moonshot
06-25-2007, 20:12
I know this has been asked before, but I have yet to read a definitive answer.
Why did Glock replace the #5 follower for the 9mm with the #6? In order to justify the cost of creating a new mold, testing the new design, and keeping several different followers in inventory, there must have been a compelling reason. All I can think of is either an existing problem was identified with the #5 follower and some type or types of 9mm ammo, a change was introduced in the design or shape of the magazine, or a change was made to the magazine spring.
As the magazine tube and spring are the same for 9mm Glocks with both the #5 follower and the #6 follower, all I can conclude is there was a reliability issue between the #5 follower and ammo.
Please do say... "as long as your magazines work, don't worry about it". I'm not worried about it. I am simply curious.
Anyone with info, please enlighten me.
moonshot
Why did Glock replace the #5 follower for the 9mm with the #6? In order to justify the cost of creating a new mold, testing the new design, and keeping several different followers in inventory, there must have been a compelling reason. All I can think of is either an existing problem was identified with the #5 follower and some type or types of 9mm ammo, a change was introduced in the design or shape of the magazine, or a change was made to the magazine spring.
As the magazine tube and spring are the same for 9mm Glocks with both the #5 follower and the #6 follower, all I can conclude is there was a reliability issue between the #5 follower and ammo.
Please do say... "as long as your magazines work, don't worry about it". I'm not worried about it. I am simply curious.
Anyone with info, please enlighten me.
moonshot
