Yup, I already tried that, it passes the function test.
Yup, I already tried that, it passes the function test.
May be something else then.Originally Posted by 167
But it is odd that it has been good for 8,000 rounds then suddenly crap out without something broken.
I would definitely go one change at a time.
If the RSA change doesn't fix it, I would be tempted to change it back before changing anything just to make sure the RSA wasn't masking some other problem.
Unless you find something odd in your detail strip.
AFAIK there are no plans for the .40 extractor.
That was my thought too, a chipped one.
While changing a RSA may help function from an overall sense, it has little to do with extraction reliability and/or robustness. I've found over 24 years of shooting, training and armoring Glocks, that the magazine springs have more effect on ejection than much of anything else, as the top round in the stack literally does most of the ejection work. If you don't believe that, chamber a round in your chosen Glock and then remove the magazine before firing that round. You will find that if your gun runs well (as in most of what was made before the 3rd Gen M series serial numbers) the fired case ejects down the bottom of the magazine well instead of out the ejection port. Now try that for 10-50 rounds so you can see a trend. If the gun is running poorly, you will start seeing inline "stovepipe" malfunctions with the fired cases trapping between the breechface and the barrel hood, some of which will be 180 degree reversed in attitude. Rarely will a Glock consistently eject the fired cases out the ejection port without a magazine on board and that should give you some serious pause if the gun is carried to defend your life.
Let me make a really serious statment: Glock extraction and ejection function has been marginal ALL ALONG with the platform! It's just that we've seen them work just well enough on that ragged edge that we haven't really worried too much. When they apparently changed the extractor design during Gen 3 and guns stopped running well, we all sat up and began to take more notice and the problem got lots more attention. The new ejector is a very weak bandaid type fix for some guns some of the time, but it's like giving a cancer patient an aspirin...you may get a bit of short term relief, but the sickness remains. The extractor's design is lacking and the spring system powering the extractor is also lacking. This causes the extractor to lose control of the fired case during the actual extraction from the chamber at different points of the cycle and at different levels of failure to maintain uniform tension on that case. When this happens, the fired case is presented to the ejector at different attitudes and levels of control, resulting in wild ejection patterns, or no ejection at all.
So what to do about this? Randy Lee at Apex Tactical has a prototype extractor and extractor spring that some of us have been beta testing in 9mm Glocks that shows lots of promise. It is a tool steel, EDM machined part and it's tough as woodpecker lips and performs at a level that is where service pistol extractor function should be. Mine is at 2525 rounds without failure and passes the no magazine ejection (out the ejection port) test without problem. It's holding the fired case consistently so that ejection patterns are very consistent and to the location they should be. Will he do a .40 caliber version? Don't know, but I'm sure it's needed, given some of the G22 and G23 function I've seen.
Regional Government Sales Manager for Aimpoint, Inc. USA
Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)
This seems like the most common way for informed people to begin when answering questions about addressing underlying design issues in common service handguns. (Other than HK, which doesn't count because my blue-collar friends would stop talking to me if I had one. Oh, wait. Maybe the fact that I have is why I have no blue-collar friends?)
In all seriousness, why doesn't Lee just design the perfect modern service handgun already? I've only been doing this for a year or two, and I'm already tired of reading about ejector models and HREDs and extractor dips. I went ~300 flawless rounds with my Gen3 G19 today, and was pleasantly surprised. I want to be bored by my hardware again...
/rant off
The answer, it seems to me, is wrath. The mind cannot foresee its own advance. --FA Hayek Specialization is for insects.
My experience with a Gen.4 G22. I bought it NIB in November and for the first few hundred rounds this was the story...
I replaced my ejector with the most recent version and all has been well. I do get a random reminder of brass to the forehead but overall it's much better. The original extractor has been okay from what I can tell or atleast it's been flawless with the new ejector. Given, I only have about half the amount of rounds you have through your G22. I haven't replaced my RSA, although its due. It will be intersting to see how a new RSA affects my pistol's reliability. I've been holding my breath because the Gen.4 problems seem to appear out of thin air, some earlier in use and some much higher rounds counts. I hope you get it solved but from my own personal experience, sample of uno, I'd try an ejector if you haven't already.
Every one of those photographs show very serious extractor failures. The fact that your different ejector is helping is a plus, but the fact that this ever happened AND that you're still taking hits to the face reflect a level of performance that is not sufficient to trust your life to.
Regional Government Sales Manager for Aimpoint, Inc. USA
Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)
Mr. Dobbs, I agree. It's very frustrating to say the least.
WayneRarely will a Glock consistently eject the fired cases out the ejection port without a magazine on board and that should give you some serious pause if the gun is carried to defend your life.
Which guns have you performed this test on that don't rely on the magazine to eject?
I only have Glocks but I did try it on my brother's Sig P226 and the rounds fell out of the mag well too. (My only other auto doesn't have an ejector at all, the magazine has to be there.
I can't visualize a design that could 100% prevent this as the extractor has to be open on the bottom to allow the rim to slide up during loading and without something holding the round up during extraction I would think it would start slipping out of the extractors grip before being struck by the ejector. With the Glock the extractor is very "pointy" and the point is fairly high, if the case moves down much during extraction it is going to hit the chamfered edge and get driven down out the magwell.
I don't know a different way to do this. If the ejector hits before the case is completely extracted it wouldn't be able to eject live rounds. Unless the ejector was possibly spring loaded and incorporated into the breech face (like many rifles).
Maybe a much stronger extractor spring and a more aggressive claw on the extractor. But a stronger spring might start acting like a frozen extractor and cause stove pipes as well.
Maybe an ejector that hits lower on the case?
My brother has several other designs of automatics, next time I am back home, I think I will try it out and see what the others do.
FWIW I have 4 G19s. 2 older with non-dip and 2 newer with the dip. The "dip" ones eject out of the port 75% of the time. The old ones always dump rounds down the magazine well.
I don't have that many rounds on the newer guns but they eject the same as my others.
I would be interested to hear the differences.
Reply With Quote