10mm Glock KaBoom - >>> UPDATE: PISTOL RETURNED <<< - Page 9

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 10mm Glock KaBoom - >>> UPDATE: PISTOL RETURNED <<< (Page 9 of 9)

Posted: 11/30/2011 3:21:09 PM EST

[#1]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I thought Glock had a lifetime warranty so why are they charging you? Maybe it's just on their new stuff.

Did they x-ray the slide to determine it wasn't damaged? Do you know if Glock is going to replace the frame with one from another 2nd gen or will they upgrade it to the 3rd? I would be angry with myself for not sending the gun back to Glock when you first noticed the case buldge because it would saved the cost of the replacement barrel and frame damage but hindsight is 20/20.

Ummm... If they are only replacing the frame, they must think the barrel is fine. Which means they likely would have thought it was fine years ago.
So even if I would have sent the gun in, I would have likely still had the explosion.

Nothing was said about which frame would be used.
I said I wanted something as close to original as possible.

If they can provide a second generation frame, great!
If 3rd generation, I told them I want a standard size frame, with the Glock accessory rail, and non-ambidextrous magazine release.

I see your logic as well. I haven't read through all of the posts but did you mention the barrel to them when you sent it in? Seems that they're fixed on blaming the ammo if that's the case to remove their liabliity. Good luck on getting the frame that you want.

I mentioned that several people questioned the chamber near the feed ramp.

But I was not accusing Glock or DT, so that is as far as I wanted to go.

Posted: 11/30/2011 3:26:47 PM EST

[#2]

Quoted:

Yeah... but a pressure test won't prove the brass case is any good.

Yes it would. If you tested 5-10 rounds as a sample from the same box / lot and they all were within SAAMI spec, you would then 'know' that pressure was not the issue. If they were overpressure, question answered.

If not over SAAMI spec, then section the cases from the pressure test and 5-10 more to see if they are thinner than 'normal'. If of sufficient thickness, the brass can also be tested for hardness. (Soft brass has less tensile strength.)

I have followed this entire thread and what I see is a lot of theories and opinions but no linear approach to determining what actually was the cause of the kaboom.

Posted: 11/30/2011 4:22:29 PM EST

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Yeah... but a pressure test won't prove the brass case is any good.

Yes it would. If you tested 5-10 rounds as a sample from the same box / lot and they all were within SAAMI spec, you would then 'know' that pressure was not the issue. If they were overpressure, question answered.

If not over SAAMI spec, then section the cases from the pressure test and 5-10 more to see if they are thinner than 'normal'. If of sufficient thickness, the brass can also be tested for hardness. (Soft brass has less tensile strength.)

I have followed this entire thread and what I see is a lot of theories and opinions but no linear approach to determining what actually was the cause of the kaboom.

I disagree. We can't say anything about the brass when testing pressure.

If 5-10 rounds were all within SAAMI specs, we don't know if the brass is good or not
UNLESS you assume the chamber was ideally shaped for the maximum pressures.
I doubt anyone here will say that the chamber is "right", regardless of Glock's opinion.
Trusting the word of the manufacturer that their product was designed correctly is in
poor form when discussing a hard core analysis like you are talking about.
Who writes the rules on how much support a chamber must provide to the brass? Anyone?

If we proved the ammo exceeded SAAMI spec, that also doesn't prove the brass was good or bad.
It simply allows the argument that you can't blame the brass if there was too much pressure.
But that doesn't mean the case wasn't also too thin, or made of the wrong alloy, or too soft.

Yes, the brass could be tested. In fact, I have the resources to have micro hardness surveys performed if I wanted. (probably free if I asked nice)
Fat_McNasty already measured thicknesses and believes the DoubleTap brass is thinner than the original Norma design.
Does SAAMI have specifications for thickness and hardness?

Posted: 11/30/2011 4:32:49 PM EST

[#4]

Quoted:
ok got to the range today.. and test fired them in my gun (colt delta factory non ramped barrel). and there is a tiny bit of a bulge, you really have to look for it. slight primer flattening. but no where near as flat as my hot loads i fired in the same session.

