GLOCK Model 37 .45cal EXPLODES in my 15 year olds hand

[deeGman]

Glocks chamber support is as close to LoneWolf as one could get. I have some LW barrels to shoot HC lead in my G20's. The GAP all the reloaders i know have told me its a real nice round to reload about impossible to DC. No XD's here really HK2000's or whatever no Springfield design at all. As for as KB's go Glock's hold their on against all metal guns anyday. The chamber support or lack of well see the pics. a myth as there is no such thing as a fully supported chamber in a semi. only in a revolver. IMHO and .02

[cwdtx]

LOL this was wayyyyyyyyyy to kewl! Damn near like a soap-opera My wife might have even enjoyed this!

[Boris]

Originally Posted by deeGman

Glocks chamber support is as close to LoneWolf as one could get. I have some LW barrels to shoot HC lead in my G20's. The GAP all the reloaders i know have told me its a real nice round to reload about impossible to DC. No XD's here really HK2000's or whatever no Springfield design at all. As for as KB's go Glock's hold their on against all metal guns anyday. The chamber support or lack of well see the pics. a myth as there is no such thing as a fully supported chamber in a semi. only in a revolver. IMHO and .02

All that and as I mentioned before. The Kb problem was an issue with the ammo. That ammo was recalled. It had nothing to do with the pistol. That ammo would have been dangerous in any make of 45GAP pistol.....

[old semperfi]

why would you not keep box and all brass from session,i understand why no help. old semperfi

[deeGman]

Originally Posted by Boris

All that and as I mentioned before. The Kb problem was an issue with the ammo. That ammo was recalled. It had nothing to do with the pistol. That ammo would have been dangerous in any make of 45GAP pistol.....

This factory ammo Kb's seem to me are happening alot these days. I know of 2 recent ones but good news the ammo manufacture is replacing the entire gun and bad ammo. A Ruger single action blew the entire cylinder in half and ripped the back strap off. But with this the most important thing is you were not badly injured. I will not ask the ammo company since it could cause you problems. good luck,d

[mesinge2]

Originally Posted by deeGman

This factory ammo Kb's seem to me are happening alot these days. I know of 2 recent ones but good news the ammo manufacture
is replacing the entire gun and bad ammo. A Ruger single action blew the entire cylinder in half and ripped the back strap off. But
with this the most important thing is you were not badly injured. I will not ask the ammo company since it could cause you
problems. good luck,d

I had a 38 Special remington UMC fail on me. It felt like a .357! I am just happy I was shooting it in my Model 28.

Here is the case with a bore light in it:

[TheGunClinger]

Originally Posted by mesinge2

FYI, I didn't realize it was a zombie post when I posted but here it is anyways:







Personally, I own two XDm's and am a great fan of the XD and do not care for the Glock, but it has nothing to do will any potential dangerousness or poor quality. I just don't care for the way they fit in my hand. I am a 1911 shooter and the XD just "feels" better in my hands then the Glock.

That being said there is no problem with owning for firing a Glock. It is true there have been quite a few reports of impressive failures with Glocks. But it must be keep in mind that they are also one of the most popular designs today. So, simply because there are more of them they will have reports of failures.

Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBdYBc0BLgQ

Every manufacturer (firearm and ammo) occasionally makes a lemon. For example here is an XD failure:

http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f...trouble-28573/





+1 for this statement. Even though I like my XDm's they don't hold a candle to my Colts:

Attachment 44212

Nothing holds a candle to 1911's and they dont have to be Colts.

[Boris]

Originally Posted by TheGunClinger

Nothing holds a candle to 1911's and they dont have to be Colts.

Gotta watch them 1911s though. The most reliable will be the ones built to mispec, but accuracy will be worse than a box stock Glock. 99.9% come from the rack with MIM parts. There is nothing wrong with MIM, but JMB didnt design the parts of the 1911 to handle MIM. You can make MIM parts for 1911s, but they will be substandard. Put a better trigger on it and they might fire when you drop the slide (seen it). Some are sooooo tight they become unreliable if you look at them funny or get a few specs of powder in the works.

Give me a MIM free 1911 with a non milspec trigger (that is about twice the pull weight of a box stock Glock) that has enough slop in the slide to function and I will have one heck of a gun. The rack grade ones these days are substandard IMLO. Even 1911s that cost more than a grand have plastic MSHs.

I allready got a 45. When I get a 1911 it will be in 10mm and I will replace all the MIM parts before I even shoot it. I like the Comander size guns so it will probably be that size. The G19 is not the perfect carry gun, a Commander done right (10mm) is the perfect carry gun IMO.

