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 03-02-2012, 13:37   #151
M&P15T
Beard One
 
M&P15T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken grant View Post
Another way is to re-work the hook on the extractor itself but I don't think anyone will try that.
Reading this thread, gently stoning the hook is what was done by Dave, if I read it correctly.

Question? Do your extractors fall right out of your slides, or do they require force to come out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ak103k View Post
If what youre saying is right, and the extractor and/or slide were that far out of spec, then the outer edge of the extractor would not be flush with the slide when the case wasnt present.

All my Glocks extractors (with LCI) sit flush when the case isnt present, including the ones that seem to have an issue (with my reloads). Put a case under the extractor, and the LCI sticks out, because the case lifts it off its resting point on the slide.
It's impossible for me to determine if stoning the contact point actually helps, but worst case scenario is it makes no difference. It could be that stoning that contact point works in some way that's not entirely obvious.


It could also be, that stoning that contact point in some way allows the extractor's gripping point to actually be closer to the breech face, and in that way helping to hold the spent casing longer/tighter for better ejection. I'll take my GEN3 G17C apart later this evening to take a closer look, as it's been hitting me in the head with cases the last few times I've shot. FYI my G17C is at least 3-4 years old.
__________________
Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (519 BC 430 BC) Power should only be given to those that want it least.

Last edited by M&P15T; 03-02-2012 at 13:39..
M&P15T is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 13:47   #152
ballr4lyf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 412
Quote:
Originally Posted by M&P15T View Post
Dude, seriously....this stuff is beyond easy. If you screw it up, a new extractor is like $5.
Easy or not was not the question... It is beyond my comfort level.

Writing a C++ program to determine the sum of all prime numbers under 2 billion is easy, but I am pretty sure that it is outside most people's comfort level.

I am not a gunsmith, nor a "garage gunsmith", nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

EDIT: Let me put it this way, I have detail stripped my glock and have held the extractor in my hand... I know that I cannot work to the level of detail required to get this done properly--my hands just aren't that steady.

Last edited by ballr4lyf; 03-02-2012 at 13:50..
ballr4lyf is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 13:48   #153
ken grant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: middle ga.
Posts: 1,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by M&P15T View Post
Reading this thread, gently stoning the hook is what was done by Dave, if I read it correctly.

I don't think gently stoning will work. I was thinking about a major re-work to have more contact area.

Question? Do your extractors fall right out of your slides, or do they require force to come out?

Yep, they fall right out



It's impossible for me to determine if stoning the contact point actually helps, but worst case scenario is it makes no difference. It could be that stoning that contact point works in some way that's not entirely obvious.


It could also be, that stoning that contact point in some way allows the extractor's gripping point to actually be closer to the breech face, and in that way helping to hold the spent casing longer/tighter for better ejection. I'll take my GEN3 G17C apart later this evening to take a closer look, as it's been hitting me in the head with cases the last few times I've shot. FYI my G17C is at least 3-4 years old.
Stoning the contact point will let the extractor move closer to the C/L of the breech face but with a case in place even with the barrel dropped to it's lowest point, the case still keeps the contact points from touching at all.

Last edited by ken grant; 03-02-2012 at 13:50..
ken grant is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 13:52   #154
ak103k
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA- In the shadow of the Shade
Posts: 705
Obviously, this fix seems to be helping some, I just havent seen any real difference with the couple of extractors Ive tried it with mine.

Im still seeing the problem with my reloads, and still so far, none at all with factory. That still leads me to believe it might be the brass issue, but who knows. Now if I was having the problem with factory, Id probably have a different opinion.

Ill keep watching this and the other threads with interest, and keep fiddling. Hey, I wonder what would happen if I just left it out all together. Think it would work like a P7?
ak103k is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 14:33   #155
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
@ken grant:

1.
what part exactly is thicker with the older non-LCI extractor? what do you mean with "thicker head"

2.
you mean to cut of a little bit of the plastic tail of the non-LCI spring loaded bearing to give the spring more way to get compressed, instead of the extractor depressor plunger hitting the tail of the spring loaded bearing when it has still a long tail, right?
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 14:56   #156
ken grant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: middle ga.
Posts: 1,239
#1---- The spring loaded bearing head is thicker on the ones for the non-LCI,s
Two different bearings for LCI's & non-LCI's

#2--- It was just an idea on my part. Have not tried it yet.
I did take a look at it and decided that the bearing for the LCI ext. would not push into the recess to let a thicker head fit.
I believe the bearing bottoms out on the plunger.

I will try a non-LCI bearing( thickerhead) that I have on hand to see if it will increase spring pressure on the extractor. I am sure it will bottom out so I will cut just a little off the tail.
ken grant is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 15:29   #157
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
thanks for the explanation, ken. still some questions:

#1
with "thicker" you mean the diameter of the plastic bearing is larger, or that it is longer than the LCI bearing?

if wider in diameter:
is the channel in the slide for the thicker non-LCI bearing also wider in diameter? otherwise a bearing with larger diameter (thicker) won't fit the channel of the plunger, spring etc., right?

