2015 Glock 19 GEN 4 Handguns still unreliable / have design flaws

[StraitR]

In my experience, even if you are LE, you can expect the Glock mothership in Smyrna to swap a few parts and call it good. The Glock regional LE reps are noticeably more responsive but their primary job is LE Agencies, not individual officers.

My agency issues SIG 40's but allows personally owned Glocks. If I call Glock Smyrna and tell them I'm having a problem with my personally owned Agency approved Glock, they will tell me to send it to my agency's national armory. The problem with this is we don't issue Glocks and their supply of Glock parts is limited. If they don't have the necessary parts on hand they may have my gun 6 months or more until they get more Glock parts.

I agree with Ralph's recommendation for. docSabo's G19 - I would try a HRED or an APEX extractor before calling Glock,

If it fixes a high percentage of pistols in the least amount of time/money spent, it's not hard to fathom that being an effective SOP (from a corporate POV). It's undoubtably much cheaper to blindly follow a flowchart of swapping out $5-50 worth of parts and ship it back than it is to pay techs to shoot/diagnose every individual pistol returned.

I'm not saying this is exactly what they do because I've never sent back a Glock to date, but given the simplistic design (low cost parts, likely low cost labor), I can see how that model would quickly end up being "Best Practice". If I were a betting man, I'd say that's exactly what they do, and I'd also say that they take the same approach for round two on the same pistol. Spitballing, of course.

We are talking about non-LE guns run through Glock CS.

[JHC]

If it fixes a high percentage of pistols in the least amount of time/money spent, it's not hard to fathom that being an effective SOP (from a corporate POV). It's undoubtably much cheaper to blindly follow a flowchart of swapping out $5-50 worth of parts and ship it back than it is to pay techs to shoot/diagnose every individual pistol returned.

I'm not saying this is exactly what they do because I've never sent back a Glock to date, but given the simplistic design (low cost parts, likely low cost labor), I can see how that model would quickly end up being "Best Practice". If I were a betting man, I'd say that's exactly what they do, and I'd also say that they take the same approach for round two on the same pistol. Spitballing, of course.

We are talking about non-LE guns run through Glock CS.

Agree about the general theme but I've spoken to a few techs there about problem guns. They do shoot them. But yeah all they do is swap parts. That's all anyone does on a Legos gun. They don't fit barrels.

I'm sure they got a bad rap from their rough patch circa 2010 when they got a complaint gun, changed an RSA to the latest, stepped out on the range and dumped a couple magazines and called it good. Later, similar routine with extractors probably.

[StraitR]

Agree about the general theme but I've spoken to a few techs there about problem guns. They do shoot them. But yeah all they do is swap parts. That's all anyone does on a Legos gun. They don't fit barrels.

I'm sure they got a bad rap from their rough patch circa 2010 when they got a complaint gun, changed an RSA to the latest, stepped out on the range and dumped a couple magazines and called it good. Later, similar routine with extractors probably.

Agreed.

And I'm sure that simple parts swapping fixes 90% of the problems 90% of the time. IMO, that's the beauty of the design.

[GJM]

I got me two late model G4 19 pistols this month that seem to be running fine.

Agreed that part swapping seems to cure most problems, and the Obama inspired buying can make the other problems go away to someone one that wouldn't know BTF from BFF, or care at all, and would just be delighted to get one.

[HCM]

If it fixes a high percentage of pistols in the least amount of time/money spent, it's not hard to fathom that being an effective SOP (from a corporate POV). It's undoubtably much cheaper to blindly follow a flowchart of swapping out $5-50 worth of parts and ship it back than it is to pay techs to shoot/diagnose every individual pistol returned.

I'm not saying this is exactly what they do because I've never sent back a Glock to date, but given the simplistic design (low cost parts, likely low cost labor), I can see how that model would quickly end up being "Best Practice". If I were a betting man, I'd say that's exactly what they do, and I'd also say that they take the same approach for round two on the same pistol. Spitballing, of course.

We are talking about non-LE guns run through Glock CS.

All true- I can swap my own parts for what is costs me, as an individual, to ship a gun to Glock.

[StraitR]

I got me two late model G4 19 pistols this month that seem to be running fine.

Agreed that part swapping seems to cure most problems, and the Obama inspired buying can make the other problems go away to someone one that wouldn't know BTF from BFF, or care at all, and would just be delighted to get one.

