[jc2]

It sounds like Glock has stopped manufacturing/supplying parts for pre-ban high capacity magazines.
from Glockmeister's website
We are sorry to inform you that Glock has started using only the new style #4 followers on all 9mm mags. The Old style #1 and #3 are NO LONGER AVAILABLE.

ALL 9mm FOLLOWERS ORDERED HERE ARE THE #4 NEW STYLE FOLLOWERS ONLY AND WILL NOT FIT THE OLD MAGAZINES!!

DO NOT ORDER IF YOU HAVE MAGS OLDER THAN JANUARY OF 2002!
What this means is that if you need to replace the plastic follower of your high dollar, pre-ban high capacity magazine, you are SOL thanks to Glock, Inc.! I've never really worried about buying used Glock hi-caps in the past because I could always order a rebuild kit from Glockmeister--not anymore.

What has happened to Glock's customer service and support for their customer base?

[BamBam]

Guess it's time to pick up some ten-rounders for plinking and save the hi-caps for carry.

Buying used hi-caps on the 'net might be like throwing $75 down the drain now.

[JohnKSa]

Hi jc,

What Glock are you buying used magazines for these days?

Good shooting,

John

[ThePerfectOne]

in Belgium you can get high capacity mags for $ 12 :neener:
but you can't buy the ten-rounders :D , 'cause we do not have that :banghead: law on high cap mags!

[T.Stahl]

They can't stop making parts for high-cap magazine when they are still selling them in other parts of the world, can they?
Or how am I here in Europe supposed to repair my mags once they wear out?

[jc2]

They can't stop making parts for high-cap magazine when they are still selling them in other parts of the world, can they?
Or how am I here in Europe supposed to repair my mags once they wear out?
They changed the design of the high capacity magazines in January 2002 and are no longer manufacturing parts for the older magazines. When your old magazines wear out in Europe, you will have to buy new magazines. Those of us who live in the USA are just SOL. Thanks Gaston.

[JimC]

Just another example of Glock Perfection and not caring for the consumer as they used to. :cuss:

Glock has "dropped the ball" once again.

This is right up there with the frame debacle. :fire:

Kind of gives all you Glock sheeple a warm and fuzzy feeling for the kind folks down in Smyrna, doesn't it? :rolleyes:

[craigz]

Hey I've got some of the old followers in my parts box. Anybody here want to buy them...for $75 each. :)

[kalibear45]

in Belgium you can get high capacity mags for $ 12

Dam you! :D

[Sven]

Correct me if I'm wrong: send in your NFML full capacity magazines to Glock in GA, and they will rebuild them with new springs and followers.

What is the problem here?

[Dan Shapiro]

I wouldn't worry. If there is a big enough demand, and there will be, someone will make them until it beomes illegal to do so.

[JimC]

What is the problem here?

The problem could be that Glock will no longer make the #3 or the previous standard capacity followers as replacement parts for worn or damaged ones for mags sent to them.

They have already saids that they have very few hi-cap tubes left for some calibers and none for others.

Kind of like hi-cap mag control on Glocks part. :fire:

[jc2]

Correct me if I'm wrong: send in your NFML full capacity magazines to Glock in GA, and they will rebuild them with new springs and followers.
Not if they were made before 2002 (i. e., all "pre-ban"). If the follower is shot (and it happens), you're SOL as far as Glock is concerned.

[ajacobs]

will the number 4 followers fit pre 2002 low caps. In other words should I take the followers out of my low caps, save them for my high caps and order new ones for my low caps? Does this make sence to anyone?

[Nero Steptoe]

Nothng like the dissemination of bad information to get people stirred up! A bunch of hand-wringers have concluded, based only on a report that Glockmeister doesn't sell 9mm1 or 9mm3 Glock followers anymore that pre-ban 9mm Glock mags are obsolete. 9mm4 followers can be modified to fit pre-ban Glock 9mm mags. I'm sure that the nature of the modification will be public pretty soon so that we owners of 9mm Glock pre-bans can do the work ourselves.

Obviously, the problem only involves 9mm Glock mag. Of course, none of the other pre-ban Glock mags are affected.

[JohnKSa]

jc,

What kind of used Glock magazines are you buying?

[9x19]

jc,

Such a credible source for all things Glock. :rolleyes:

I'm sure that she conferred directly with both Gaston and Robert so as to present only factual accurate data.

