PDA

View Full Version : Glock 32 misfeed


stitcher
July 25, 2012, 17:31
I just got a glock 32 in .357 sig, I've shot 50 rounds through two different mags, and had 5 or six failures to feed in the 10 round mags. The followers are different, and I've heard that could be the problem.

spider991
July 26, 2012, 21:50
Try some of the 13 round factory mags and if it jams again,send it back! Are those mags aftermarket? That is definatly NOT typical. That gun should eat every piece of ammo and beg for more. Matter of fact, if you have factory ten rounders now-send it back.

homelandprotector
July 27, 2012, 08:24
Definitely do not limp wrist fire that baby, I've known that any Glock especially the compact models will FTF when not held firm with stiff wrist and arm. The slide will not cycle fully without adequate back pressure.

Happen to me also, hold it firm.:cool:

stitcher
July 28, 2012, 07:42
Thanks fellas

Tim Dreas
August 01, 2012, 11:29
This was a problem with a 357 Sig Glocks when they started using 10 round magazines. They changed the shape of the barrel feed ramp. The ones that don't feed well have a narrow ramp with wide flats on either side of the ramp. Certain brands of ammo may work and certain magazines may work better than others but the real fix is to replace the barrel with one that has a full width rounded feed ramp. The feed ramp on the "good" 357 Sig barrels have narrow edges on the sides instead of the wide flats. The "bad" 357 Sig barrels were Glocks first effort to increase case support in the 357 Sig barrels. Compare your barrel to earlier and later 357 Sig Glocks. The earliest ones have polished feed ramps and the least case support. The newest ones have black feed ramps and more case support and the ones that feed well have wide, rounded feed ramps.

homelandprotector
August 02, 2012, 09:58
This was a problem with a 357 Sig Glocks when they started using 10 round magazines. They changed the shape of the barrel feed ramp. The ones that don't feed well have a narrow ramp with wide flats on either side of the ramp. Certain brands of ammo may work and certain magazines may work better than others but the real fix is to replace the barrel with one that has a full width rounded feed ramp. The feed ramp on the "good" 357 Sig barrels have narrow edges on the sides instead of the wide flats. The "bad" 357 Sig barrels were Glocks first effort to increase case support in the 357 Sig barrels. Compare your barrel to earlier and later 357 Sig Glocks. The earliest ones have polished feed ramps and the least case support. The newest ones have black feed ramps and more case support and the ones that feed well have wide, rounded feed ramps.
Who would have known?? :bow: Only on the Falfiles someone would......... :cool:

stitcher
August 02, 2012, 18:14
That is some great information thanks!

Tim Dreas
August 02, 2012, 19:29
I'm not sure Glock will replace the barrel nut I'm almost certain that is the problem. The "bad" barrels have a feed ramp that has the sides of the recess nearly parallel where the "good" barrels have a flared feed ramp. When you compare them side by side you can easily see the difference. A factory replacement barrel should fix the problem. The replacements have replacement numbers on them and won't match the pistol's serial number, even if Glock does replace it. If you replace it yourself, you can keep the original barrel with the matching serial number and don't have to go through all of the shipping and waiting on Glock. Find a functional Glock 32 or any working 357 Sig Glock and compare the barrel to yours to make sure that is the issue. It is not an uncommon problem with the 357 Sig models but those barrels were only used a short time.

Tim Dreas
August 03, 2012, 13:27
I believe this photo is a "good" Glock 357 Sig barrel feed ramp, 2nd from left.


http://www.warriortalk.com/showthread.php?66003-Glock-s-Unsupported-Chamber/page2

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/66/bigversionofglockrebate.jpg/

If your feed ramp looks like a narrow groove with wide, flat sides, then it is the one of the "bad" ones. I have pictures of one somewhere but I can't locate them right now.

reganhouse
September 02, 2012, 17:28
Hello all,

I am not an FAL owner, but I was directed to this interesting thread by my FFL who found it after discussing failure-to-feed (FTF) experiences I have had with a G32.

I won't go into the whole sordid story, but suffice to say that since I first bought this pistol, NIB, I encountered FTFs with it whenever I used the remanufactured FMJ truncated cone ammo from Georgia Arms. After much effort to solve the problem on my own by replacing the mag springs, modifying the magazines (nub removal) and replacing the magazines, I sent the pistol to Glock. They sent it back to me with no observable alteration to the pistol. However, they exchanged the original (#2-marked follower) mags with new (#2-marked follower) mags. There was no indication of what, if anything, they had done or had found. The problem persisted. That was about 9 months ago.