Its the brass that DT is using. it needs a bit thicker Web for the pressures that they are running.. and to be compatible with glocks old style ramping jobs.

Ding! All other conspiracy theories out the window. Amazing how so many Glock fanboys jumped on the wagon accusing OP of owning a Bubba modified barrel, even after posting multiple photos of barrels with the same profile. Seems Glock will not admit their early barrels were not "right" even after making substantial changes down the road. The reason they didn't replace the barrel is they didn't want to admit that they were unsafe being unsupported. Kudos to OP for having the balls to post his story, hope everyone learns something here. I don't own a Glock, but if I ever do it will be a 9mm, no .40 or 10mm for me in this breed.

Posted: 11/30/2011 4:35:06 PM EST

[#5]

Quoted:

Does SAAMI have specifications for thickness and hardness?

That I don't know. I can send you the American Rifleman article from 1931 about the founding of SAAMI that I scanned.

My point is that it may have been a perfect storm......or not. Individual factors have not been removed as possible causes, so we can make a reasonable assessment, but nothing 'proven'

Posted: 11/30/2011 4:42:42 PM EST

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Is it OK to call all parties stupid in this case?

DT for probably loading out of spec ammo

Glock for putting out barrels with the proclivity to blow up, and charging to fix damage from said blow up

The OP for pretty much all of his actions in this case. WHY DIDN'T YOU SEND ANY OF THE AMMO TO GLOCK?

Hey genius, do think it is smart to ship live ammo with a gun, regardless of the condition of the gun?

I told Glock there was plenty of ammo. I told Glock to contact me for any reason. They didn't.
I believe it is safe to assume they wouldn't bother testing the ammo.

Your methodology is fucked. DIldos. Retarded. The 6th graders up the street are making fun of your ignorance of the scientific method.

At the end of the day, you STILL will not know if the barrel is at fault, or the ammo.

You asked in a prior post who you could send ammo to for pressure testing. How about DT or maybe Glock?

You seem unwilling to take the smallest steps towards keeping your body and gun intact, or to even keep from paying for another party's error, be it DT or Glock.

I'm no genius (actually, by any metric I AM), but I am sure as hell am not so shit ass stupid as to:

A. Blow my fucking gun up
B. Blow my fucking hand up
C. Pay for replacement of blown up gun when DT or Glock is clearly responsible.

Posted: 11/30/2011 4:42:46 PM EST

[#7]

$47? Deal.

Posted: 11/30/2011 5:07:42 PM EST

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Is it OK to call all parties stupid in this case?

DT for probably loading out of spec ammo

Glock for putting out barrels with the proclivity to blow up, and charging to fix damage from said blow up

The OP for pretty much all of his actions in this case. WHY DIDN'T YOU SEND ANY OF THE AMMO TO GLOCK?

Hey genius, do think it is smart to ship live ammo with a gun, regardless of the condition of the gun?

I told Glock there was plenty of ammo. I told Glock to contact me for any reason. They didn't.
I believe it is safe to assume they wouldn't bother testing the ammo.

Your methodology is fucked. DIldos. Retarded. The 6th graders up the street are making fun of your ignorance of the scientific method.

At the end of the day, you STILL will not know if the barrel is at fault, or the ammo.

You asked in a prior post who you could send ammo to for pressure testing. How about DT or maybe Glock?

You seem unwilling to take the smallest steps towards keeping your body and gun intact, or to even keep from paying for another party's error, be it DT or Glock.

I'm no genius (actually, by any metric I AM), but I am sure as hell am not so shit ass stupid as to:

A. Blow my fucking gun up
B. Blow my fucking hand up
C. Pay for replacement of blown up gun when DT or Glock is clearly responsible.

