. They made a slight grove cut in the slide, opposite of the extractor. This causes this deresistance you feel. On the plus side, it helps hold the case in place so that the ejector hits the empty case with authority. My Glock 45 ejects the empty 9mm cases farther than any 9mm handgun I’ve used over the last 30 years.

I was told that Glock has included this change into the entire Gen5 line going forward.

Thank you!

[HCM]

When I do this with every other Glock, the round is pulled out by the extractor and glides right over the ejector causing the round to fall out very easily. Using my current sample size, I imagine this is considered proper ejection and extraction for the pistols. Also, I've never had a single failure with any of these pistols that exhibit this behavior.

Glock has made some changes to the Gen 5’s but is not an “issue” rather it is a fix to a long term “issue” with Glocks.

Pistols are not made to extract and eject “slowly by hand” they are made to function at full speed as generated by the recoil of a fired cartridge.

What you are seeing is the improved extraction and ejection engineered into the Gen5 series. This was discussed in one of the Gen 5 or 19x threads.

For decades Glock has gotten by with minimally functional extraction and ejection, essentially using the top round in the magazine as a de facto ejector.

The “gliding over the ejector” you see in the earlier guns is NOT proper functioning. I’ve seen a bigger sample size than the OP including numerous Gen 3 & 4 Glocks exhibit extraction and ejection issues.

The new ejector and accompanying breech face cuts are discussed here : https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?32859-Different-Glock-GEN5-Ejectors-for-17-and-34-5-19X

[alex]

Glock has made some changes to the Gen 5a but is not an “issue” rather it is a fix to a long term “issue” with Glocks.

Pistols are not made to extract and eject “slowly by hand” they are made to function at full speed as generated by the recoil of a fired cartridge.

What you are seeing is the improved extraction and ejection engineered into the Gen5 series. This was discussed in one of the Gen 5 or 19x threads.

For decades Glock has gotten by with minimally functional extraction and ejection, essentially using the top round in the magazine as a de facto ejector.

The “gliding over the ejector” you see in the earlier guns is NOT proper functioning. I’ve seen a bigger sample size than the OP including numerous Gen 3 & 4 Glocks exhibit extraction and ejection issues.

You're absolutely correct

[HCM]

You're absolutely correct

Related prior thread : https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?32859-Different-Glock-GEN5-Ejectors-for-17-and-34-5-19X

Also discussed in the latter part of the G45 thread. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?33111-Leaked-new-Glock-G45

[Super77]

My G45 does the same. It’s a good thing: As HCM described the ejection is much stronger and more consistent than previous Glocks. I’ve had crazy consistent ejection and no brass to fase in 1200 rounds. Just be careful when you clear the chamber to make sure the hand-ejected round actually ejects and you don’t carelessly rechamber it.

[alex]

Related prior thread : https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?32859-Different-Glock-GEN5-Ejectors-for-17-and-34-5-19X

Also discussed in the latter part of the G45 thread. https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?33111-Leaked-new-Glock-G45

Thank you again, I really appreciate it.

[HCM]

Here is a question, maybe one for PensFan. - we have seen ejection improved in older Glocks by replacing the 336 ejector with the 30274 ejector.

Would the new Gen 5 ejector offer additional improvement in an older gun by itself or does it have to be used in conjunction with the new breech face cuts ?

[PensFan]

Here is a question, maybe one for PensFan. - we have seen ejection improved in older Glocks by replacing the 336 ejector with the 30274 ejector.

Would the new Gen 5 ejector offer additional improvement in an older gun by itself or does it have to be used in conjunction with the new breech face cuts ?

It’s not restricted to Gen5. You can run it in any Glock 9mm except the G43.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[alex]

Thank you everyone.

[Pistol Pete 10]

I've not had this problem with my 19G5.

[O4L]

Fix for BTF! :)

[STI]

Here is a question, maybe one for PensFan. - we have seen ejection improved in older Glocks by replacing the 336 ejector with the 30274 ejector.

Would the new Gen 5 ejector offer additional improvement in an older gun by itself or does it have to be used in conjunction with the new breech face cuts ?


It’s not restricted to Gen5. You can run it in any Glock 9mm except the G43.

I back to back "tested" 30274 vs 47021 in G26 Gen 3 and the newest 47021 ejected best in this sample of one.

Also interesting to note was when I swapped the newest 47021 into my early build G17 Gen 5 (which came with 30274) there wasn't a noticeable ejection difference but the consistent slide auto-forwarding I experience upon loaded mag changes, became inconsistent between mags.

[HCM]

I back to back "tested" 30274 vs 47021 in G26 Gen 3 and the newest 47021 ejected best in this sample of one.

Also interesting to note was when I swapped the newest 47021 into my early build G17 Gen 5 (which came with 30274) there wasn't a noticeable ejection difference but the consistent slide auto-forwarding I experience upon loaded mag changes, became inconsistent between mags.

Good to know on the Gen 3.

Autoforwarding is technically a malfunction so it’s reduction is a positive.

[RJ]

I've not had this problem with my 19G5.

How many rounds so far?

My 1 year old G19.5 is around 3,100+. I’ve started to experience some brass landing on my noggin lately. Prior to this ejection was generally strong and to the right.

I’ve got a new TMH/E with a 47021 Ejector en route to see if it helps.

[PensFan]

I back to back "tested" 30274 vs 47021 in G26 Gen 3 and the newest 47021 ejected best in this sample of one.

Also interesting to note was when I swapped the newest 47021 into my early build G17 Gen 5 (which came with 30274) there wasn't a noticeable ejection difference but the consistent slide auto-forwarding I experience upon loaded mag changes, became inconsistent between mags.

Auto forwarding on a Gen5 should not happen. Make sure the slide stop lever spring isn't bowed out, and that the trigger pin is properly centered when installed.