Dry Firing Glocks, The Official Word [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Dry Firing Glocks, The Official Word


DannyR
09-29-2010, 16:06
I am as guilty as anyone else when it comes to dry firing Glocks. I've always dry fired 100 times the night before and the morning of a match. My assumption was that if you have to dry fire a Glock to field strip it, then it must be OK to dry fire it, period. Well, I've been wrong (again). The official word from Glock is:

"If you’re going to dry fire onther than for disassembly, use a snap cap."

That is a fact and not an invitation for argument. Just accept it for what it's worth.

I've just ordered A-Zooms in 9mm and .45GAP from MidwayUSA.

doneroman
09-29-2010, 16:16
Hmm interesting.


What're you gonna do with the 45 gap one? :rofl:

DannyR
09-29-2010, 16:19
My competition Glocks are 9mm and .45GAP.:cool:

My carry Glocks are 9mm and .45GAP:

All my Glocks are 9mm and .45GAP

COM165
09-29-2010, 16:20
Wow, I can't even tell you how many times that I have dry fired all of my Glocks. What damage can it do?

DannyR
09-29-2010, 16:22
I don't know. My 1996 G19 is approaching 75,000 fired rounds and countless thousands of dry fires.

kirgi08
09-29-2010, 16:22
tagged.

bentbiker
09-29-2010, 16:26
What damage can it do?
Cracks in breech face and/or FP.

fullotto69
09-29-2010, 16:26
Now did that come from GLOCK, or did it come from some random Glock armorer? Because "Josh " in customer service at GLOCK in Smyrna said to dry fire as much as you want and if you feel uncomfortable about it to use the snap cap to ease your mind?

firefighter4215
09-29-2010, 16:27
To me it just makes sense to use a snap cap. Cheap insurance against damages.

Bill Lumberg
09-29-2010, 16:28
We had minor breechface damage detected during semi-annual armorer inspection. Over the phone, the glock rep immediately pronounced it to be from dryfiring. It turned out to be someting else, but his immediate pronouncement of dryfiring as the cause told me all I needed to know. That said, many of our guns have been dryfired a thousand or more times with no ill effects. Sans snap caps.

I am as guilty as anyone else when it comes to dry firing Glocks. I've always dry fired 100 times the night before and the morning of a match. My assumption was that if you have to dry fire a Glock to field strip it, then it must be OK to dry fire it, period. Well, I've been wrong (again). The official word from Glock is:

"If you’re going to dry fire onther than for disassembly, use a snap cap."

That is a fact and not an invitation for argument. Just accept it for what it's worth.

I've just ordered A-Zooms in 9mm and .45GAP from MidwayUSA.

SCC
09-29-2010, 16:30
:embarassed:

COM165
09-29-2010, 16:31
I have a few snap caps for my .40 that have a small recess where the pin will strike. But for my 9mm I have a bag of SAF-T-TRAINERS that are flat in the back (no recess for pin to strike). They are blaze orange and made by a co. called Precision Gun Specialties Inc. I had used them for malfunction drills. Are these considered "snap caps" and is it safe to use them in my 19?

chasbo00
09-29-2010, 16:40
At most competition pistol matches, shooters are required to "unload and show clear" at the end of stages. This entails removing the magazine; pulling the slide to the rear if it's not already at slide lock; physically showing that the chamber is empty to the range or safety officer, letting the slide go forward; and lastly, pulling the trigger (dry firing) the pistol before re-holstering. I don't think inserting a "snap-cap" in this process will be well received.

My personal dry fire practice drills would be cumbersome with "snap-caps."

I would also like to hear a technical explanation why dry fire with a Glock, other than for disassembly, should be with "snap-caps."

FobulousGlock
09-29-2010, 16:53
At most competition pistol matches, shooters are required to "unload and show clear" at the end of stages. This entails removing the magazine; pulling the slide to the rear if it's not already at slide lock; physically showing that the chamber is empty to the range or safety officer, letting the slide go forward; and lastly, pulling the trigger (dry firing) the pistol before re-holstering. I don't think inserting a "snap-cap" in this process will be well received.

My personal dry fire practice drills would be cumbersome with "snap-caps."

I would also like to hear a technical explanation why dry fire with a Glock, other than for disassembly, should be with "snap-caps."


Why is it cumbersome with snap caps? You only need to move the slide back enough to re-engage the trigger. Do you let the snap cap fly out of the gun everytime?

Jeff82
09-29-2010, 16:55
:wow:

chasbo00
09-29-2010, 16:58
Why is it cumbersome with snap caps? You only need to move the slide back enough to re-engage the trigger. Do you let the snap cap fly out of the gun everytime?

I often dry fire without a magazine. Although one only needs to pull the slide back a short distance, I find I often pull it back far enough to eject a snap-cap.

MoNsTeR
09-29-2010, 17:04
Who cares who said it? Gaston Glock himself could say that and it wouldn't mean anything. at. all. Either it will damage the gun or it won't. That's an empirical question that has nothing to do with what engineering, marketing, customer service, or anyone else says on the subject.

Glocks&Ducs
09-29-2010, 17:15
At most competition pistol matches, shooters are required to "unload and show clear" at the end of stages. This entails removing the magazine; pulling the slide to the rear if it's not already at slide lock; physically showing that the chamber is empty to the range or safety officer, letting the slide go forward; and lastly, pulling the trigger (dry firing) the pistol before re-holstering. I don't think inserting a "snap-cap" in this process will be well received.

My personal dry fire practice drills would be cumbersome with "snap-caps."

I would also like to hear a technical explanation why dry fire with a Glock, other than for disassembly, should be with "snap-caps."

I think you are taking the advice just a bit too literal. Some people dry fire hundreds, if not thousands, of times in a relatively short period of time for trigger practice. I'm sure this was meant to address those situations.

DannyR
09-29-2010, 17:15
My quote comes from Glock, Inc., in Smyrna, GA.

Glocks&Ducs
09-29-2010, 17:16
I often dry fire without a magazine. Although one only needs to pull the slide back a short distance, I find I often pull it back far enough to eject a snap-cap.

So don't pull it back that far. Problem solved.

COM165
09-29-2010, 17:17
I just used the saf-t-trainers (dummy rounds) in my 19 and it didn't feel right. You can feel the resistance when the firing pin strikes the flat primer area. When I used the snap cap in my 27 it felt like a normal dry fire. I don't know the brand of snap cap. A friend of mine just gave me a 3 or 4 rounds. They just say 40S&W with a *-*. dunno?

Anyway, is it safe to use the dummy rounds in my 19 or should I invest in some real "snap caps"?

Thanks.

remat
09-29-2010, 17:24
My quote comes from Glock, Inc., in Smyrna, GA.

But who at Glock said it?
I have been told that no Glocks are made in the U.S. by Glock Inc, in Smyrna too.

I want to see it in writing on official GLOCK letterhead. Unlike previous posters I would also accept word-of-mouth from Gaston Glock also. :)

Glocks&Ducs
09-29-2010, 17:28
But who at Glock said it?
I have been told that no Glocks are made in the U.S. by Glock Inc, in Smyrna too.

I want to see it in writing on official GLOCK letterhead. Unlike previous posters I would also accept word-of-mouth from Gaston Glock also. :)

They aren't made in the US. Only the lower receivers are.

DannyR
09-29-2010, 17:29
Fine, write to Glock and request it. It's no fuzz off my peach if you choose not to accept my information. What matters to me is that I indeed believe my reliable source.

