arover2 said:
I'd like to ask another question about the .40S&W caliber. Is it safe to use factory made +P .40S&W ammo in polymar framed pistols, such as the Glock model 22?
Preferrably 165 or 155 grain JHP's in the .40+P factory ammo.
My question could also be the same for the 9MM +P factory made ammunition. And using this same type of ammo in the Glock model 17.
Recently I purchased a few boxes of 9MM Speer Gold Dot +P 124 grain JHP for my Glock 17.
When I took this Speer ammo to a pistol range to fire a few rounds, a fellow shooter on the range warned me against the use of all +P JHP's, in any grain weight bullet in any caliber for all Glock pistols.
He stated the higher pressure of +P's with continued use in any polymar pistol, could lead to frame separation. And most especially Glocks.
Does anyone know about this? Thanks for any advice.
You're being fed a gigantic line of B.S. Glocks aren't fragile. They are, in fact, very durable. Chuck Taylor has a Gen I G17 with over 200,000 rounds through it. What you have is a self-proclaimed expert pushing personal opinion as fact because he feels being on the other side of the counter gives him that right. I've seen enough of his type to ignore 90% of the crap I hear from people on the other side of gun counters as me. +P ammunition is fine for all modern pistols in good condition, including polymer framed pistols, for as long as there is a SAAMI designation for +P ammunition in that caliber. For the record, this excludes .40 Smith and Wesson as SAAMI does not acknowledge that there is such a thing. It is my not-so-humble opinion that you should stay away from +P marked .40 Smith and Wesson and generally avoid companies who market it because there is no guidelines for it and no pistol is built to take it--regardless of its frame material. If you want that much velocity from a .40 caliber bullet, you should have gone with a 10mm Auto. Trying to turn any .40 S&W into a 10mm Auto is probably going to end poorly for you and your pistol regardless of whether it is a SIG, HK, 1911, or other.
I am getting tired of combating the same Internet rumors. The Glock does not have an unsupported chamber and contrary to popular belief, the barrels are actually very good quality. The chambers are a little looser than most to accomidate more reliable feeding, and the feed ramp removes a very small portion of material from the six o' clock position. Other than this, the overall quality and support of the Glock barrel is very similar to other well-respected brands--including HK. Even this small lack of support at six o' clock shouldn't be enough to cause excessive or dangerous case support issues. I know my Glock 20 runs fine without it and the two people I knew with 23s never complained. And like I've said before, if you plan to reload and want to hover near the atomic level for your choosen cartridge, and you feel an aftermarket barrel with more support and a tighter chamber might prove to be safer and increase case life, fine. Get an aftermarket barrel. The Glock is every bit as high quality, durable, and reliable as any of the pistols from SIG and HK and others and purchasing an aftermarket barrel to quell your fears will do nothing more than price it comparably with these other brands. In fact I have a $1000 HK USP Tactical that I would sell way before my Glock 20.
Or, since you guys seem so good at it and seem to enjoy it so much, you can continue to run around in circles with your hands in the air screaming that the sky is falling because of Glock's "unsupported chambers" or "polymer frames" or whatever. Go for it. Knock yourselves out. I'm getting kinda tired of wading through the B.S but whatever turns your crank so-to-speak. I'll continue shooting my Glock and enjoying every minute of it.
