Conversion barrel conundrums: HELP!

[Rarebird]

Glock armorers HELP! Glock "40 to 9" conversion barrels that enable shooting 9mm ammo from a .40 caliber Glock, typically made by Lone Wolf, Storm Lake, Bar-Sto, KKM, etc., are said to require only a barrel swap and a 9mm magazine to shoot reliably. However, some have said that the extractor should be swapped as well for 100% reliability.

Here's the puzzle: Considering the 9mm conversion barrels are manufactured with an offset chamber - to allow the .40 caliber extractor claw to align properly, then wouldn't swapping out to a 9mm extractor be unnecessary? And worse, wouldn't it cause a misalignment of the extractor claw?

Someone with intricate knowledge on this topic, please chime in. Change the extractor, or not? And by the way, it is clear that changing to a 9mm ejector (not extractor) does help get the empty brass slung in the right direction regardless, therefore, I can see how changing to the 9mm ejector would help but, I fail to see how changing the extractor could help if the manufacturer has already allowed for this by offsetting the chamber slightly.

 

[Tinker]

I am NOT an armorer....just an owner of two .40 cal. Glocks. All I do is drop in the LW conversion barrels, load up the 9mm mags and shoot the rigs until I'm out of ammo.

 

[Legionnaire]

I'm with Tinker. My G23 has functioned flawlessly with both LW and KKM 40/9 conversion barrels. Don't sweat it.

 

[scaatylobo]

Ditto

Used a LW conversion barrel in the G-27 to make it a G-26,NO problem .

Did use the G-26 mags though.

 

[silversport]

I have a G23 with a Storm Lake conversion barrel...just the barrel change and I use GLOCK 9mm mags (both G19 and G17) without issue...I mainly use 124GR Speer Gold Dots and Lawman...I did have a couple hiccups with cheap lighter weight cartridges but no issues with the good stuff...I would (and have) trust(ed) my life to the combo...

Bill

 

[hentown]

You're reaching a conclusion based on a false assumption. The 9mm conversion barrels don't feature an "offset" chamber. Think about that one for a nanosecond and see the error of your ways.

You probably won't need the 9mm extractor, but not because the barrel's chamber is offset.

 

[Rarebird]

Glock conversion barrel

Hentown, your premise that the chamber itself isn't "offset" is correct. My phrasing is what's offset here (lol!). Let me correct myself to say that the chamber block, not the chamber is what's milled for the .40 cal. extractor (or, maybe it is not, that's what I'm asking). And perhaps there's a better machining word than offset for this.

Note the following excerpt taken from a review on Lone Wolf Barrels: "With this conversion barrel, the loading side of the barrel is off-centered a hair so that the rounds can line up with the ejector pin properly, since they are smaller rounds than the firearm is meant to eject." The link for this is: http://www.concealednation.org/2013/10/review-lone-wolf-40-9-conversion-barrel-for-glock-27/

Meanwhile, I've contacted 3 different aftermarket barrel makers with this question and will post here if, when and what they reply to me.

It would be great if anyone could post here addressing whether there is or is not a difference in the machining of the chamber block area on conversion barrels that compensates for the extractor distance. Remember: a .40 cal. (10mm) extractor is not designed to purchase on a 9mm shell case. While the testimonials here of it working well are appreciated others have reported to the contrary.

 

[SDGlock23]

Having done the 9mm conversion thing a few times, here's my take.

First time was just the 9mm LW barrel and 9mm magazine on a G23. No issues.

Second time was with the 9mm LW barrel, 9mm magazine and 9mm extractor on a G35, no issues either but it did eject the brass a little more consistently in one direction.

Bottom line, either way there were no malfunction issues.

 

[hentown]

I'm a loyal Lonewolf customer. Have one of their threaded barrels for my G17, with another threaded barrel coming in this week for my G26. Both will be for shooting suppressed, of course.

I don't think you could go wrong with any of the manufacturers. I've used several different brands, and they all work well.

My suggestion would be to buy the barrel of your choice (they'll all be just about the same) and try shooting with the .40 extractor. If you see issues, then buy a 9mm extractor. 9mm extractors fit into .40 slides and vice-versa. Not so 10 mm/.45acp extractors and slides.

 

[Rarebird]

spring loaded bearing

Thanks hentown and others here for relaying your experiences about conversion bbls.

Swapping out the extractor is simple and easy enough but whether it's worth it remains unclear ... as I wait to get a reply from aftermarket barrel manufacturers on this.

Meanwhile, does anyone know if the spring loaded bearing needs to be changed out if the extractor is changed? Or does this have no bearing (very punny)?