Subsequently, I did a number of tests at the range with different types of ammo and deduced that the problem was the bullet nose would catch on the lower lip of the feed ramp and that this may have been caused by the way the round was presented to the feed ramp AND the thickness of the lower lip on the feed ramp. My final effort involved use of a benchrest to deflect any possible claim by Glock that I was limp wristing. (Please note that I have shot many rounds of this same ammo with a SIG P229 without a single FTF.)

With all of my test data in hand and written up into a 13-page letter including photos, I went to my FFL, who is a certified Glock armourer, and asked him to talk to Glock on my behalf. My reasoning was that he would have a better chance of discussing this subject with a technical person at Glock and possibly could exert more leverage on them to be responsive. It was at this point that my FFL located this FAL forum thread.

Comparison of my barrel with the example shown in the link provided by Tim Dreas verified that I have the 'narrow feed ramp with the wide flats on either side'. My FFL forwarded pictures of my barrel to Glock, told them of the issue as discussed in this thread, and requested that they send a replacement barrel of the more recent design. He received no response.

Unfortunately, I was away for about 1 week during this period and when I returned the excellent picture showing the different feed ramps was no longer posted. Because I had not downloaded it, I could not use the image again.

My questions for Tim Dreas are, "Do you still have those pictures and could you send them to me"? and "How did you come by that information"?

To say the least, I am extremely disheartened by my experiences with Glock customer service, but my FFL has told me that this is pretty much par for the course these days. I am at the point of either purchasing a third party barrel like the ones made by Lone Wolf that has a more dished out and wider feed ramp, selling my pistol, or locating a Glock barrel with the correct feed ramp. Needless to say, I have quite a bit invested into this pistol.

Thank you for your answers and for providing this information. I was very surprised to see no such information on GT. I suspect other G32 owners have encountered this problem and simply given up. I still have some hope of resolving it. Regardless of the outcome, I will report my findings when the dust finally settles.

Tim Dreas
September 02, 2012, 20:16
Hello all,

I am not an FAL owner, but I was directed to this interesting thread by my FFL who found it after discussing failure-to-feed (FTF) experiences I have had with a G32.

I won't go into the whole sordid story, but suffice to say that since I first bought this pistol, NIB, I encountered FTFs with it whenever I used the remanufactured FMJ truncated cone ammo from Georgia Arms. After much effort to solve the problem on my own by replacing the mag springs, modifying the magazines (nub removal) and replacing the magazines, I sent the pistol to Glock. They sent it back to me with no observable alteration to the pistol. However, they exchanged the original (#2-marked follower) mags with new (#2-marked follower) mags. There was no indication of what, if anything, they had done or had found. The problem persisted. That was about 9 months ago.

Subsequently, I did a number of tests at the range with different types of ammo and deduced that the problem was the bullet nose would catch on the lower lip of the feed ramp and that this may have been caused by the way the round was presented to the feed ramp AND the thickness of the lower lip on the feed ramp. My final effort involved use of a benchrest to deflect any possible claim by Glock that I was limp wristing. (Please note that I have shot many rounds of this same ammo with a SIG P229 without a single FTF.)

With all of my test data in hand and written up into a 13-page letter including photos, I went to my FFL, who is a certified Glock armourer, and asked him to talk to Glock on my behalf. My reasoning was that he would have a better chance of discussing this subject with a technical person at Glock and possibly could exert more leverage on them to be responsive. It was at this point that my FFL located this FAL forum thread.

Comparison of my barrel with the example shown in the link provided by Tim Dreas verified that I have the 'narrow feed ramp with the wide flats on either side'. My FFL forwarded pictures of my barrel to Glock, told them of the issue as discussed in this thread, and requested that they send a replacement barrel of the more recent design. He received no response.

Unfortunately, I was away for about 1 week during this period and when I returned the excellent picture showing the different feed ramps was no longer posted. Because I had not downloaded it, I could not use the image again.

My questions for Tim Dreas are, "Do you still have those pictures and could you send them to me"? and "How did you come by that information"?

To say the least, I am extremely disheartened by my experiences with Glock customer service, but my FFL has told me that this is pretty much par for the course these days. I am at the point of either purchasing a third party barrel like the ones made by Lone Wolf that has a more dished out and wider feed ramp, selling my pistol, or locating a Glock barrel with the correct feed ramp. Needless to say, I have quite a bit invested into this pistol.

Thank you for your answers and for providing this information. I was very surprised to see no such information on GT. I suspect other G32 owners have encountered this problem and simply given up. I still have some hope of resolving it. Regardless of the outcome, I will report my findings when the dust finally settles.

I have some problems with the computer that I think should have all of the photo's. I am in the process of buying a new computer and recovering the data from the one with the photo's. It is only a Windows problem, bot a hardware problem and it still boots but won't transfer any files and it won't search. I can access the files on it with a Live Linux CD but it it will take some time to search the files.