I should know better by now that any posting of reliable information results in a brawl, so I will not trouble you with any more informational posts.

chasbo00
09-29-2010, 17:30
Competition shooters have been dry firing the hell out of Glocks for over a decade. I just find it odd that Glock has not issued a caution or recommendation until now about excessive dry firing.

Glocks&Ducs
09-29-2010, 17:31
I just used the saf-t-trainers (dummy rounds) in my 19 and it didn't feel right. You can feel the resistance when the firing pin strikes the flat primer area. When I used the snap cap in my 27 it felt like a normal dry fire. I don't know the brand of snap cap. A friend of mine just gave me a 3 or 4 rounds. They just say 40S&W with a *-*. dunno?

Anyway, is it safe to use the dummy rounds in my 19 or should I invest in some real "snap caps"?

Thanks.

It doesn't matter. The material that the saf-t-trainers are made of is still designed to absorb the firing pin strike. The only reason snap caps are different is because they are designed to "snap" when struck. The important thing is that there is some form of support on the breachface.

NDCent
09-29-2010, 17:38
Competition shooters have been dry firing the hell out of Glocks for over a decade. I just find it odd that Glock has not issued a caution or recommendation until now about excessive dry firing.

True...

People smoked tobacco for centuries before they were told it could cause cancer.

COM165
09-29-2010, 17:44
It doesn't matter. The material that the saf-t-trainers are made of is still designed to absorb the firing pin strike. The only reason snap caps are different is because they are designed to "snap" when struck. The important thing is that there is some form of support on the breachface.

Thank you.

Fine, write to Glock and request it. It's no fuzz off my peach if you choose not to accept my information. What matters to me is that I indeed believe my reliable source.

I should know better by now that any posting of reliable information results in a brawl, so I will not trouble you with any more informational posts.

Please continue to post whatever info that you come across. There are many who appreciate the important updates from an experienced armorer.

Cody Jarrett
09-29-2010, 17:45
Now did that come from GLOCK, or did it come from some random Glock armorer? Because "Josh " in customer service at GLOCK in Smyrna said to dry fire as much as you want and if you feel uncomfortable about it to use the snap cap to ease your mind?
True. I also checked with Glock on this and got the same answer. Besides, I use a titanium striker. How will that get cracked?

bentbiker
09-29-2010, 17:47
Competition shooters have been dry firing the hell out of Glocks for over a decade. I just find it odd that Glock has not issued a caution or recommendation until now about excessive dry firing.
They have. Butch posted the same information 6 months ago and received the same reception -- "If it's not how I do it, it has to be wrong. I remove the copper anti-seize before shooting, I dry-fire without snap-caps, and I lube with engine oil. And I'm gonna keep on doin' it 'til they explode in my face. Nobody is gonna tell me I have to . . ."

JC2317
09-29-2010, 17:51
Danny,
I know you would not have posted it unless you thought the source was reliable. That's good enough for me.
Thank You

freetobejbp
09-29-2010, 17:51
I am as guilty as anyone else when it comes to dry firing Glocks. I've always dry fired 100 times the night before and the morning of a match. My assumption was that if you have to dry fire a Glock to field strip it, then it must be OK to dry fire it, period. Well, I've been wrong (again). The official word from Glock is:

"If you’re going to dry fire onther than for disassembly, use a snap cap."

That is a fact and not an invitation for argument. Just accept it for what it's worth.

I've just ordered A-Zooms in 9mm and .45GAP from MidwayUSA.

The Glock Pros do it they told me so!

TxGun
09-29-2010, 17:58
It seems to me that this is the expected precautionary advice from Glock. In other words, in their collective opinion, it's probably better not to do it (dry fire without snap caps), even though their pistols can obviously handle it...in fact, thousands of repetitions of it. As with any mechanical device, there is additional wear involved. It may be minute...but it's there. Glock is advising that their position is you minimize it even further with snap caps.

A least that's my take. No reason to go off the tracks over it, and personally, I appreciate Danny passing it on.

fastbolt
09-29-2010, 18:25
DannyR deserves thanks for taking the time to post this sort of info.

I'm unsurprised about this, FWIW.

I've never cared for the idea of excessive dry-fire when striker-fired pistols are involved. It's one thing to have a gently tapered firing pin being pushed through a breech face hole, but I've always suspected that it was another thing to have the mass of a striker-type firing pin being hammered against the rear of the slide's breech face. The mass of the striker-type firing pin's head would seem to act as a small hammer being beaten against the inner surface of the breech face.

I'd prefer some support on the front of the breech face when doing a lot of dry-fire, myself.

Also, it's not uncommon for firearm manufacturers to continually evaluate their products and make recommendations involving use. It's good business. Another example would be Glock's providing armorers with the Wearable Parts Replacement Schedule for .40's being used by LE. It provides a recommendation for the replacement of several parts in their .40 models based upon round count intervals, as well continuing to inspect and evaluate for potential parts replacement at an earlier point while in-service.

Thanks DannyR.

Old Style
09-29-2010, 18:52
Thank you.



Please continue to post whatever info that you come across. There are many who appreciate the important updates from an experienced armorer.

+1 :thumbsup:

redbaron007
09-29-2010, 19:09
Fine, write to Glock and request it. It's no fuzz off my peach if you choose not to accept my information. What matters to me is that I indeed believe my reliable source.

I should know better by now that any posting of reliable information results in a brawl, so I will not trouble you with any more informational posts.

DannyR...FWIW....I appreciate your comments/posts. Don't let the those who would argue with Jesus discourage you. :supergrin:



:wavey:




red

platoonDaddy
09-29-2010, 19:13
Read on other forums that the Gen 4's have MIM extractor and firing pin

cmcinc
09-29-2010, 19:22
Right or wrong...I still use them.

coastal4974
09-29-2010, 20:06
The Glock Pros do it they told me so! They have forgot more than you know.

Why so rude?

BWT
09-29-2010, 20:25
I believe in snap caps, because I don't want Murphy telling me I should have when the SHTF. Thanks OP for the post.

remat
09-29-2010, 21:17
Fine, write to Glock and request it. It's no fuzz off my peach if you choose not to accept my information. What matters to me is that I indeed believe my reliable source.

I should know better by now that any posting of reliable information results in a brawl, so I will not trouble you with any more informational posts.

Geez, I really didn't expect everyone to get so mad.

remat
09-29-2010, 21:22
They aren't made in the US. Only the lower receivers are.

Rough crowd. In the U.S. that is considered the pistol. Springfield did less than that for years and they were still legally "made in the U.S."

My posts were never intended to be antagonistic, but seem to be coming across that way. This is my last post in this thread.

Have a nice evening everyone.

Craigaz
09-29-2010, 21:29
Danny,
I know you would not have posted it unless you thought the source was reliable. That's good enough for me.
Thank You

Good enough for me too. Danny frequently provides us with great information, I see no reason to view this any differently.

Danny - Thanks for your efforts to keep us in the loop.

Blunt object
09-29-2010, 21:43
I don't know. My 1996 G19 is approaching 75,000 fired rounds and countless thousands of dry fires.
Actually, this is the kind of information from a seasoned Glock guy that reinforces my belief that dry firing does not harm Glocks.
It mirrors my experience, corporate pronouncements notwithstanding.

Glockbuster
09-29-2010, 21:46
It's definitely good info to know. And now off to buy a snap cap. That said, I wont loose sleep for all the times I've dry fired nor will I care if I do it again occasionally.

weisse52
09-29-2010, 21:51
Right or wrong...I still use them.

And I will as well.

I appreciate reliable information.

Thanks.

mboylan
09-29-2010, 21:59
.....

