GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-22-2012, 19:27   #101
Dave Nowlin
Fisher of Men
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Savannah, Tn.
Posts: 260
I think you and I may be talking about different things. If you follow the leg of the extractor which contains the claw down to where it turns 90 degrees away toward the pivot pin. You will see a small pad on that arm. If you remove material from that pad the extractor will swing further in. My guess is the pad is there to allow for adjusting travel. They forgot to tell the Glock Armorers about it. Other wise what is the function of this pad?

Last edited by Dave Nowlin; 02-22-2012 at 19:50..
Dave Nowlin is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 19:31   #102
ithaca_deerslayer
Senior Member
 
ithaca_deerslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Upstate NY, USA
Posts: 20,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3/4Flap View Post

Look, unless Glock has truly fixed the binding issue, just getting new extractors is not necessarily EVER going to help. The binding in the ejector slot must be eliminated.
Wait, when did the "ejector slot" become part of this discussion?
ithaca_deerslayer is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 19:43   #103
3/4Flap
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Idaho Nowhere near a McDonald's
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithaca_deerslayer View Post
Wait, when did the "ejector slot" become part of this discussion?

Since I screwed up and hammered "ejector" when I meant "extractor".

Thanks and glad it came from an Ithaca fan.

Me, too.
3/4Flap is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 19:54   #104
ak103k
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA- In the shadow of the Shade
Posts: 705
Quote:
It seems to me that the extractor shoulder has no effect at all with a cartridge in place.
I tend to agree with Ken here, and what hes saying makes sense.

If you use the face of the loaded chamber indicator as a reference, when there is no round present, the indicator is flush with the slide. Put a clean factory round in the gun, and the indicator now sits 0.031" higher than the slide. That leads me to believe that with a round in the gun, the shoulder is also going to be the same distance off its "rest" in the slide, and never will bottom out.

For me, the jurys still out, as Im right back where I was, with reloads having the issue, and factory rounds functioning fine, even with what I think is a worn extractor.
ak103k is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 19:56   #105
3/4Flap
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Idaho Nowhere near a McDonald's
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken grant View Post
Whoops!!!! I may have figured it out.
As the barrel unlocks and drops down, the case moves down the breechface and extractor as well.
Maybe at this point the extractor shoulder bottoms out and stops any farther inward movement.
Beat me to it.

Yup.

The extractor needs;

1} to move freely in/out during the entire rearward slide process till the empty leaves the gun

2} follow the case as the case moves along the bolt face

Really, folks, there is a lot more going on here than the "Limpwristing Did It!!" and "Use Better Ammo!!" crowd would have you believe.

Some of them may be good parts swappers, but they are surely no gunsmiths.

Last edited by 3/4Flap; 02-22-2012 at 19:58..
3/4Flap is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 22:04   #106
bentbiker
NRA Member
 
bentbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 4,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken grant View Post
I fail to understand what effect removing material from the extractor's inner shoulder does for better ejection.

I know it lets the hook move closer to the center but a cartridge in place holds the extractor away from the center even before material is removed.

It seems to me that the extractor shoulder has no effect at all with a cartridge in place.
An easy test of what ken is saying: If you have an LCI extractor and it is flush with the slide when the chamber is empty and it stands out as designed when the chamber is loaded, then that shoulder is not limiting rotation. If you have brass that is worn enough to defeat the LCI, you need new brass. Has anyone had success taking material off the shoulder WITHOUT also polishing the top and bottom of the extractor and/or working on the claw?

Edit: Just realized AK said almost exactly the same thing -- but faster.

Last edited by bentbiker; 02-22-2012 at 22:33..
bentbiker is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 22:52   #107
3/4Flap
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Idaho Nowhere near a McDonald's
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentbiker View Post
An easy test of what ken is saying: If you have an LCI extractor and it is flush with the slide when the chamber is empty and it stands out as designed when the chamber is loaded, then that shoulder is not limiting rotation. If you have brass that is worn enough to defeat the LCI, you need new brass. Has anyone had success taking material off the shoulder WITHOUT also polishing the top and bottom of the extractor and/or working on the claw?

