Portland OR PD to stop using Glock .45


PDA






gunsmith
March 13, 2004, 04:22 AM
I don't know if they are talking about the new .45 Glock introduced ,or if they were having problems with double stacked mags.
http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=65410
Portland Police to change firearms after failures...
The Portland Police Bureau is discontinuing the use of a certain kind of handgun.
Chief Derrick Foxworth has ordered all of his officers to quit using Glock .45 caliber handguns like this.

The guns apparently failed during firearms training at the beginning of the month, about 250 officers are currently carrying these guns.

The chief now wants them to start using Glock 9 millimeters.

He says the police bureau has not had the same kind of problems it has had with the .45 caliber firearms.

If you enjoyed reading about "Portland OR PD to stop using Glock .45" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
tlhelmer
March 13, 2004, 07:56 AM
I read the article. I didnt see what type of failures they were having. Does anyone know?

Stickjockey
March 13, 2004, 07:53 PM
From the article on kgw.com, sounds like the same type of KB's that the .40SW Glocks are known for.

I believe they're 21's.

PromptCritical
March 13, 2004, 08:01 PM
I am originaly from Portland, but that is not why I'm writing this. I own a Glock 21C and have fired way more rounds out of it than any police officer will ever fire out of his. Ok, I may be exagerating. Seriously, though, I have shot at least 5000 rounds thru mine and I have hardly ever had a malfunction, let alone a kaboom.
They want to go back to Glock 17's? That is a ludicrous idea. Good guns, and all, just not enough punch, IMO. No flames, Please. Not trying to start a 9mm vs. .45ACP war.

nipprdog
March 13, 2004, 08:20 PM
stickjockey,

could you post the article?

can't read without registering.:D

fastbolt
March 13, 2004, 08:42 PM
Here's a link over at GT which actually has some info sprinkled in it here & there ... including the teletype.
http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=228994&highlight=NLETS

nipprdog
March 13, 2004, 09:49 PM
thanx, fastbolt.

Stickjockey
March 13, 2004, 10:32 PM
04:14 PM PST on Saturday, March 13, 2004


Associated Press


Portland Police Chief Derrick Foxworth has ordered a recall of .45-caliber Glock Model 21 firearms, weapons carried by 230 Portland officers.




.45 calibur Glock 21 handgun. (Company photo)
His order comes after two of the guns exploded in the hands of two separate officers during training this month. Neither of the officers was seriously injured.


"We don't want a reoccurrence of this happening again," Foxworth said. "It's the prudent thing to do."


The Portland Police Bureau at first thought the problem was caused by an ammunition malfunction. After the second explosion, the bureau's training division did further analysis and determined the explosions may have been caused by a defect in the weapon or a design problem.


Police will switch to 9 mm handguns. They are negotiating with officials at Georgia-based Glock to replace the .45-caliber weapons with 9 mm handguns at no cost.


Because the .45-caliber Glock is popular among law enforcement, the Portland police training officers sent a teletype to agencies nationwide. They heard back from several, including agencies in Florida and Texas, that had similar problems.


Other agencies, including the Los Angeles Police Department, and Multnomah and Clackamas counties sheriff's departments, reported no problems.

There ya go, nippr!

nipprdog
March 14, 2004, 05:31 AM
thanx stickjockey!

TBeck
March 14, 2004, 07:52 AM
I already posted the link to this issue on another Glock thread but here it is again. It comes from Dean Spier's THE GUN ZONE. Scroll down to the bottom to see the PPB bulletin.



PPB Glock 21 kB! (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/g21kb3.html)

I like Glocks and I carried a Glock 21 for years. But Glock has a serious engineering flaw in their large-bore (>9mm) models. The cartridge case is not fully supported at the feed ramp and the gun can fire while not fully in battery. I think Glock did this to increase reliability in feeding, but the result is a small but definite number of the pistols "spontaneously disassemble" from time to time.

DMK
March 14, 2004, 09:28 AM
spontaneously disassemble LOL! Good term. :D

turbonatr
March 14, 2004, 10:34 AM
The gun shown on thegunzone.com blew up while shooting 200gr. semi-wadcutters (reloads, LEAD reloads at that) which is a big no-no in Glock barrels. It shouldn't be a surprise that the pressures rose to dangerous levels which caused this. It also goes on to say he "may have" DOUBLE CHARGED this particular load which used brass that was "probably old". Geeze, talk about a recipe for disaster!!

Natures natural selection process, I suppose.

Boats
March 14, 2004, 11:22 AM
Alas, PERFECTION continues on unabated by reality.

TheFederalistWeasel
March 14, 2004, 11:25 AM
Okay honest question here, not trying to Glock bash.

I carry a Glock 22 on duty, which is mandated by my department. I fully understand why people are experiencing KB’s in the G22, the chamber support issue, hot loads and carbon buildup in the chamber /barrel.

Is the G21 .45 suffering from the same issues?

I thought the .45 had a fully supported chamber?

I really want honest answers here cuz I was seriously thinking of asking the Chief if he’d consider letting me carry the G21 over the .40 because of the KB issue.

We had a KB last month and a department south of us had an officer suffer the partial loss of a finger due to a Glock mishap with a G23.