[mesinge2]

Originally Posted by Boris

Gotta watch them 1911s though. The most reliable will be the ones built to mispec, but accuracy will be worse than a box stock Glock. 99.9% come from the rack with MIM parts. There is nothing wrong with MIM, but JMB didnt design the parts of the 1911 to handle MIM. You can make MIM parts for 1911s, but they will be substandard. Put a better trigger on it and they might fire when you drop the slide (seen it). Some are sooooo tight they become unreliable if you look at them funny or get a few specs of powder in the works.

Give me a MIM free 1911 with a non milspec trigger (that is about twice the pull weight of a box stock Glock) that has enough slop in the slide to function and I will have one heck of a gun. The rack grade ones these days are substandard IMLO. Even 1911s that cost more than a grand have plastic MSHs.

I allready got a 45. When I get a 1911 it will be in 10mm and I will replace all the MIM parts before I even shoot it. I like the Comander size guns so it will probably be that size. The G19 is not the perfect carry gun, a Commander done right (10mm) is the perfect carry gun IMO.

I am on my third set of springs on my Government size Colt Combat Elite and I replace my springs at 3,000 rounds. No jams ever!

Also, I am on by fourth set of springs/guide rods assemblies with my Officer's frame Colt defender and I replace those springs at 500 rounds. I had three jams within the first 100 rounds with hollow point ammo and now it runs flawlessly even with Gold dot and Hornady HP loads.

[DunRanull]

Thought-provoking thread which I wouldnt have paid attention to until recently when a used 3rd gen Glock model 21 came my way.. sort of outta the blue. Never would have considered it but for the fact that I got some experience with the XD and got past my "plasto-phobia". After sorting thru all the above, Im wondering on the wisdom of my choice! Considering trading it in on an XD....

[Hammerslagger]

This is an almost 3 year old thread. The short answer is that the ammo was defective. Its is not the first time such has happened and it will not be the last.

[mogunner]

And it's not the first nor the last time a Glock blew up.

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by Boris

Gotta watch them 1911s though. The most reliable will be the ones built to mispec, but accuracy will be worse than a box stock Glock. 99.9% come from the rack with MIM parts. There is nothing wrong with MIM, but JMB didnt design the parts of the 1911 to handle MIM. You can make MIM parts for 1911s, but they will be substandard. Put a better trigger on it and they might fire when you drop the slide (seen it). Some are sooooo tight they become unreliable if you look at them funny or get a few specs of powder in the works.

Give me a MIM free 1911 with a non milspec trigger (that is about twice the pull weight of a box stock Glock) that has enough slop in the slide to function and I will have one heck of a gun. The rack grade ones these days are substandard IMLO. Even 1911s that cost more than a grand have plastic MSHs.

I allready got a 45. When I get a 1911 it will be in 10mm and I will replace all the MIM parts before I even shoot it. I like the Comander size guns so it will probably be that size. The G19 is not the perfect carry gun, a Commander done right (10mm) is the perfect carry gun IMO.

I don't want to start a flame war here, but a 1911 - even a military-spec one - is often times more accurate than a box stock Glock. The Glock has a longer trigger travel - at least that's been my experience with them -- and I shoot 1911s way more accurately than Glocks BECAUSE of the trigger.

As for MIM, my Springfield had it and worked fine. I had the trigger parts replaced with a Cylinder & Slide kit which is tool steel.

Mine is tight and is 100% reliable on everything I feed through it. My slide to frame fit isn't as tight as some custom 1911s, but it isn't loose.

99.9% of it is preference. The Glock fans will always try to say that their guns are better than "Gun X."


Yes - I know - old post, but I felt like I had to step up and defend the 1911. They work absolutely fine for me. I'm not an old fart who's stubborn to try new stuff either - I'm 25. The newer generations of people who are saying 1911s don't work are not doing something right. If you want a lighter gun, more ammo, something with no external safeties, that doesn't cost a fortune - then get a Glock. They aren't bad guns, but to compare them to 1911s is apples to oranges.

[Hammerslagger]

I will make a few more comments relative to posts #112 and #113.

No gun is "Perfection" as Gaston Glock claimed and advertised; but Glocks are serviceable, RELIABLE, durable guns that are capable of "getting the job done" that they were designed to do. "Out of the box", they are one of the most accurate and reliable military and police type pistols. They were not designed to be match target pistols or to be easy on brass for reloading, or to use bare lead projectiles. They are very unforgiving of bad trigger control technique, when used for target shooting.

Almighty God, as the Marines once quipped, did not "give to John M Browning the design for the best one handed, man killing machine that could ever be devised", unless you believe that Almighty God made a bunch of oversights that the U. S. Army corrected in the 1920's (June 15, 1926, methinks) with the A1 design changes.