Edit: Just realized AK said almost exactly the same thing -- but faster.
Read my post above.

I believe I also said the same thing three or four pages ago, or on one of the other 42 "Glock ejection sucks" threads running now. I can't remember exactly where.

To repeat; The extractor actually moves as the case slides across the breech face. Reducing the shoulder or "pad" as Dave called it allows the extractor to maintain contact with the case head for a very short period of extra time.

I actually, as I've done the work on mine, come to believe the freeing up of the extractor in the slide slot is more important, but it may be that this additional time also proveds added benefit.
3/4Flap is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 23:04   #108
Terry C.
in the swamp
 
Terry C.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Waycross, GA USA
Posts: 22
Okay, I promised a pic and here it is. This is how my stoned extractor looks . . .

General Glocking

The only surfaces touched were the top and bottom. And I did it as Dave described, on a flat hard Arkansas stoned lubed with honing oil.

The gritty and binding extractor movement is what I had originally. It was also very difficult to get out of the slot during disassembly. Now it moves freely and will drop out under its own weight.
Terry C. is offline  
Old 02-22-2012, 23:27   #109
tinman517
Senior Member
 
tinman517's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,079


Although, I thankfully have never experienced any of the issues, which you folks have had . . . I have to admire the " Can do/Can fix " attitude, here.
tinman517 is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 04:06   #110
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 663
i had the probs with a G17 gen.3 with an extractor that moved free and fell out on its own while disassembling. everyone (even in this board) called me a limp wrister and stated i should use more powerful ammo. what really did it for my G17 was getting a .40 ejector installed and a NON LCI extractor. that did the job.

nice to here, that i wasn't the only one called a "limp wrister"

but i'm still very interested in this topic and admire all the brainwork here, perfect guys, that's what i call real enthusiasm, really great work here.

i still have a question:
what exactly do you mean with a dipped and a non-dipped extractor, where should the "dip" be, that differs one from the other and which is older and which newer, and which will work better out of the box?
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 08:33   #111
ken grant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: middle ga.
Posts: 1,444
[QUOTE=dusty_dragon;18619227]i had the probs with a G17 gen.3 with an extractor that moved free and fell out on its own while disassembling. everyone (even in this board) called me a limp wrister and stated i should use more powerful ammo. what really did it for my G17 was getting a .40 ejector installed and a NON LCI extractor.


Where did you get the NON LCI extractor?
I would like to get a couple
ken grant is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 09:23   #112
eaglefrq
NRA Member
 
eaglefrq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,297
I have a Gen 4 G19 brass to the head and a Gen 3 G26 with zero problems.

I swapped the extractors and the G26 still had zero issues and the G19 still had some brass to the head. It appears in my case, the extractor is not the issue.

My thinking by switching them the 26 would develop problems and the 19 would be solved, but that didn't happen.
__________________
You are free to choose, but you are not free from the consequence of your choice.

Last edited by eaglefrq; 02-23-2012 at 09:36..
eaglefrq is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 09:40   #113
Dave Nowlin
Fisher of Men
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Savannah, Tn.
Posts: 260
My Gen 3 27 doesn't give problems either. That's why I studied it to help figure what to do to the G30SF. I really don't think any of the 26s or 27s seem to have this problem. There is evidently some very minor difference in the geometry that we aren't seeing. This problem seems to exist in the mid & full size pistols. There must be some minor difference in the way the slot is cut in the slide for the exxtractor as well as some variations from gun to gun in this respect. This would indicate that if these slides are cut on CNC someone isn't checking for tool wear as often as they should. Then again it may be a combination of that and poor quality of the molded parts. More gun manufacturers seem to be going to these MIM parts and they tell us they are good On the other hand Kimber's quality has been going downhill with these parts as well. Do you suppose we may be recognizing a trend.
Dave Nowlin is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 10:24   #114
3/4Flap
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Idaho Nowhere near a McDonald's
Posts: 1,091
I wonder what the slide speed of the little guns is.