Fed

:confused:

Baba Louie
March 14, 2004, 11:46 AM
FWIW
When taking my first CCW class, our instructor, a retired Marine Gunnery Sargent, shooter par excellance (USMC Rifle team, etc, and GLOCK Armourer) told us... or warned us of this "unsupported" area in the G21 and G30 Glock barrels. He did go on to say that Bar-Sto of 29 Palms had barrels which fully supports the chambered round. So for $200 extra you can purchase a barrel which has a little more "Perfection" than that found in the stock product.
Whereas I don't doubt him for a minute, I've never looked into it and BarSto's website offers no language to that effect, but I do know that they do whatever it takes to keep the USMC happy.
http://barsto.com/

Just a FWIW FYI

roscoe
March 14, 2004, 12:25 PM
"We don't want a reoccurrence of this happening again," Foxworth said.

OWWW! My brain hurts just reading that sentence.

turbonatr
March 14, 2004, 12:29 PM
It is the lead build-up that causes unsafe pressures in the barrel, not carbon. This is why lead is NOT to be fired through a Glock barrel. Reloaded ammo is almost always the cause. The few factory incidents that occur seem to be with Federal ammunition which apparently uses the thinnest brass (Winchester using the thickest). I have also heard reports that a good number of the factory ammo mishaps happened with a cartridge that has been chambered more than once.

I am unaware of ANY gun that uses a truely 100% fully supported chamber. Matter of fact, good ole Dean has a pic of a .40 caliber Glock blown up on his site which used an AFTERMARKET barrel (Jarvis of BarSto, I don't recall) chambered in .357Sig at that! I guess he though nobody would catch that.:rolleyes:

Last I heard, Glock turns out SEVEN .40 caliber pistols to one of all the other caliber guns. Naturally, you will hear more problems with this caliber pistol. Your'e probably more likely to be struck by lightning than have a Glock blow up in your hand even with reloads. Even less likely to have a problem with factory ammo.

I have personally have seen Sigs, Smiths, Berettas, a USP and even one Raging Bull in 454 Casull blow up in the shooters hands. It can and will happen to all of them. Funny, if Glock used full supported chambers and had feed failures more often, they would be mocked for that.

But at least they wouldn't blow up, right?

:rolleyes:

fastbolt
March 14, 2004, 02:04 PM
Unfortunately, this is probably going to be getting a lot of attention, if only because Glock owners and enthusiasts are going to feel compelled to "defend" their favorite make of handgun, or else they're going to suspect this isn't a gun-related problem. Too bad, because a lot of other "problems" surface from time to time with commonly used L/E weapons, of all makes, and generally these problems are resolved in one way or another without it making the rounds of the public forums with a lot of fanfare.

Of course, sometimes they DO make the rounds ... Look at the previous Beretta slide cracking issue, and how it's come back around with the weapon malfunctions reportedly caused by slides cracking on LASD weapons. From what I was given to understand, they're still pleased with the weapon model, and are going to be addressing what they suspect may be the underlying causes of such failures. Time will tell ...

On the other hand, this isn't the first time that G21's, and even G30's for that matter, have been mentioned regarding some weapons which have suffered damage while shooting factory ammunition. This subject is an easy one to find and read about on various firearms boards ...
http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum78/HTML/000252.html

If it's correct that the Portland PD has obtained initial "lab" results showing the ammunition samples to be within normal pressure tolerances, then you could see how they might decide to pull the weapons out of service ... at least temporarily ... until further discussions with both Glock and Federal. This would seem to be simple common sense. Nobody wants to see anyone at risk for potential injury, and nobody wants to have the PD folks feel uneasy and uncertain about whether their service weapons will perform properly for them in actual situations.

We'll probably see some resolution to this that satisfies everyone involved, especially considering the favorable reputations of the two manufacturers involved ... even if it doesn't satisfy the firearms enthusiasts and owners on the public forums, such as this one and GT.

This may not be the only agency to discontinue using the G21, or the G30, either ...

I learned of a small local agency that recently discontinued use of their .45 ACP G30's, and switched to .40 S&W Glocks (I haven't had time to confirm the exact model). This doesn't surprise me, in a way ... because the last time I was involved with their agency at a range qualification, when the G30's were adopted and issued, there were at least half a dozen of the folks that experienced what appeared to be ammunition related functioning problems (Speer 200gr+P GD) possibly due to the increased slide velocities and recoil impulse ... and one shooter that was using an older, personally owned G30 who appeared to have a magazine (spring?) related functioning issue. Let's face it, using +P .45 ACP ammunition in smaller framed .45 weapons can sometimes cause issues for some shooters. Although they changed to a different brand of +P ammunition at some point, apparently they finally decided that the .40 S&W was a better choice for their needs.

I was watching someone function test a couple of .45's with some Ranger T-Series RA45TP ammunition the other day. Using the ammunition in a full sized, all steel 1911 model the pistol & ammuntion combination functioned just fine, as expected. In a lightweight Commander, however, the slide failed to lock back when the magazines were empty ... and these were the same magazines being used in the steel weapon, and were new, high quality magazines. The opinion of the armorer doing the shooting was simply that the increased slide velocity generated by the +P ammunition was the cause. The weapon functions perfectly fine using the standard pressure RA45T version.

Well, I've never been a fan of +P .45 ACP ammunition, myself. I've also experienced functioning issues in different weapons that appeared to be directly related to the increased slide velocities of different +P ammunition. I've even spoken to a couple of firearms manufacturers that admitted that the increasing popularity of much of today's +P .45 ACP ammunition was causing them some headaches. Balancing slide mass and recoil spring rates to produce reliable functioning with just about anybody's standard pressure ammunition was apparently much easier before a lot of folks jumped on the +P "magnumizing" bandwagon ... and that was with full size weapon platforms. Now, with the constantly shrinking .45 platforms, it's apparently become a bit more "interesting" ...

Getting back to the G21 topic, though ...