In the 1950's many if not most US WW II combat veterans typically held the opinion that the "GI 45" was the worst pistol in the war. Comments like "You were better off throwing it at the enemy than shooting it at him" were typical. A retired U S Marine Col. named Jeff Cooper, and a discovery (or rediscovery) by a LA County, CA Deputy Sheriff named Jack Weaver were instrumental in changing the common perception of the 1911 from an inaccurate, piece of crap pistol to "best combat pistol in the world", which it might still well be.

There are many good to excellent firearm designs. Leaving junk quality guns out of the equation, it is about 98% person and 2% gun in almost all situations; and especially so in combat.

The gun is just a tool. As with any tool, if you do not know how to use it, a better made or more expensive or refined tool is not going to help you much, if any. In an emergency, the ability to "keep thinking" and instantly become "task focused, doing what needs to be done, moment by moment" is often the difference between living and dying. Only those persons who have "been there and survived" can fully appreciate the foregoing concept.

Glocks, per post #112: I have seen more than one Glock disabled by broken parts that should not have broken. I have seen more than one Glock that "blew up" (cartridge case blowout, with and without a catastrophic barrel failure). I have never seen a Glock "blow up" that was not ammo related. I am unaware of any credible information alleging that a Glock barrel had a catastrophic failure because of an internal barrel defect. If anyone has any credible details (like a H P White lab report) about such a failure(s), please share them with us.

Relative to post 113, the 1911 (1911-A1) does not need any person to defend it. Any person who does not recognize the genius of this pistol's design, does not know much about firearms. It is usually the preferred platform for both "any center-fire" and "45 bore size" Bullseye match target pistols.

In the late 1950's and early 1960's the U S Army got serious about winning matches and did a lot of research relative to the 1911 and the .45 ACP Ball cartridge. The 230 grain Ball Match cartridge was found to have an accuracy limitation of 1.9" extreme spread of widest two shots@ 50 yards, for 10 shots from a machine rest firing fixture built on a bolt action rifle receiver fitted with an internally match dimensioned barrel. They found that the average as issued GI pistol would average about 6", 10 shot Match Ball ammo groups @50 yards from a machine rest. {The 10 ring is 3.36" and the 9 ring is 5.54"} Some really tight examples grouped about 4" on average. About 1962 The Army acceptance standard for a National Match 1911-A1 was three consecutive 10 shot Match Ball ammo targets that averaged 3" or better groups, with no one group to exceed 4.5". [Fine and rare pistols if you can find one with its DCM sale paper. Beware of counterfeits.}

Hope some of this is informative.

[CJ_56]

This is an almost 3 year old thread. The short answer is that the ammo was defective.

How can you know that without ever having examined the gun in question first hand? I read through some of this thread. I did see your post where you said you never said anything that you didn't know to be true or something to that effect. I think you might want to reconsider what you said here in this last reincarnation of this thread. You may have good reasons for thinking what you do but I don't see how you can make a blanket statement of truth based on photos on the net. Nothing personal. But I've seen a bunch of these threads and people always want to blame the ammo. You discounted most of what the OP said about not using hand loads and the history of the gun and decided based on the "facts" that you cherry picked. That sounds too much like the work of a fan boy to me.

I don't care what you opinion is. You could well be right but I don't think you know that for sure. After all Kabooms have been a Glock issue for a long time. Do I know if all the accounts of KB's are true? Nope. But I've seen lots of photos and testimonials. I even saw some video. Are Glocks the only guns that ever have this problem? Nope. Heck I have a Marlin 60 that split a case and fired powder out the side of the chamber and into my eyes. I've shot thousands of rounds through that rifle since then without a problem. But it had to fire out of battery because it didn't blow a hole in anything to allow hot gas and powder residue to escape. The cartridge has a nice split in the side showing where it shot out that gas and residue. But it had to get out of the chamber some way.

When something with more power splits a case or fires out of battery (causing the case to split) sometimes it takes out half of the gun with it. Lots of Glock fans like to blame hype for the stories surrounding especially the .40 S&W Glocks. But if this was all an elaborate ruse it was a very successful one. I tend to think that when there's smoke there's fire most of the time. I have seen hype destroy the reputation of guns for a while but they always come back. Glock still has these issues pop up sometimes even if it's just zombie threads.

Again I don't know what happened. I just know the reputation of Glocks for KB's and I know that people can hype a situation and create a myth. I saw two guys make experts out of shooters in a week (or so they thought). They had people who came onto a shotgun board and asked total newbie questions one week telling people that Remington Express shotguns were total rust magnets the next week. Both the guys who started this hype had left their shotguns in foam cases. But it was Remington's fault anyway. And literally hundreds of people believed their story because they wanted to believe it. They wanted to think that spending a few more dollars on a gun meant that gun was way better. And they wanted to think they knew more about shotguns than people (me) who had been shooting for 45 years. I have an Express. I've had it about 5 years. It's never had a speck of rust on it. So yes hype does exist.

