Don’t Try This at Home

I have received no fewer than six text messages this morning from Glock. All were up in arms over my casual attitude toward gun cleaning.

So, as a public service message, please note:

Dirty guns are worse then clean guns. Clean guns last longer and shoot more reliably.

Do I think you need to clean your modern pistols after every couple hundred rounds at the range? No. Should you purposely go 10,000+ rounds on a gun you carry every day for self-defense just to see if it will keep working? No.

And regardless of how often you clean the gun, I’m a big believer in keeping guns properly lubricated. While I may only clean my guns when there’s a full moon on a Thursday, I put a few drops of Militec on the rails, barrel, and action every range session or two. In my experience, proper lubrication is far more important than a mirror finish or white glove spotlessness.

Train hard & stay safe! ToddG

19 comments

  1. Wow, seems they’re butthurt.

    Last time I checked you used the same procedure to test every gun. I thought Glock took pride in working in harsher conditions than the competing designs. I guess not.

  2. A jelly donut!!!!

    Sorry, Glock, Gunny, jelly donut…just had to.

    As for the Glock and cleaning. I wonder how many other people doing “torture tests” have received text messages. Did they send one to Vickers for dunking guns in a pond?

  3. While what you said is true, isn’t that what this test is all about? I mean, it’s not the first one you’ve done. If Glock was to voice protest, why not do it upfront?

  4. Perhaps the Glock’s greatest weakness is it’s market share. With so many Glocks in service, it’s created a vibrant aftermarket parts niche. With the number of aftermarket parts, people are going to experiment, often at the expense of quality and reliability. As you pointed out very clearly, this most recent failure was not a Glock part, but an aftermarket one. This would seem to be a weakness shared with the 1911, despite whatever the fanboys of each platform have to say.

  5. “Butthurt” is the very last thing I would say to describe the texts I received. They were 100% sincere and concerned that readers might see the way I treat my guns, think it’s “cool” or even just perfectly acceptable, and then risk their lives with guns that aren’t in the best possible condition under what could be the worst possible conditions.

    The test gun is running great regardless of cleaning… wouldn’t you think Glock, if it only cared about looking cool, would want to encourage that? Instead, rather than having me push the gun to new heights, they’re more concerned about people possibly getting hurt because they didn’t adequately care for their life-saving equipment.

    I may not agree with their take on cleaning, but you certainly cannot fault them for trying to look out for the well-being of their customers more than “looking awesome” on a blog…

  6. I clean my Glocks when I can see the slide slowing down… usually at about 2,000 rounds.

    I don’t recommend it, but I do it.

    That is part of the reason I shoot a Glock. My Kimber, Kahr… wouldn’t perform well enough to train if I did that to them. I don’t like cleaning, I like shooting.

  7. Todd, I am not able to read the texts in question, so all I am left with is assuming the tone from the post you made about them. Seeing as you described them as ‘up in arms’ about your cleaning regimen, that was what I pictured.

    It’s an endurance test, meant to challenge the firearm. It is subjected to the same stress the H&K pistols and the M&P were subjected to. I’m pretty sure we’re all on the same page there — it just seemed like Glock wasn’t.

  8. So Glock is concerned enough about how you clean your gun but the whole ejection/extraction problem is just gonna get glossed over?

  9. Based on the Glock Website and the way they leave GSSF in the dark ages I am amazed they know how to text.

  10. jelly — Understood. If my description led you to misunderstand, that’s 100% on me, not Glock.

    Tom — No one I deal with at Glock is “glossing over” the reliability issues with the gen4 9mm guns. Having worked for two major competitors, I can tell you from first hand experience that it’s very easy to see the problem, identify the problem, report the problem, complain about the problem, and never see upper management do anything about the problem. At least Glock appears to be addressing the gen4 9mm issues.

  11. The fact that Glock sent you multIple text speaks to the issue at hand…your testing…and subsequent issues you have publicized…threatens the reliability image, and thus Glocks enormous market share.

    To put into perspective, did HK ever text you around your P30 or HK45 testing?

    It would appear to the regular guy reading your test blog that Glock is concerned about how their product is stacking up, and wants you to clarify that you are running the pistol dirty…thus it would never ever do that if you just cleaned it…whereas HK did what, made an enormous display marketing play ou of what you did…

    I can only imagine what Sig would say to you if you were running one of their pistols…

  12. Todd:

    Glock is right. A clean weapon is a happy weapon. And not only does cleaning make the weapon feel happy, which as we all know makes it shoot better, it also protects small metal parts like springs from the abrasive effects of baked carbon fouling. Even better, it gets one to inspect the condition of the other parts as well, which sometimes can prevent awkward things from happening–like a connector breaking when one is really, really hoping that everything will keep working.

    A clean weapon is a happy weapon.

  13. SteveJ, Totally agree that a clean weapon is a happy weapon but, sort of like Todd, I’ve fired guns at least past the 1000 – 2000 round mark to see if they have any issues.

    I’d be willing to bet that carbon buildup in no way contributed to the connector breaking. Metal parts don’t crack because of grunge. They may (eventually) erode through by abrasion but since Todd didn’t mention the connector being worn to paper thin I doubt that was it.

  14. Liability. No company’s going to go tell you it’s ok to ‘abuse’ thier equipment.

  15. The texts are purely Glock CYA. This whole experience might be a good argument for a separate trainer gun and carry gun.

  16. Teutonic – “To put into perspective, did HK ever text you around your P30 or HK45 testing?”

    Texted, emailed, called, met in person… unlike the Glock test, the two HK tests and the S&W M&P test before them were officially supported by their respective manufacturers. They provided armorer training, spare parts, and an open line of communication whenever I had questions.

    The Glock test is being done sua sponte and any information or assistance from Glock is unofficial. The texts I received were not “corporation to corporation” but rather “buddy to buddy.”

  17. Lomshek:

    I agree with both parts of your post. I too routinely put weapons through a 1000 or 2000 round test for reliability, and I doubt that carbon abrasion had any effect on that connector. My guess is that it was the result of an improperly heat-treated metal part combined with repeated heating and cooling cycles from Todd’s high-round-count range sessions. However, a detail strip every 5000 rounds or so might have uncovered the crack forming.

    One of the impressive things about modern pistols is how well they handle extreme temperatures and other abuse, but as Todd has noted they are still full of small metal parts, and small metal parts will break from time to time. Preventive maintenance won’t stop all untimely breakages–but it will help. And of course, it does wonders for the weapon’s self esteem.

Leave a Reply