Since it isn't my agency, I won't list the name, but I've been listening to a reputable firearms/armorer instructor recently, as well as a L/E distributor for a couple of firearms manufacturers ... and they've both, separately, told me about an agency that is apparently on the verge of discontinuing use of their G21's, after having used them for several years. The cause, IF it occurs, would NOT be because of any reported failures similar to the Portland PD situation, but a different issue supposedly causing malfunctions and agency concerns. This agency has a bit less than 3,000 weapons in service, and this isn't the first time they've had a concern with a functioning problem with their weapons. The last time I heard about it, a few years ago, it was a magazine issue, which was resolved.

From what I've been told by these two different sources familiar with the situation, either the concern with the G21's will be addressed and resolved to the agency's satisfaction, the G21's may be replaced with G22's ... or else the agency will return to using another make of weapon, chambered in .45 ACP. Time will tell ...

That certainly doesn't mean the G21 isn't a fine firearm, though, or that all of the non-L/E owners who have them and have enjoyed perfectly reliable functioning are wrong ... ;)

It's always something ...

turbonatr
March 14, 2004, 02:27 PM
I would be interested to know the ratio of rounds gone downrange versus the number of rounds that caused problems with the agency that is having G21 problems.

It's funny how when a few hundred thousand rounds go downrange without incident you don't hear about how awesome the firearm is, but when the first problem arrises people come out of the wood work to bash that particular gun which ever it may be.

I also don't think Glock owners are the most "defensive" when it comes to their guns. In my experience, it seems 1911 owners are typically the owns that, shall we say, energenically defends thier beloved pistol. Maybe it has something to so with the long-running popularity of the gun or it's time with our armed forces...maybe a little of both and then some.

I own firearms of all makes and models and give credit where it is due to each of them. They all have their strong points and their weaknesses. One thing is for sure, none of their manufactures send me "loyalty checks" in the mail to get into arguements over the interent over theirs being the best. So, I do not.

Double Maduro
March 14, 2004, 02:31 PM
I believe that the Oregonian article said that the Kboom was caused by the round not chambering completely and going off anyway. This was reenforced in a conversation with a Portland Police Officer yesterday.

Also I beleive these were factory rounds, again according to the PO.

I have nothing against glocks, except they don't fit my hands. But when the stories keep popping up, and at a higher rate than for other pistols, you begin to wonder. I also find it interresting that the glockies always want to blame the ammo, before any real info is available.

Bad ammo can and does cause kbooms but it seems that Glocks are more susceptible to it. Again, I am not knocking glocks or those who love them, I am just wondering why these things happen, or seem to happen, to glocks more often than to other makes.

Maybe it is a big anti glock conspiracy, we only mention the kbooms that happen in glocks and nothing else.

The officer I talked to carried one of the G 21's and loved it. He is not happy about having to give it up.

DM

fastbolt
March 14, 2004, 03:04 PM
turbonatr

I can't answer that question at this time, although I can say that from what we were told, this isn't exactly an "overnight", single occurrence issue which is causing a "knee-jerk reaction". The agency worked with Glock to resolve their previous "reported" magazine-related problem, and they're trying to get this problem resolved as well. They apparently aren't the sort of folks that would unreasonably "jump" at the first sign of some issue or other. Depending on Glock's response, though, it may very well result in a change of caliber, or manufacturer ...

Double Maduro

I've got to ask ... what's your favorite brand(s) of cigar? My cigar vice is a recently acquired one, only about 4+ months old ... but I could've bought a couple of new guns for the money I've invested in it in that time.;) It's amazing how many folks I know at work, including at least one vendor I talk to during my range duties, that are cigar smokers ... I juest never realized it.

Double Maduro
March 14, 2004, 03:19 PM
Fastbolt,

My favorite cigar of any is the Montechristo #5. However it is from Cuba and is not available here.

My Favorite non Cuban is the Padron Anniversary Principe Maduro.

Other favorites are Hoyo de Montery Rothschild Double Maduro
Padron 2000,3000 4000 maduros

Yep, I could have bought sevral new weapons for what I have spent on cigars, but we all make our choices.

What do you like in the way of cigars?

In fire arms I like my Ruger P90 and 22/45.
I like my Makarov a lot more than I thought I would, saw it at the shop and couldn't put it down.

I'll save my preferrence in long arms for another thread. Don't want to hijack this one.

By the way, here is a link to the Oregonian article.

http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1079183259140830.xml?oregonian?lcps

DM

turbonatr
March 14, 2004, 03:23 PM
I would think you hear about it more with Glocks than other brands since Glock has (last I heard) more than 50% of LE contracts. Glocks are also very popular with carry permit holders. Also, people seem to flat-out ignore Glock's explicit warning NOT to shoot lead in their barrels. People do it anyway. Again, perhaps natures natural selection process. Glock owners are quick to blame ammo since so many people ignore this warning and pay the price.

I am sure that this isn't the sole incident with this agency, but I am willing to bet hundreds of thousands more rounds have hit the departments backstop than have blown up guns.

At any rate, I will continue to shoot my Glocks, Smiths, 1911s, etc. without fear. It isn't worth worrying about, IMHO.

TBeck
March 14, 2004, 03:48 PM
The round in question was a Federal Hi-Shok, so I doubt lead buildup was an issue. Two guns on the same PD experienced catastrophic failures.

I am not arguing that Glocks are tough and reliable. My G21 survived an obstructed barrel from an American Ammunition squib with no more damage than a bulged barrel. The only failures my G21 ever had were with that ammo. So it was pretty obvious that the ammo was at fault.