I just don't think you can discount a possible Glock failure from the evidence you received. I went through that same evidence and I didn't see enough there to definitively say it was the ammo. I actually like Glocks BTW. I also like CCI/Speer ammo. I'm not willing to blame one over the other especially when one does have a bad reputation and the other doesn't. I will say that I bought an XDm instead of a Glock and one of the reasons why was the potential for KB issues. But I tried very hard to find a Glock to fit my hand well a few years back. I knew about the KB issue but I was going to buy one anyway. I wouldn't dream of totally discounting the value of a gun based on unconfirmed hype. But I would at least consider it considering all the photos I've seen. I've never seen a photo of a rusty Express.

[Lanrezac]

hogger129, Boris left in a huff early this year when he was asked to substantiate some of his more remarkable statements. Personally, after he claimed to firing more than 200,000 rounds of pistol ammunition a year (IIRC), I took everything he said with a grain of salt.

[CJ_56]

Hope some of this is informative.

It is sir. I don't know how I missed this post before I posted last. I must have loaded the page the night before and not refreshed it before posting. I would have probably asked a question or two about what you say if I had seen it then. So here are my questions.

What made 1911's the accurate pistols they are today?I have heard the comment before that soldiers didn't particularly like the 1911 in WWII. But the idea that it was worse than a Luger amazes me. Those things ARE dangerous. There's a reason the Germans didn't carry them with a round in the chamber. They were prone to fire that round. I don't know that 1911's were doing that.

Besides that I've shot a number of very accurate 1911's in recent years and some of them were cobbled together from various parts from different guns. I amazed my friends by nailing the bottom end of a pop can from 30 yards on the second shot. It aimed horribly because it was made from leggo parts. But once I saw where it aimed and adjusted for the extreme difference in the POA and the POI I was able to hit the can on a regular basis. It only took me one shot. Apparently my friends had been trying to hit that can all day with that pistol. Some people just don't know anything about Kentucky windage and we were in Kentucky! We were on the farm next to mine in fact. I grew up on my farm and I learned to shoot there. But that's all irrelevant. I just like talking about Kentucky.

If the 1911's were really that bad why wasn't more made of the Sig pistols that were released post war. The accuracy claims made about those pistols were far better than the 1911's according to your info. I just wonder why the 210 didn't catch on more in the USA than it did. I know it wasn't a US made gun and didn't have the WWII mystique associated with it. But it was a heck of a shooter and apparently so before the 1911 became good at all. Is that why the US military became serious about accuracy with US built pistols?

I hope you know these answers because I'm very curious. Glocks are pretty accurate but I've never shot one that compares to the accuracy of my "Made In W. Germany" P220. It was the lack of weight that made the Glock famous of course. But the P220 was much lighter than the 1911 and it used metal instead of plastic. It was of course heavier than the Glocks though. I can see why people who needed to carry a duty weapon preferred a Glock. I'm just curious why competition shooters didn't gravitate to the Sigs the way people did the Glocks. They are very accurate pistols or at least mine is. Maybe I'm just "Super Shooter" or something. j/k

[Raven18940]

I feel it bears repeating that guns are dangerous. Any gun can go kaboom any time you pull the trigger for any number of reasons ranging from bad ammo to a metallurgical fault in the barrel. Search google images for "gun kaboom" and you'll see pretty much every gun ever split in two somehow.

Statistically however, guns are almost completely safe for the shooter as long as you're behind them.

[Brass Tacks]

This thread was.... interesting!

But on a lighter note

Originally Posted by Hammerslagger

There are no personal injuries that required any medical attention here. {Thanks, in part, to the design of the Glock pistol. The 1911 design often sprays the shooter's face with unburned powder and bass fragments, when a case blows out. I personally witnessed such happen about 6 weeks ago. ALWAYS WEAR EYE PROTECTION WHEN SHOOTING ANY FIREARM.}

This is why you should never store your fish in a Glock

Glad the boy wasn't injured and this doen't sour him on handguns.

[al45lc]

[QUOTE=Hammerslagger;942970 Relative to post 113, the 1911 (1911-A1) does not need any person to defend it. Any person who does not recognize the genius of this pistol's design, does not know much about firearms. It is usually the preferred platform for both "any center-fire" and "45 bore size" Bullseye match target pistols.[/QUOTE]


I agree, however would you care to tell that to Rob Pincus of "Trigger Time"?
He stated that the 1911 was a "bad idea" to begin with on Facebook.
Do you suppose he knows much about guns?
Such is the world of opinions, eh?

[aryfrosty]

Originally Posted by ArnoldsPupil

Also the slide lock was blown off as well as the mag release button.

How can I hold the breech oopen to take pics and or get the slide off?

You won't need to hold the slide locked open to disassemble the Glock.