The most disconcerting reports of Glock extraction issues, to me, are those that show up in higher round count guns (5k, 6k, 7k etc.). Normally, we can do things like the 2000 round challenge and then generally rest assured that if there were underlying issues, they have been sorted. In the case of some aforementioned Glocks, that's not necessarily the case, and it makes me a little uneasy.

All true- I can swap my own parts for what is costs me, as an individual, to ship a gun to Glock.

True. And cost aside, self-sustainability, for those that value it, is one of the greatest attributes of Glocks.

[Clay]

Several of the guns that have had problems with high round counts have been squared away by a thorough cleaning, and in one case I'm aware of, a recoil spring replacement.

I had a crappy Glock 19 made in early 2012 that I couldn't remedy with a parts swap, so I sold it to the shop I bought it from. I did get a little pissy about that crappy one, and bought a few other pistols to try out, but eventually I came to my senses. Now I have a bunch of Gen4's, and they've been 100% so far, but nothing on earth is perfect.

I don't believe there is a more reliable, durable, and user-sustainable pistol on the market than the Glock, specifically the 9mm models. There are so many in service around the world, there have been so many tests and field trials - at this point no other pistol is as proven, except maybe the M9. It absolutely baffles me that every week, some idiot on Youtube is still going to "torture test" or "field review" a Glock pistol, and wants to be taken seriously.

If my $550 Glock goes 7,000 rounds without a malfunction I'm tickled pink. If I can spend $40 and make it good as new, I'm ecstatic.

Back to drinking my Kool-Aid....

[HCM]

If my $550 Glock goes 7,000 rounds without a malfunction I'm tickled pink. If I can spend $40 and make it good as new, I'm ecstatic.
.

From a dollar value standpoint a $500 pistol which fires $1500 worth of ammunition is a reasonable return.

However, for me, it's not the odds, it's the stakes.

My G17 Gen 4 is my duty gun. So it was not a good feeling when it suddenly started shitting the bed at 7k rounds.

I tried a detail strip, thorough cleaning, new RSA, and a factory extractor and spring-loaded bearing from another GEN 4 G 17, still no bueno. So far the HRED and a light polish on the top and bottom of the extractor sems to have fixed it.

We have about 100 officers with personally owned Glocks. Including mine I've seen 3 with FTE issues. In all three factory parts swaps reduced the malfunction rate but did not eliminate it. We run Speer Gold Dot +P 124 and Winchester Ranger 147 grain (the old FBI load) so it's not an ammo issue.

[Clay]

From a dollar value standpoint a $500 pistol which fires $1500 worth of ammunition is a reasonable return.

However, for me, it's not the odds, it's the stakes.

My G17 Gen 4 is my duty gun. So it was not a good feeling when it suddenly started shitting the bed at 7k rounds.

I tried a detail strip, thorough cleaning, new RSA, and a factory extractor and spring-loaded bearing from another GEN 4 G 17, still no bueno. So far the HRED and a light polish on the top and bottom of the extractor sems to have fixed it.

We have about 100 officers with personally owned Glocks. Including mine I've seen 3 with FTE issues. In all three factory parts swaps reduced the malfunction rate but did not eliminate it. We run Speer Gold Dot +P 124 and Winchester Ranger 147 grain (the old FBI load) so it's not an ammo issue.

I totally see where you're coming from, and that sucks to have to deal with.

The problem I see is people, or whole departments for that matter, then make a switch to a newer, but less proven design, like the SIG 320 or whatever, and then you're really playing with the stakes. You can say "well, it hasn't had a single problem", but the thing is, there may be 5,000 of them out there in the hands of serious users, and the gun is less than five years old, versus a 30-year design with millions out there in use.

[s0nspark]

You can say "well, it hasn't had a single problem", but the thing is, there may be 5,000 of them out there in the hands of serious users, and the gun is less than five years old, versus a 30-year design with millions out there in use.

If the current design was actually 30 years old and proven reliable we wouldn't be having this conversation ;-)

Glock has problems related to tolerance stacking and the lack of precision they employ in manufacturing, and it apparently makes sense for them financially to pretend otherwise - this from a company that has never been all that willing to own up to problems. Not that they are alone...

I'm just glad there are other solid choices available.