Now where is that dang tooth fairy with my money?

[sonoranjack]

I bought my second gen Glock 17 back in 92. In 10 years all I've had to replace is the mag springs. I have 2-17rd mags & 3-19 rd mags. Since these are the only mags for this pistol I've ever had. I use them regularly on he range. I'm not worried about the followers breaking & needing to be replaced.

[Kahr carrier]

:what:

[Blueduck]

9mm4 followers can be modified to fit pre-ban Glock 9mm mags. I'm sure that the nature of the modification will be public pretty soon so that we owners of 9mm Glock pre-bans can do the work ourselves.

As I'm sitting at my kitchen table with file,dremel and punch in hand I'll be thinking- "Glock Perfection" :rolleyes:

[Michigun]

Who here has worn out a GLOCK follower?

[JimC]

The term "worn out" may not be the correct term here.

While I was an LE Armorer, I encountered Glocks while on the range that failed to lock the slide back on the last round fired.

After operator error was eliminated, simply replacing the old follower with a new one and possibly, at times, replacing the mag spring along with it but not always necessary, the problem was solved and the pistol was 100%.

I have seen Glock company Armorer's at GSSF matches routinely swap out mag followers to resolve problems that the owners report and most of the time, the problem goes away.

"Worn out"?

Maybe not but, the cause of a malfunctioning magazine? I think so, at times. ;)

If the older followers are not available, how will these problems be corrected in the older mags?

I know for a fact that there are LE agencies out there with generation one followers in G19 pre-ban standard capacity magazines. How does Glock plan to replace these when needed?

By replacing the whole mag with an LE/Govt. Restricted one? :eek:

Good way to get pre-ban mags out of circulation. :fire:

[Michigun]

I see your point JimC & have to give you credit for catching that one… I knew the augment against my own “post” while writing it.

However, GLOCK has said that if a 9mm3 follower were the fix for a particular gun, that particular gun wouldn’t go without one. Take that how you will, but that tells me that GLOCK still has them around & will.

By the way, my G19 suffered from the very problem that you were writing about. The 9mm3 fixed that for me.

[JimC]

:D ;) :D

[556A2]

I guess I'll have to "settle" for Browning Hi-Power for my next regular Wundernine buy, o'well no Glock 17 for me :D

[jc2]

I'm with JimC. It seems like replacing followers solve a lot of problems. I routinely replace them--usually once a year--and certainly every time I bought a used magazine (at least when I could still get rebuild kits from Glockmeister). I'm kind of fanatic about maintaining tools on which my life may depend. Speaking about being fanatic about properly maintaining tools on which my life depends, I'm another one who doubts the wisdom of having to set down at "my kitchen table with file,dremel and punch in hand" to try to make something work that was not intended to work.

The bottom line is Glock, Inc. has left owners of pre-ban hi-caps "high and dry." While it is true that only 9x19 magazines are affected now now, the word is (on Glock Talk at least) that the .40 S&W (and probably 357 Sig) magazines are next since the purpose of the change seems to be cost cutting the manufacture of the magazine rather than any improvement in functioning (even though the end result will be eventually to render pre-ban magazines useless).

[Nero Steptoe]

Which one of you guys has actually sent a 9mm Glock pre-ban mag to Glock/Smyrna for repair, only to have Glock/Smyrna tell you that it can't be repaired due to their not having 9mm3 followers??


I didn't think so.

[jc2]

Nero -

Why would you want to ship a magazine to Smyrna and back to replace a follower? That's definitely operator maintenance (at least, for me, it is).

Why would anybody even want a weapon that you had to ship the magazines to the manufacturer for something as basic as replacing a magazine follower?

[Schuey2002]

Time for Wolff to step up and start cranking out more Glock stuff.:D

[JohnKSa]

jc,

What Glock do you own?

(Is this a hard question???)

[4v50 Gary]

I'm boycotting 9mm Glocks. Besides, I've got plenty of mags for my M21. :D

We've got to let the sun set on the '94 ban. Give us back our evil black guns so we can get into bayonet fights. :rolleyes: There is a good valid economic reason why we should have magazines with greater capacity than 10 rounds. We'll spray & pray more (I'm sure the Lord will be pleased but he may have to put you on hold), shoot more ammo (makes Winchester, Federal, Cor-Bon, etc. happier) and leave the range faster so someone else can do the same. The economic benefit? Faster turnaround at the range. Higher range attendance. Oh, the ammo thing? Well, we would have shot that stuff anyway.