 

[rbernie]

The rim diameter of 9mm and 40S&W are close enough (by design) to allow the breechfaces and extractors to be similar, if not identical. On a Glock, swapping the extractor has been proven to be unecessary when converting a G22 (or G23, G27, G35, G31, G32, and G33) to shoot 9mm via use of a conversion barrel. When swapping the extractor, changing the spring loaded bearing is not necessary (assuming that you're using the same generation of extractor and that it's not heavily worn) and replacing the spring is likewise needed only if the pistol has seen heavy use.

 

[Rarebird]

rbernie: you post interesting information here that the mere 1mm extractor specs pose no practical problems mechanically. What you post appears accurate from all I have gathered on this topic. In a related matter, even the Sig Sauer P239/P229 extractors for their .40/357Sig AND 9mms are shown as the same part number on MidwayUSA. So, that would seem to support what you are stating here that it does not matter. Strangely however, TopGun Supply, a Sig stocking dealer, lists the extractors as 2 different part numbers.

Meanwhile: KKM has courteously replied to my question on this, stating that extractor change is not necessary and, that there is no "offset" in the milling of the conversion bbls. Similarly, Lonewolf rep. replied that changing out the extractor is not necessary but would be fine if the conversion is permanent and dedicated to shooting only 9mm.

Thanks to everyone here for taking the time to address this topic.
____________________________________________________________
Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer. And here's a new word for gun grabbers: they're "hoblophobes." Hoblophobe: A person with an irrational fear of weapons, generally guns, usually occuring as a result of a liberal upbringing.

 

[mach1.3]

I have a G23 with a LWD threaded 40-9 conversion bbl and a KCI 9mm G19 mag. All is great. I also have the ported 4.9" .40 replacement bbl and that works great as well. The ported bbl works so well that I qualified for my CHL with it and shot the lights out. So far the LWD bbls have my nod as replacement or conversions with my G23. My next step is to get the LWD ported (inboard/outboard)extended bbl in .40 for my G35 and maybe even the 40-9 conversion for same.

I wish the sailing were as smooth with the EFK .40 ported bbl I got as a conversion for my Sig P229 in .357.

 

[decoy562]

I've had no issues with my Storm Lake 9mm and 357 sig barrels with the factory extractor in my gen 3 Glock 23. Just change the barrel and magazine and go.

 

[wally]

No issues with .40S&W 9mm conversion barrels in Glock 22 and S&W M&P40. The chambers are most definitely not offset. In my M&P40c I just dropped in a S&W 9c barrel and with 9mm mags its been 100% despite all the slop in the barrel hood.

The .40S&W mags can "work" if you are willing to ignore occasional stovepipes and ejection of live rounds which sometimes jam.

None have had enough POA/POI shift to be worth adjusting my sights, which I think is pretty remarkable.

 

[Rarebird]

UPDATE: KKM has courteously replied to my question on this, stating that extractor change is not necessary and, that there is no "offset" in the manufacture of the conversion bbls. Similarly, Lonewolf rep. replied that changing out the extractor is not necessary but would be fine if the conversion is permanent and dedicated to shooting only 9mm.

Thanks to everyone here for taking the time to address this topic.
____________________________________________________________
Here's a new word to put on those pesky gun grabbers: they're "hoblophobes." Hoblophobe: A person with an irrational fear of weapons, generally guns, usually occuring as a result of a liberal upbringing. (this is a real word, look it up).

 

[Rarebird]

You're reaching a conclusion based on a false assumption. The 9mm conversion barrels don't feature an "offset" chamber. Think about that one for a nanosecond and see the error of your ways.

You probably won't need the 9mm extractor, but not because the barrel's chamber is offset.

Here's a link to product review on Lone Wolf barrels. Note the quote (below) excerpted from that review:

http://www.concealednation.org/2013/10/review-lone-wolf-40-9-conversion-barrel-for-glock-27/

"With this conversion barrel, the loading side of the barrel is off-centered a hair so that the rounds can line up with the ejector pin properly, since they are smaller rounds than the firearm is meant to eject."

 

[gunnutery]

I may be beating a dead horse here, but I haven't had any issues either with my 40-9 LW conversion, kept the stock extractor.

 

[hentown]

Here's a link to product review on Lone Wolf barrels. Note the quote (below) excerpted from that review:

http://www.concealednation.org/2013/...-for-glock-27/

"With this conversion barrel, the loading side of the barrel is off-centered a hair so that the rounds can line up with the ejector pin properly, since they are smaller rounds than the firearm is meant to eject."

I would seriously question the expertise of the dolt making that review.

 

[Rarebird]

I would seriously question the expertise of the dolt making that review.

