Wrong Glock parts in my gun?

was this frame an 80%? The tolerances look way of to have a functional firearm.

You are playing with fire especially for posting pictures.

groundhog34 said:

You are playing with fire especially for posting pictures.

Click to expand...

I have to ask why you stated that the OP is playing with fire for posting photos of a homebuilt firearm. Unless the OP lives in a restrictive state that bans homemade firearms, then he is good to go as far as federal laws are concerned. And he did not say where he is from so we don't know if he is breaking any state laws or not. He is definitely not braking any federal laws.

Walkingfunk said:

I bought everything as a Glock 17 parts. Did I get sold a different glock model part, or did I mess up somehow?

Click to expand...

It is obvious that you are using cheaper aftermarket parts. I have never seen a Gen 3 9mm 336 ejector like that. OEM and most aftermarket 336 ejectors are bent and not straight. And there are plenty of instances showing that aftermarket parts can cause issues since some are out of spec.

No matter if you are replacing parts in an OEM frame, building a 80% or 3d printing a frame, you are always better off using OEM Glock parts when you can for the best reliability.

12Bravo20 said:

It is obvious that you are using cheaper aftermarket parts. I have never seen a Gen 3 9mm 336 ejector like that. OEM and most aftermarket 336 ejectors are bent and not straight. And there are plenty of instances showing that aftermarket parts can cause issues since some are out of spec.

Click to expand...

You can see in the first shot he posted the little casting mark on the side of the housing which is typical of the cheap aftermarket parts kits. The lack of markings on, and shape of, the ejector are also telltale signs of it not being OEM. The final nail in the coffin is the black colored spring (instead of the OEM bare silver).

Great webpage from MGB showing the differences between the typical aftermarket parts and the Glock OEM parts:
https://www.marinegunbuilder.com/post/glock-oem-parts-vs-knock-offs

That being said, I've bought dozens of these cheap LPKs during the last 2 years or so when the availability of OEM kits has been extremely thin and prices very high. The comparable aftermarket kits can be purchased for about $40 delivered if you're patient and hunt a little (for example: https://bigbellytoys.com/lock-lower...-polymer-80-oem-gen-3-non-adjustment-trigger/). The "more reputable" aftermarket parts kits that guys are buying from eBay (from vendors like KM Tactical) for much higher prices are the exact same parts as the ones for sale there at Big Belly Toys.

A little time stoning and polishing and tweaking these aftermarket parts goes a long way toward ensuring they're reliable. None of them I've used have been so "out of spec" that they couldn't be tweaked with some needle-nose pliers or a file in literally a few minutes to get them running properly. They've worked great for me in both P80s and 3D printed frames like the DD17.2 and DD19.2.

The only Glock parts I see is the upper. Glocks are so cheap, I can’t see the use in home making any part of a Glock. Good luck with your project

As a member of the Marine Gun Builder forum, I have seen plenty of cheap aftermarket parts that are indeed out of spec. The most common parts we see that are out of spec are the trigger housings, trigger bars and firing pins (striker) which leads to bead sear engagement issues. Another common issue seen is that "drop in" barrels still need to be hand fitted to the slides on occasion.

Several of my write ups have been posted to the Marine Gun Build Blog. My user name there is: bapegg.

JDGray said:

The only Glock parts I see is the upper. Glocks are so cheap, I can’t see the use in home making any part of a Glock. Good luck with your project

Click to expand...

Depending on what part of the country one is in, even OEM Glock pistols have been hard to come by one rate last 12-18 months. Plus one can fully customize an 80% build without having to first buy an OEM Glock then spend additional money on aftermarket parts. One will not save much if any money when building a full blown custom pistol but you can still build a Plain Jane for around $400-$450.

Building your round firearm at home is not for everyone, and that is okay. For others, we enjoy knowing that we can make something that is as good or better than a factory firearm.

That ejector looks like it's for a 40 cal. You'll probably have reliability issues when shooting it. My brother in law had a 17 built with the 40 ejector and he'd get spent casing stuck in the action every other mag or so. The 9mm ejector has a slight bend to it.

C-grunt said:

That ejector looks like it's for a 40 cal.

Click to expand...

That's the same ejector that comes on all these aftermarket lower parts kits, which are advertised as being for "17/19/22/23".

