The conversation should not be confrontational, and anyone having evidence of a potential danger is my friend for pointing out their concerns. I do not handload, I will not run cast bullets in my Glocks (or any hex-rifled handgun)for the very reasons listed. As a result of these posts, I am sitting here looking at the chamber support my g27 provides; the only area not fully supported is a 1-1.5mm directly above the feed ramp. Is this the area of failure you are referring to?
You are absolutely right.
If the problem with the Glock 40's and 45acp's was the unsupported chamber, we would have had a whole lot more KB's than we in fact had. Just a very few.
That is why it was so difficult to ascertain what happened. It was "intermittent". Anyone that must repair anything of consequence knows intermittent problems are often the devils own work to figure out.
That is what happened with the Glock's. It was like in many things a group of conditions that had to be met before there was a risk of a KB. The 2 truly random problems were the QC or quality of the Tennifer process in a small number of guns AND the occasional rather hot, but in spec factory round come together. The Tennifer process Making the chambers either to brittle or to soft. I believe brittle, but that is my opinion. And the hot side of the in spec range of some ammo. The Scientists and engineers we had do this, (and I love to remind everyone that several were in fact rocket scientists working at Cape Canaveral) We sent the barrel to a Metallurgy lab on our own nickle.
With that report, which I no longer have a copy of, that was the conclusion we came to. That is why it is rather rare, and there were so few. More than other guns, but not a serious issue with most Glock 40 and 45acp shooters either.
My personal response was to sell my 3 45acp Glocks, and only keep 9mm. It was at that time, about 15 years ago that I came to the conclusion to only carry fighting guns in the caliber they were designed for.
If I want 9mm I preferred SIG's, (220, 225, 226 and 228) but I would be almost as happy with any of my present Glock's 17,19,26,34. (mainly because of egonomics) But in 9mm you have a rather vast choice of firearms. If I carry a 1911 or want to shoot 45 acp that is what I use, a 1911 5" Government type. Tried a SIG 220, but found it to not be as reliable in 45acp than in the caliber it was originally designed in, 9mm. Imagine that.
I believe the gun I am most impressed with in 40 cal today is the S&W M&P. It may be the first handgun built from scratch to be a 40, although the SIG 229 is close behind.
Basically what I am saying choose the caliber your platform/gun of choice was designed for. Is it possible to have a reliable firearm in a caliber other than the original design, sure. But I have never heard of any weapon designed in one caliber and equally as reliable in another. In most cases it is simple engineering. That is the case with Glock's too.
IN the end, it is more common sense than genius. Does that make 40 or 45acp Glock's dangerous, nope, does it mean they are inferior guns, nope. It's just if you want THE most reliable Glock get a 17. The 40's and 45acp's have had and in some other ways continue to have some issues. That is all.
ALL GUNS HAVE ISSUES, all of them. Some have more than others. Just understand what the issues are with the gun you select and use. Particularly a weapon you may have to trust you and your loved ones lives to one day. That's it.
Many folks can blissfully keep shooting what ever they have, and never be aware of the issues. Another person can run into those issues with the first box of cartridges run through the gun. With Glock's the good running guns are by a vast number the norm, not the exception.
Of late, because of the arthritis in my trigger finger, I retro'd back to my original carry and fighting handgun, the 1911, in 45acp of course. Shortest trigger pull of any practical fighting weapon. But, and this I knew long before I returned to it, and that is it take a lot to set one up, and a lot more to keep them running. Luckily I know how, and can afford it and do it.
Frankly most folks carrying 1911's would be better off with Glocks in 9mm, but try to tell them that. They are the same folks that wonder why their thunder blaster keeps needing new recoil springs, or how to adjust a sear spring etc... or wonder why their shorter than 5" 1911 doesn't work as well as the originally designed 5" models. Never heard a Glock shooter do or say that.
Even my Glocks and SIG,s I change out the springs every 5000 rounds. In my 1911's, it is about every 1500 i.e.
So that is where I am coming from. To the kool aide drinkers, it doesn't matter, they think I am insulting their best girl. Nope, just pointing out she has a birthmark or two. But of course to the true believer that is an insult.
As for me I am done here.
"None are so blind as those who choose not to see"
Go figure.
Fred