Ford has sold umpteen thousand Explorers. Let's say that there was a small but real chance that turning the ignition switch on your Explorer could result in the steering column catching fire. It didn't happen often, but it did happen. You would reasonably expect Ford to issue a safety recall to fix the current cars and then change the design to prevent future cars from being affected.

Glock refuses to admit there is a problem. They won't even change the design of the barrels to eliminate this risk in the future! The Emperor's new clothes are perfect!

turbonatr
March 14, 2004, 04:17 PM
As posted above, Federal ammunition was by far the most found in these incidents when factory ammo was, indeed, the ammo fired. Federal, IIRC, was also the most popular ammo where bullet set-back was to blame. Combine that with thin brass, and it also appears Federal may have a problem that needs to be addressed.

For the record, I have fired approximately 6000 rounds of 45 Super between my G21C and G30. This does not include the standard pressure and +P .45acp ammo I have fired in them. My guns are still in as-new condition and I still have all of my appendages. I cannot speak for anyone else, but my experience with Glocks has been 100% statisfactory. I only wish some of the cars I have owned were so reliable!

TheFederalistWeasel
March 15, 2004, 08:16 AM
A lot of folks believe the Glock is the cats meow for the simple reason that so many LEO carry it, but fail to take into account that LE weapons are most often chosen for price.

Lowest bidder wins.

Glock has been very aggressive in this area; even allowing PD’s to turn in confiscated weapons to Glock for credit towards their purchase. Glock then resells these turn-in guns back to dealers who resell them to you and me.

My department has 125 sworn officers and so far I’ve seen two distinct flavors when it comes to our firearm, the G22.

First type is the average guy, looks at the gun as just another tool nothing more and nothing less, only shoots in for qualifications, would carry anything the Chief told them to and does not carry while off duty.

Second type is the group I’m in… don’t like the pistol for various reasons, most common is ergonomics, secondly the high failure rate of the gun and the fact that in a 50-mile radius of our department there are 4 cops who have had them catastrophically fail, one loss partial use of his hand as a result. Not a good selling point.

I carry a G22 only because I have no other choice, IMO it’s a piece of junk, I’ve already had to get one replacement mag due to cracks in the mag, the gun has a horrible grip and I’m waiting for it to blow up in my hands on the range one day, so I can sue the snot out of Glock and retire from LE.

Glockers wail and moan when a cop has what they call an ND, in LEO circles we have another term for it, it’s called Glock-Leg. My department issued S&W 5906 9mm’s before the Glock and it’s amazing talking to the senior cops around the house who say they had none of the problems common with Glock today, you didn’t hear of limp wristing, or KaBooms or Glock-Leg (Smith-Leg) you didn’t hear of these problems and at one time S&W had far more of the LEO market than Glock does today, they were more or less the only game in town plus most cops came over from S&W wheel guns.

At my department the unanimous agreement (greater than 50%) is that if the Chief would listen we would ditch the Glock. But unfortunately for us Glock is just up the road and the Glock rep is in and out of our department at least once a month pedaling new wares and replacing our problematic guns for little to no charge.

Oh yea did I mention that last week we had 8 Glock 22’s in our armory, brand new from the factory that could not go more than one mag without a jam? Glock sent us a whole box of new replacement mags and lo-n-behold the buggers still jammed. Glock came down and replaced all with new guns, I’ll report back once the Instructors have time to see if these work.

Even the troopers of the GSP and the few GBI Agents I know tend to agree with us the Gun has problems. More and more LE Agencies are beginning to see the light with this gun especially as more and more larger departments have problems with it.

The Bibb County Sheriffs Department (Central GA. Macon about a 600 man department) is tossing its Glocks for the S&W P99 in .40

The gun is sub standard at best and it’s beginning to catch up with Glock.
:mad:

turbonatr
March 15, 2004, 08:18 PM
My Glocks must be defective....they all work.:rolleyes:

Cosmoline
March 15, 2004, 09:07 PM
Two words for the Portland PD

SIG SAUER (aka you get what you pay for, cheapskates!)

Doc
March 15, 2004, 09:52 PM
1) guns are mechanical devices and ALL devices fail

2) glock 21 and 30 have fully supported chambers

3) lead in glocks is bad

4) reloads are CHEAP, not GOOD

The cartridge case is not fully supported at the feed ramp and the gun can fire while not fully in battery.

i am not sure what this means, but the design of the
feeding of rounds, and the point at which the round
can be fired by means of the firing pin contacting
the primer does not differ among glocks, nor
most other semi auto pistols of this design.

if this were an issue, then the model 18 (and other unoffical fully
automatic glocks in "Large" calibers would have catastrophic
failures each time they are fired in full auto mode

doc

Dienekes
March 16, 2004, 12:48 AM
Any day now the "new wave" of police handguns will come along. Revolvers.

another okie
March 16, 2004, 06:00 PM
I think the reason Glock owners so often say "lead" or "reloads" is that all of us see people regularly ignoring Glock's very explicit warnings. At almost every IDPA or IPSC match I go to I see people shooting hundreds of lead rounds or horrible looking reloads through their Glocks. Glocks are not perfect. They're going to fail every now and then, but why raise the odds so high?

Frankly, I don't really understand why the police are so in love with the .40 anyway. It's high pressure and the loading leaves little margin for error. It has good paper ballistics, but requires lots of practice to master. I suspect if agencies start replacing Glock .40s with Smith or Beretta .40s we're going to start hearing about failures in those brands.

Why not just let each officer pick a handgun that fits their hand, that they can shoot well, and that they have confidence in?