RYNOCG201
09-29-2010, 22:04
This-
To me it just makes sense to use a snap cap. Cheap insurance against damages.

This-
Danny,
I know you would not have posted it unless you thought the source was reliable. That's good enough for me.
Thank You

And This-
Please continue to post whatever info that you come across. There are many who appreciate the important updates from an experienced armorer

Thanks DannyR

Armed-N-Ready
09-29-2010, 22:06
Snap caps are a must.

The Retired Sarge
09-29-2010, 22:22
For 20 years I have shot Glocks extensively and dry fired W/O snap caps. No problems occurred. When talking to the techs at Glock, Inc on many occasions I always ask the dry firing/snap caps question and was always told to fire away-no snap caps needed. Today I was talking with Fred at Glock, Inc on another matter and again I asked the snap cap question. Fred stated that Glock, Inc now recommends snap caps be used for any dry firing beyound a few trigger pulls. Bill.

Glocks&Ducs
09-29-2010, 22:34
Rough crowd. In the U.S. that is considered the pistol. ...

No it isn't. In most cases, the lower receiver is what is considered the firearm for the purposes of transferability according to the ATF. That doesn't automatically make it the pistol.

kirgi08
09-29-2010, 22:37
As far as I'm concerned,Coach and Butch are the Glock gurus around here.It dismays me that some would be so rude ta Coach for the info he went out of his way ta provide for those of us on GT.'08.

Angry Fist
09-29-2010, 22:41
Moving parts and mechanical wear. Striker vs. breechface. Metal to metal contact can only last for so long... It's ineviteable, not impossible.

chasbo00
09-29-2010, 22:43
For 20 years I have shot Glocks extensively and dry fired W/O snap caps. No problems occurred. When talking to the techs at Glock, Inc on many occasions I always ask the dry firing/snap caps question and was always told to fire away-no snap caps needed. Today I was talking with Fred at Glock, Inc on another matter and again I asked the snap cap question. Fred stated that Glock, Inc now recommends snap caps be used for any dry firing beyound a few trigger pulls. Bill.

Makes one wonder what has changed doesn't it. I don't doubt the OP's assertion that using snap caps is now the official Glock recommendation. But I would like to know why the change -- is there something different about the Gen 4 models? Some other reason?

Angry Fist
09-29-2010, 22:44
No it isn't. In most cases, the lower receiver is what is considered the firearm for the purposes of transferability according to the ATF. That doesn't automatically make it the pistol.
Yeah, see the difference in buying a slide vs. buying a frame... Slides don't need an FFL.

glockgt
09-29-2010, 23:11
Thanks for the info Danny,

regards

fastbolt
09-30-2010, 00:10
You know, there are probably any number of Glock armorers who don't post some things in the various internet firearms enthusiast forums, GT included, because of how some folks seem to either take such things personally, or just seem inclined to argue. (Myself included among those armorers who refrain from posting a number of things.)

Like most other Glock armorers, I've had occasion to call back and discuss some problems I've come across with the techs at Glock (GA), and I've been told any number of things which are contrary to what a lot of "hobbyists" & "fervent enthusiasts" sometimes like to espouse as if they were facts. Sometimes I'll contribute a new recommendation of fact I've learned, and sometimes I'll just pass because of the roar of bickering and argument. (Sometimes I'll PM someone and offer some insight or relate an experience regarding something they've asked, including an occasional new update received from Glock techs.)

Fortunately for me, there are a handful of more experienced Glock armorers who have the patience to wade among the static and try to help correct some of the info freely dispensed by the misinformed. I've only been a Glock armorer for 10 years and have more time with other platforms, so it's not like my presence or thoughts are likely missed. :rofl:

For every thread in which I do post, there are at least a dozen thread topics in which I won't post (usually after I wrote a response and then decided to hell with it and didn't post it) because of the nature and tone of many posters (and even more in which I won't post more than once, if the thread is devolving).

It might be prudent and polite to listen to those experienced Glock armorers who take the time to try and pass along something which they think might be beneficial for Glock owners. It's not like it's benefiting them, you know. ;)

As usual, just my thoughts. Feel free to ignore at your leisure.

English
09-30-2010, 02:17
For 20 years I have shot Glocks extensively and dry fired W/O snap caps. No problems occurred. When talking to the techs at Glock, Inc on many occasions I always ask the dry firing/snap caps question and was always told to fire away-no snap caps needed. Today I was talking with Fred at Glock, Inc on another matter and again I asked the snap cap question. Fred stated that Glock, Inc now recommends snap caps be used for any dry firing beyound a few trigger pulls. Bill.

Like limp wristing, the lack of use of snap caps is a convenient excuse for some otherwise unexplained problem. It might be that they hava actually discovered that the slight damage eventually caused by dry firing can eventually cause a problem or it might just be a change of personel where some critical individual has come into Glock with a 1911 background!

English

English
09-30-2010, 02:24
DannyR,
You are a highly respected individual within the GT community. If only you had told us earlier that you use .45GAP for both competition and carry it might have stopped or reduced many of the anti .45GAP threads.

English

Happy Hunting
09-30-2010, 02:38
...where some critical individual has come into Glock with a 1911 background!

even that is debated.

platoonDaddy
09-30-2010, 03:16
Competition shooters have been dry firing the hell out of Glocks for over a decade. I just find it odd that Glock has not issued a caution or recommendation until now about excessive dry firing.



One of the tech support guys working the phone lines at Glock is on medevil crusade against dry-firing. In his prior work experience he was in retail selling weapons and gained this bias opinion. I specifically asked him, why the latest Gen 4 manual doesn't state in in red. When pushed further he stated he has been after them to include that statement in the Armour & owners manual.

It is my personal opinion the OP ended up talking to this medevil crusader.

For those of you on the fence, call tech support: 770.432.1202

As previously stated the Gen 4 has MIM: extractor & firing pin. The impact of dry-firing with MIM could certainly damage them. When you clean your weapon, inspect them from time to time.

AZson
09-30-2010, 03:37
At most competition pistol matches, shooters are required to "unload and show clear" at the end of stages. This entails removing the magazine; pulling the slide to the rear if it's not already at slide lock; physically showing that the chamber is empty to the range or safety officer, letting the slide go forward; and lastly, pulling the trigger (dry firing) the pistol before re-holstering. I don't think inserting a "snap-cap" in this process will be well received.

My personal dry fire practice drills would be cumbersome with "snap-caps."

I would also like to hear a technical explanation why dry fire with a Glock, other than for disassembly, should be with "snap-caps."

+1 on that

Glockrunner
09-30-2010, 06:29
What is "MIM" in reference to in the Gen 4 23?

Thunderbolt56
09-30-2010, 06:57
Dammitall! I knew I should have exercised that snap-cap stock option last week. :shocked:

I bet it splits by this time next week. :supergrin:

platoonDaddy
09-30-2010, 07:32
What is "MIM" in reference to in the Gen 4 23?



MIM is Metal Injection Molding and the two leading industries using MIM parts are the firearms & health industry.
http://www.gknsintermetals.com/technology/mim.htm

On another forum a VERY well respected Armour stated that all Gen 4's specifically the extractor and believe he said the firing pin are MIM.

Talking about MIM, my 870 extractor was MIM until I changed it out with a steel extractor from Brownells.

COM165
09-30-2010, 07:42
You know, there are probably any number of Glock armorers who don't post some things in the various internet firearms enthusiast forums, GT included, because of how some folks seem to either take such things either personally, or just seem inclined to argue. (Myself included.)

