Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: School me on Gen 2 G17s...

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Lyonsgrid View Post
    I've had a few Gen 2 17's over the years with mixed results. I like the the frame sans finger groves and rail and the older finish on the slide. The accuracy just always seemed a little sub par compared to the Gen 4 17's.

    Attachment 15858

    Attachment 15859

    My Gen 2 has surprised me from time to time. It seems to find some loads it really likes occasionally.

    Tested some Perfecta in it along with my P226, 92FS, and a CZ 75b Omega. It hit right at point of aim instead of just above POI. But it was consistent in 25 ft grouping.

    Name:  image.jpg
Views: 419
Size:  61.9 KB

  2. #22
    Site Supporter Tamara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    In free-range, non-GMO, organic, fair trade Broad Ripple, IN
    Quote Originally Posted by SSGN_Doc View Post
    He did tell me mine had been the subject of a Striker block recal and needed that update.
    The firing pin block "upgrade" involves replacing: the firing pin, firing pin safety, the extractor, the spring loaded bearing, and the trigger bar. (And their associated springs.)
    Last edited by Tamara; 04-22-2017 at 07:26 PM.
    Books. Bikes. Boomsticks.

    I can explain it to you. I can’t understand it for you.

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    south TX
    Quote Originally Posted by Catshooter View Post
    There were gen 2s with serial numbers in "E" range that had some poorly heat treated frame rails. Glock can tell you exactly with a phone call.
    My former agency had Gen 3 22s in that series. I didn't realize that some gen 2s were affected as well.
    Last edited by Chuck Whitlock; 04-26-2017 at 09:12 PM. Reason: clarification
    "It's surprising how often you start wondering just how featureless a desert some people's inner landscapes must be."
    -Maple Syrup Actual

  4. #24
    Member JonInWA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Auburn, WA
    While I certainly think a Gen 2 G17 is an eminently credible gun, unless I was singularly driven by needing a frame without fingergrooves (they don't bother me in the least on the subsequent Gen 3 and Gen4 guns), given a choice I would almost always opt for a later-Generation of Glock. GLock is noted for making not just generationally-notated changes, but also for making beneficial product-improvement changes to their guns within a specified Generation. These improvements are often quite subtle to the naked eye, and sometimes Austria has not even informed Smyrna of them at the time of introduction.

    The bottom line is that a later Glock is simply likely to be a better Glock. Of course, there are caveats to this paradigm, such as the initial runs of the MIM "dip" LCI extractors replacing their cast predecessors, and the unbeveled inner muzzle ring on the initial Gen4 guns, and the spring calibration (or lack thereof) on the initial Gen4 G17s. There appears to be about a 2 year period from 2011-2013 that it was more likely to experience disproportionate issues until Glock sorted out both Gen 3 and Gen4 revisions (or made revisions to correct things...) So some knowledge and discernment can be beneficial-this forum is a great resource for that.

    In the original poster's situation, the likelihood is that the one he's considering will be quite decent, but, as others have mentioned, I'd strongly recommend that unless it's already a factory certified rebuild, I'd subject it to a visit to Smyrna for review and necessary upgrading. My personal preference would still tilt towards a current production Gen 3 or Gen4 G17, or one produced previously (but ideally avoiding 2011-2013 production pieces).

    Best, Jon

  5. #25
    Member L-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    I believe the problem Glocks with breaking frame rails are Gen3 models.
    From an older post on the Glock Sport Shooting Foundation's Facebook page:

    "The GLOCK Corporation has identified an issue with a very small percentage of GLOCK pistols produced between September of 2001 and May of 2002.* The specific issue that has been identified is the potential of breaking a rear frame rail in pistols manufactured during this time period.* Within the specific range the breakage rate has been less than 0.0188%.* So, while the actual percentage of rails reported broken is within any accepted manufacturing tolerance, it is not an acceptable situation to the GLOCK Corporation.* It is also important to note that under most conditions GLOCK pistols will continue to function with three rails.* A routine maintenance check after each time the pistol has been taken out and used would immediately indicate if there is a problem.
    We are, therefore, concerned that a limited number of customers will not get the product we have promised them and what we have always delivered, the very best pistol on the market, in short, a GLOCK.
    For these reasons, we have made the decision that in the interest of customer service, replacement frames will be offered to anyone who has a firearm in this range and decides to take advantage of this offer.* The replacement frames will have identical serial numbers to our customer's original firearm except the numeral 1 will be added as a prefix.* If you believe your firearm is within this range, please call 1-866-225-4098 to take advantage of the ultimate in customer service.
    Nothing less than the best for our customers is acceptable to GLOCK and, as always, we will continue to work towards Perfection."


    I personally have two Glocks from this s/n range which broke and needed new frames. These were both .40 guns, a G23gen3 and a G27gen3. I had a third G31gen3 .357SIG gun way out of the range which also incurred a broken rail. I don't/didn't have any 9mm Glocks in that s/n range.

    Approximate s/n range:
    EKx###US to EVx###US
    Last edited by L-2; 04-27-2017 at 03:38 PM.

  6. #26
    Member Balisong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Arizona
    I had a G22 and a 27 from that era. The 22 was in the affected SN number range. The 27 wasn't. Still have the 27 and carry it frequently. Wasn't aware that recall applied to any Gen 2s. I will say I didn't like how quiet that whole thing was. Only in a few areas of the web was it mentioned and I only came across it accidentally. Nobody in my usual gun shops had heard anything about it and they were heavy Glock stocking dealers.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    South East South Dakota
    You know, I think it was the gen 3s.

    I must be getting old . . . I paid $259.99 for my first 23. Full retail too.


    Cat

  8. #28
    for 4 bills I would get a new one gen III or IV, some of those early Glocks had problems with new manufactured Glock magazines.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •