Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test: Week 31

22-Oct-11 – 14:46 by ToddG

43,693 rounds 8 stoppages
(+1 w/non-LCI extractor)
0 malfunctions 1 parts breakages

Quite a few rounds went downrange over the past week with four separate trips to the range.

Before the last range session, I swapped out my Trijicon HD sights for a set of Warren/Sevigny 2-dot. I repainted the white ring around the front tritium dot in orange for a bit more visibility and hit the range. Over the past few weeks I’ve been feeling that both my maximum slowfire accuracy as well as my serious accuracy at speed on low probability targets were suffering a bit due to the Trij HD’s wide front sight.

It’s too early to tell for sure, but if yesterday was any indication, the Warren sights were no help. For example, on a particular walkback drill you can compare my results from Monday (Trij HD) and Friday (Warren):

position Trij HD Warren
2H 16yd 11yd
SHO 10yd 5yd
WHO 15yd 9yd

I also tried Dot Torture, which was the pistol-forum.com Drill of the Week. Monday at seven yards with the Trijicon sights I scored a perfect 50. Friday I moved it out to 8yd with the Warrens and scored a 45. I was actually hoping the Warren sights would help me reclaim the glory of Week 5: HK45 Test when I scored a perfect 50 at 10yd. No such luck.

One thing the Warren sights are doing, however, is showing me just how bad my trigger pull is. Even after more than seven months, I’m still struggling with the Glock trigger compared to the HK LEM system. It’s particularly noticeable on the press-out. Hopefully, sooner rather than later there will be a decent “3.5#” connector for the gen4 guns that can be mated with a NY1 trigger spring for more of a rolling break. While the dot connector is a tremendous improvement over either the standard gen3 connector or the minus gen3 connector, it puts almost all of the pull weight at the actual break. I’m almost to the point of buying a bunch of aftermarket 3.5 connectors to see if any of them will give me the trigger pull I want in a gen4 pistol with a NY1 trigger spring.

Having said that, I’m not writing the Warren sights off quite yet. I’ll give it a few weeks of dedicated practice before I make a final decision about whether they’re helping or hampering my overall shooting.

Train hard & stay safe! ToddG

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

  1. 13 Responses to “Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test: Week 31”

  2. Which version of the Warren sights are you using?

    By Jason on Oct 22, 2011

  3. Did you get the .245″ front sight, or the standard .215″? If .215″, are you using a six o’clock hold?

    By James V on Oct 22, 2011

  4. Tried any of the glocktriggers.com or Vanek triggers? Opinions on either? Or is the issue that they don’t make a trigger for the Gen 4?

    I’m still trying to work through the stock Gen 3 trigger in my 19 until I feel like I’ve “earned” a better trigger.

    By rob on Oct 22, 2011

  5. Looks like different ammo, too. Blame that!

    By John on Oct 23, 2011

  6. This is a fun story to follow…but I’m dying of curiosity. Of the endurance tests you have done to date, inc. which pistol would you choose for a “can-buy-one-and-only-one-to-use-on-a-desert-island-inhabited-by-zombies?”

    Ok, that sounded wierd, but I guess simply stated I’m asking whether you have an absolutely clear preference for one over all the others.

    I own and have shot the **** out of both Glocks and M&Ps, but have no experience with HK. Seems to me like that is your gold standard, but I can’t find a post here where you compare them all side by side and pick a winner.

    Thanks for such an informative website.

    By Billy Shears on Oct 23, 2011

  7. Todd-FWIW, I’ve been very satisfied with my Warren Tacticals on my G34-with the front sight’s rear face first painted with white Liquid Paper for a base coat (and to aid in removal if so desired at a later date)followed with a top coat of Testor’s Neon Green. The front sight really pops out with this treatment, and both coats are thin enough to still allow the serrations to be visible.

    Of course, my totally non-scientifically quantified (but empirically derived) conclusion is that accurate shot-on-target placement is 75% trigger pull, 25% sight specific (assuming, of course, a semi-decent set of sights to begin with)

    Best, Jon

    By Jon Stein on Oct 23, 2011

  8. If the thin front sight of the Warren is giving you trouble, you can always try an XS Big Dot with an Ameriglo I-Dot U notch rear.

    (Or not…)

    By Mitchell, Esq. on Oct 23, 2011

  9. I have found that the Lone Wolf Dist new coated 3.5lb connector has given me that buttery smooth rolling-break in my gen4 G26 that I was looking for. Whatever coating LWD is using, it is ultra slick…..a DROP of slip 2K EWL and that thing is like butter on ice.

    It’s a cheap $15 mod to try. I’ve put them in 3 gen4 G26’s so far with identical (favorable) results). They’re my 2011 X-mas gift item.

    By Deputy Bravo on Oct 23, 2011

  10. Hk is the gold standard

    By dj on Oct 24, 2011

  11. Jason — The sights are the Warren Sevigny Carry 2-dot.

    JV — I have not measured, but I’m fairly certain they’re the 0.215 sights. I’m hitting maybe an inch or two high at 25yd.

    rob — I’ve never installed a non-OEM connector in a Glock before. But per Deputy Bravo’s recommendation, I just ordered one of the Lone Wolf 3.5 connectors. We’ll see how that works out.

    Mitchell — If I was going back to a wider front, I’d just stick with the Trijicon HD sights. They worked very well.

    Billy Shears — That’s an easy question. I think the HK P30 LEM is hands down the best pistol I’ve ever used.

    By ToddG on Oct 24, 2011

  12. Any news about the Warren Tactical sights for HK P30, i cant find them at their web site.

    Dawson Presision have startet to make sights for HK Pxx guns.

    By faksen on Oct 25, 2011

  13. faksen — I haven’t heard anything out of Warren Tactical regarding the HK for more than a year.

    By ToddG on Oct 26, 2011

  14. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the LWD connector when you get it. Certainly would be a lower-cost solution than the $10+ trigger kits for the Glocks. I just have a hard time dumping 1/5-1/4 the cost of the base gun into a trigger assembly.

    By rob on Oct 28, 2011

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