Like most other Glock armorers, I've had occasion to call back and discuss some problems I've come across with the techs at Glock (GA), and I've been told any number of things which are contrary to what a lot of "hobbyists" & "fervent enthusiasts" sometimes like to espouse as if they were facts. Sometimes I'll contribute a new recommendation of fact I've learned, and sometimes I'll just pass because of the roar of bickering and argument. (Sometimes I'll PM someone and offer some insight relate an experience regarding something they've asked, including an occasional new update received from Glock techs.)

Fortunately for me, there are a handful of more experienced Glock armorers who have the patience to wade among the static and try to help correct some of the info freely dispensed by the misinformed. I've only been a Glock armorer for 10 years and have more time with other platforms, so it's not like my presence or thoughts are likely missed. :rofl:

For every thread in which I do post, there are at least a dozen thread topics in which I won't post (usually after I wrote a response and then decided to hell with it and didn't post it) because of the nature and tone of many posters (and even more in which I won't post more than once, if the thread is devolving).

It might be prudent and polite to listen to those experienced Glock armorers who take the time to try and pass along something which they think might be beneficial for Glock owners. It's not like it's benefiting them, you know. ;)

As usual, just my thoughts. Feel free to ignore at your leisure.

Excellent post, sir. I agree with you 100%.

SawgrassRaven
09-30-2010, 07:42
You know, there are probably any number of Glock armorers who don't post some things in the various internet firearms enthusiast forums, GT included, because of how some folks seem to either take such things either personally, or just seem inclined to argue. (Myself included.)

Like most other Glock armorers, I've had occasion to call back and discuss some problems I've come across with the techs at Glock (GA), and I've been told any number of things which are contrary to what a lot of "hobbyists" & "fervent enthusiasts" sometimes like to espouse as if they were facts. Sometimes I'll contribute a new recommendation of fact I've learned, and sometimes I'll just pass because of the roar of bickering and argument. (Sometimes I'll PM someone and offer some insight relate an experience regarding something they've asked, including an occasional new update received from Glock techs.)

Fortunately for me, there are a handful of more experienced Glock armorers who have the patience to wade among the static and try to help correct some of the info freely dispensed by the misinformed. I've only been a Glock armorer for 10 years and have more time with other platforms, so it's not like my presence or thoughts are likely missed. :rofl:

For every thread in which I do post, there are at least a dozen thread topics in which I won't post (usually after I wrote a response and then decided to hell with it and didn't post it) because of the nature and tone of many posters (and even more in which I won't post more than once, if the thread is devolving).

It might be prudent and polite to listen to those experienced Glock armorers who take the time to try and pass along something which they think might be beneficial for Glock owners. It's not like it's benefiting them, you know. ;)

As usual, just my thoughts. Feel free to ignore at your leisure.

^^^^^^^^^^^

This.

Fastbolt, clear out your inbox, I need to send you a PM!

:wavey:

MarkCO
09-30-2010, 08:06
Danny posted what the "official" recomendation is from Glock w.r.t. dry firing. That should be undebated as this same information has been, and is easy to confirm.

However, Danny did not say why, and neither has Glock. Until we know why, 90% of what has been posted on this thread is worthless bickering. If this can get back to a reasonable discussion instead of personal attacks, I'll leave it open.

coastal4974
09-30-2010, 08:09
What is "MIM" in reference to in the Gen 4 23?

Metal Injection Molding

oops, too late

tinman517
09-30-2010, 08:30
I do not quite understand what all the debating is all about. This topic has been discussed across many different platforms. Everyone has a position on this topic. You either change your position or stay put. What is there to debate?

Personally, I will not risk any potential damage to any of my gun, if I have control over it. Others may decide otherwise, which is find.

Snarlingiron
09-30-2010, 08:56
(usually after I wrote a response and then decided to hell with it and didn't post it) because of the nature and tone of many posters (and even more in which I won't post more than once, if the thread is devolving).
:rofl:

Man, I am so happy to know I am not the only one that does this. While I am pretty new on this forum I have been on several others for a number of years. I am guessing that only about 25% of the posts that I write actually get posted. Usually, I review it just before hitting the "Submit Reply" button and go, "Nah, not worth the grief I'm gonna get." and hit the back button on the browser and move on to the next topic.

I have learned to post what I know or think is correct and let it go at that. Folks can take or leave it as they wish.

Good post, fastbolt. It is hard for me to understand why folks get their knickers in a twist over the fact that everyone on the planet doesn't see everything exactly the same way they do.

Duck of Death
09-30-2010, 09:21
Thanks for the info, I've never dry fired my Glocks, always figured metal crashing into metal is not good.

In fact I don't dry fire any gun, don't think it does much good. I already know how to pull a trigger, I want live fire to feel and manage recoil.

KAK
09-30-2010, 09:26
If you break a striker buy a new one. I dry fire all the time, no problems here.

KAK
09-30-2010, 09:28
Thanks for the info, I've never dry fired my Glocks, always figured metal crashing into metal is not good.

In fact I don't dry fire any gun, don't think it does much good. I already know how to pull a trigger, I want live fire to feel and manage recoil.

Metal crashes into metal every time you fire.

poodleplumber
09-30-2010, 09:53
My wife and I are taking a Spanish class at night at a local college. One of our classmates is a native Spanish speaker, raised in southern Texas my Mexican parents. She is taking the class as an easy A elective (her other classes are some difficult math classes). My wife and I have befriended her and soak up all the knowledge we can from this sweet, charming, generous lady. Two of our gringo classmates are willing to argue with her about pronunciation of words in her native tongue.

Thank you, Danny. Your knowledge and advice is welcomed by many.

speicher
09-30-2010, 10:29
But who at Glock said it?
I have been told that no Glocks are made in the U.S. by Glock Inc, in Smyrna too.

I want to see it in writing on official GLOCK letterhead. Unlike previous posters I would also accept word-of-mouth from Gaston Glock also. :)

What confuses me, is knowing that we are now getting receivers in the 17,22,31 models being manufactured in Georgia and distributed in the U.S.
This of coarse is easily identified by the side of the receiver saying "Glock Inc. Smyrna GA." no "Made in Austria" on the receivers with those models anymore.

But then have a Glock tech in Smyrna state that anything manufactured here in Georgia is for export only, not for the U.S. market??? It seems to be a direct contradiction.

RAH
09-30-2010, 10:35
This isn't the first time that Glock provides contradictory information. I was told more than once by people in their tech department that it's fine to dry fire, but I can see why that advice would change. Glock probably wants to protect themselves from people who dry fire excessively, cause unintentional damage, and then expect Glock to repair the damage for free. By warning against dry firing Glock is engaging in CYA.

fastbolt
09-30-2010, 10:37
^^^^^^^^^^^

This.

Fastbolt, clear out your inbox, I need to send you a PM!

:wavey:

I deleted a couple to make room. You can also use my listed email address if you wish.

fb

Glocks&Ducs
09-30-2010, 10:37
If you break a striker buy a new one. I dry fire all the time, no problems here.

But why increase the chances of your striker breaking in the first place? What if it breaks when you need it to defend yourself?

Glocks&Ducs
09-30-2010, 10:38
Metal crashes into metal every time you fire.

If you are referring to the striker the majority of that impact is cushioned by the primer, which gives as it is struck.

fastbolt
09-30-2010, 10:57
When pushed further he stated he has been after them to include that statement in the Armour & owners manual.

Nothing goes into the manuals unless cleared by Glock headquarters in Europe. That's one of the reasons the last armorer manual revision took so long to be released, waiting for approval from headquarters.