Double Maduro
March 16, 2004, 06:33 PM
another okie,

The guns in question are .45's not .40's. The weapons apparantly failed when they fired rounds not completely chambered and it was factory ammo.

It just seems that we hear about more Glock kabooms than other makes. Some people say that's because there are so many glocks out there. If that's the case why don't we hear about 1911's, or berreta's going kaboom.

If the Glock is so closely engineered to the edge that it fails catastrophically when the slightest thing is wrong, then they need to re-engineer it with some strength to spare.

Here are a few more links:

Here is a link to more information about Glock Kabooms.
http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/gindex.html

Here is another link you may find interresting;
http://www.f-r-i.com/glock/FAQ/FAQ-kb.htm

There have been a number of reports of glock kabooms with factory ammo. These are not all caused by reloads or lead.

Again, I'm not knocking Glocks, I just want to know what is causing this.

DM

QuarterBoreGunner
March 16, 2004, 06:43 PM
Glock-Leg I just love that term. I mean, it'll never replace 'Garand Thumb' but...

Dean Speir
March 16, 2004, 08:16 PM
Doc declaims: …glock 21 and 30 have fully supported chambers… This is inaccurate… or perhaps we have a "definition of terms" issue.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cartridge case is not fully supported at the feed ramp and the gun can fire while not fully in battery.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i am not sure what this means, but the design of the feeding of rounds, and the point at which the round can be fired by means of the firing pin contacting the primer does not differ among glocks, nor most other semi auto pistols of this design. There are plenty of graphic illustrations of this around the 'Net; not only did Tamara post one here not long ago, but you can see a supported/not fully-supported comparison here (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb.html).

You've also made an assertion about semi-auto pistol firing pins which is not credible to anyone with familiarity with striker-fired self-loaders.

Doc
March 16, 2004, 08:45 PM
Doc declaims:
quote:
…glock 21 and 30 have fully supported chambers…
This is inaccurate…

DEAN you are corrrect.

i just looked at the cartridge in the barrel (AGAIN)
and the cartridge is NOT fully support in either my 21 or 30.

my sincere apologies. very sorry! i think i was just too tired
(i was 'post call') when i originally looked at it. mea culpa, mea culpa...

the issue regarding catastrophic failures however would seem
NOT whether the cartridge is fully supported,
but rather if the cartridge can be fired prior to the gun being fully in battery
(that is what appears to have happened in these photos (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb.html)).

to that end, i would suggest that (READ: MY OPINION)
any semi auto pistol MIGHT fire out of battery
and have a similar catastrophic event, since the case is NOT contained
in the chamber of any firearm when it fires out of battery.

Further, the frequency with which this event is documented in glocks MAY
be simply as result of the popularity of the gun, ergo disproportionate representation,
and its use in settings of less skilled operators (least common denominator)
especially for LEO's.

and i stand by my statement that IF firing out of battery were an issue for glocks,
then the fully auto versions would see a high incidence of catastrophic failure
(since the fire at the first possible instant as the gun goes into battery)
but again that is OPINION

HadEmAll
March 16, 2004, 11:07 PM
Has anyone ever seen or heard about a .40 Glock kaboom that didn't involve:

lead bullets
reloaded brass
PMC 165 grn factory
Federal 180 or 155 grn factory

?

fastbolt
March 17, 2004, 12:20 AM
Has anyone ever seen or heard about a .40 Glock kaboom that didn't involve ...

Yes, my brother's G22 experience involved Fiocchi factory FMJ ammunition ... and if I remember the details correctly, I was reading on another forum about an agency back east that reportedly had 2-3 similar problems while using Remington factory ammunition, but naturally I can't vouch for the accuracy/authenticity of the latter.

Dean Speir
March 17, 2004, 09:31 AM
Thanks for being stand-up, Doc… but twere there more like you.

the issue regarding catastrophic failures however would seem NOT whether the cartridge is fully supported, but rather if the cartridge can be fired prior to the gun being fully in battery….

to that end, i would suggest that (READ: MY OPINION) any semi auto pistol MIGHT fire out of battery and have a similar catastrophic event, since the case is NOT contained in the chamber of any firearm when it fires out of battery.

Further, the frequency with which this event is documented in glocks MAY be simply as result of the popularity of the gun, ergo disproportionate representation, and its use in settings of less skilled operators (least common denominator) especially for LEO's. One of the things the authors (I was but one of three) of the draft Glock kB! FAQ (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb.html) attempted to establish w-a-a-a-a-y back in '97 was that the ability of the celebrated pistols to fire out-of-battery and their unsupported chambers immediately above the feed ramp, were mutually contributory. Yes!, the "generous" chamber datum (a constant in all greater than 9 X 19mm Glocks) is enough when the case-web of the brass is also at issue, but without examining the position of the primer strike on the chambered round in a catastrophic event, one doesn't know if the out-of-battery condition was contributory.

In re, your "opinion," the issue here is simply that when an already not-fully-supported round is not-fully-chambered, it follows that even more of the case web would be exposed at the instant of ignition, yes?

With all due respect, Doc, the (enormous… my word, not yours) "popularity of the gun" is the first refuge of those who Rosco Benson long-ago referred to as "Kool Aid drinkers." It is undoubtedly true, so true in fact that it may be said to be a "faint glimpse into the obvious," but I think that to dismiss these events in such a manner (as "within the statistical norm"), is naïve. Portland Police Bureau's findings, to the extent that they can be verified by an independent examination of the ruined Models 21, are major.