#2
can the non-LCI and also the LCI extractor be used with the same bearing, spring and plunger vice versa, although diffferent (thicker) bearings exist?

#3
are the plunger and the spring the same with LCI and non-LCI extractor and just the bearing is different, or are the plunger and spring also different?
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 15:42   #158
ken grant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: middle ga.
Posts: 1,239
#1-----longer
#2----- not according to Glock. different bearings for each.
#3----- Same plunger and spring, different bearings
ken grant is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 16:04   #159
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
roger that, thanks a lot, buddy

can you figure out what sense the older, longer bearing will make with the same spring and plunger used on both versions?
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 16:24   #160
ken grant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: middle ga.
Posts: 1,239
I figured the thicker(longer) head would put just a little more spring pressure on the plunger which would lead to more pressure on the extractor to engage the empty case.

As the bearing with the thinner head will not depress enough in the slide to accept a thicker head, I think the bearing bottoms out on the plunger.
As I think the thicker head bearing will do the same, I would take a little off the tail of the bearing.

As i have not tried this, I am only guessing but it does make sense to my eyes.
ken grant is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 16:31   #161
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
right, sounds the same to me, just let me /us know, when you tried it out and what happened
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 17:03   #162
Ruze789
Registered User
 
Ruze789's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1
Thanks to all who have shared info in this thread. I have a new Gen3 G17 with a whole lotta erratic ejections so I'll be doing some extractor polishing this weekend to start. If that doesn't help I'll be calling Glock to see if I can get the newer ejector to replace the 336 that's in mine.
Ruze789 is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 17:16   #163
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
when i had the problems with my gen.3 G17 years ago, there was no 4th gen. and so no new ejector available, the 336 was the newest one, so there was no help from another different 9mm ejector.

i fixed the prob by using the ejector of the .40S&W that was current at that point of time and also by using the older non-LCI extractor.

the use of the .40S&W ejector was a great improvement, it hits the brass more to the right and gives it a different twist/angle while extracted/ejected, but this alone didn't solve the prob 100%, but in combination with the older non-LCI extractor, my brass-to-the-head-problem was solved 100%.

i also own a gen.3 G19 with the LCI extractor and the 336 ejector and with that G19 i never had any brass-to-head-issues. weird and funny.

btw:
does anyone know if i'd use a gen.4 "." dot connector in a gen. 3 G19 with gen. 3 trigger bar (like it is supposed to be), will it have a lighter or a heavier trigger pull, compared to a "-" minus connector in a gen. 3 G19 with gen. 3 trigger bar?
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-02-2012, 17:57   #164
Glockpotion23
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamonjj View Post
details?
Man, just reading what you have..nice arsenal
Glockpotion23 is offline  
Old 03-03-2012, 01:38   #165
sigpro-fessor
5 Times A Day
 
sigpro-fessor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio. The danger Zone.
Posts: 2,369
waiting on the Apex extractors...
__________________
bL0gG3r...
sigpro-fessor is offline  
Old 03-03-2012, 06:58   #166
M&P15T
Beard One
 
M&P15T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,122
I went home last night and detail stripped my slide. My extractor is tight in the slide (I had to pry it out), and has wear marks at certain contact points. The last time I shot, a few cases smacked me in the face, so I'm going to do some stoning/polishing and see if it helps.
__________________
Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (519 BC 430 BC) Power should only be given to those that want it least.
M&P15T is offline  
Old 03-03-2012, 07:11   #167
ak103k
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PA- In the shadow of the Shade
Posts: 705
Just curious, but was the extractor and cut also loaded with crud when you got it out?

I noticed on mine that Ive removed, there was a lot of junk in the cut and around the extractor, even though I try to blast it out now and then while cleaning with air and/or Gun Scrubber.

I wonder if that doenst also contribute to the problem, especially if the fit is tight to start with.
ak103k is offline  
Old 03-03-2012, 07:15   #168
M&P15T
Beard One
 
M&P15T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by ak103k View Post
Just curious, but was the extractor and cut also loaded with crud when you got it out?

I noticed on mine that Ive removed, there was a lot of junk in the cut and around the extractor, even though I try to blast it out now and then while cleaning with air and/or Gun Scrubber.

I wonder if that doenst also contribute to the problem, especially if the fit is tight to start with.
No, I detail strip my slide quite often, cleaning that area thoroughly. But I would think you are on the right track.....an already tight fit, coupled with debris getting into that area over time, relates to extraction/ejection issues that seem to develop over time, which is what most people report.
__________________
Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (519 BC 430 BC) Power should only be given to those that want it least.
M&P15T is offline  
Old 03-04-2012, 06:27   #169
Arc Angel
Deus Vult!
 