Not an uncommon practice, either. Manufacturers want to be careful with what they allow published, even in restricted publications like armorer manuals.



As previously stated the Gen 4 has MIM: extractor & firing pin. The impact of dry-firing with MIM could certainly damage them. When you clean your weapon, inspect them from time to time.

When S&W started receiving some complaints about their original machined stock strikers breaking when dry-fire was involved their engineers went back and reviewed striker design and manufacturing. After some exhaustive testing they determined that excessive dry-fire might cause some strikers to fail. I was told that the original MRBF done with the original striker indicated it wouldn't typically be likely fail until a high dry-fire cycle rate had occurred, but that's a mean figure and it doesn't mean an isolated striker might not fail at an earlier number of cycles. My original M&P strikers didn't exhibit any problems from dry-fire, but I didn't subject them to excessive dry-fire, just what was needed for initial familiarization and inspections.

The revised and improved striker design included a change to using MIM strikers. While some of the transition .45 strikers were still being machined from stock (I got one of them), I was told that all of the revised strikers will be changed over to MIM. Some striker spring changes will probably be involved due to mass changes, as well. S&W wouldn't have gone to using MIM strikers over their original machined strikers unless they felt it offered an improvement for both them and their customers and would resolve the issue being reported by a small number of customers.

The use of MIM in the automotive and firearms industries is a good thing, as long as the process is used for parts in which MIM manufacturing ism suitable ... and as long as the MIM process is done properly, of course.

I've seen more breakage and failure with forged and cast parts than I have MIM parts as an armorer for many S&W handguns. ;) Ditto in some other makes of guns, as well. Just depends on how well the MIM was done.

I was told that although S&W uses a vendor to make their MIM parts, that they bought and own the MIM molds being used, which is one way to help make sure the quality of the parts is going to meet your specifications.

FobulousGlock
09-30-2010, 10:58
seriously people! just use a dang snap cap. those things are not that expensive.

Bowtie
09-30-2010, 11:28
Great Post Danny..Thanks again..Been trying to get this across to folks here for years but always turns into a pissing match..Even after tons of pics of damaged breach face..

Zane Zackerly
09-30-2010, 11:49
But who at Glock said it?
I have been told that no Glocks are made in the U.S. by Glock Inc, in Smyrna too.

I want to see it in writing on official GLOCK letterhead. Unlike previous posters I would also accept word-of-mouth from Gaston Glock also. :)

I agree.

I'm not doubting the OP, but documentation that can be copied and pasted all over creation is, of course, the best evidence.

platoonDaddy
09-30-2010, 11:49
What confuses me, is knowing that we are now getting receivers in the 17,22,31 models being manufactured in Georgia and distributed in the U.S.
This of coarse is easily identified by the side of the receiver saying "Glock Inc. Smyrna GA." no "Made in Austria" on the receivers with those models anymore.



I can only speak for my Gen 4 G17, stamped on the right side of the receiver:

Made in Austria
Glock, Inc. Smyrna , Ga

fastbolt
09-30-2010, 12:17
It's not always reasonable to expect 'documentation' or someone revealing the name of their 'source' when some info like this is passed along from a manufacturer. Sometimes it's considered confidential until a 'formal' release is able to be done, and sometimes it's just something passed along as a courtesy to an armorer. Immediately broadcasting the name of the company employee might not exactly be in the best interest of either the employee or the armorer (if they want to continue receiving a such developing heads-up type info, anyway ;) ).

Also, just because a manufacturer isn't ready to make a written notification in their owner and/or armorer manual materials yet, that doesn't mean they aren't quietly passing the info along to their certified armorers at some point. (The head's up thing when something has been observed, but may still be under review by the company regarding any official notification.) This happens among some of the other major firearms companies, too.

It's also handy to remember that armorer manuals aren't technical manuals. They're only intended to help trained armorers be better able to diagnose simple problems and make corrections or repairs in the field (meaning away from the factory), as well as maintain service weapons in optimal condition. While not many cops may do as much shooting as enthusiasts and competitors, their guns are arguably subjected to variable conditions and circumstances that can sometimes be a bit more abusive, or at least harder, on guns than those in the hands of private owners.

I remember when a rep told me he was recommending to his LE customers that they start replacing the recoil springs assemblies in the .40's at about 2,500 rounds, but he did say that it wasn't anything "official" from Glock at that time. Then, something like a couple of years later, during a recert armorer class I attended, it was said it was now recommended to replace the RSA's at 3,000 rounds. Then, a while later I received a copy of the wearable parts replacement schedule for LE .40's where it was recommended that RSA's were replaced in 22/22RTF/34's at 2,500 rounds, in 23/23RTF's at 2,000 rounds and in the G27 at 3,000 rounds.

Then there was the usual disclaimer that the RSA should be checked at each range session or qualification, using the standard Glock recoil spring field test as taught in the armorer class, and the RSA replaced more often as may be needed.

Then, when speaking with another rep I was told that the new Gen4 RSA's would probably be good for between 5,000 - 7,000 rounds. I expect that will be in writing when I go to my next armorer recert at some point.

Now, most privately owned Glocks will likely never be fired more than 500 rounds let alone 5,000 rounds (and some manufacturers have suggested an even lower round count is probably likely for the typical handgun owner). Enthusiasts and folks who enjoy various competitive venues are the exceptions, of course, and it's likely they have access to Glock armorers to keep their guns in optimal condition for extending usage, or they may have become armorers, themselves.

ron59
09-30-2010, 12:32
Danny....

Just want to put in my $.02 that you continue to post useful (and educational) information as you receive it. Please don't allow the bickering from a few prevent the rest of us from having access to knowledge as it becomes available.

I think this is a *particularly* painful subject, as so many people have been told that it was okay to dry fire, and have done so for so many times... and now hear that Glock advises against it. Remember that most of these people LOVE their Glocks, so to hear they might have been doing something damaging to it makes them become defensive of their actions.

I, too, have done a bunch of dry firing with my Glock in the past... but now that I've read this, will start using Snap Caps (which I already have).

RAH
09-30-2010, 14:13
DannyR,

I forgot to thank you for the info.

fastbolt,

Thanks also for the great info.

fastbolt
09-30-2010, 14:18
De nada.

Glockrunner
09-30-2010, 15:21
Metal Injection Molding

oops, too late
Thanks!

I did a search and found that out, then edited my post to reflect that I knew.

Guess I never hit the SEND button...

nedfolks
09-30-2010, 15:46
I dry fire my glocks all the time because I like the trigger to the rear. No snap caps have ever been used in my Glocks. I don't even own a snap cap.

Glocks&Ducs
09-30-2010, 16:02
I dry fire my glocks all the time because I like the trigger to the rear. No snap caps have ever been used in my Glocks. I don't even own a snap cap.

The advice does not apply to dry firing the gun occasionally, such as we all need to do in order to decock the trigger.

rick7938
09-30-2010, 16:53
Unfortunately, in anticipation of some of the flaming replies that are generated in reponse to a legitimate question, many of us who have been lurking on these discussion forums before joining don't ask a question. I started a verbal gun battle on a shotgun forum by asking whether I would notice much of a difference in the shooting characteristics of a plain round barrel vs. a ribbed barrel since I have only ever owned solid or vent rib shotguns. I was called everything from an "elitist prime donne" to a "*******king redneck retard." Which didn't hurt my feelings because I just consider the sources, but I still didn't get my question answered.