JohnKSa
March 17, 2004, 08:49 PM
Dean,

As I read your site, all of the Glock 21 incidents it catalogs involve remanufactured/reloaded/questionable quality ammo.

edited--(I should say did catalog--it seems that the new Portland incident has displaced the previous incidents--the newest of which was 4 years old IIRC--involving Master remanufactured ammo and American ammunition.)

Given that the manual specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition, how much of an indictment is it to say that a gun is unsafe with ammunition that the manual recommends you not use?

To throw in one more possibly relevant bit of information, I note that Federal (provider of the ammo used in the Portland PD incidents) is currently in the throes of an ammunition recall. It's a different caliber, to be sure, but a QC problem is a QC problem, no matter how you cut it.

Dean Speir
March 18, 2004, 12:17 AM
Given that the manual specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition, how much of an indictment is it to say that a gun is unsafe with ammunition that the manual recommends you not use?

To throw in one more possibly relevant bit of information, I note that Federal (provider of the ammo used in the Portland PD incidents) is currently in the throes of an ammunition recall. It's a different caliber, to be sure, but a QC problem is a QC problem, no matter how you cut it. Please provide the specific cite in the manual which "specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition," and the revision date of that particular manual.

I'm curious as to how you deem as "possibly relevant" the fact of Federal's product advisory regarding .45 Colt (as opposed to .45 ACP, the round involved in the PPB events) when PPB has specifically announced that the Federal .45 ACP High-Shok was not at fault in the two recent catastrophic failures. I don't wish to brand you as a "selective reader" out of hand, but did you miss that part, or just dismiss it en toto? But let us address, arguendo, the point that it appears that you were attempting to make, however inartfully: "how much of an indictment is it to say that a gun is unsafe with ammunition that the manual recommends you not use?"

One could not unreasonably file your rhetorical question under res ipsa loquitor, for if the manual actually said that itself, then that would be an actual self-indictment, wouldn't it? it seems that the new Portland incident has displaced the previous incidents--the newest of which was 4 years old IIRC--involving Master remanufactured ammo and American ammunition.) Nothing has been displaced, other than the long-stated advisory that no 9 X 19m kB!s have ever been satisfactorily documented.

The other pages you seem to be referencing are:
http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/g21kb.html

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/g21kb2.html

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/glock-kb2.html But a final point… if you wish to take a hard line on the "a QC problem is a QC problem, no matter how you cut it" issue, then you should also apply this to Glock Inc./Glock Ges.m.b.H. given their number of non-recall "recalls" over the past several years, including but not limited to the frame-rails (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/problems.html), the Phase 3 malfunctions (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/phase3.html) and the Models 26 and 27 guiderods (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/guiderods.html).

kbr80
March 18, 2004, 01:17 AM
Nothing has been displaced, other than the long-stated advisory that no 9 X 19m kB!s have ever been satisfactorily documented


Is this true? NO kb's in the 9mm glocks. I own a 17 and think it is the best glock of all.

JohnKSa
March 18, 2004, 10:06 PM
Please provide the specific cite in the manual which "specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition," and the revision date of that particular manual.
Kidding, right? You have a Glock manual and can type it in yourself if you want to see it posted.
PPB has specifically announced that the Federal .45 ACP High-Shok was not at fault in the two recent catastrophic failures.
Selective reader indeed--your own site points out that PPB has a rather checkered history when it comes to reporting Glock "problems." As you said earlier, truly independent confirmation is required. The facts of the case don't support an indictment of the firearm at this point:
Fact: Guns have been in PPB service for some time.
Fact: Guns have been shot a lot with lots of different ammo.
Fact: Two Guns blow up using the same kind of ammo in the space of a month.
Fact: Ammo company is currently recalling defective ammo in another caliber. (Throw this one out if you like--it's only icing.)
Conclusion: Guns are defective? Doesn't play well to me...
One could not unreasonably file your rhetorical question under res ipsa loquitor, for if the manual actually said that itself, then that would be an actual self-indictment, wouldn't it?
Twould indeed. To be fair, your site comes pretty close to saying as much. From memory here---> "Glocks are good, Glocks are great, just don't use reloads as the manual states." Is that close?if you wish to take a hard line on the "a QC problem is a QC problem, no matter how you cut it" issue, then you should also apply this to Glock Inc./Glock Ges.m.b.H.
But not even you believe that, right? You're still shooting your Glock 21, aren't you?

Dean Speir
March 18, 2004, 11:41 PM
Please provide the specific cite in the manual which "specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition," and the revision date of that particular manual.

Kidding, right? You have a Glock manual and can type it in yourself if you want to see it posted. No, John, I'm not kidding… either post the exactly language you site, or retract. I do have a manual and since so many have apparently hallucinated exactly what that manual says, it's posted in TGZ's Glock section: http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/manual.html.

Or mebbe we just have different definitions of "specific." PPB has specifically announced that the Federal .45 ACP High-Shok was not at fault in the two recent catastrophic failures.

Selective reader indeed--your own site points out that PPB has a rather checkered history when it comes to reporting Glock "problems." As you said earlier, truly independent confirmation is required. The facts of the case don't support an indictment of the firearm at this point:
Fact: Guns have been in PPB service for some time.
Fact: Guns have been shot a lot with lots of different ammo.
Fact: Two Guns blow up using the same kind of ammo in the space of a month.
Fact: Ammo company is currently recalling defective ammo in another caliber. (Throw this one out if you like--it's only icing.)
Conclusion: Guns are defective? Doesn't play well to me... Understandably… you've long been a Glock apologist.

"Checkered" is your characterization, not mine. PBB has determined what the facts are, and your recitation is at variance with theirs.