Hentown: your thinking on this certainly makes most sense, especially since 2 actual barrel manufacturers have responded to my question that the barrels are NOT made off center. However, apparently, this matter has not been laid to rest elsewhere.
Here's a quote of what's is being posted on other forum sites,". . . the conversion barrel is bored ever so slightly off center.
It does not affect the point of impact since the whole bore is off center from one end to the other.
What that does is put the extractor FIRMLY into the case because the center of the bore is in the same relationship to the extractor.
The barrel companies have tested this to death
There is no benefit whatsoever from putting a 9mm extractor in a G23.
It actually does not even make sense, because the claw on the extractor is not any bigger for a 9mm than for a 40.
If anything the 40 extractor is bigger."

As for me, at this point I just wanted to ascertain if the extractor swap would be of any benefit. The LW rep. stated it would if the conversion was permanent and dedicated to 9mm but, otherwise, not necessary.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The rim diameter of 9mm and 40S&W are close enough (by design) to allow the breechfaces and extractors to be similar, if not identical. On a Glock, swapping the extractor has been proven to be unecessary when converting a G22 (or G23, G27, G35, G31, G32, and G33) to shoot 9mm via use of a conversion barrel. When swapping the extractor, changing the spring loaded bearing is not necessary (assuming that you're using the same generation of extractor and that it's not heavily worn) and replacing the spring is likewise needed only if the pistol has seen heavy use.

There's a YOUTUBE session of one of the Glock gurus (somebody who seems pretty knowledgeable) using STOCK 9mm barrels in .40 slides. The guns functioned properly and, surprisingly (to me, at least) demonstrated essentially unchanged accuracy despite a smaller diameter barrel in a larger slide opening. It seems pretty clear that the Glock design is fairly robust and flexible.

Other guns may be less forgiving than Glocks.

 

[Rarebird]

There's a YOUTUBE session of one of the Glock gurus (somebody who seems pretty knowledgeable) using STOCK 9mm barrels in .40 slides. The guns functioned properly and, surprisingly (to me, at least) demonstrated essentially unchanged accuracy despite a smaller diameter barrel in a larger slide opening. It seems pretty clear that the Glock design is fairly robust and flexible.

Other guns may be less forgiving than Glocks.

". . . It seems pretty clear that the Glock design is fairly robust and flexible. . . "

Robust and flexible is a problem for someone more interested in precision and reliability. Either there is or is not a precision point of contact between the extractor claw and the shell case when firing 9mm conversion bbls. Precision means no slippage over time, no failure to extract, etc., just as though firing the designed .40 cal.

 

[Tinker]

Rarebird,

You seem obsessed with changing the extractor for some reason. Do it if you choose, but I have run hundreds of rounds through my converted Glocks with no detectable issues at all. Especially no accuracy issues with a Glock, converted or not. Look up a youtube video with the keywords "Hickok 45, Glock 23 at 230 yards". Also another YT guy popping steel regularly at 100 yards with a Glock.

 

[hentown]

Hentown: your thinking on this certainly makes most sense, especially since 2 actual barrel manufacturers have responded to my question that the barrels are NOT made off center. However, apparently, this matter has not been laid to rest elsewhere.
Here's a quote of what's is being posted on other forum sites,". . . the conversion barrel is bored ever so slightly off center.
It does not affect the point of impact since the whole bore is off center from one end to the other.
What that does is put the extractor FIRMLY into the case because the center of the bore is in the same relationship to the extractor.
The barrel companies have tested this to death
There is no benefit whatsoever from putting a 9mm extractor in a G23.
It actually does not even make sense, because the claw on the extractor is not any bigger for a 9mm than for a 40.
If anything the 40 extractor is bigger."

As for me, at this point I just wanted to ascertain if the extractor swap would be of any benefit. The LW rep. stated it would if the conversion was permanent and dedicated to 9mm but, otherwise, not necessary.

The only thing that's cockeyed here is the opinion of the idiot posting that the barrels are off-center. His rationale is dimwitted.

 

[Rarebird]

Rarebird,

You seem obsessed with changing the extractor for some reason. Do it if you choose, but I have run hundreds of rounds through my converted Glocks with no detectable issues at all. Especially no accuracy issues with a Glock, converted or not. Look up a youtube video with the keywords "Hickok 45, Glock 23 at 230 yards". Also another YT guy popping steel regularly at 100 yards with a Glock.

Vetting out a clarification concerning a mechanical function, especially after reading so many different opines about it, is a fun pursuit but I'm hardly "obsessed."

Thanks nonetheless for your testimonial, added to the gazzillions, regarding glock durability. If and when Hickok45 posts a YouTube vid shooting a G27 converted to 9mm, please let us know.