So, there are a lot of questions that never get asked for fear of getting flamed and still not getting an answer. I am a new Glock owner, but am very careful about asking a question in the wrong way. Just an observation from a new guy with no credentials. However, as a retired Army SGM, I think that I recall having some of these flamethrowers in my units. Character, or lack thereof, is demonstrated in both the written and spoken word.

cowboy1964
09-30-2010, 17:34
The official word from Glock is:

"If you’re going to dry fire onther than for disassembly, use a snap cap."


Yeah, "official" from where?

Glockrunner
09-30-2010, 18:25
Yeah, "official" from where?

If you had read a little farther you would have seen it was from GLOCK INC.
Mr. Ryan isn't one to spread rumors here and knows what he speaks of.

malleable
09-30-2010, 18:28
tagged

Glockrunner
09-30-2010, 18:29
Unfortunately, in anticipation of some of the flaming replies that are generated in reponse to a legitimate question, many of us who have been lurking on these discussion forums before joining don't ask a question. I started a verbal gun battle on a shotgun forum by asking whether I would notice much of a difference in the shooting characteristics of a plain round barrel vs. a ribbed barrel since I have only ever owned solid or vent rib shotguns. I was called everything from an "elitist prime donne" to a "*******king redneck retard." Which didn't hurt my feelings because I just consider the sources, but I still didn't get my question answered.

So, there are a lot of questions that never get asked for fear of getting flamed and still not getting an answer. I am a new Glock owner, but am very careful about asking a question in the wrong way. Just an observation from a new guy with no credentials. However, as a retired Army SGM, I think that I recall having some of these flamethrowers in my units. Character, or lack thereof, is demonstrated in both the written and spoken word.

While true it is a shame people behave like that.
I guess more gets done around here thru emails and PM's just because of this attiutide.

kshutt
09-30-2010, 18:53
Danny,

Thanks for the useful information. Please ignore the few morons that want to argue with you.

SIGlock
09-30-2010, 21:29
My 1996 G19 is approaching 75,000 fired rounds and countless thousands of dry fires.

All right. This is the real "data" that we need to know. Countless thousands of dry fires. That does not include the 75,000 fired rounds which actually has some material damaging effects to the breech face (due to impact fatigue during the casing pushing backward on the breech face).

As a material engineer.... I think it is O.K. to dry fire.....moderately....say a few hundred times a year. That's more that most people want to dry fire anyway.

So, why Glock advices to use snap-cap? "BE SAFE THAN SORRY" motto. I would advice the same thing....if I was working for Glock.

Glocks&Ducs
09-30-2010, 21:38
All right. This is the real "data" that we need to know. Countless thousands of dry fires. That does not include the 75,000 fired rounds which actually has some material damaging effects to the breech face (due to impact fatigue during the casing pushing backward on the breech face).

As a material engineer.... I think it is O.K. to dry fire.....moderately....say a few hundred times a year. That's more that most people want to dry fire anyway.

So, why Glock advices to use snap-cap? "BE SAFE THAN SORRY" motto. I would advice the same thing....if I was working for Glock.

But the majority of the breach face is contacted by the entire face of the casing, and as a whole it isn't as thin as it is immediately surrounding the firing pin hole. I believe the advice came about in order to prevent the weaker circle around the firing pin hole from becoming cracked and protruding, or because they have switched to MIM for the firing pin. We have seen pictures of the firing pin hole protruding in the past.

DannyR
09-30-2010, 23:50
I accept the written advice I receive from the Warranty Service Department of Glock, Inc., Smyrna, GA as good, sound advice. I have admitted to my excessive dry firing in the past. My "A-Zoom" snap caps should arrive today, and I will use them in the future. I will also present my 1996 G19 with a brand new recoil spring assembly after round #75,000 this month. The pistol should outlast me.

One should always dry fire a Glock before field stripping and before putting it away (unloaded).

556A2
10-01-2010, 01:58
One of the things I liked switching to the Glock platform was you could dry-fire endlessly without need for a snap-cap.

This doesn't make me a happy camper.

in_this_city
10-01-2010, 03:47
I think it is O.K. to dry fire.....moderately....say a few hundred times a year. That's more that most people want to dry fire anyway.

A few hundred a year is fine, but for me, I dry fire a few hundred times a week. I always use a snap cap cause Id rather be safe than sorry.

and thank you DannyR for your informative posts. They are much appreciated.

captdreifus
10-01-2010, 03:57
Here is my question: How many times can you dryfire on the same snap cap? Mine has taken a beating and I am not sure if its cushioning the fp anymore..

thanks.

capt

TRMN8R
10-01-2010, 04:24
My wife and I are taking a Spanish class at night at a local college. One of our classmates is a native Spanish speaker, raised in southern Texas my Mexican parents. She is taking the class as an easy A elective (her other classes are some difficult math classes). My wife and I have befriended her and soak up all the knowledge we can from this sweet, charming, generous lady. Two of our gringo classmates are willing to argue with her about pronunciation of words in her native tongue.

Excellent analogy for this thread (and likely a few others :whistling: ).

Coach,

I personally request that you continue to post as you have been with updated, relevant Glock information as you deem fit. It is MUCH appreciated by me, as well as many MANY other members on this board. Those that don't are the same individuals that would have you believe they invented the internet and coat hangers :upeyes: .

Butch
10-01-2010, 06:50
I have a few snap caps for my .40 that have a small recess where the pin will strike. But for my 9mm I have a bag of SAF-T-TRAINERS that are flat in the back (no recess for pin to strike). They are blaze orange and made by a co. called Precision Gun Specialties Inc. I had used them for malfunction drills. Are these considered "snap caps" and is it safe to use them in my 19?
I didn't have time to read all 5 pages of this thread, but if anyone is still wondering about snap caps vs dummy rounds, go to the bottom of this article: http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/blog.php?b=4

greyeyezz
10-01-2010, 07:23
Occasional dry firing is probably fine, excessive like thousands of times a week is maybe causing issues. Maybe Glock is getting tired of fixing damaged breech faces. I know for a fact excessive dry firing of a Sig will damage the breech block pin, I've seen it personally.

RAH
10-01-2010, 07:55
I accept the written advice I receive from the Warranty Service Department of Glock, Inc., Smyrna, GA as good, sound advice. I have admitted to my excessive dry firing in the past. My "A-Zoom" snap caps should arrive today, and I will use them in the future. I will also present my 1996 G19 with a brand new recoil spring assembly after round #75,000 this month. The pistol should outlast me.

One should always dry fire a Glock before field stripping and before putting it away (unloaded).

Have you changed any springs or other parts on your Glock 19?

Snarlingiron
10-01-2010, 08:54
Ok, dummy question for the sages amongst us. If one were to use a snap cap, how should it be accomplished? Glock says not to drop a round into the chamber and close the slide due to possible damage to the extractor.

When I dry fire practice I make it a practice to remove all ammunition and magazines from the area. I am guessing I will have to modify my procedure to removing all ammo, loading the snap cap into an otherwise empty magazine, chambering the snap cap, and then proceed to dry fire? Having the magazine in there makes me a bit uncomfortable.

Realizing that plastic snap caps wouldn't damage the extractor, but wouldn't the extractor then damage the rim of the snap cap?

Then on the other hand, if it takes me 10 years to damage the breech face, or whatever, that makes the cost of a new slide what about $15.00 a year (don't really know what a replacement slide would cost)?

Just thinking it through... maybe too much.

Fun thread. Again I find it hard to understand why folks get so riled up. It's your gun, if you want to dry fire it without a snap cap go right ahead. Just don't piss and moan when it eventually causes some damage.