SOME lg frame pistols exhibit LESS problems with higher recoiling ammunition of whatever bullet weight. This is at the core of Radian and others' continuous admonition not to use "weak" {sic} ammunition, I think.

thus, even a poorly made extractor MIGHT work fine in a smaller frame pistol. Just a theory.

As to why the larger frame pistols seem to be problematic even with extractors that work in the smaller ones, well, the above explains it; the "bad" extractor needs to be worked on regardless of the fact that it might work well in a dinky-frame pistol. Again, I'm not being dogmatic, just making a suggestion.

Extraction from a semi and full auto gun is a wondrous thing. It is a FAR more complicated process than many assume.

For a time I owned two Stemple 76/45 submachine guns. From time to time one demanded attention to the extractor and then started breaking extractors. a cheap part, I kept fixing it and studying the process of extraction and came to realize this is a "process". and in a liquid-framed pistol {as the Glock appears to be under highspeed photograhpy during the firing cycle} it must be complex indeed!

And then there are those guns that just plain make extraction a non-issue like many Browning A5's. They just WORK.

I remember my father-in-law's old Belgian that fired thousands of rounds of shot on ducks and geese and...did so with one of its extractors missing. i eventually got around to a detail strip and added the extractor where it needed to be...or didn't need to be as the case was.

Yes, gun mechanisms are fascinating.

You Norwegians will know what I mean when I say many of us have "kruttsjuke!"

Yes, it is a disease...
3/4Flap is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 10:25   #115
byf43
NRA Life Member
 
byf43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 13,592
Wow!!!!!!!

GREAT information in this thread!!

I've been reading on other forums about guys ready to throw their Glocks into the trash (well, not literally!) regarding the extraction/ejection issues.
(One guy even repeats over and over again about the 'cover-up' and lack of recall for "E Series" Glocks, etc., etc., etc.)

If anyone is old enough to remember the 'good ole days' of 1911s, the 'pros' would TUNE their extractors or TWEAK their extractors (and ejectors, too!) to make the pistol perform better.

They used to take a new 'virgin' case and insert it into the breech and see how well the extractor held the case to the breechface.
IF the extractor needed 'tuning' or 'tweaking', it was done.
(Yes, they 'torqued' the extractor to give more tension, and honed the underside of the extractor 'lip' to allow the rim to 'slide' past it. Heck! I remember polishing the inside of the extractor, where the rim made contact.)

I'm no 'pro', and I've tweaked and tuned a few 1911 extractors in my time.

Dave Nowlin and 3/4Flap have done their homework!!!
GREAT JOB!!!!!

FWIW, all of my Glocks have performed perfectly (sofar!).
I don't usually pay attention to where my empty/ejected cases are going, since I'm payin' attention to my target/sights, but, I've never had a piece of brass come back at me.
(Luck???? Maybe.)


A little polishing and 'tweaking' is not a bad thing to do, IF you understand what you're doing (and why).
These Glock pistols are mass-produced. They're not custom-built, one-off marvels from Gaston Glock's High Performance gunsmiths.

Again, Dave Nowlin and 3/4Flap . . .
Well done!!!!!
__________________
G21 Gen2; G19 Gen3; G30SF; G23 Gen3; G26 Gen4. GLOCK Certified Armorer

"Live Free. Practice democracy. Make a difference. Love your family and your country." H.N.K. (My Dad) 09/02/1924 - 05/11/2012

Last edited by byf43; 02-23-2012 at 10:29..
byf43 is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 11:01   #116
3/4Flap
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Idaho Nowhere near a McDonald's
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by byf43 View Post
If anyone is old enough to remember the 'good ole days' of 1911s, the 'pros' would TUNE their extractors or TWEAK their extractors (and ejectors, too!) to make the pistol perform better.
Thank you very much.