So you wouldn't pay $47 to get a $600 gun back working again? What do you propose the OP does with it let them keep it? Have Glock send back a baggie full of
blown up parts? It never seems to amaze me how cheap people can be. Sure it would be nice to have a brand new gun, they didn't have to offer that. I'm no Glock fan but it sure beats nothing, they didn't have to do anything. They could have just blamed it on the ammo and told OP to pound sand.

Posted: 11/30/2011 5:36:54 PM EST

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Is it OK to call all parties stupid in this case?

DT for probably loading out of spec ammo

Glock for putting out barrels with the proclivity to blow up, and charging to fix damage from said blow up

The OP for pretty much all of his actions in this case. WHY DIDN'T YOU SEND ANY OF THE AMMO TO GLOCK?

Hey genius, do think it is smart to ship live ammo with a gun, regardless of the condition of the gun?

I told Glock there was plenty of ammo. I told Glock to contact me for any reason. They didn't.
I believe it is safe to assume they wouldn't bother testing the ammo.

Your methodology is fucked. DIldos. Retarded. The 6th graders up the street are making fun of your ignorance of the scientific method.

At the end of the day, you STILL will not know if the barrel is at fault, or the ammo.

You asked in a prior post who you could send ammo to for pressure testing. How about DT or maybe Glock?

You seem unwilling to take the smallest steps towards keeping your body and gun intact, or to even keep from paying for another party's error, be it DT or Glock.

I'm no genius (actually, by any metric I AM), but I am sure as hell am not so shit ass stupid as to:

A. Blow my fucking gun up
B. Blow my fucking hand up
C. Pay for replacement of blown up gun when DT or Glock is clearly responsible.

So you wouldn't pay $47 to get a $600 gun back working again? What do you propose the OP does with it let them keep it? Have Glock send back a baggie full of
blown up parts? It never seems to amaze me how cheap people can be. Sure it would be nice to have a brand new gun, they didn't have to offer that. I'm no Glock fan but it sure beats nothing, they didn't have to do anything. They could have just blamed it on the ammo and told OP to pound sand.

Was it defective ammo?

Was it a defective gun?

It was one of the two.

The loser, gets to pay for my gun.

Furthermore, wouldn't you say that the OP has an obligation to the community to do his best to determine the actual cause of this explosion, rather than just leaving things at "Don't use DT in 2nd gen Glocks"? Not eliminating as many variables as possible, when it's not going to cost him anything is pretty selfish.

It's not about the fifty bucks.

Posted: 12/1/2011 1:01:51 AM EST

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Is it OK to call all parties stupid in this case?

DT for probably loading out of spec ammo

Glock for putting out barrels with the proclivity to blow up, and charging to fix damage from said blow up

The OP for pretty much all of his actions in this case. WHY DIDN'T YOU SEND ANY OF THE AMMO TO GLOCK?

Hey genius, do think it is smart to ship live ammo with a gun, regardless of the condition of the gun?

I told Glock there was plenty of ammo. I told Glock to contact me for any reason. They didn't.
I believe it is safe to assume they wouldn't bother testing the ammo.

Your methodology is fucked. DIldos. Retarded. The 6th graders up the street are making fun of your ignorance of the scientific method.

At the end of the day, you STILL will not know if the barrel is at fault, or the ammo.

You asked in a prior post who you could send ammo to for pressure testing. How about DT or maybe Glock?

You seem unwilling to take the smallest steps towards keeping your body and gun intact, or to even keep from paying for another party's error, be it DT or Glock.

I'm no genius (actually, by any metric I AM), but I am sure as hell am not so shit ass stupid as to:

A. Blow my fucking gun up
B. Blow my fucking hand up
C. Pay for replacement of blown up gun when DT or Glock is clearly responsible.

So you wouldn't pay $47 to get a $600 gun back working again? What do you propose the OP does with it let them keep it? Have Glock send back a baggie full of
blown up parts? It never seems to amaze me how cheap people can be. Sure it would be nice to have a brand new gun, they didn't have to offer that. I'm no Glock fan but it sure beats nothing, they didn't have to do anything. They could have just blamed it on the ammo and told OP to pound sand.