COM165
10-01-2010, 13:22
I didn't have time to read all 5 pages of this thread, but if anyone is still wondering about snap caps vs dummy rounds, go to the bottom of this article: http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/blog.php?b=4


Thanks for posing this, Butch. It was very helpful. After reading this, I realized that both of the types of rounds that I have been using are "dummy rounds". I thought that the ones with the recessed area where the primer goes were snap caps. I was wrong.

So today I went out and bought some A-Zoom snap caps in .40S&W. They didn't have 9mm or .45ACP, so I'll have to check back. But I feel the difference when I dry fire. One of the dummy rounds I had basically had the same feel of dry firing. When I used the A-Zoom snap caps, I could feel the resistance of the pin striking the primer.

-gunut-
10-01-2010, 13:38
Fine, write to Glock and request it. It's no fuzz off my peach if you choose not to accept my information. What matters to me is that I indeed believe my reliable source.

I should know better by now that any posting of reliable information results in a brawl, so I will not trouble you with any more informational posts.

you are such a drama queen. people get all kinds of info from glock so it is normal to question it.

GMT
10-01-2010, 13:40
Fine, write to Glock and request it. It's no fuzz off my peach if you choose not to accept my information. What matters to me is that I indeed believe my reliable source.

I should know better by now that any posting of reliable information results in a brawl, so I will not trouble you with any more informational posts.

Danny, I for one would appreciate if you would continue with the posts as you have in the past. I have learned a great from you over the years and would hate to see that com to an end.

silvrevo
10-01-2010, 15:09
A-Zooms are nice,,,, dont buy the cheap plastic ones,, they dont work,, and splinter.

Duck of Death
10-01-2010, 15:44
*QUOTE*
I have learned a great from you over the years and would hate to see that com to an end.

Don't loose any sleep over it since 2002, when I joined GT, he's been going to quit posting 3 times.:faint:

Rusty Shackleford
10-01-2010, 15:45
people get all kinds of info from glock so it is normal to question it.

That would be my experience.

I had two guys giving me conflicting information the last time I dealt with them.

Kind of results in zero confidence, but there is no harm in being careful.

Sonnytoo
10-01-2010, 15:56
My 1996 G19 is approaching 75,000 fired rounds and countless thousands of dry fires.

I suspect this answers my question.
sonnytoo

gunsmoke92
10-01-2010, 21:09
Thanks Danny, good info for sure. I am sorry Sir that so many people can't just take good information and say thanks, instead of questioning good peoples motives. Use the information, don't use the information, it's up to the individual, but trying to discredit an individual for providing something useful is just deplorable. It's people like you that get people like us to the next level. Thanks again and keep up the good work. :perfect10:

Wriggly
10-02-2010, 01:22
Dry firing Glocks is ok, it really is......

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y50/wriggly1dog/GlockBreechFaceExcessiveDryFireDamage6.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y50/wriggly1dog/GlockBreechFaceExcessiveDryFireDamage3.jpg

The after market slide manufacturers will be celebrating, now that Glock has put out a disclaimer.

pistolcompetitor
10-02-2010, 03:02
Ok, dummy question for the sages amongst us. If one were to use a snap cap, how should it be accomplished? Glock says not to drop a round into the chamber and close the slide due to possible damage to the extractor.
<snip>

Take the snap cap and chamber it only after loading it in a mag and racking the slide. If you drop it directly into the chamber you risk damaging your extractor claw. One of the GATE guys mentioned this, too.
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=16074668

English
10-02-2010, 06:24
Dry firing Glocks is ok, it really is......

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y50/wriggly1dog/GlockBreechFaceExcessiveDryFireDamage6.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y50/wriggly1dog/GlockBreechFaceExcessiveDryFireDamage3.jpg



I am sure this is just a limp wristing problem! http://glocktalk.com/forums/images/smilies/sunnies.gif

English
10-02-2010, 06:40
Take the snap cap and chamber it only after loading it in a mag and racking the slide. If you drop it directly into the chamber you risk damaging your extractor claw. One of the GATE guys mentioned this, too.
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=16074668

I can't believe that the impact of the ramped nose of the extractor against the rim of the cartridge would be enough to damage either. The extractor is clearly designed so that the rim of the incoming caartridge will slide up underneath it in the normal rechambering process. It is also clearly designed so that it will cam over the rim of a cartridge which is already in the chamber and I know an instructor who believes he must have done this several thousand times with the same G19 in the process of demonstrating misfeeds. His extractor is still the original one.

This does not mean that extractors cannot break but I doubt that they break for this reason.

English

ChrisJn
10-02-2010, 07:01
Thanks Danny, good info for sure. I am sorry Sir that so many people can't just take good information and say thanks, instead of questioning good peoples motives. Use the information, don't use the information, it's up to the individual, but trying to discredit an individual for providing something useful is just deplorable. It's people like you that get people like us to the next level. Thanks again and keep up the good work. :perfect10:

I agree.
DannyR, remember the police training adage "Idle and silly remarks will be ignored". Also the old WW11 poster:-
http://londonphotography.biz/623513t.jpg

Gary1911A1
10-02-2010, 09:18
Thanks Danny and Wriggly for the informative info and pictures. I have to order some snap caps so I can continue to practice for the GSSF Match later this month. I really do enjoy this forum as I learn so much.

StanA
10-02-2010, 09:38
I have alway's thought snap caps for dry firing is a good Idea.
But you have to admit it makes Glock's (and others) disassemble method seem strange if not wrong? In theory you risk damage each time you break it down. You would think Glock would redesign it so that it does not have to be dry fired for take down. :dunno:

Glock 21/22
10-02-2010, 17:48
Think I'll call BS on this one. Snap caps are probably a good idea, not not needed in my opinion.

AustinTx
10-02-2010, 19:02
I can't believe that the impact of the ramped nose of the extractor against the rim of the cartridge would be enough to damage either. The extractor is clearly designed so that the rim of the incoming caartridge will slide up underneath it in the normal rechambering process. It is also clearly designed so that it will cam over the rim of a cartridge which is already in the chamber and I know an instructor who believes he must have done this several thousand times with the same G19 in the process of demonstrating misfeeds. His extractor is still the original one.

This does not mean that extractors cannot break but I doubt that they break for this reason.

English


I tried to close a Glock slide, on a chambered round, by dropping the slide from spring pressure. After 3 or 4 tries, I quit because the extractor wouldn't jump the cartridge rim. I was afraid it may get chipped. I've seen pictures, here on GT of extractors that did chip. I don't know the actual cause of those chips.

I found out that I could chamber a round, ease the slide closed and then just push on the rear of the slide, with my thumb to close it. The extractor wouldn't slide over the rim when hit at high speed but will if just pushed over it.

One of my Glocks would chamber with just thumb pressure but another one required a slight bump, after closing to slide against the case head.

Just my observation.

TxGun
10-02-2010, 19:13
This is not unusual. Many pistols balk at this. Just one example: 1911 shooters know it's a bad idea to drop the slide on a singly-loaded round and cause the extractor to jump the cartridge rim. It was not designed to do this . The cartridge rim comes up under the extractor as it feeds from the magazine. Personally, just as a matter of practice, I would never do this with any semi-auto.

AustinTx
10-02-2010, 19:39
I can't believe that the impact of the ramped nose of the extractor against the rim of the cartridge would be enough to damage either. The extractor is clearly designed so that the rim of the incoming caartridge will slide up underneath it in the normal rechambering process. It is also clearly designed so that it will cam over the rim of a cartridge which is already in the chamber and I know an instructor who believes he must have done this several thousand times with the same G19 in the process of demonstrating misfeeds. His extractor is still the original one.