Not sure in on what you base your "Guns have been shot a lot with lots of different ammo" assertion.

And yes, two of the same models suffer catastrophic failures with the same Federal ammo three days apart. And their departmental armorers records revealed a third such event seven years earlier. Is this within a statistical norm? I dunno… that's not my forte.

if you wish to take a hard line on the "a QC problem is a QC problem, no matter how you cut it" issue, then you should also apply this to Glock Inc./Glock Ges.m.b.H.

But not even you believe that, right? You're still shooting your Glock 21, aren't you? Yes, I still shoot my Model 21 on an irregular basis, but I'm disinclined to allow you to impose your particular beliefs on my firearms disciplines… especially since I was only pointing out your inconsistencies.

We'll both learn more about this in the coming months, including Glock's "official position" on the issue.

JohnKSa
March 19, 2004, 12:26 AM
Dean sez: Please provide the specific cite in the manual which "specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition," and the revision date of that particular manual.

Glock manual June 1991 Form US005-06/91

page 13

"Only use high quality commercially manufactured ammunition, in excellent condition and in the caliber of your pistol."

Also on page 13

"The use of reloaded ammunition will void the warranty, due to the fact that there is no way to verify the standards (SAMI 'sic'/ NATO) adhered to because reloads or poor quality ammunition sometimes do not need 'sic' specification (SAMI 'sic'/NATO), exceed limits and could be unsafe."

On page 27

"GLOCK shall not be responsible for injury death, or damage to property resulting from...the use of ammunition other than original high quality commercially manufactured ammunition in good condition..."

These quotes are from what the manual terms "RED COLUMNS".

The manual on p 19 states:

"Strictly obey instructions as per red columns."

Let's see, I said:the manual specifically warns against the use of reloaded/low quality ammunition

you've long been a Glock apologist
This from a man who finds the need to add a section to his website called "Is Dean Speir a Glock Hater?" :D

"Checkered" is your characterization, not mine.
It seemed a reasonable description--here's what your website says--I guess the folks here can decide what term they wish to use.
"It should be noted that PBB is the same agency in which one goof caused another goof's issued Model 17 to discharge in its holster during a PR24 training exercise back in '90!"
I believe that the initial bulletin blamed the gun until it became apparent that the gun had been improperly modified--correct?

Not sure in on what you base your "Guns have been shot a lot with lots of different ammo" assertion.
A good number of officers have been carrying/shooting/training/qualifying with these guns for over 7 years. Perhaps they used only one kind of ammunition in all the guns for all that time, but making a statement like that would, IMHO, be extremely less supportable than saying that lots of different kinds of ammo has gone through those guns in the last decade.
their departmental armorers records revealed a third such event seven years earlier.
Perhaps a similar event, but not truly a third like the one we're discussing, RIGHT? ;) I know you're not saying that the PPD knew that the guns were defective 7 years ago and continued to allow their officers to use them.I'm disinclined to allow you to impose your particular beliefs on my firearms disciplines
Ah yes, I recognize that sentiment--was feeling it when I first posted to this thread. ;)

artherd
March 19, 2004, 01:05 AM
This may be Tin Foil Hat area, but because of the following, I am begining to suspect at least a few of the people who claim "It was factory ammo! I never shoot lead!" may be lieing.

...I’m waiting for it to blow up in my hands on the range one day, so I can sue the snot out of Glock and retire from LE.


On page 27
"GLOCK shall not be responsible for injury death, or damage to property resulting from...the use of ammunition other than original high quality commercially manufactured ammunition in good condition..."


If you have EVER shot lead or re-loads in your Glock, you forfit the warranty and any rights to Federalist's big lawsuit plans. No offence Federalist.


This would leave one or three Kbs that just happened because ???? happens. Nothing endemic, and nothing that dosen't happen to every other mechanical device.

If we're going to declare an epidemic, let's make sure it really is an epidemic, not just sensational BS and fradulant lawsuits or outright negligence.




All that said, my Glock is in 9mm because I personally feel it is likely the most reliable Glock, the caliber for which the most design research and testing was done, and I want as reliable a self-defense sidearm as I can possibly get. And as 9mm +P+ has more power than .45ACP I don't feel underguned.

S_O_Laban
March 19, 2004, 01:31 AM
Does anybody know where the g36 stands on case support? I've yet to see one, much less shoot one.

gunsmith
March 19, 2004, 01:53 AM
now I'm all paranoid...I carry a g22 at work...I would hate for it to fail.
I don't have the money for another gun right now,my little sp101 is reliable enough but I may need more then 5 shots:(

artherd
March 19, 2004, 07:44 PM
gunsmith- statistically I belive you are ~100x more likely to be struck by lightning than have a catastrophic failure caused by factory ammo with your Glock.

If you are shooting lead or reloads, don't. Otherwise, keep living your life man!

Dean Speir
March 23, 2004, 08:50 PM
I've been poking around on this matter since my last post here, and came up with some interesting information from Portland Police Bureau… and just this afternoon PPB's primary investigator on the kB! issue… the fellow who issued the 9 March LE teletype… contacted me, so more information is being developed. The page is at: http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/ppb.html.

But in another thread, since locked on general principle, JohnKSa, in discussing "Perspective," made an outrageous and defamatory assertion completely without foundation, and it demands addressing: One of the more "vigorous compilers of glock incidents" whose initials are D.S. has now updated his site to include the latest Portland PD Glock incident. (Remember the last one--where Portland PD claimed that their Glock 9mms were shooting by themselves and then had to fess up that they had been modified improperly?) I have no idea how you could even begin to provide any substantiation for that belief.