Was it defective ammo?

Was it a defective gun?

It was one of the two.

The loser, gets to pay for my gun.

Furthermore, wouldn't you say that the OP has an obligation to the community to do his best to determine the actual cause of this explosion, rather than just leaving things at "Don't use DT in 2nd gen Glocks"? Not eliminating as many variables as possible, when it's not going to cost him anything is pretty selfish.

It's not about the fifty bucks.

Obviously you aren't old enough to have been through this circle jerk.
DT is NEVER going to admit their ammo was to blame.
And if Glock is returning my gun with the original barrel, they are as much as saying their barrel is "Glock Perfection".
Rule #1 when there is an accident is NEVER NEVER NEVER admit anything.

Determing the actual fault would require sending the ammo and barrel to an independent lab.
Having worked at a metallurgical lab that did failure analysis, I can assure you the battery of tests required would start at $1000.

And to what end? Especially if it was inconclusive, or shared between the two manufacturers.

In all honesty, it appears it was likely a combination of both Glock's barrel, and DT's ammo.
(I am still not laying blame on anyone but myself)

I would NEVER recoup the cost of proving liability because of the very small amount of damages.

You have to pick your battles. I'm sorry you aren't happy that I'm not suing everyone involved.

Posted: 12/1/2011 3:37:44 AM EST

[#11]

Glock could very easily of said "The barrel was damaged during this event, we are sending a new one as a replacement" and kept their mouth shut on it being their fault.

Posted: 12/1/2011 5:48:42 AM EST

[#12]

Quoted:
Glock could very easily of said "The barrel was damaged during this event, we are sending a new one as a replacement" and kept their mouth shut on it being their fault.

This. They should have replaced it with a new barrel. If it kabooms again and seriously damages OP's hand, Glock is looking at a potentially expensive lawsuit.

Posted: 12/1/2011 11:21:46 AM EST

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Glock could very easily of said "The barrel was damaged during this event, we are sending a new one as a replacement" and kept their mouth shut on it being their fault.

This. They should have replaced it with a new barrel. If it kabooms again and seriously damages OP's hand, Glock is looking at a potentially expensive lawsuit.

That is exactly what I was thinking. However, I intend to use a different barrel that I already own, so it doesn't matter one way or the other.
It is just a little weird that Glock wouldn't think about the potential liability.

Posted: 12/7/2011 2:13:51 PM EST

[#14]

The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.
Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.
Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx
("x"s represent numbers)
This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.
To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.
It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.
They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.
(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Posted: 12/7/2011 2:46:47 PM EST

[#15]

Damn that was quick.

Posted: 12/7/2011 3:28:21 PM EST

[#16]

Thanks for the update.

Posted: 12/7/2011 3:49:28 PM EST

[#17]

Quoted:

The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.

Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.

Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx

("x"s represent numbers)

This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.

To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.

It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.

They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.

(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Posted: 12/7/2011 3:53:52 PM EST

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.
Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.
Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx
("x"s represent numbers)
This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.
To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.
It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.
They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.
(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Either that or one of the Glock factory replacements.

Posted: 12/7/2011 3:58:28 PM EST

[#19]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.

Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.

Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx

("x"s represent numbers)

This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.

To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.

It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.

They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.

(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Either that or one of the Glock factory replacements.

I must say, I like the look of the KKM's chamber area.

Would be interesting to learn how it shoots . . .

Posted: 12/7/2011 4:03:06 PM EST

[#20]

I'm glad that the OP's gun was repaired and that everything worked out for him. But I can't help but think that when it comes to handguns, it probably makes more sense to develop high intensity ballistics in revolvers.

Fluffy

Posted: 12/7/2011 4:05:34 PM EST

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Glock could very easily of said "The barrel was damaged during this event, we are sending a new one as a replacement" and kept their mouth shut on it being their fault.

