Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test: Week Three

8-Apr-11 – 11:18 by ToddG
5,424 rounds 5 stoppages
(+1 w/non-LCI extractor)
0 malfunctions 0 parts breakages

A mere 377 rounds through the gun this past week, but what an important 377 it was. The G17/4 finally passed the 2,000 Round Challenge after three aborted starts. With absolutely no cleaning or lubrication since the latest extractor was installed, the pistol fired 2,008 rounds without a stoppage of any kind.

To be completely candid, I do not feel like the G17 is out of the woods yet. More than a few friends & students have reported gen4 9mm Glocks that began to experience problems between two and four thousand rounds into their service life. The next couple weeks will be very telling. Either the new extractor will continue to drive the gun forward this year or it, too, will fall down and put yet another dent in the program. Then just as the pistol achieves 4,000 through this new extractor it will be time to replace the recoil spring assembly and we get to see if a fresh (stiff) spring causes further bobbles or runs like a champ.

This weekend I’ll be in Ohio visiting Ken Hackathorn. Would shooting the Hackathorn Standards using my Ameriglo Hackathorn sights in front of Ken Hackathorn himself be just about the greatest shooting experience imaginable? Then next week wraps up with a law enforcement-only Aim Fast, Hit Fast in California.

Train hard & stay safe! ToddG

Previous Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test posts at pistol-training.com:

  1. 10 Responses to “Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test: Week Three”

  2. Todd,
    How are the reloads coming along with the new muscle memory to get wired?
    Some of us felt that the Gen 4 ran “flatter” myself included – but since shooting about 1k through the more aggressive RTF2 G17, I’m starting to think the secret sauce was the grip treatment as I’m no longer so certain of a difference between the two generations.
    Do you have any thoughts on the guns handling?
    Thanks

    By JHC on Apr 8, 2011

  3. Shooting a perfect Hack standards would be the coolest thing ever, but no pressure 😉

    By NickA on Apr 8, 2011

  4. Whoa … shooting the Hackathorn with the Hackathorn next to Hackathorn … that’s what legends are made of. Wow.

    By GhettoSmack on Apr 9, 2011

  5. It’s too early to make a decision yet, but when you get to the point that you normally replace it, you might want to leave the original recoil spring in for a while. I might be wrong, but my sense is that these new springs are going to be able to function for many thousands of extra rounds, precisely because they are so stiff.

    By SteveJ on Apr 9, 2011

  6. See you at the Sunday Studies Group.

    By SteveK on Apr 9, 2011

  7. Shooting a perfect 300 would have been great, but I had to settle for a 288.

    By ToddG on Apr 9, 2011

  8. Very nice, Todd.

    I am signed up for a Hackathorn class this fall, and am SO looking forward to it..

    By Bill Lance on Apr 10, 2011

  9. Todd,

    What’s the verdict on the Hackathorn sights? I may be ordering a pair soon! Thanks for your updates.

    By Justin D on Apr 11, 2011

  10. Just a little info on extractors. Todd mentioned he’d gotten new extractors, one with a number 1 and one with a 3…both seemed to fit fine and he was using the number 3 now.

    I just bought a new gen 4 G19 to try out. The date on the case envelope was 3/10/11 (so should be latest production) and the extractor was marked “4”. The extractor fell out easily, so the fit seems good. Hopefully I’ll get 500 rounds or so through it in the next couple of weeks.

    By Wes on Apr 15, 2011

  11. Wes, can you advise whether the “4” extractor still exhibits the dip in the middle that characterized the 9mm extractors that were shipped during 2010? These units, which exhibited a tightness (more difficult removal) were easily identified when viewing them in the gun from the side — the top edge clearly sagged.

    If we have “new” numbered extractors showing 1, 3, and 4, I’m betting the numbers are cavity numbers for multi-cavity mold, rather than a revision number.

    By bentbiker on Apr 23, 2011

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.