[Tom B]

I am not a patent attorney but if the recorded owner of a patent stops making the part cannot someone else then procure patent rights? I am a 9mm Glock owner/lover but this company is begining to piss me off! With the improving quality (and increased round capacity) of revolvers from the major players these days I have turned my interest from Glocks more and more anyway. Glock should remember that high capacity 9mms were their bread and butter. You take the "high" from capacity and this leaves a void. :cuss:

[JohnKSa]

Before everyone gets all spun up, it might be worth while to contact Glock and see what they have to say about this.

After all, the internet isn't always the best source for determining company policy, and it's just possible that the person who started this post might be more interested in negative publicity for Glock than he is in informing the general public.

No accusations--just a word to the wise.

BTW, jc, you never did tell us what kind of Glock you own.

[jc2]

My information was from Glockmeister (which I consider a credible source--having done business with them for many years). I posted a direct quote from their website and provided a cite. Make of it what you will.

FWIW, there are two or three other active threads on Glock Talk and one on Pistolsmith (in none of which I have participated) if you are really worried about a one man campaign to besmirch Glock, Inc. The other threads include reports of contact with Smyrna on the subject--the reports are not we're clear saying both that they will take care of the pre-ban hi-caps, but that they don't have the followers (and none in the pipeline) with which to do it.

If I do have an ulterior motive, it is the hope that Glock, Inc. "gets the word" and does something about it.

[JohnKSa]

if you are really worried about a one man campaign to besmirch Glock, Inc.
Your words chief, I just posted a caution not to get to freaked out over something posted on the internet when they can find out the whole story by talking directly to Glock.

BTW, aren't you the guy who claims that if it's not written down on paper somewhere it didn't happen?

If you really believe that's true, then shouldn't I be asking you for the name of the publication that you read this information in?

You still haven't told us what kind of Glock you have.

[jc2]

it's just possible that the person who started this post might be more interested in negative publicity for Glock than he is in informing the general public.
Your words chief!

BTW, I told you my "agenda:"
it is the hope that Glock, Inc. "gets the word" and does something about it.

[JohnKSa]

it is the hope that Glock, Inc. "gets the word" and does something about it.
Give them a call. I'm sure they'd love to hear from you.

(770) 432-1202

Let us know what they say--unless you're not really interested in actually trying to solve this "problem".

BTW, what kind of Glock do you own?

John

[Blueduck]

As the guy who posted at pistolsmith It's obviously at least a 2 man campaign ;). My secret "Agenda" is that I want 6 9mm-3 followers (three for the used mags I've bought recently and three for spares) and I'm ticked because I can't find anywhere to buy them. Drats! my devious plan is clear to all:( Kinda like the Kennedy assasination or the Roswell area 51 deal huh? I suspect jc2's "ulterior motive" is just as twisted and devious as my own:scrutiny:

Reason I don't send $150 worth of mags to Glock is the fact that there is no reason I should be without my mags for a month (the amount of time it took last time I sent some pre-bans in) and the fact that they have been known to "lose" them.

Of course if John is willing to send me 6 9mm-3 followers for $12 I'll be happy to shut up and just make fun of the people who were not smart enough to buy them when they had the chance:D

[TJC]

Apparently Glock Inc. Service people are not really happy about this either. The fix that they have or will have shortly for the lack of #3 followers will be to file the little tab like shelf in the mag tube off to allow the #4 followers to work. There is also some minor fitting of the follower that may/may not be needed for it to work. It means more work for them when they receive a mag for repair.

Question arises, what happens when they decide to change from the #4 followers? You have already altered your mag tube for the new #4's to work and now they bring out the #5. Will it work in the old tubes or not. We'll have to wait and see I guess.

[JimC]

You're all missing the point here. Glock has a plan in mind. It's all in conjunction with... "Glock Perfection" :confused:

[Nero Steptoe]

As I said, nothing like the spreading of incorrect information by the brilliantly ignorant! :) Check this cut-n-paste out from Glocktalk!