This does not mean that extractors cannot break but I doubt that they break for this reason.

English

I agree with the point English is making here, it looks like the ramp on the chamber side of the Glock extractor should ride over the case rim. It just seems like it doesn't want to work that way though. It may work better if the bevel were cut at a more shallow angle.

I'm gonna need to disagree about the 1911. Their little thin, beveled and polished extractors will ride over a chambered round, without any problem. I don't do that, though and it's not a particularly good idea to load a 1911 that way. Any pistol that is going to be issued to an army needs to be foolproof. The 1911 never had a reputation for breaking extractors, because of the design.

TxGun
10-02-2010, 19:49
I agree with the point English is making here, it looks like the ramp on the chamber side of the Glock extractor should ride over the case rim. It just seems like it doesn't want to work that way though. It may work better if the bevel were cut at a more shallow angle.

I'm gonna need to disagree about the 1911. Their little thin, beveled and polished extractors will ride over a chambered round, without any problem. I don't do that, though and it's not a particularly good idea to load a 1911 that way. Any pistol that is going to be issued to an army needs to be foolproof. The 1911 never had a reputation for breaking extractors, because of the design.

Well, I've been shooting 1911s for 40 years and all I can tell you is no really knowledgeable 1911 aficianado will do this. It is absolutely not designed to do it, it definitely will damage the extractor if done repeatedly, and you will eventually begin having FTEs. You'll ruin the extractor's tuning and risk breaking/chipping the hook. It was, BTW, a good way to get chewed out at Gunsight, at least when Jeff Cooper was still in charge. It was one of the things they instructed us not to do... with any pistol (not just 1911s).

Wriggly
10-03-2010, 01:37
Well, I've been shooting 1911s for 40 years and all I can tell you is no really knowledgeable 1911 aficianado will do this. It is absolutely not designed to do it, it definitely will damage the extractor if done repeatedly, and you will eventually begin having FTEs. You'll ruin the extractor's tuning and risk breaking/chipping the hook. It was, BTW, a good way to get chewed out at Gunsight, at least when Jeff Cooper was still in charge. It was one of the things they instructed us not to do... with any pistol (not just 1911s).

Absolutely true. I have tuned quite a few extractors for folks that did not follow this advice.

Gary1911A1
10-03-2010, 02:30
This is not unusual. Many pistols balk at this. Just one example: 1911 shooters know it's a bad idea to drop the slide on a singly-loaded round and cause the extractor to jump the cartridge rim. It was not designed to do this . The cartridge rim comes up under the extractor as it feeds from the magazine. Personally, just as a matter of practice, I would never do this with any semi-auto.

I agree and will add is there really any good reason besides a class three malfunction where a fired case doesn't extract where one would want to do this.:dunno:

English
10-03-2010, 09:15
Well, I've been shooting 1911s for 40 years and all I can tell you is no really knowledgeable 1911 aficianado will do this......

I have no doubt of the truth of your statement, but to what extent is that knowledge based on empirical evidence as opposed to something that some said seemed likely that was repeated by more and more people?

Wriggly's statement above seems likely to be about 1911s since Glock extractors are not tuned. It indicates that 1911 extractors chip often enough to be noteworthy, but is there any substantial link to that damage being caused by dropping the slide on a loaded chamber or is it just thought that it is?

I can see that a mis-fitted extractor, where that is possible, or one that is out of spec, or a pistol which has a notch along side the chamber for the extractor to fit into could result in an impact between extractor and barrel face which could chip the extractor. That is very differeing from an impact on the relatively soft brass of a cartridge against the camming ramp of the extractor.

Here the mass of the extractor is negligible and the spring pressure holding it in the closed position is so low that it can be moved with a finger nail. This does damage the finger nail but it is really not much resistance! It seems to me that if this can damage an extractor there is a fault with its hardening, its design or its manufacture. If that is the case, I would sooner stress it enough to make it fail, find out why and fix it so that it does not fail again.

As AustinTx said, any pistol intended to be issued to an army should be foolproof. An extractor which fails with such slight provokation does not meet that criterion.

English

English
10-03-2010, 09:30
I agree and will add is there really any good reason besides a class three malfunction where a fired case doesn't extract where one would want to do this.:dunno:

It is rather important that a type three malfunction can be cleared without breaking the pistol.

Apart from that the only other significant reason I can think of is as a means to top up the pistol with a round in the chamber before inserting a full magazine in a way that eliminates the possibility of bullet setback and a lot of administrative fiddling with magazines and part used rounds. In that case I would let the slide forward gently and push it to so that the extractor engages. I would then partly withdraw the slide to make sure that engagement had taken place before inserting the full magazine.

In the really rare situation that you have used up all your loaded magazines and have run dry but have loose rounds it is far quicker for one desperate shot to tip the pistol to the left, drop in a loose round, tilt it downward, drop the slide (you do need to use the slide release lever but might need to rack as well depending on the pistol), aim and fire. In this I speak from the experience of having practiced it. The alternative of removing the magazine, holstering the pistol or holding it in your teeth, putting rounds in the magazine then reloading as normal does not work well against the clock even when you have a bench to save your teeth.

English

TxGun
10-03-2010, 11:55
[QUOTE=English;16083439As AustinTx said, any pistol intended to be issued to an army should be foolproof. An extractor which fails with such slight provokation does not meet that criterion.

English[/QUOTE]

Really? Do you guys know anything about the 1911 design, other than what you think it should be? :whistling: This appears to be reality vs. the theoretical. 1) No pistol is completely foolproof, military issue or not, and that includes the 1911, and the Berreta 92. 2) Proper training is the vehicle that teaches you what to do, and perhaps more importantly, what not to do. 3) Arguing about this is futile, so what I'm going to suggest to you is: send an inquiry to any reputable 1911 gunsmith and ask him if dropping the slide on a chambered round is a good idea. Go ahead. See what response you get back. Might you get away with it a few times? Sure. Is it damaging, especially if done routinely? Absolutely! And again, while some designs might handle it beter than others, I doubt any manufacturer of any semi-auto pistol would encourage you to do this with their product. If you think they would...ask them. They all are designed such that the cartridge rim comes up under the extractor during the normal feeding cycle, and the extractor hook is not meant to jump the cartridge rim as SOP.

English
10-03-2010, 12:26
Really? Do you guys know anything about the 1911 design, other than what you think it should be? :whistling: 1) No pistol is completely foolproof, military issue or not, and that includes the 1911, and the Berreta 92. 2) Proper training is the vehicle that teaches you what to do, and perhaps more importantly, what not to do. 3) Tell you what, arguing with someone who has no practical knowledge is futile, so what I'm going to suggest to you is: send an inquiry to any reputable 1911 gunsmith and ask him if dropping the slide on a chambered round is a good idea. Go ahead. See what response you get back. Might you get away with it a few times? Sure. Is it damaging, especially if done routinely? Absolutely! Jeez...obvious 1911 novices telling us how the 1911 should be designed. :upeyes:

Well, I do have one and I have had one or another over more than 20 years. I used to think it was the ultimate combat pistol but nowadays I prefer Glocks.

None of that matters very much relative to your rather arrogant post. Let me try to put it another way. Designing a latch that will pass over the rim of a rimless cartridge as the slide closes is not a great feat of mechanical engineering. Designing one that does not break as it does so should not be something at a very high level of design skill. Can you explain why this is so difficult if the situation is as you claim it to be? I actually have quite a lot of practical knowledge. Is your problem that you don't have much theoretical knowledge and so you can't answer the actual question?

English