Good demonstration although swapping parts out on the same gun would be a better demonstration.Originally Posted by Doublestack45
He sure does like seeing how close he can get his fingers to the muzzle doesn't he?
Good demonstration although swapping parts out on the same gun would be a better demonstration.
He sure does like seeing how close he can get his fingers to the muzzle doesn't he?
Not something to really worry about IMHO. As someone said above most Glocks will not eject cleanly/normally with the magazines removed. As a former 1911 builder and user this bothered me significantly and I spent a lot of money and time to make them past this "test". At the time I mistakenly thought that achieving perfect ejection sans magazine was going to make the gun more reliable in general but I was wrong.
Some of my efforts included playing with different OEM extractors, Apex extractors, White Sound extractor springs, etc. With enough parts switching you can achieve normal ejection without the mag but it's not going to make the gun any more reliable and I've learned it actually can make the gun less reliable.
I was cringing that entire video.
I thought the same watching the video on both your points.
If anyone has the need to pass this "1911 extraction test" I have two apex extractors with the non LCI bearings for sale. One for gen 3 and one gen 4.
I've posted on this before, taught on this before and spent time thinking about it for years. It IS important that a service pistol pass this test and Glocks are the number one "failers" of it. It is why ejection with a Glock is often to all points of the compass and it tells you that your ejector on the typical stock Glock is really the top round in the magazine, not the actual ejector. The extractor is failing to maintain tension on the case during the extraction step and is failing to keep the fired case against the breech face so that the ejector can pinion it out the ejection port. If it's failing in its tension responsibilities there, then it's doing the same with those selfsame duties when feeding and chambering a round from the magazine.
Running that isolation test that Hilton Yam published and that Ken Hackathorn brought forth is a huge indicator of design, manufacture and consistency of a pistol. Just because your gun "works ok" doesn't mean crap, it just means you think it's ok. I've yet to see any 3rd Gen 9mm pass it without modification and the mix on Gen 4 guns is about 50/50 in my checking.
I have fixed many guns for folks that realize the ramifications of this failure and here's the recipe: Apex Extractor, their extractor depressor spring, the non-LCI bearing and a 30274 4th Gen ejector. If the gun can be fixed, this does it. If that doesn't work and the gun is for serious use (as in you stake your life or loved ones lives), the gun should go away. My experience with my carry 3rd Gen G19s is that they now eject in patterns outside the gun like my HKs (which by the way, set a standard of excellence on function testing).
You don't have to agree and you may get away with a lot, but Glock knows their guns have significant deficiencies and don't give a shit because they sell all they make. It's your life to risk. If a 3rd Gen Glock was an airplane, I sure as hell wouldn't fly on it as it comes from the box. I have too much time and have watched too many rounds (over 2 million) go downrange from them to know.
Last edited by Wayne Dobbs; 01-26-2017 at 07:31 PM.
Regional Government Sales Manager for Aimpoint, Inc. USA
Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)
Correction: my Gen 4 has the most recent 30274 ejector, not the 336 noted above.
Thank you for your insightful post.
Curiosity leads me to ask if you think if the tension you mention is as important for situations when a round is being collected and driven forward, versus when an empty case is being propelled/pulled backwards.
i personally am OK with the ejection performance of my glocks so long as i get no BTF and ejection is sufficiently energetic to clear the case from the vicinity of the gun. I hope that my glocks potentially failing the 1911 test does not get me killed in the streets.
Last edited by fishing; 01-26-2017 at 09:42 PM.
I am very new to the Glock, having purchased a 19-G4 at the beginning of this year. The gun came with the 30274 ejector and the 0-3-4 recoil spring.
Attempting the 10-8 Performance Test as I've seen it on the Gun Nuts Media website. I had 5/8 Failures to Extract with the 2-hand, limp wrist no magazine component, and 3/8 Failures to Extract with the 1-hand, strong wrist component, firing 115 grain MagTech ammo.
It is difficult to envision a situation where I would need to fire a round in the gun without a magazine, and need the round extracted properly. I understand that using no magazine, weak 115 grain range ammo, and not using a 2-hand, firm wrist is intentionally putting the gun into a worst-case environment for extractor function.
However, while I can accept marginal trigger pull quality, I do not wish to accept marginal extractor function. I feel confident that modern guns can and should work in the worst-case environment outlined above. I have zero desire or intention to speak for Gun Nuts Media/Caleb, but there is a video of a S&W M&P passing the test on the GNM youtube page.
I've have received an Apex Tactical extractor, and am waiting on a White Sound HRED. I have high hopes.
This pains me to read, as I have 2 4th gen 19's that eject so erratically its almost comical. It's now another $120 or so to invest in 2 apex extractors and springs for said pistols. The new CZ is becoming more and more appealing. Thank you for the insight, it's greatly appreciated.
Last edited by Larry Sellers; 01-26-2017 at 10:28 PM.
Look! Just because we're bereaved, that doesn't make us saps!
Reply With Quote