"I know several of us have had problems with our 9mm full cap mags and needing the 9mm3 followers. I called glock on 1-22-03 and asked how I go about ordering 20 for my mags. The customer service guys told me to fax in an order "...advised place a part order using part number - SP01812 and specify 9mm3 followers. Cost: $1.00 each"
I faxed in an order to (770) 433-8719 on the same day with my credit card number and return address info. Yesterday I recieved 20 brand new 9mm3 followers"

[BamBam-31]

jc2, as in Juliet Charlie 2? Nahh....

[jc2]

Check this cut-n-paste out from Glocktalk!
I just received my order of 9mm magazine followers from Glock. I requested the "9mm3" followers a month ago, but today I received a package with "9mm4" followers (part #SP01812). I called Dan in Glock's technical service and he said they are all out of the #3 followers and the #4 is the current production follower. He said the newer #4 followers were designed for current production hi-capacity, law enforcement magazines.
Sounds to me like the "the spreading of incorrect information by the brilliantly ignorant" is starting at Smyrna--(or else Nero just OD'd on Kool-aide:p).

All kidding aside, the primary source of my information was Glockmeister--a large Glock dealer with whom I have dealt for years, and whom I trust. The majority of the posts on Glocktalk (including numerous posters who have had contact with Smyrna) indicates there is (or was) a problem with followers (9mm3) for pre-ban standard capacity magazines.

Maybe, there was not problem, and Glock just screwed up . . . or maybe Glock screwed up and then realized that it had problem. I don't know and really don't care, but I do hope Nero is right though, and Glock has "fixed" the problem whatever it was.

[Nero Steptoe]

Why don't you place an order for forty or fifty 9mm3 followers and see what happens?? I'm planning on ordering twenty or so. I can't vouch for the information. I copied it from a post on GT by a guy who ordered and received 20 9mm3 followers. At any rate, this has been a silly, inconsequential, airheaded, simpleminded thread, and I hereby withdraw from participation therein.

[Blueduck]

Not sure who's right the poster on Glock Talk or Glockmeister but I can say Glock *could* be doing a better job of dealing with it. I've tried to call them three times this week spent an hour on hold total and have yet to get a human being (phone bills gonna be great this month).

I could just try the fax number with my order and credit card number, of course this number could have been posted by the same guy who ripped everybody off on the mag bodies ;)

[jimmy]

This morning I called Glock and asked about the status of the 9mm3 follower. I was advised:

(1) The 9mm3 follower has not been discontinued.

(2) 9mm3 followers are out of stock at this time.

[ryucasta]

Has anyone seen these new 9mm followers? Doe’s anyone here have the dimensions for this supposed new follower and finally can someone post a picture that compares both?

BTW, I ordered some 9mm3 followers from Glockmeister late last year and he had a hard time getting them to me but I did get them. The one thing he did tell me was that it would be difficult for him to get more since Glock had discontinued them. Now having said that I haven’t bothered to confirm this with Glock since I have what I need and even if it were to be discontinued item and the new followers didn’t work with Glock’s pre-ban magazines Arredondo and Scherer make followers for Glock magazines I'll just have to go through the inconvenience of tuning them. Seems like a tempest in a teapot to me.

:rolleyes:

[ryucasta]

John,

Why do you keep asking what kind of Glock JC owns? Is there some particular reason for asking the same question four times? If so please enlighten us.

[JohnKSa]

ryucasta,

If you do a quick search on jc2 posts here you will immediately recognize him from TFL where he posted under a slightly different name.

On TFL he stated he did not own a Glock and never intended to own one. However, that put a bit of a kink in his posting habits since his favorite topic was Glock--particularly anything which shaded the company or its products in a negative light. He was never overt enough to be branded a troll since that would have destroyed his ability to post credibly as "just another gun owner trying to inform people". But since, by his own admission, he obviously wasn't a Glock owner and never intended to be, his motives for continually involving himself in virtually every Glock discussion on TFL eventually became painfully clear.

Predictably enough, when he started posting here, he initially made the statement that he did own a Glock pistol. When I queried him regarding the apparent disparity in his claims here vs at TFL, pointing out that although his name was a little different, his posting style was unmistakeably identical, he never replied. Now, as you noticed, he seems to be avoiding the issue...

Regards,

John

PS. This will surely qualify as a personal attack in jc's mind--I predict hijinks will ensue...

[ryucasta]

Understood.