I only shoot my reloads. Years ago, there was an old ordnance officer who posted on GT and, before GT, on UGW. Can't remember the guys' name, but he thought the .40 was poorly conceived and designed.
My personal believe is that shortening a case that works well (10mm) and using the same bullet weights dramatically decrease the margin for error when reloading. Also, just don't have any place in my "arsenal" for .40. I'm pretty happy with 9mm and .45ACP. I've done a lot of experimenting with .400 Cor-Bon and .40 Super, without having to change platforms.
To reiterate: If Glock's design were flawed in such a manner as to cause KB's, then we'd be hearing of tens of thousands of KB's, not the few that are posted on this and other websites. Ol' Occam even works with Glocks.
duck: Thanks to Glock's design, I suffered no damage from my REAL KB. Felt like I'd hit my trigger finger with a hammer, and I was afraid to look at my hand, as I expected to see part of my finger missing. Looked at finger and it was black, then I was afraid to clean the "black" off, for fear of seeing bone, mangled flesh, etc. Didn't even have a bruise!
As I've posted in the past, I was pleasantly surprised that Glock/Smyrna took care of me, even though I was using an aftermarket barrel with reloaded ammo.
Thanks for the interest and opinions expressed in this thread. I'd bet Ol' Pepper against a DemocRAT's brain (something valuable v. something worthless) that a "certain" specious website only quotes GT'ers who are on my infamous Ignore List, when discussing KB's and GT.
That rates a big ol' "hardehardeharharhar!"
If G21's had "design flaws", wouldn't you think that I'd have had a problem by now, having fired over 100,000 rounds of my reloads through my G21's?? Some folks, of course, are offended by rational thought and "critical thinking skills."