This. They should have replaced it with a new barrel. If it kabooms again and seriously damages OP's hand, Glock is looking at a potentially expensive lawsuit.

That is exactly what I was thinking. However, I intend to use a different barrel that I already own, so it doesn't matter one way or the other.
It is just a little weird that Glock wouldn't think about the potential liability.

My assumption is that if they replaced yours with one of a more modern or "improved" design, that it might set a precedent. Gun companies realize gun owners probably use the Internet as much as just about anyone, and if word gets out a recall like situation might just get created, which may be warranted in many people's mind. If they built 10,000 of these that would mean they would have to replace 10,000 barrels. Again they aren't admitting anything by "fixing" the gun for $47, this is middle ground. If they didn't do anything for the OP, they would be the bad guy times ten.

Posted: 12/7/2011 4:06:44 PM EST

[#22]

Quoted:

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx

("x"s represent numbers)

This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.

To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.

It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

To my knowledge and this comes from Glock, is that replacement frames, slides, barrels all have different style serial numbers so they know if it has been replaced just by looking at it. We had a frame replaced on a G23, and it came back with a funky serial number, I called and asked, and that is what they told me.

Posted: 12/7/2011 4:08:51 PM EST

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.
Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.
Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx
("x"s represent numbers)
This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.
To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.
It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.
They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.
(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Either that or one of the Glock factory replacements.

I must say, I like the look of the KKM's chamber area.

Would be interesting to learn how it shoots . . .

You are right about the KKM's chamber. VERY sweet.
However, the reason for the extreme bevel on Glock's is to make them more extremely reliable.
You sacrifice reliability to have 100% case support.
As this is a carry gun, I depend on it to be 100% reliable.
I suspect the factory replacement barrels are a more reliable (in terms of feeding), but I'm not sure about how safe they are.
Only one way to tell. Send some lead downrange and look at the brass.

Posted: 12/7/2011 4:31:19 PM EST

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.

Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.

Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx

("x"s represent numbers)

This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.

To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.

It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.

They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.

(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Either that or one of the Glock factory replacements.

I must say, I like the look of the KKM's chamber area.

Would be interesting to learn how it shoots . . .

You are right about the KKM's chamber. VERY sweet.

However, the reason for the extreme bevel on Glock's is to make them more extremely reliable.

You sacrifice reliability to have 100% case support.

As this is a carry gun, I depend on it to be 100% reliable.

I suspect the factory replacement barrels are a more reliable (in terms of feeding), but I'm not sure about how safe they are.

Only one way to tell. Send some lead downrange and look at the brass.

Right you are. I would expend a certain quantity of my carry ammo through that KKM barrel, and see how reliable it proves to be, especially after the first box has gone through.

Have you shot the KKM tube enough to get a feel for any feeding issues, vs. the factory barrels?

Posted: 12/7/2011 5:01:53 PM EST

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.
Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.
Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx
("x"s represent numbers)
This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.
To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.
It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.
They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.
(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Either that or one of the Glock factory replacements.

I must say, I like the look of the KKM's chamber area.

Would be interesting to learn how it shoots . . .

You are right about the KKM's chamber. VERY sweet.
However, the reason for the extreme bevel on Glock's is to make them more extremely reliable.
You sacrifice reliability to have 100% case support.
As this is a carry gun, I depend on it to be 100% reliable.
I suspect the factory replacement barrels are a more reliable (in terms of feeding), but I'm not sure about how safe they are.
Only one way to tell. Send some lead downrange and look at the brass.

Right you are. I would expend a certain quantity of my carry ammo through that KKM barrel, and see how reliable it proves to be, especially after the first box has gone through.

Have you shot the KKM tube enough to get a feel for any feeding issues, vs. the factory barrels?

No, I haven't. Hope to get to the range soon though.

Posted: 12/7/2011 5:08:13 PM EST

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The pistol arrived via FedEx this morning.

It came in a box for an olive drab model 21, SN GSL894.

Also inside the box was the factory fired brass cases in the little envelope, fired from the GSL894.

