New vs old style Glock extractor plunger length?

[1KPerDay]

Anyone know the difference between new and old length extractor plungers for Glocks? I’m considering buying an Apex extractor to hopefully cure the brass to face I’m getting but it says it requires the old length (longer, I think) plunger. Both of my Gen 3 .40s have the same length plunger at approx. 1.72”.

 

[LiveLife]

If you mean Spring Loaded Bearing (that goes on the end of extractor plunger spring to prevent gouging of plastic slide cover) old vs new as in older without loaded chamber indicator vs newer loaded chamber indicator - https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1004281780

Yes, older bearing has longer head/cap.

Without loaded chamber indicator - SP01176


With loaded chamber indicator - 2714S

 

[1KPerDay]

Ah. Hmmm. Not sure actually what I mean. I think the info says plunger so I took that to mean the longer steel part. Lemme look it up.

 

[LiveLife]

No, you use the same plunger, just change the plastic bearing at the end of spring (Apex kit comes with extractor and spring) with the $2 Glock part # SP01176.

This from Apex website for Gen3 models - https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Details/191891

"For most consistent results Apex Tactical Specialties recommends using the following Glock factory parts ... Extractor ... Spring Load Bearing for Glock Model 17, 19, 26 and 34 - Glock Item # SP01176"

 

[1KPerDay]

Thank you. Can you explain how the little ramp works in conjunction with the plunger/extractor? How does it know which way to be oriented or doesn’t it matter? Trying to imagine the purpose of the ramp.

 

[1KPerDay]

Or is the ramp a non issue and the only functional difference is the length of the cap?

 

[LiveLife]

Or is the ramp a non issue and the only functional difference is the length of the cap?

The ramp at the tip goes inside the extractor plunger spring. I don't think it does anything.

Yes, APEX requires use of longer head/cap bearing that was used with pre-loaded chamber indicator extractor.

 

[LiveLife]

I just checked the Spring Loaded Bearings of my Gen3 G22/G23 with loaded chamber indicator extractors and they now look to have flat bottoms and color is white. Picture may not show but tip is thin tapered in profile and concave (matching the plunger tip when spring compressed?). Looking at other SLB pictures, they all show flat bottom so maybe the ramp was manufacturing excess that should have been removed.

Anyway, since you will be ordering the older SLB with flat bottom, it should be none issue.

 

[LiveLife]

OK, found a better picture showing what the bottom of SLB should look like new

 

[JohnKSa]

... maybe the ramp was manufacturing excess that should have been removed.

Correct. The "ramp" is just leftover plastic from the molding process.

 

[1KPerDay]

Thanks guys. My G22 has the LCI extractor and my G23 Has the non LCI extractor (both SLBs are white, one is cut shorter at the fat end as noted). I guess I’ll try the apex extractor and see if it works before I order another.

 

[LiveLife]

G22 has the LCI extractor and my G23 Has the non LCI extractor

Have you tried replacing the ejector?

 

[LiveLife]

Gen3/4 40S&W used ejector #1882 and now uses ejector #28926

 

[zaitcev]

I’m considering buying an Apex extractor to hopefully cure the brass to face I’m getting but it says it requires the old length (longer, I think) plunger.

Good luck and please let us know how it went.

I tried to cure BTF with Apex (although on on my Brownells slide) and the blessed Apex just never worked right. It produced FTE by slipping off the rim. I figured that it did not go deep enough, but not because of the pusher's length: the machining in Brownells slide didn't allow Apex to rotate inward far enough. I scalloped out some material with Dremel, and it made a positive difference, but not enough. It continued to make FTE with the slipping off the case once in a while. The OEM extractor works 100%, except for the BTF.

Eventually, I re-created the "G45 notch" in the face of the slide and that seemed to help the BTF... but not completely yet again.

BTW, instead of buying it, I 3D-printed a longer pusher's bearing. Here's an OpenSCAD with dimensions, which are juust a little larger than the stock. For some reason, the printed part comes out a little smaller after finishing, so it matches. I use a 3mm ABS.

-------
$fn=16;
cylinder(11.0, 2.6/2, 1.5/2);
cylinder(2.5, 4.1/2, 4.1/2);

 

[LiveLife]

I tried to cure BTF with Apex (although on on my Brownells slide) and the blessed Apex just never worked right.

I sent PM to OP showing forum example of Apex extractor/spring not completely addressing BTF issue and suggested contacting Glock customer service as brass to face is happening with factory components. (I am also using Gen3 Glock 22/23 with 40-9 conversion barrels without BTF issue)

Some report replacing Gen3 9mm models with ejector with Gen4 9mm ejector addressed 98% of BTF issue with changing SLB (Spring Loaded Bearing) with pre LCI (Loaded Chamber Indicator) which applies more extractor tension addressed the rest.

Interested in how this plays out for OP as pistols involved are Gen3 Glock 22 and 23 with factory and 40-9 conversion barrels.

 

[1KPerDay]

Going to try updated glock ejectors and 9mm extractors (using appropriate SLBs) first and see if that solves the issue. Thanks for the input on the Apex extractor.
Will report back

 

[1KPerDay]

Well I got the parts from Brownells plus an extra set of fancy AR-15 safety levers I didn't order (I left a message for them asking how they wanted me to send them back), and I put the new MIM 9mm LCI extractor in my G22 slide with conversion barrel and BTF is worse than before. Brass goes up, to the right, to the left, back in my face... ugh. HOWEVER I didn't have any FTEs I have been occasionally having with the stock .40 extractor.

I guess I'll try a different ejector next. People lose their minds when you ask about putting a 9mm ejector in a .40 with a conversion barrel but I've never been able to satisfactorily determine why. I'll just swap the ejectors and see if it solves the issue, and be super careful when ejecting live rounds because apparently your gun will instantly blow up if you do this.

some light reading for any interested
https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/9...as-to-do-with-conversions-and-safety.1164966/

 

[zaitcev]

People lose their minds when you ask about putting a 9mm ejector in a .40 with a conversion barrel but I've never been able to satisfactorily determine why.

Maybe because it rubs against the slide just a little, and they're concerned about periodic bending and fatigue.

 

[1KPerDay]

Maybe because it rubs against the slide just a little.

Explain please. Far as I know the only meaningful differences between 9/40 slides are the sides of the breech face (wider for .40s obviously) and the muzzle opening... I believe the clearance for the ejector is identical on the slide between 9 and 40. Correct me if I'm wrong.