I like your injection of the 1911. On several other threads I've mentioned the 1911 as an example of a gun that has been modified in myriad ways JUST TO KEEP IT RUNNING!!!

I was a 1911 fan for many years, and used one for stock shooting for years, but good heavens, while the gun is certainly one of the GREATS, it has warts all over it...bred into it.

A can-be short lifeexpectancy of sear notches, loosening of plunger spring assemblies, and YES, EXTRACTOR issues as well.

As I've mentioned before; Guys; look at the opening of the ejection port that occured on almost all 1911's some 30 or so years ago. THAT is a fix one guy on the SIGForum used to fix Glock ejection problems...and it worked!

These darn things are devices and as such they get tied up sometimes, and sometimes companies do stuff that totally mucks up their own product; witness the ups and downs and finally down and outs of the Winchester firm; the post-64 M70 abortion, the switch back to the pre-64 action, then the slide down in QC of all their guns; cheapening processes, eliminating fitting so you could look clean thru the wrist of the 94's and see daylight on the other side!

And rugers, my FAVORITE bolt action rifles inthe M77MKII/Hawkeye series. I rebed, fix the trigger and bevel the ejector edges and slot edges on every single one I buy...or they don't work right!

Guys, SIG's are done. Smith M&P's have warts. Walther PPQ's are perfect, the rage, but just wait a while!

So now we have Herr Gaston Glock rolling over, rubbing his eyes, popping a squat and dropping a deuce in his own bed.

Hey, it happens!

You want a good, functioning gun?

Fix it yourself or sit around and wait for the company to do it...

Or, STOP LIMPWRISTING AND USE BETTER AMMO!!!
3/4Flap is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 11:03   #117
ken grant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: middle ga.
Posts: 1,444
Anyone know where I can get NON-LCI extractors?
Where to get NON-DIP LCI extractors?

I did purchase an extractor for an older pistol without the angle cut to match the slide but have not tried it yet.
Hoping to find some older ones with the angle cut.

Last edited by ken grant; 02-23-2012 at 11:06..
ken grant is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 11:41   #118
diamondd2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by eaglefrq View Post
I have a Gen 4 G19 brass to the head and a Gen 3 G26 with zero problems.

I swapped the extractors and the G26 still had zero issues and the G19 still had some brass to the head. It appears in my case, the extractor is not the issue.

My thinking by switching them the 26 would develop problems and the 19 would be solved, but that didn't happen.
Probably because the slides are actually out of spec. That's why Glock won't talk, way too much money to replace all them slides. So, adjusting your extractor to to fit the slide is the way to go.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
diamondd2 is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 12:21   #119
bentbiker
NRA Member
 
bentbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 4,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusty_dragon View Post
i still have a question:
what exactly do you mean with a dipped and a non-dipped extractor, where should the "dip" be, that differs one from the other and which is older and which newer, and which will work better out of the box?
Best I can do is this one with the dip across the top edge. The old ones had a totally flat top edge. There have been posts saying that brand new guns were again shipping with non-dipped extractors (insinuating that Glock had returned to the old design/process. That is not correct -- at least not all. My new Gen4 G19 with a test-fire date of 1/30/12 still has the dip. However, the tightness exhibited by a previous dipped extractor was absent, I experienced no issues in first 100 rds. As I typed this, it just occurred to me that I need to try the old "tight" dipped extractor in the Gen4 and find out whether the extractor caused the tightness, or whether the slot caused it.
General Glocking


This one from Butch has a circle around the area that is dished out, but you have to have the extractor out of the gun to see/feel that surface:
General Glocking
bentbiker is offline  
Old 02-23-2012, 12:28   #120
voyager4520
-----
 
voyager4520's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SE Colorado
Posts: 8,586
Both of these are newer extractors, one has the dip and the other doesn't. My G27 had a non-dip extractor exactly like the one in the pictures, test-fire Aug '09.

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=216
__________________
G23 G27
voyager4520 is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:23.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 675
164 Members
511 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31