I've put quite a few of 'em together on P80 and 3D printed frames and haven't had any reliability issues with slide fitment, FTE, or anything else using that very ejector essentially unmodified. That being said, the slight bend that the 336 ejector has is easily replicated on the aftermarket ejector with pliers and/or a vice.

This is obviously easier for folks to do when they have an OEM Glock part sitting right there on the bench to compare the aftermarket one to, but it isn't that complicated if it needs to be done.

JDGray said:

The only Glock parts I see is the upper. Glocks are so cheap, I can’t see the use in home making any part of a Glock. Good luck with your project

Click to expand...

Nobody home builds Glock-pattern handguns to save money.

Here is what the different Glock 9mm ejectors look like. From top to bottom: Gen 3 (336), Gen 4 (30274), and Gen 5 (47021). They all have a bend in them. What the OP has is an aftermarket copy of the Gen 3 336 ejector that is not bent to the correct shape. For better ejection of empty cases, the Gen 4 or 5 ejectors are preferred.

The ejector looks like the one installed in my factory G43 lower, It's hard to read the part number w/o pulling it out, but it looks like it's stamped 33214

Jimfern said:

The ejector looks like the one installed in my factory G43 lower, It's hard to read the part number w/o pulling it out, but it looks like it's stamped 33214

Click to expand...

A G43 ejector is too short to fit into the double stack trigger housings.



What the OP has is an aftermarket ejector based off teh Gen 3 336 ejector. But the aftermarket one is not bent like an OEM ejector.

I would be interested in seeing a side-profile of your pistol. Maybe when you're done you can do a little show-and-tell.

Hacker15E said:

That's the same ejector that comes on all these aftermarket lower parts kits, which are advertised as being for "17/19/22/23".

I've put quite a few of 'em together on P80 and 3D printed frames and haven't had any reliability issues with slide fitment, FTE, or anything else using that very ejector essentially unmodified. That being said, the slight bend that the 336 ejector has is easily replicated on the aftermarket ejector with pliers and/or a vice.

This is obviously easier for folks to do when they have an OEM Glock part sitting right there on the bench to compare the aftermarket one to, but it isn't that complicated if it needs to be done.

Click to expand...

When I put a 9 mm conversion kit on my G33 in .357 I did get 9x19 case stuck just as you describe after the ejecter got a rounded corner from I think from the steel russian, the gun was jamming up most of the time. I was afraid to bend that ejector and just fired either .357 sig or with another barrel I fired 40 in it.
I do not believe in aftermarket parts that are substandard for a serious gun. Those parts that are connected to fire control groups had better be right or ADs might occur. While I have never heard of it, I always fear such a gun going FA.
Apparently the FA conversion of glocks just requires a very simple part that is extremely illegal.

12Bravo20 said:

I have to ask why you stated that the OP is playing with fire for posting photos of a homebuilt firearm. Unless the OP lives in a restrictive state that bans homemade firearms, then he is good to go as far as federal laws are concerned. And he did not say where he is from so we don't know if he is breaking any state laws or not. He is definitely not braking any federal laws.



It is obvious that you are using cheaper aftermarket parts. I have never seen a Gen 3 9mm 336 ejector like that. OEM and most aftermarket 336 ejectors are bent and not straight. And there are plenty of instances showing that aftermarket parts can cause issues since some are out of spec.

No matter if you are replacing parts in an OEM frame, building a 80% or 3d printing a frame, you are always better off using OEM Glock parts when you can for the best reliability.

Click to expand...

It is currently not illegal and probably will remain legal to finish any 80%. I am waiting to see what the ATF is going to put into 'law'. I think the only change will be new 80% frames will have to go through a dealer with serial number, but you can still finish them. I believe you will be able to finish any frame still in your possession, but if it goes to a dealer and likely a gunsmith will require a serial number be added at that time.
But in this current climate, not sure if I would mention it.

barnetmill said:

Apparently the FA conversion of glocks just requires a very simple part that is extremely illegal.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is just a piece that sticks in from the back of the slide and trips the reset bar by pushing it to the side.

The good news is that there's nothing about the aftermarket parts that make them any more susceptible to this happening accidentally than OEM Glock parts.