I'm not certain Glock has ever replaced the defective narrow feed ramp 357 Sig barrels. Maybe they have once, but most people say that Glock claims there is nothing wrong with the barrels. For all of the trouble of shipping and waiting I would just buy a factory replacement barrel. Even if Glock replaces the barrel, the serial number won't match. The replacements have "replacement" serial numbers that are completely different. More than likely the replacement will be a good one.

I had the monitor on my good computer go out and now I am using the monitor from the troublesome computer, so I don't even have a monitor hooked up to it right now. I'll try to hook up a monitor and search for the photo's this week but I am actively shopping for a replacement computer this week and moving the computer gear around so it might take some time.

reganhouse
September 02, 2012, 21:15
Thank you very much, Tim, for replying so quickly, especially considering your computer problems right now. As for the photos, any time you can get them is fine. It is not urgent.

However, I am somewhat confused. Are you saying that Glock only came out with two types of barrels and that the most recent ones are the ones that feed best?

I purchased my pistol in January 2011 but it was produced May 20, 2009. I have attached a picture of the .357 SIG barrel (far left) along with a .40 S&W non-replacement barrel I bought (middle) and then a Lone Wolf 40-9 barrel. The .40 S&W and 40-9 barrels work flawlessly. Perhaps you can verify that my .357 SIG barrel is of the poor feeding variety from the date of production and the picture. Here is a link to the photos...

http://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af326/reganhouse/

My worry about purchasing a Glock factory replacement barrel was that without seeing the feed ramp in the web photos, I couldn't be certain that I was getting the correct barrel.

I will be curious to see your response and thank you very much. This has been a painful experience, but your information (still would like to know how you gained it) has raised my hopes.

http://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af326/reganhouse/

Bob

Tim Dreas
September 03, 2012, 05:16
Thank you very much, Tim, for replying so quickly, especially considering your computer problems right now. As for the photos, any time you can get them is fine. It is not urgent.

However, I am somewhat confused. Are you saying that Glock only came out with two types of barrels and that the most recent ones are the ones that feed best?

I purchased my pistol in January 2011 but it was produced May 20, 2009. I have attached a picture of the .357 SIG barrel (far left) along with a .40 S&W non-replacement barrel I bought (middle) and then a Lone Wolf 40-9 barrel. The .40 S&W and 40-9 barrels work flawlessly. Perhaps you can verify that my .357 SIG barrel is of the poor feeding variety from the date of production and the picture. Here is a link to the photos...

http://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af326/reganhouse/

My worry about purchasing a Glock factory replacement barrel was that without seeing the feed ramp in the web photos, I couldn't be certain that I was getting the correct barrel.

I will be curious to see your response and thank you very much. This has been a painful experience, but your information (still would like to know how you gained it) has raised my hopes.

http://s1020.photobucket.com/albums/af326/reganhouse/

Bob

No, There are at least three styles of 357 Sig barrels in pre-generation 4 models. The first had the least case head support and a polished (silver) wide feed ramp that fed very smoothly. At some point Glock added more case head support and quit polishing the feed ramps or the feed ramps were finished later and were black. When the signal stack magazines came out (or sometime after) the feed ramp of some or all 357 Sig models got the narrow feed ramp and its troubles. Those barrels weren't used for long.

Anyway, regardless of the year, the narrow feed ramp barrel is most likely the problem.

I just saw your pic. The "good" 357 Sig barrels have feed ramps similar to the 40 S&W one.

Tim Dreas
September 03, 2012, 05:35
The newer barrels have more case head support and more vertical feed ramps than the earlier barrels. I bought a factory replacement 40 S&W barrel for 357 Sig and it doesn't feed as smoothly as the early style barrel. The newer one causes the round to "jump" into the chamber instead of gliding into it. I believe it also requires a magazine follower of number 5 or newer (maybe it was number 4 or newer). But this for the 40 S&W not 357 Sig. Those 357 Sig barrels with the narrow feed ramps rarely work properly with any magazine. They don't seem to be very common so I don't think they were made for very long.

reganhouse
September 03, 2012, 07:31
Thanks again, Tim.

I am still having some trouble undertanding the story. Here is what I think you are saying....

1. Glock originally came out with a barrel (#1) with the least case support and a polished (not black) wide feed ramp that fed rounds very well.

2) Glock then decided to improve case support and stopped polishing the feed ramp or finished it after polishing (#2). I didn't see where you mentioned whether this barrel fed properly or not and whether it had a narrow or wide feed ramp.

3) When the 10-rd mags came out, Glock started producing .357 SIG barrels with a narrower feed ramp and used them on '...some or all .357 Sig models'. These are the problematic barrels, which Glock made for only a short time (dates?) and then stopped producing.

4) Glock currently uses a barrel (#2 or a different one?) in new pistols and for replacement barrels. This one has "...more case head support and more vertical feed ramps than the earlier barrels...". I could not ascertain whether this is an entirely new design or not, but you seem to be saying that this one also has '...more case head support and more vertical feed ramps than the earlier barrels...' causing the '...round to "jump" into the chamber instead of gliding into it...'.

So, here are my questions:

Can you tell from the picture I posted (and possibly the date of manufacture) which of the above-described .357 SIG barrels I have?

Are the serialed and replacement barrels that are currently being sold by Glock a new type (#4?) or are they one of the earlier ones (#2,3), which also happen to have narrow vertical feed ramps?

I'm sorry to put you through this, but I'm trying to get a clear picture of what was produced versus what I have and what I will get if I buy a replacement barrel. I don't want to spend another red cent on this pistol without knowing it will work flawlessly. You know, Glock Perfection.

Thanks again,

Bob

Tim Dreas
September 03, 2012, 16:25
I don't have a generation 4 Glock but I believe the only difference in the barrel is a larger cutout / recess for the dual recoil spring in the generation 4 barrel.

In your pictures the earliest 357 Sig barrels look a lot like the 9 mm barrel feed ramp that is flared. The 40 S&W barrel looks like a newer design with a more vertical feed ramp and it's wide but not so flared. The 357 Sig barrel looks like the problematic ones with the narrow feed ramp. I don't know the exact years of production. Usually the year can be determined by the first letters of the serial if it has the same serial number that is on slide and the frame. I believe the narrow feed ramp only came with some single stack magazine 357 Sig models. There were law enforcement models produced at the same time and I would think they have the same barrels, but maybe not. I know some states have 10 round magazine limits, so the single stack magazine models are still sold in those states.

ALL FAL
September 03, 2012, 19:12
It all comes down to Glock needing to get their tech and customer service UP to a workable level, from what I have read in this thread, I would NOT BUY A GLOCK for the reasons seen here, I and many others are worn out dealing with poor customer service from other companies.:mad:

Sig is looking better all the time... Anything But a Glock....

CTW
September 04, 2012, 07:20
I have owned 4 Glocks and tthe only one I had issues with was. 357 sig. I bought an early model 33 when they first hit the market and it had feed problems. It did not jan, but would force the bullet's to nose ddive into the case. I would notice bullet's set back after carrying and unloading the pistol. I never really liked the combo of such a small pistol and violent round, so I got rid of it.

reganhouse
September 04, 2012, 08:46
Thank you, Tim and the other posters. As you might expect, I have read many threads about the Glock 31-33 models and FTF issues, but surprisingly, this is the only one that I have seen in which the feed ramp question has been raised. I still would like to know, Tim, where you gained your knowledge about the variations in Glock barrels. Did you work for Glock or were you a Glock armourer?

My aim (despite some frustration) is not to bash Glock. I understand that most, if not all, of the gun and ammunition manufacuturers are somewhat strapped and frequently fail in the customer service department. I personally have quite a few SIGs, but I have had no problems with them, so I have had no contact with their customer service. I have a Kel-tec and they were very responsive. This is my first adverse experience.

The only company that I have read something about that was glowing in the area of customer service was Ruger, but I do not have a weapon made by them.

I will update you all when I come to a conclusion. In the meantime, the pistol will sit in the safe.

Bob

reganhouse
September 04, 2012, 09:47
Here are a couple of things I forgot to mention. I bought the pistol in January 2011 NIB. I know that the pistol was all original because I was at the FFL's place and saw the Glock seal cut. The pistol was purchased in Virginia and had 2 13-rd mags in it (#2 followers). I think the serial # is NN207 (I'm at work), but I called Glock and I know they told me the pistol was made May 20, 2009.

So, if this is the 'bad' feed ramp, it was installed in a pistol with 13-rd mags that was made in 2009. It doesn't fit the 10-rd mag theory.

reganhouse
September 04, 2012, 09:58
Come to think of it, I believe the s/n was NGG207. I will confirm tonight when I go home.

Tim Dreas
September 04, 2012, 13:52
Here are a couple of things I forgot to mention. I bought the pistol in January 2011 NIB. I know that the pistol was all original because I was at the FFL's place and saw the Glock seal cut. The pistol was purchased in Virginia and had 2 13-rd mags in it (#2 followers). I think the serial # is NN207 (I'm at work), but I called Glock and I know they told me the pistol was made May 20, 2009.

So, if this is the 'bad' feed ramp, it was installed in a pistol with 13-rd mags that was made in 2009. It doesn't fit the 10-rd mag theory.

The first ones I saw with the narrow ramp barrels had single stack magazines. I don't know what dates the changes were made. You can compare the serial number on the BOTTOM of the frame to the serial numbers on the slide and barrel to see if all of the parts are original. If you can, try another factory Glock 32 barrel in it or look at another Glock 32 and see how its feed ramp looks.

reganhouse
September 04, 2012, 14:58
The serial numbers on the pistol (barrel, frame, slide) are all matching as would be expected with a NIB sytem. As for the magazine question, it is possible that some of these 'improved' barrels not only were produced for G32s with 10-rd mags, but also found their way into pistols shipped with 13-rd mags. I thought that the 10-round mags were double stack (not single-stack), but they had a spacer in the bottom to reduce the round count from 13 to 10. I have never seen a single stack Glock magazine, but I am not a Glock expert.

I would love to try another G32 with a 'good' .357 SIG barrel-that is a fine suggestion, but I don't know anyone right now who has an operable G32 with a 'good' .357 SIG barrel. Nevertheless, that is another avenue to pursue.

BTW, I have a G26 and have never had a FTF or other problem with it. That is my only other Glock. Most of my shooting pistols are SIGs.

Thanks again,

Bob

Kyrottimus
September 04, 2012, 15:14
The only Glocks I've ever fired were 9mm and 10mm. Never had a single problem. Then again, all glocks in existence today (except the 36) are based on 9mm/10mm designs (17/19/26 and the 20/29). They made the 22 by reconfiguring the 17, and the 21 by reconfiguring the 20...so on and so forth. You get the idea.

Needless to say, when you convert an existing, perfectly functional design away from its intended caliber, you can run into tuning issues.

Glock really should make a medium-frame pistol to bridge the gap between 9mm-base designs and 10mm/45-base designs to accommodate .40/.357 Sig. Maybe lengthen the slide/frame (front to back) a bit, really only like +5mm, to fit a more proper feed-ramp in there (but they could still fit the same holsters). They probably wont since they like using as many like-parts as possible.

I hear buying conversion barrels for a Glock 20 to shoot .40S&W works great. I wonder how feasible that would be for .357 Sig. That frame definitely has a longer "throw" and thusly can fit a more appropriate feed-ramp in it.

Tim Dreas
September 04, 2012, 20:22
The serial numbers on the pistol (barrel, frame, slide) are all matching as would be expected with a NIB sytem. As for the magazine question, it is possible that some of these 'improved' barrels not only were produced for G32s with 10-rd mags, but also found their way into pistols shipped with 13-rd mags. I thought that the 10-round mags were double stack (not single-stack), but they had a spacer in the bottom to reduce the round count from 13 to 10. I have never seen a single stack Glock magazine, but I am not a Glock expert.

I would love to try another G32 with a 'good' .357 SIG barrel-that is a fine suggestion, but I don't know anyone right now who has an operable G32 with a 'good' .357 SIG barrel. Nevertheless, that is another avenue to pursue.

BTW, I have a G26 and have never had a FTF or other problem with it. That is my only other Glock. Most of my shooting pistols are SIGs.

Thanks again,

Bob

The 10 round Glock magazines, other than the subcompact models, are single stack instead of having a block at the bottom like i0 round metal magazines have.

I pretty much knew how your barrel's feed ramp looked before you posted pictures. I am nearly certain it is a barrel problem and it is the barrel's feed ramp shape causing the problem. There are Glock 357 Sig barrels that have feed ramps that look like the 40 S&W barrels and they don't have that problem. If you were near a large enough gun shop or gun show you might be able to take a look at some other Glock 357 Sig barrels. Getting a replacement barrel usually fixes the problem. If it turns out the same, you could reshape the feed ramp or have a gunsmith reshape the feed ramp. That way the original barrel would stay original and you may still get Glock to replace it one day when they realize there was a design problem.

The reason I mentioned checking the serial numbers, is I have seen "new" Glocks (and other models) with mixed serial numbers. I don't know if they got mixed up at the factory or if a dealer took them apart or let somebody take apart a couple of pistols and accidentally mix the parts.

reganhouse
September 05, 2012, 04:57
Thank you, Tim. I learn something every day.

I will get back to the thread when I have something to report on the barrel issue. In the meantime, take it easy.

Nosing around this website has gotten me interested in the FAL. Just what I need-another gun to lust after. I wouldn't want a collector's grade gun because I want to shoot it and not worry about a scratch or two. Thinking DSA either para 18" or Stg 58 lightly used. Something like that. I haven't looked into the classifieds-that is dangerous to the bank account.

Bob

Tim Dreas
September 05, 2012, 10:03
A DS Arms FAL is great a choice Bob. I haven't seen a, "bad" replacement 357 Sig factory Glock barrel. KKM makes good aftermarket Glock barrel. (not to be coinfused with low quality EFK Fire Dragon barrels). Lone Wold Distributors is a company that sell factory Glock replacement barrels to the public for reasonable prices. They may even be good about returns and exchanges.

http://www.lonewolfdist.com/products.aspx?CAT=4

http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=725144&CAT=56

http://www.kkmprecision.com/custom_pistol_barrels/home.php?cat=1

http://www.kkmprecision.com/custom_pistol_barrels/home.php?cat=25

Companies I haven't used.

http://glockstore.com/pgroup_descrip/2_Barrels/78_Glock+Factory+Barrels/

http://www.botachtactical.com/glockbarrels1.html

http://www.topgunsupply.com/glock-barrels/

http://www.topgunsupply.com/factory-glock-barrels/

http://glockcustombarrels.com/

I hope you get it working right.

reganhouse
September 19, 2012, 01:58
Hello all,

Just thought I would let everyone know that I managed to get Glock to ship my G32 back to the factory on their dime and it has returned today. As in the case of the first time I sent it in last January, I can see no modification to the pistol and no information was enclosed in the package. Certainly, the barrel is untouched.

However, there are now three new mags with #3 followers in them. These have been substituted for the mags I sent them with #2 followers. I will try to find time to go to the range and shoot some .357 SIG and see if there is any change in the FTF problem.

I will report the results to this thread AND to Glock. Oh my!

Bob

Tim Dreas
September 19, 2012, 20:10
Sounds good so far Bob. I do not know of Glock ever replacing the barrel for this problem. I know that replacing he barrel usually does fix the problem though. Maybe they have some new magazine and followers that will work with those barrels now. If the magazines do work, you'll have to look for those followers in any additional magazines you may get in the future. Even those might change and go out of production at some point. I think the Remington 357 Sig bullets are bit "rounded" where most others are cone shaped. They may or may not make a difference. Good luck and let us know how it works out.

reganhouse
September 19, 2012, 20:20
I'll definitely post the results. My expectations are low, but I did notice that the springs on the mags with #3 followers are quite strong. Maybe that will help bring the rounds into proper alignment. However, I already tried some Wolff springs and they had no effect.

We'll see.

Bob

reganhouse
October 09, 2012, 14:19
I finally got time to go over to the range and test my G32 with the new mags with #3 followers. These are the ones Glock sent as replacements for the mags with #2 followers I sent them. I noted a much stronger spring in the new mags when I got them, so I am guessing that Glock is focusing on the feeding of rounds through the mag rather than onto the feed ramp (i.e. the barrel). It is hard to tell because no information was supplied by Glock.

In any event, I decided to shoot the Georgia Arms (GA) 125 gr truncated cone FMJ ammo that I have had the FTF problems with (50 rds) and some commercial ammo (Speer Lawman [SL], 125 gr TMJ; 50 rds). The latter is relatively inexpensive and could serve as a substitute for the GA ammo if it works.

I did the following:

1. 13 rds GA ammo in mag #1, #3 follower.
2. 13 rds GA ammo in mag #2, #3 follower.
3. 13 rds GA ammo in mag #3, #3 follower.
4. 11 rds GA ammo in mag# 1, #1 follower.
5. 13 rds SL ammo in mag #1, #3 follower.
6. 13 rds SL ammo in mag #2, #3 follower.
7. 13 rds SL ammo in mag #3, #3 follower.
8. 11 rds SL ammo in mag #1, #1 follower.

I shot at 21 feet, 2 handed, isosceles stance with a firm grip (as usual).

Results:

#1: FTF on 3rd rd.

#2: FTF on 4th rd.

#3: FTF on 2nd rd.

#4: FTFs on 2nd, 4th rds.

#5: FTF on 2nd rd.

#6: no FTFs

#7: no FTFs

#8: FTF on 4th rd.

I inspected the bullets when the FTFs occurred and noticed that the SL ammo nose was just barely catching on the lip of the feed ramp (as indicated by the position of the mark), whereas the GA ammo had a mark that intersected further up into the nose. [Note: The SL ammo has a very flat nose with sharp edges, whereas the GA ammo has more rounded edges.]

I conclude from this that there may be some ammunition component of this problem, but by firing the Speer Lawman ammo and getting FTFs, I have eliminated the 'remanufactured' vs. off-the-shelf commercial ammo question.


I am going to try to pursue this with Glock again. It seems clear that the feed ramp is part, if not most, of the problem.

Bob

Tim Dreas
October 09, 2012, 17:54
Hi Bob, I suspected there might still be some problems. I'm nearly certain the problem is the barrel.I don't know that Glock will ever own up to that as they have "tested" it and declared it is fine. I don't know if you'll get a "good" barrel by buying a replacement barrel but it might as least solve if the barrel is the problem. I like using factory barrels but KKM does make good quality barrels too. The other thing you might look at is under the barrel is a notch in the barrel where it drops next to the locking block in the frame. I have seen some 9mm Glocks where this notch wasn't deep enough in the barrel to allow the feed ramp to drop down far enough for feeding cartridges from the magazine. I do know that those 357 Sig barrels that look like your with the narrow feed ramp have problems.

reganhouse
October 09, 2012, 21:22
Thank you for your input, Tim. It is hard to overstate my disappointment and frustration with this situation.

When I look at the three barrels I have, the original Glock .357 SIG, the Glock .40 S&W and the Lone Wolf 40-9, I don't really see a problem with the notch in the barrel by the lug. These 3 barrels look essentially identical in profile. Moreover, when you look into the breech with a mag inserted (and a round in it) and the slide held back by the slide stop, the position of the .357 SIG barrel relative to the magazine (and the bullet) doesn't look like it would even be possible for a FTF. In other words, when the barrel is lugged down during rearward (and subsequently forward) travel of the slide, it looks like a sure feed. By the time the barrel is lugged up, the round should have been chambered.

I will try Glock again. Failing any resolution through them, my choices are:

1) have the Glock .357 barrel modified by a gunsmith,
2) buy a replacement (either a Glock or a 3rd party) barrel, or
3) sell the pistol.

I don't like #1 because it is an irreversible change that may not correct the problem and would probably make the pistol less desirable to a prospective buyer. Likewise, #2 is a costly risk. However, if a replacement barrel did work, I would be relieved but angry that I had to buy a replacement barrel to solve the problem. I see this as a manufacturing defect. The last choice is problematic because I don't feel it would be ethical to sell this gun to someone, even with proper disclosure, given its unresolved problem. I know that I wouldn't want to buy such a gun.

I find it almost inconceivable that major gun manufacturers such as Glock don't care enough about their customers to communicate effectively and find solutions to the occasional problems that come up. Glock sending this pistol back to me, on two separate occasions, with replacement magazines and no statement about what was done and why is simply unacceptable in my book. I guess the gun business is just too profitable.

I have quite a few pistols and rifles, about 10 of which I shoot somewhat regularly. I have never encountered a problem such as this with this lack of resolution. Given the circumstances, I am thinking I it might be best to just go with my .357 SIG P229. It has never failed to go 'bang'.

Bob

Tim Dreas
October 10, 2012, 00:34
Hi Bob, I hate risking losing a pistol in shipping to and from Glock. I went through a frame "upgrade" with them once for the Exx-xxx series frame rail issue. I would think the chances a getting another "bad" barrel when buying a factory replacement would be fairly slim. Not a solution for the 357 Sig barrel problem but you could always install a factory Glock 23 barrel for 40 S&W. I traded a Glock 27 in on a Glock 33 when the Glock 33 first came out. The Glock 27 worked well and I bought it to instal an aftermarket 357 Sig barrel before Glock made pistols in 357 Sig. Some years later I decided to buy a Glock 27 barrel for the Glock 33. It doesn't feed as smoothly as the early Glock 27 barrel did and it fits the slide very tightly. Almost too tightly. I had a used Glock 27 slide for a while that had a very loose fit on the barrels. I later old it but there wasn't anything wrong with it. The newer 40 S&W barrels require a newer follower magazine and they still feed oddly with a more vertical feed ramp that cause the cartridges to, "jump" into the chamber but the chamber does have more case support than the early 40 S&W barrels. There are a couple of companies that sell the factory replacement barrels and I think I would try another Glock 32 barrel first. It would be best to be able to try another barrel first though, if possible. The KKM barrels are very good but have slightly tighter chambers. Good luck with Glock and let us know how it goes.

reganhouse
October 10, 2012, 17:12
Thanks Tim and other posters/observers. I will let you know where this all ends.

Bob

reganhouse
October 11, 2012, 16:02
I just got off the phone with a Technical Service Representative at Glock. He was very courteous and patient, but he is one step removed from the people who actually work with the pistols that are sent back to Glock.

I brieffly described the testing that I did after receiving the pistol from Glock about 3-4 weeks ago (see earlier post on 10/9/2012). He asked for the serial number and then retrieved the internal handwritten notes about what had been done at Glock the last time before they shipped it to me. That had me excited.

In these notes he said that they inspected the internals, replaced the 3 magazines I had sent, and test fired the pistol with 'Speer brass'. When I asked him what he meant by 'Speer brass' I never got a clear answer, but I think that he simply meant commercial ammo from Speer/CCI-not sure to be honest.