In 1990, an officer in Portland Police Bureau experienced a discharge of his holstered Model 17 Glock during a PR-24 training exercise. The two MOS claimed that it discharged when the pistol was struck on the rear of the slide.

While Glock vigorously asserted that this could not happen, San Diego pistolsmith Tim LaFrance was able to replicate the event, and within two years Glock performed its first "product upgrade," one of the six-parts upgraded (http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/upgrade-faq.html) being the spring-loaded bearing which, by Glock, Inc.'s own admission, left the earlier models vulnerable to that sort of impact discharge. They had tried to impeach PBB, but they caved when their submissions failed the "DEA Frisbee Test" (impact) in Summer 1991.

PPB never 'fessed up anything of the sort you allege, because that was never an issue.

Hedger
March 23, 2004, 09:40 PM
My question would be why any LE departments would mess with Glocks. There are documented KBs, perhaps more, perhaps less than other guns but there are KBs. Even you supporters say they are finicky with ammo. Grips are marginal, IMHO. What super dooper advantages (other than weight) do Glocks give LEs that outweigh the possible negatives.

Repeat after me... Sig Sauer! Sig Sauer! Sig Sauer!

:evil:

JohnKSa
March 23, 2004, 10:35 PM
Dean,

I can't remember where I first read that the issue was improperly modified G17s in the initial PPB incident. If that is not the case, you might want to change the following quote on your site:

"It should be noted that PBB is the same agency in which one goof caused another goof's issued Model 17 to discharge in its holster during a PR24 training exercise back in '90!"

The way I read that it says that both "goofs" were PPB's.

I'm curious, and you're just the man to answer this question--How many Glock 21 kB!s have you documented in the last decade or so?

Also, why did you make me type in those quotes from my Glock manual?

John

chas_martel
March 24, 2004, 12:12 PM
Not shooting lead is not a problem with Glocks.

It has to do with polygonal barrels.

I don't understand why people get misled on this point

Dean Speir
March 24, 2004, 12:37 PM
May I respectfully submit, JohnKSa, that if you "can't remember where (you) first read that the issue was improperly modified G17s in the initial PPB incident," then you might want to stop making any such assertion.

Also, there's no need to "change" anything on the website… as I just suggested in another thread, you might look into brushing up on your reading comprehension skills… how you can imply from "one goof caused another goof's issued Model 17 to discharge in its holster during a PR24 training exercise back in '90!" that the Model 17 was "modified," is beyond me. Yes, both were PPB MOS… is that somehow significant to you? I'm curious, and you're just the man to answer this question--How many Glock 21 kB!s have you documented in the last decade or so? Well, your delamations about "recycling" withstanding to the contrary, since the Models 21 were belatedly introduced in latter 1990, we've in excess of three dozen, some of which were clearly and admittedly a result of faulty reloads or poorly remanufactured rounds, but some with "Glock-recommended" factory rounds, from the one with a Winchester STHP with a Government agent's personally-owned pistol in September '91… the 22nd or 23rd round through the gun… to the recent PPB failures. I have a number of conventional images, particularly two different Models 21 at Gunsite in 1994, but the ones on which you seem to have based your assumptions, are all digital and more easily, and faithfully, mounted… I think if you look more carefully, you'll note at least five distinct ones there at present. …why did you make me type in those quotes from my Glock manual?
To make sure we were on the same page (version).

Given your track record of inferring verities where none were even implied, it was hoped that you would figure out that what was stated was not quite what your were reporting.

moxie
March 24, 2004, 01:06 PM
Definitely sounds like double-charges to me, added to the unsupported chambers, added to the potential for increased pressure from lead bullets used with polygonal rifling. Then there's the possibility that these guns might fire when not completely in battery. Not very comforting. Progress?

Then there was the Star PD, .45 ACP, out of production for some years now. Officers Model size, 25 oz. Total reliability with any ammo remotely resembling .45 ACP. (The round does have to fit in the chamber.) Factory, reloads, jacketed, lead, shotshells, Blazer, Glaser, +P, foreign, domestic, it takes them all. Easy to maintain. Nice safety. Good sights. Accurate. Nice trigger. No grip safety. Inexpensive to boot. How we've progressed.

Oh, the PD has a fully supported chamber, except for a tiny notch cutout at the 12 o'clock position that permits visual verification of a loaded or unloaded chamber. Nice touch. The only "upgrades" it ever needed (maybe) were some Pachmayr rubber grips and some Wolff springs after 10,000 rounds or so.

Would that someone would bring them back. (Mine are not for sale.)

JohnKSa
March 24, 2004, 10:07 PM
Dean,

I didn't say that I read that the G17's were modified on your site--I said I couldn't remember where I read it. Therefore, your mental gymnastics, trying to determine how one could get from what is posted on your site to what I said, are pretty pointless.

I still think that the statement about "goofs" on your website is ambiguous and I did initially read it as tacitly supporting the "modification theory" but obviously never considered it the source of any such theory. Thanks for the clarification.

36 documented G21 kB!s? Do you have information on how many of those involved only "original high quality factory ammunition."

BTW, I never accused you of recycling kB!s. What I was referring to was the number of times I've seen a post on one of these forums trumpeting "another Glock failure" which turned out to be a reference to a years old link. For the record, I've never accused you of being intentionally deceitful, about the most critical statement I've made about you was that you tend a bit towards the sensational at the expense of absolute technical objectivity.

Since I'm still not seeing it, would you be so kind as to point out the contradiction between my statement and the passage from the Glock manual.

John

If you enjoyed reading about "Portland OR PD to stop using Glock .45" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!