Do I need new springs? Glock 17 mags hold 18 rounds.


PDA






Thunder496
November 27, 2008, 09:00 AM
I bought my wife a used 3rd gen G17 last year, and soon after I noticed that both mags that came with the gun would hold 18rd not the 17rd I thought G17 mags held. We have put about 400 rounds through it with only one malfunction, but I don’t remember if it was a FTF or FTE. Both mags are FML with the flat Glock base plate with 3206. One mag has “9mm3" on the follower. The other has “9mm” with “4" in a different spot on the follower, and is marked “RESTRICTED LE/GOVT ONLY”, and “GLOCK, INC., SMYRNA, GA 9.13.94" on the body. I disassembled both mags and don’t see any problems. I just want to know if anyone else has came across this, and is it a problem like weak springs.

If you enjoyed reading about "Do I need new springs? Glock 17 mags hold 18 rounds." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Z71
November 27, 2008, 09:39 AM
I just checked my newest G17 mag, and it will indeed swallow 18 rounds.

I bought this mag brandnew, so I would presume it's just fine.

I have an older LEO only mag and it will not swallow 18 rounds, just 17. This mag is well used, and would likely have a spent spring if any G17 mag would.

I bet your mags are ok, as my new mag holds 18 too.

I don't know of I would willingly overload the mags myself. I've seen floorplates pop off overloaded high cap pistol mags before, although not a Glock.

shamus
November 27, 2008, 09:40 AM
If you can cram an extra round in the magazine, then it may be time to replace the spring.

It may not be necessary, but getting new springs would be a prudent thing to do.

wanderinwalker
November 27, 2008, 11:47 AM
I have a couple of G-17 mags that will indeed swallow 18. They were police-trade ins, and have worked fine since I got them several years ago. I also have a barely used G-26 mag that will hold 11 rather than the marked 10, and it too works fine.

So long as it works, you're good to go. If you want, pick up a few spare springs and followers, just in case, but you're not likely to need them too soon.

Drail
November 28, 2008, 02:32 PM
Overloading magazines is a very bad idea. You'll have better reliability and longer life if you underload by one round.

regal
November 29, 2008, 12:13 PM
Is it possible to buy and replace a Glock mag spring, or do you have to buy a new mag ?

rcmodel
November 29, 2008, 12:17 PM
Glock mags over-compress the springs badly when loaded to standard capacity. Putting 18 in a 17 round mag would surely spell the death nell in a short time!

If you want them to last a long time, download by at least one round.

Glock springs can be had all over the place.
Wolff, Brownell's, Midway, etc.

rcmodel

Mad Magyar
November 29, 2008, 12:53 PM
Strange, where are all the posters that kinda say, "they last forever". You know, Uncle Joe's WWll in the attic for 60 years and it "doesn't skip a beat"! YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!:)

krs
November 29, 2008, 02:31 PM
Don't you think that Glock deliberately specifies them to be 17 round mags even though eighteen can be loaded in order to insure long spring life, positive reliable feeding, and a lack of the sorts of feed issues suffered by so many other pistols that specify their magazines to hold as many rounds as it's possible to cram into them?


Seems like a smart way to play in the agency procurements competition game.

rcmodel
November 29, 2008, 02:47 PM
I don't know about the 9mm guns, but my .40 mags will just barely hardly hold the specified 13.


that specify their magazines to hold as many rounds as it's possible to cram into them?It's been my experiance over the years that Glock is one of the biggest offenders in that regard!
In fact, they may have started the present trend with the first G-17 of over-stuffing a mag until the spring just can't stand it any more.

There was a very good design reason why 1911 mags only held 7, and Browning HP's only held 13. Old John and others were smart enough for a loaded mag to stay that way forever without harming the spring.

rcmodel

krs
November 29, 2008, 03:59 PM
Just a guess......

my G19 mags will hold the fifteen they're spec'd to hold, but no way natural would get another one in.

Thunder496
November 30, 2008, 05:54 AM
When I load it up to be tucked away in the dresser next to the bed to make sure it is 17+1 instead of 18+1. At the range I probably won’t worry about over loading the mags for a couple of minutes at a time. I’m a little surprised there is not some type of “stop” to keep the mags form being over loaded. Seriously how many of you go to the trouble to count out how many rounds you place in your mag on a regular bases? Personally I have always just kept cramming them In till the next one wouldn’t go. I just happen to realize I was coming up short with the ammo I had left in the box.
Thanks for the input

Companion Cube
November 30, 2008, 07:58 AM
rcmodel,

Would you mind providing a source that shows that the Glock mags are flawed by design?

While I admit to being a Glock KoolAid drinker, I am genuinely interested in whether or not my mags require underloading.

I have read about springs/mags/capacity every time I've had the opportunity on a gun forum(here, GlockTalk, etc.) and I have never heard of problems with Glock mags.

Seven For Sure
November 30, 2008, 10:38 AM
I can get 13 357sig in my 23 mags no problem, 12 .40 rds. fit snug. I could get 13 in but don't feel the need. There are tons of follower generations (my new .40 mags are #8), some allow +/- 1 rd.

trickyasafox
November 30, 2008, 03:48 PM
I'm with Seven For Sure-

Glock has gone through a number of magazine generations and follower generations, I suspect some combinations may allow for slightly more room than others, but all will at least do specified capacity.

I have g17 mags that will do 20 rounds with a plus 2 base plate, so I don't think yours is too far out of line at all. They have worked well for some time now.

rcmodel
November 30, 2008, 04:32 PM
Would you mind providing a source that shows that the Glock mags are flawed by design?I don't know of a source, other then my personal experience with my Model 23 over 12 years.
And about 45 years of gunsmithing all kinds of guns.

Oh!
And the 2004 Glock Annual, published by Harris Publications, for Glock as advertising media. (Free handout at Cabala's)

In it, on page 38, is an article by Chuck Taylor titled Glock 17 Torture Test - After 13 years and 186,000 rounds, it's still perfect!

On page 41 Taylor states:
"100 rounds short of the 5,000th shot, the magazines failed to lock the slide open."

Later on the same page, he said:
"At 11,000 rounds, another new set of magazines gave up."

On page 42 Taylor states:
"In fact, since discovering that loading 15 rounds instead of 17 into the magazines prevented the springs from softening, and I haven't had a single malfunction since."

Then later he said:
"I replaced the magazine springs with a new set of Glock springs early in the test (11,000) and they are all still functioning perfectly after 100,000 rounds."

To me, that indicates over-compression, and a design flaw.
They designed them that way so they could get 1-4 more rounds in the mag then other guns of the time period.

The contempery Browning HP only held 13, the S&W 59 series held 15, but you can leave them loaded till hell freezes over without hurting the springs in the slightest!

PS: Take a gander at this X-Ray picture of a fully loaded Glock magazine and tell me thats good for the spring!
http://www.lasermax.com/

rcmodel

woodfiend
November 30, 2008, 04:57 PM
Seeing that magazine spring crumpled like a bird's nest is asking for trouble. Loading them up Special Forces or SWAT teams could probably afford to buy tons of magazines. Heck, they probably get them for free. Underloading them 1 or 2 rounds would be what I would do.

If you enjoyed reading about "Do I need new springs? Glock 17 mags hold 18 rounds." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!