According to the notes, the testing was done with 50 rds, 25 rounds fired by each of two individuals. No FTFs. He raised the issue of remanufactured ammo that I have had the most experience with. I told him that my last test, conducted only a couple of days ago, was a side-by-side comparison of the Georgia Arms remanufactured .357 SIG ammo and Speer Lawman TMJ ammo, and that I observed FTFs with both types (although fewer with the Speer). I then mentioned that if the 'testers' had not filled the magazines completely, they would not see the problem because it only happens on rounds 2-5 from a fully loaded magazine. I have never had a FTF on the first round or with 8 or fewer rounds in the magazine. He wasn't able to say anything about that.

Then I asked what he would advise me to do, and he asked me if I wanted to send it back to Glock again. I told him I would think about it, but, honestly, I can't see anything that will come of that. Despite the extensive background information I provided Glock, they do not seem to consider the barrel issue relevant because they do not observe FTFs under their test conditions.

Arghhhh!

Right now, I am contemplating buying a 3rd party (or Glock replacement) barrel to see if this will eliminate the problem. If it does, I would then go back to Glock and advise them of my findings. Despite the added cost of purchasing the barrel I would at least have the problem solved or be able to see a way forward.

If anybody on this forum who has a G32 that works ,llives in the northern VA area and would be willling to contact me to set up a comparison, I would be very grateful. I will supply the ammo. My idea would be to shoot both pistols with the same ammo, switch pistols between shooters and swap barrels between pistols.

Bob

Tim Dreas
October 11, 2012, 17:29
I think "Speer brass" is shorthand for brass cased Speer ammunition and not aluminum cased CCI Blazer ammunition that they often use in other calibers. CCI quit making aluminum cased 357 Sig ammunition due to bullet setback.

If you can get a look at another Glock in 357 Sig, have a look at the feed ramp and I think you will see the difference in some of them.

Unless there is something off with the frame of the pistol, I think a barrel change will fix it. If your magazines are generation 4 magazines, I think they are slightly longer than the earlier magazines. With a longer magazine, such as a Glock 31 magazine, sometimes the finger at the bottom of the grip will put enough pressure on the magazine to tilt it in the frame. Some frames have more magazine play than others. From the years and the shape of the feed ramp it must be a generation 3 Glock. Even with the shorter magazines there may still be enough magazine sticking out of the bottom to tilt it in the frame. My money is on the barrel being the problem though.

reganhouse
October 11, 2012, 18:00
Thanks, Tim. I am thinking of seeing if I can take a look at some Gen 4 G32s at local gun stores or shooting ranges.

Bob

reganhouse
December 08, 2012, 15:59
Much has transpired since my last post, but I will try to summarize for the sake of ending this thread....

1) I went to a LGS/shooting range and examined another Gen3 G32 (rental gun)-the barrel/feed ramp was identical to my Gen3 G32's.

2) I asked the range master there to shoot my G32 with 50 rds of the Georgia Arms (GA) remanufacutured ammo that I have had the FTFs with. He proceeded to shoot 49 rounds without a FTF at which point I was becoming despondent, then he had a FTF on last round.

3) I pondered my next step for some time. Although Glock said I could send the pistol back, that didn't seem worthwhile or warranted. Buying a new barrel without being able to inspect it was time consuming and costly. Finally, while working security at a local gun show I talked with a local gunsmith about my problems with the G32. He suggest that I bring it in, and said "... we'll test fire it and go from there". Sounded good to me.

4) I brought pistol to the gunsmith's shop and gave him a brief recapitulation of the saga and left it with him to test fire.

5) About 10 days later I went back to the gunsmith shop. He had test fired it with the ammo they use for that purpose and did not get a FTF. I then was given an opportunity to use their simulator for evaluation of my technique. I passed with flying colors. Consensus: it's the ammo. The gunsmith (and several other individuals I have spoken with) have said that remanufactured ammo, especially for calibers with a bottle necked case, have had problems of various types. The gunsmith also could not give Winchester WB a clean bill of health (as I can attest-I found several set back bullets and one inverted bullet!!!). The fact that I have NEVER had a FTF problem with commercial ammo and that four different people, including a range master, have had FTFs with the Georgia Arms FMJ ammo, seems to to have led to a conclusive result.

Interestingly, I have not encountered problems with the GA ammo using my SIG Sauer P229, so I will continue to use up the GA remanufactured ammo with that pistol and use only commercial ammo with the G32.

Now that wasn't so hard was it? Arghhh!

yarro
December 08, 2012, 23:48
The 10rd mags are used for tap rack bang drills in my .357sig Glocks. They are not reliable at all. All the evil high caps that I have run flawless.

-yarro