Will Glock/USA recover from their PR nightmare?


PDA






Zander
January 5, 2003, 02:29 AM
Do you own a Glock?

Are you aware that certain Glocks have a defect that may result in a failure of the pistol, perhaps in the most dire of circumstances?

As of May 2002 [at least], Glock has known that certain Glock pistols have been subject to failure of one or more of the rear frame rails, some of which have resulted in a non-functioning and/or non-repairable condition.

Indeed, some pistols shipped since the date of known failures are still in the inventory of distributors and dealers. Glock's initial reaction was to deal quietly with pistols being used in LE departments and to ignore completely the civilian market. When the magnitude of the problem was "leaked" via the 'net, the reaction of Glock's management was to grudgingly accept phone calls from concerned owners as to the inclusion of certain serial number ranges of affected pistols.

No notification to wholesalers, dealers or current owners/users!

As of this date, no comprehensive list of the affected pistols has been published in any format, much less on-line at their website. The bunker mentality of Glock remains...that owners of their pistols must call the factory to determine if their pistols are among the suspect serial series.

I find this completely unacceptable for a firearms company. What's your opinion?

If you enjoyed reading about "Will Glock/USA recover from their PR nightmare?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
PATH
January 5, 2003, 02:32 AM
Zander,

Do we have confirmation of this information and what is the source? I would like to know all the facts before I venture an opinion on this matter.

PATH

Schuey2002
January 5, 2003, 02:42 AM
Path, go to www.glocktalk.com and you will see what he is referring to.. :)

PATH
January 5, 2003, 02:45 AM
Schuey,

Thanks for the heads up!

PATH

Blackhawk
January 5, 2003, 03:02 AM
Glock wasn't even dented by this screwup. It's target market is bulk buying agencies. They're being taken care of.

Glocks are sold to individual users, but Glock doesn't consider end users as a top priority market.

To bad for individuals with a problem gun who have to take a back seat to some agency with 25,000 of them, a contract, and a passel of lawyers.

However, it's not my job to get in gunfights, and I have other options than a Glock, so I don't NEED a Glock 24/7, a problem one will EVENTUALLY get fixed for free, and it's not going to dissuade me from owning Glocks now or in the future.

I guess I expect mechanical devices to fail, and it's not going to give me heartburn if they do. Maybe it'll get me killed someday, but so will a bunch of other things.

WonderNine
January 5, 2003, 03:27 AM
Impossible! Glocks shoot even at the bottom of the ocean! The reliability of GLocks is supernatural! :D

I don't own any Glocks so come to your own conclusions on the point of my post. :)

11xray
January 5, 2003, 03:45 AM
Friends don't let friends shoot Glocks.

http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/glock/gz-g35-40kb.html

I like my fingers and face just the way they are, thank you very much.

Robert inOregon
January 5, 2003, 04:04 AM
Where's the PR nightmare? They still have over 50,000 units on backorder.

Admiral Thrawn
January 5, 2003, 04:39 AM
Umm.... KaBooms are more likely the result of some stupid action of the firer rather than the weapon itself...

e.g. botched reloading jobs, etc :rolleyes:

Double Maduro
January 5, 2003, 04:45 AM
The reason I don't own a glock is they don't fit my hand.

I have heard of kb's in glock, rugers that throw the mag release lever across the room and problems with every other kind of gun ever made and most of the companies are still in business.

dave
January 5, 2003, 06:02 AM
No.

jimmy
January 5, 2003, 06:13 AM
I have one pistol affected by the frame rail breakage advisory, according to Glock. One of these days I'll ship it to Smyrna for a replacement frame. Meanwhile, I have other Glocks that I can and do carry.

IOW, the problem has not undermined my confidence in Glock pistols in general. I personally wouldn't object to buying another Glock. Before doing so, however, I'd have to be sure it was not one of the guns with a potentially bad frame.

My $0.02.

Tamara
January 5, 2003, 07:23 AM
See the following threads:

1 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2095)

2 (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=567947&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending)

;)

ruger357
January 5, 2003, 07:30 AM
Have a G26 and called Glock, they told me my gun was not affected. A friend of mine was not so lucky. He picked up a brand new G19 only to find out that it is affected.

Col. Mustard
January 5, 2003, 08:00 AM
Do you own a Glock?

Are you a Democrat?

Are you aware that certain Glocks democrats have a defect that may result in a failure of the pistolpolitics, perhaps in the most dire of circumstances?

As of May 2002 [at least], Glock owners democrats have known that certain Glock pistols democratic policies have been subject to failure of one or more of the rear frame rails policies, some of which have resulted in a non-functioning and/or non-repairable condition.

Any similarity between real Glock owners and Democrats is purely coincidental. :D

Tamara
January 5, 2003, 08:02 AM
"Today on Jerry Springer: When Analogies Go Bad!" :rolleyes: :D

Lone_Gunman
January 5, 2003, 08:36 AM
Blackhawk, I dont think I would necessarily agree with your assessment of Glock's market, and I am not sure Glock would either.

The law enforcement market is relatively small, compared to the gun buying public in general, and certainly the mark-up is a lot higher on civilian guns.

I suspect on any given day, more Glocks are sold to civilians than police organizations.

Peetmoss
January 5, 2003, 09:48 AM
Co[ied and pasted from http://www.gssfonline.com/ This is in the hot topics section

"GLOCK Frame Rails - The Real Scoop!

The GLOCK Corporation has identified a problem with a very small percentage of GLOCK pistols produced between September of 2001 and May of 2002. The specific problem that has been identified is the potential of breaking a rear frame rail in pistols manufactured during this time period. Within the specific range the breakage rate has been less than 0.0188%. So, while the actual percentage of rails reported broken is within any accepted manufacturing tolerance, it is not an acceptable situation to the GLOCK Corporation. It is also important to note that under most conditions GLOCK pistols will continue to function with three rails. A routine maintenance check after each time the pistol has been taken out and used would immediately indicate if there is a problem.

We are, therefore, concerned that a limited number of customers will not get the product we have promised them and what we have always delivered, the very best pistol on the market, in short, a GLOCK.

For these reasons, we have made the decision that in the interest of customer service, replacement frames will be offered to anyone who has a firearm in this range and decides to take advantage of this offer. The replacement frames will have identical serial numbers to our customer's original firearm except the numeral 1 will be added as a prefix. If you believe your firearm is within this range, please call 1-866-225-4098 to take advantage of the ultimate in customer service.

Nothing less than the best for our customers is acceptable to GLOCK and, as always, we will continue to work towards Perfection."

Lone_Gunman
January 5, 2003, 09:50 AM
That is pretty much good enough for me.

cratz2
January 5, 2003, 11:40 AM
Around these neck of the woods, they do seem to be much affected. When I was in buying my new Makarov, three people were in front of me, all buying Glocks. G23s are pretty hard to come by as are of the 30 and 36.

Hk Paul
January 5, 2003, 11:42 AM
Will Glock/USA recover from their PR nightmare?
To me this is no big deal.
Glocks are great guns and havnt faild me once.
I havnt herd about them living on the edge of disaster.

Nero Steptoe
January 5, 2003, 12:16 PM
"Friends don't let friends shoot Glocks. "


People who have friends who read and believe Dean Speir have friends with sub-normal I.Q.'s.

Redlg155
January 5, 2003, 12:38 PM
I don't think it hurt Glock very much if at all.

The guys who sit behind the computers and go to places like here and Glock Talk hear about these problems. Compared to the numbers of gunowners out there we are a relative minority.

How is the general public supposed to know unless Glock sends a recall notice or warning to every person who purchased the weapon?

The same thing with vehicles. If you go down to your dealer and ask to see his book on how many advisorys and recalls your vehicle has on it, you would be very surprised. I had this happen with a mass airflow sensor on a Chevy Corsica. It went out after 140,000 miles. Went to the dealer and he told me that part was an affected part, but since I made it past my warrantly period and it didn't die I wouldn't get a new part for free. I know..it's not the same magnitude of a glock failing when you need it. This is just an example.

Good Shooting
RED

Dean Speir
January 5, 2003, 04:05 PM
They are simply too entrenched to not recover, #1, and, #2, their core customer is not the "gun-buying public," but law enforcement agencies which they are handling with "kid gloves." (Even NYPD after almost six [6!] years of the "tastes great/less filling" hassle about the curious Phase Three malfunctions (http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/glock/gz-phase3.html).)

The fact that Glock has now acknowledged to its sales staff that there are 169,782 pistols at risk of the frame slide rail breakage, and that those non-MOS in jurisdictions like, say, the entire state of California, are screwed if they possess one of those pistols, won't cause more than a ripple in the company's remarkable success story.

10-Ring
January 5, 2003, 04:16 PM
Still a sore point w/ me :banghead:

Does Glock care? Nope. Will it affect them negatively? Nope. They've got too many buyers & users an percentage wise, so few complaints:cuss: Will they someday crash and burn :fire: doubt it

megatronrules
January 5, 2003, 04:29 PM
Are my glocks affected? They where made a while ago 1987 for the g17 and 94 or 95 for the g26. Or is thie simply for new guns?

denfoote
January 5, 2003, 04:31 PM
So Dean,
What you are really saying is that Glock should be forced out of business either by special legislation or massive law suits and every one of the ubiquitous examples of their product should be confiscated and destroyed, simply because of a manufacturing screw up???!!!!!

The tenor of your posting, along with other writings of yours, which I have read, leads me inescapably to this conclusion. It is well known that you are, to say the least, not a friend of Glocks. I just want you to make clear what your real philosophical intent here is. I am not prepared, nor do I have the time or patience to engage you in any sort of debate on the merits of the pistol line.

I just want a clear statement, free from Orwellian double speak of what your position is on the subject. Do you think Glock Inc. needs to die????? :evil:

Peetmoss
January 5, 2003, 04:32 PM
It appears that only Glocks manufactured between September of 2001 and May of 2002 are effected by the frame rail problem.

tomkatz
January 5, 2003, 04:51 PM
on glocktalk the lists of affected guns compiled by users of these guns are there for anyone to see, and if you call glock they will tell you if it is an affected serial #, if this is a cover up it is the most pitiful attempt at one I've ever seen. And yes, this has been absolutely beaten to death on TFL....tom

MountainPeak
January 5, 2003, 08:31 PM
I own a G22 and a G20. Both have been reliable, accurate firearms. The only time I was disgusted with them was after reading, as I remember, their 2000 GT annual. They had a big production article bragging about the new program for ballistic finger printing. I wrote 3 seperate letters asking them how it would reduce crime and wouldn't it in effect set up a registration data base? No answer from them, no more Glocks for me! P.S. I never will buy another one because of the lack of response. Two of my three letters were sent certified. They got them, but I guess I didn't warrant a response!

MountainPeak
January 5, 2003, 09:01 PM
It is true the Glocks that were failing were from an E serial numbered lot over a few month period. I have personal knowledge that they corrected the problem for bulk purchasers quickly. I also have knowledge that their original estimated failure rate, due to a rail not rounded properly was B.S.. They first put out an estimate of potential failure at 1 in 10,000-25,000. My first hand info.(that I believe) was 6 out of 450. You do the addition and believe what you want. Originaly their response was if you were not LEO or PRO-security don't worry, wait until it breaks and we will replace it free. A real god damn comfort for someone that is using it to protect themselves and family. They have of course backed off on that crap now. Once again, I am not a Glock hater, but I hate corps. that try and hide when a mistake is made. Thought I would edit to add this. My G22 has close to 8000 rounds through it with ZERO malfunctions. That's right not even a bad primer misfire! Full disclosure on my part, but I still don't like how they mealy mouthed my requests about BFP or tried to make light of their sharp rail problem. I will now shut up!:)

laynlow
January 5, 2003, 09:10 PM
Oh boy, this again. I own two Glocks under the recall. When and if they break Glock will replace the frame. Glock will replace the frame now if I choose, but frankly I am not that excited about the problem. I'm just gonna keep shooting them and enjoying them.

Schuey2002
January 5, 2003, 09:25 PM
As Mal H once said over on TFL,
To paraphrase Indiana Jones: "Glocks! Why does it always have to be Glocks?" :D

Dean Speir
January 5, 2003, 10:17 PM
So Dean,
What you are really saying is that Glock should be forced out of business either by special legislation or massive law suits and every one of the ubiquitous examples of their product should be confiscated and destroyed, simply because of a manufacturing screw up???!!!!!

The tenor of your posting, along with other writings of yours, which I have read, leads me inescapably to this conclusion. It is well known that you are, to say the least, not a friend of Glocks. I just want you to make clear what your real philosophical intent here is. I am not prepared, nor do I have the time or patience to engage you in any sort of debate on the merits of the pistol line. Then may I respectfully suggest that what time you do have, denfoote, be spent on remedial reading instruction. You've made at least two presumptions which are in no way supported by any factual evidence. (Here's a clue (http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/glock/gz-glock-dir.html#hater?) about one of them.)

So start with freeing yourself of your preconceptions and then re-reading what I actually wrote. I traded my manners for a handgun!!! So we see… but not your contentiousness. :p

denfoote
January 6, 2003, 12:29 AM
Like I said, Dean, I have neither the time nor the inclination to engage in your Orwellian semantics games. I asked you a simple question, which was "Do you think that Glock Inc. should die??" A simple yes or no answer was what I was looking for!!! You have at least answered it in part by your muddled non answer. I have no more time to spend on you. :banghead:

Dean Speir
January 6, 2003, 12:41 AM
…it's a wise man who realizes when he's been called on his B.S., takes his lumps and scurries away.

:p

mjustice
January 6, 2003, 01:06 AM
Glock will recover, but it's because they don't rely on civilian sales to pay the bills. The LEO market continues to be the "breadwinner" for this company.

As long as they continue to fix what they break, they'll never go out of business.

MJ

duncan
January 6, 2003, 01:48 AM
I appears as if some of us do not own Glocks or visit another fine forum called GlockTalk.

There are published lists of the affected serial numbers over there. One call to the factory and you can send it in for a replacement. May take a couple of weeks but they are honoring their word.law enforcement agencies are getting their frames replaced first for obvious reasons.

Couple of upset people. True. Glock Inc. is not perfect. never seen any company that was. But they are keeping their word and their warranties.

Those with only one CCW gun, their Glock. But as with most shooters, come on, who doesn't have several. Or a couple of safes full? No problems.

Glock has an unwritten practice to treating people well. Several guys over at GlockTalk blew up their Glocks trying to hotrod some handloads. Glock replaced their guns at cost. Talk about some happy guys. They live in the real world and want to keep folks happy.

I can tell you of many other people who Glock has treated very very well.

I bought a 10mm Glock 20 used about 6 years old. Was getting 4 inch groups at 15 yards compared to my normal 2 inch groups at 25 yards offhand. Glock had upgraded the barrel to the 10mm Glocks a couple of years after my Glock was manufactured. They sent me a brand new factory barrel in exchange for my old barrel - free. Now I have great accuracy and all I had to do was spend $4 to send them the old barrel. Not very many gun manufacturers would do that.

Another time I bought a Glock 17 police trade in and it had an old extractor on it. I called and they sent me a brand new extractor - free. It's how they do business that develops that loyalty you see in Glocksters;)

So no PR problem. People just waiting.

duncan
January 6, 2003, 02:00 AM
For my knothole, the law enforcement market is only perhaps 20 percent of Glock USA's overall business.

In the half dozen gunshops I frequent, they guys are selling 100 plus Glocks a month, every year. That adds up some serious numbers and considering civilians tend to own two and three Glocks, it starts to exponentially surpass law enforcment sales. Especially when you consider most agenices only buy 50-100 guns every six years. How many guns have you bought and sold and traded in six years - as a civilian?

And considering the Glock 36 which was designed for the civilian CCW market, I think Glock's real cash cow is the civilian market. Cops get a healthy $100 kncoked off of each Glock they buy at a minimum.

So I think some of the analysis may not be accurate here . . .

RoyRapoport
January 6, 2003, 05:32 AM
Glock will, quite easily, recover from this PR fiasco. How do I know?

How about this: I have a friend who is, pretty much, one of the most politicized people I know. He HATES giving money to companies he thinks screw the consumer. He was recently in the market for a new handgun and decided to go for the G22 because of a whole bunch of features the G22 had that most other makers' guns did not have (caliber interchange capability, significant parts overlap with my two G17s, etc). Of course, we did call Glock from the gun store to verify the serial number.

I wanted to get one more gun before CA's new 1/1/2003 laws. When I researched the options I had, I found that basically there was something wrong with almost all companies:
Glock: This non-recall recall fiasco;
Kahr: Poor customer service and machining marks on their fairly expensive guns;
S&W: Good guns and customer service but really, I'd rather not give my money to people who stab me in the back;
Kimber: Great customer service which you'll need because they use crappy MIM parts and I saw way too many people posting "so my safety snapped off the other day" sorts of posts.

In the end, I've chosen to be somewhat philosophical about this recall issue -- I don't see Kimber recalling their guns because they know their small parts have a tendency to occasionally snap. The thing that really burns me is the fact that Glock's service ends up altering your SN which means you have to go through a new registration cycle in CA.

But unfortunately, I think that most of the big gun companies are not all that great to give money to. I ended up going with a Kahr, but justified it to myself by paying $200 less than retail and purchasing it used -- so the money wasn't going to Kahr.

-roy

mjustice
January 6, 2003, 12:27 PM
For my knothole, the law enforcement market is only perhaps 20 percent of Glock USA's overall business.

duncan, can you provide some backup to this statement? I've always been under the impression that the exact opposite is true.

MJ

J.Bourne
January 6, 2003, 03:53 PM
Hey Dean, where did you get those statistics you cited?

I'm always curious where you get your statistics, as you never really seem to cite the sources...

Zander
January 6, 2003, 04:10 PM
May take a couple of weeks... Haven't heard of any non-LEO civilian getting that sort of turnaround time. Lately, Glock has been saying months, not weeks.

Let me see if I can rephrase the question.

Let's presume you have a Glock to sell. You know that it is on the "recall" list. Do you tell any potential customer?

Are you honest enough to tell anyone who might purchase your pistol that it is at risk of failure, no matter how slight the possibility? Or do you just sell it, knowing that the customer is "bound" by caveat emptor?

Inquiring minds want to know...

RoyRapoport
January 6, 2003, 04:23 PM
I, for one, would be extremely explicit about the recall situation. I still think of this community as a group of people I'd hate to see screwed.

-roy

Betty
January 6, 2003, 04:35 PM
Let's presume you have a Glock to sell. You know that it is on the "recall" list. Do you tell any potential customer? Are you honest enough to tell anyone who might purchase your pistol that it is at risk of failure, no matter how slight the possibility? Or do you just sell it, knowing that the customer is "bound" by caveat emptor?

In a private sale, I would feel the seller should be morally responsible enough to tell the buyer - "do onto others". But of course, private sales are "caveat emptor".

In a retail sale, the retailer should tell the buyer, or return the product back to the manufacturer for repair or replacement. I don't know the law on this matter, but retailers should not sell products that are known to be defective. Dad's had a few recalls on items ranging from space heaters to other hardware items in his hardware store, and tries to track down the customers who have bought these items, or post a notice in the newspaper on on the front door.

Tamara
January 6, 2003, 04:41 PM
Were I still behind a counter, you'd better believe I'd've called Glock and checked the serial # on every gun in the case.

If the boss didn't like it, I'd bail. I don't participate in unethical business. :eek:

sm
January 6, 2003, 04:44 PM
I must have also attended the same school of ethics and ideas as Runt and her dad. If I tell the truth, I ain't got to remember a lie.

SkySlash
January 6, 2003, 04:51 PM
I've got 1000+ rounds from various manufacturers of various grain JHP, both +P and +P+, and 5000+ rounds from various manufacturers of various grain FMJ 9mm through my Glock 26, and I have never had a FTF, Mis-feed, or jam of any kind.

I've had those problems with other guns, including Glocks, and I sold them. If I find a gun as reliable as my G26, I keep it and carry it, if not, I sell it and never look back.

I'll never carry a gun I don't trust implicitly, and I'll never keep a gun I won't carry.

I don't care who makes it. If a gun fires 1000+ rounds of my flavor without a hiccup, and I like the way it handles, then I trust it, and the manufacturer or their problems with their other guns is irrelevant to me.

-SS

If you enjoyed reading about "Will Glock/USA recover from their PR nightmare?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!