Arc Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 10,956
Blog Entries: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusty_dragon View Post
....... i also own a gen.3 G19 with the LCI extractor and the 336 ejector and with that G19 i never had any brass-to-head-issues. weird and funny.

btw:
does anyone know if i'd use a gen.4 "." dot connector in a gen. 3 G19 with gen. 3 trigger bar (like it is supposed to be), will it have a lighter or a heavier trigger pull, compared to a "-" minus connector in a gen. 3 G19 with gen. 3 trigger bar?
Me, too! From what I've been reading about 3rd gen. pistols there is a slight reduction in trigger pull weight with the, '.' connector over the factory standard, '-' connector.

(Don't own one; so I can't say from personal experience. The, '-' connectors I'm using, now, are certainly good enough that I feel no need to run right out and try something different, though.)
Arc Angel is offline  
Old 03-04-2012, 06:33   #170
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
okay, so it is possible to use a gen. 4 "." dot connector in a gen.3 G17 or gen.3 G19 and it should assumingly reduce the weight of pull even a little bit more than the "-" minus gen.3 connector, right?
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-04-2012, 06:54   #171
Arc Angel
Deus Vult!
 
Arc Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 10,956
Blog Entries: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusty_dragon View Post
okay, so it is possible to use a gen. 4 "." dot connector in a gen.3 G17 or gen.3 G19 and it should assumingly reduce the weight of pull even a little bit more than the "-" minus gen.3 connector, right?
Well, I see we're both on the internet at the same time!

This is what I've been reading; but, like I said, I have no personal experience with it. I'll tell you a little secret, though: Whenever I'm really stuck on a question like this I'll call one of the large aftermarket Glock parts suppliers, and speak to their tech support people.

Why? Because, too often, you can't trust the internet to give you the right answer; and, when dealing with Smyrna, you just never really know.
Arc Angel is offline  
Old 03-04-2012, 07:10   #172
dusty_dragon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 645
yes, seems we have to much spare time, hah

what you said about the aftermarket part retailers and glock itself is absolutely correct, i often encountered the fact, that the people in the factory (no matter where or what) have much less clue and idea of their product, than the real "freaks" (in a very positive sense) in the aftermarket zone or the user zone
dusty_dragon is offline  
Old 03-04-2012, 15:21   #173
lawboy
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 81
Take this for what it's worth:

As stated earlier, my Gen 3 G19 has never malfunctioned, but does spit brass to the face on occasion. The extractor that came with the gun is the LCI with the dip, with a "2" on the post. I ordered a new extractor, still an LCI with the dip, but this one has a "3" printed on the post. I tried the new extractor with 100 rounds of WWB, and while there were still no malfunctions, the brass to the face continued. The old extractor would drop free when doing a detail strip, while the new one had to be shaken out.

I took an Arkansas stone and some oil and rubbed the flat sides of the new extractor lightly in circular motions on both sides. This took some of the black off of the part but not much. After finishing, the sides of the extractor were very smooth, and it would drop freely from the silde with no effort.

After 100 more rounds of WWB today, every round ejected to the right and slightly back (3:30 - 4:00) in, dare I say it, a neat little pile.

I'm not sure what the difference between the "2" and "3" on the extractors mean, or if that has anything to do with it, but I'm happy.
lawboy is offline  
Old 03-04-2012, 16:16   #174
Arc Angel
Deus Vult!
 
Arc Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 10,956
Blog Entries: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawboy View Post
....... I'm not sure what the difference between the "2" and "3" on the extractors mean, or if that has anything to do with it, but I'm happy.
My Gen3 G-19 came with a molded #2 extractor, as well. Serendipitously (That's actually a word!) I polished my #2 extractor before I fired the pistol. It was sticking; but, after polishing, it began to fall free.

I've already got an investment cast LWD extractor for a backup; but, at the same time, I've decided to continue using the original #2 extractor. So far I've been through, about, 3,000 rounds with absolutely no complaints.
Arc Angel is offline  
Old 03-05-2012, 19:36   #175
voyager4520
-----
 
voyager4520's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SE Colorado
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by dusty_dragon View Post
okay, so it is possible to use a gen. 4 "." dot connector in a gen.3 G17 or gen.3 G19 and it should assumingly reduce the weight of pull even a little bit more than the "-" minus gen.3 connector, right?
In a Gen3, the - connector gives about a 4.5lbs pull, the dot connector gives about a 5lbs pull, and the standard connector gives about 5.5lbs. In a Gen4, the - connector is just under 5lbs, the dot connector is about 5.5lbs, the regular connector is nearly 6lbs.

The dot connector is "in between" the minus and standard connectors.
__________________
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 13:31.



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


Users Currently Online: 1,208
354 Members
854 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42