Not that any of that matters. Just interesting.

The pistol was returned with a new 3rd generation frame and magazine. Serial number Gxxxxx

("x"s represent numbers)

This is not a standard retail frame's serial number.

To my knowledge, ALL retail frames have at least two letters. And all 3rd generation frames have 3 letters.

It came with a standard right-handed magazine release and Glock rail. Exactly what I wanted.

Glock returned the pistol with the original slide and barrel.

They kept my TruGlo TFO sights on the slide, but replaced my Wolf spring with a factory spring.

(They put the Wolf spring in the box)

Are you switching over to the KKM barrel now?

Either that or one of the Glock factory replacements.

I must say, I like the look of the KKM's chamber area.

Would be interesting to learn how it shoots . . .

You are right about the KKM's chamber. VERY sweet.

However, the reason for the extreme bevel on Glock's is to make them more extremely reliable.

You sacrifice reliability to have 100% case support.

As this is a carry gun, I depend on it to be 100% reliable.

I suspect the factory replacement barrels are a more reliable (in terms of feeding), but I'm not sure about how safe they are.

Only one way to tell. Send some lead downrange and look at the brass.

Right you are. I would expend a certain quantity of my carry ammo through that KKM barrel, and see how reliable it proves to be, especially after the first box has gone through.

Have you shot the KKM tube enough to get a feel for any feeding issues, vs. the factory barrels?

No, I haven't. Hope to get to the range soon though.

Thanks, I'd love to see an update with info from your range session.

Posted: 12/17/2011 8:39:31 PM EST

[#27]

Quoted:

That was close to really, really bad.

Glock strikes again...

Or Double-Tap strikes again. Your choice.

Posted: 12/17/2011 8:43:08 PM EST

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Always thought a powerhouse like a 10mm would be better in a steel framed 1911 type pistol.

Early 10mm loads were quite powerful. Since then, most are much lower in pressure which is why Glock got away with such a shitty chamber. Plus they had to assure feeding and reliability.

Enter boutique loads which are at the SAAMI limits. Old barrel with hot loads equals kB.

1911s in 10 mm have fully supported chambers as they are ramped. Because people back then respected the 10mm.

I have two Colt 10mm 1911s, one a standard Government Model and one a "Match Ten" with a Gold Cup frame , both of which would disagree with your statement.

Posted: 12/17/2011 8:53:03 PM EST

[#29]

Quoted:

I knew it was going to be a glock.

What other company has the balls to still make pistols in such a kickass chambering?

Posted: 12/19/2011 5:05:02 AM EST

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:

I knew it was going to be a glock.

What other company has the balls to still make pistols in such a kickass chambering?

Colt (O2020), European American Armory, Nighthawk, Kimber... Can also still get SIG conversions, Smith & Wesson 1076's and 610's on auction sites. Seriously, the GLOCk isn't that 'Special' because you can get a gun from the factory in 10mm, and it's not that special of a caliber as it hasn't proven itself to have any seriously notable performance advantages of over more commonly available calibers in factory ammo loads.

It's a niche caliber that's tough for most customers to justify purchasing into... If it weren't for reloaders and Glock, the caliber might have nearly died out again. The only thing keeping the caliber alive is Glock offering affordable production guns, and reloaders keeping their own personal loads hot enough to retain a performance advantage that makes it somewhat more worthwhile. If it weren't for a small core group of enthusiasts running hotter-than-spec ammo, other more serious shooters have learned that the factory ammo performance difference is negligible, and given the costs of the ammo it causes many buyers to seek other caliber choices.

The ammo availability in a number of localities is very scarce (high priced if available), and if it wasn't for Glock keeping a low-cost production gun on the market, and handloaders keeping their personal loads a little 'hotter' on the pressure scale, the caliber might have died out again. Still to this day it's not a comparatively popular selling caliber.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 10mm Glock KaBoom - >>> UPDATE: PISTOL RETURNED <<< (Page 9 of 9)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us