Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Glock 19 gen 5 for idpa ccp


cjd1215

Recommended Posts

Has anyone that purchased a Glock 19 gen 5 confirm that it wil fit in the idpa ccp box.  Glock's website says the width of a glock 19 gen five is 1.34. However I am not sure where these measurements are taken. I know the gen 5 is wider than a gen 4 because of the extra slide lock on the right side. The legal max width for ccp is 1 3/8.   The 1 3/8 is 1.375 so if 1.34 is indeed at the widest point of the weapon then it should barely fit in the box. However I would like to know for sure of someone can conform it indeed does fit in the box. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone that purchased a Glock 19 gen 5 confirm that it wil fit in the idpa ccp box.  Glock's website says the width of a glock 19 gen five is 1.34. However I am not sure where these measurements are taken. I know the gen 5 is wider than a gen 4 because of the extra slide lock on the right side. The legal max width for ccp is 1 3/8.   The 1 3/8 is 1.375 so if 1.34 is indeed at the widest point of the weapon then it should barely fit in the box. However I would like to know for sure of someone can conform it indeed does fit in the box. 
1.3749 wide would barely fit. 1.34 fits with room to spare.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
1.3749 wide would barely fit. 1.34 fits with room to spare.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

There is some issue with glock 5 passing safety. At a sanctioned match I shot last week the glock 5 was rejected at safety check because the firing pin lock could not manually function from what I understand.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I am going to go with a Gen 4. I do not care for the flared magazine well. I understand the triggers are different as well. Someone said the are more like the glock 42 and 43 triggers. I have many blocks and since I am familiar with the gen 3 and gen 4 I will stick with them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/9/2017 at 6:53 PM, f2benny said:

There is some issue with glock 5 passing safety. At a sanctioned match I shot last week the glock 5 was rejected at safety check because the firing pin lock could not manually function from what I understand.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

 

What? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
What? 
I'm not sure what the question is. A new glock 5 failed the chrono safety test. The SO who did the check said the glock 5 has some issue that prevents it from manually being tested for the positive function of the firing pin block. He said they are safe but the 5 can't pass in the way the rules require the SO to check the safety.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2017 at 5:16 PM, Agent #1911 said:

What? 

 

2 hours ago, f2benny said:

I'm not sure what the question is. A new glock 5 failed the chrono safety test. The SO who did the check said the glock 5 has some issue that prevents it from manually being tested for the positive function of the firing pin block. He said they are safe but the 5 can't pass in the way the rules require the SO to check the safety.

This makes no sense at all.  If the gun is functioning as the manufacturer intended then some random SO shouldn't be able to bar it's use based upon his inability to make it function like a previous model of that gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes no sense at all.  If the gun is functioning as the manufacturer intended then some random SO shouldn't be able to bar it's use based upon his inability to make it function like a previous model of that gun.
Rule h. The SO felt bad but said take it up with IDPA.d5af72b2df70f9441c25186b05dd6764.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, f2benny said:

Rule h. The SO felt bad but said take it up with IDPA.d5af72b2df70f9441c25186b05dd6764.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

I appreciate that you are trying to clarify what someone else did but that set of rules covers modifications.  I was under the impression that we were talking about an unmodified factory gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, f2benny said:

That's the equipment check list for all guns at a sanctioned match to see if they've been modified.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

Okay, so I see what you are saying.  If the gun is stock and Glock just changed up something then these rules wouldn't apply, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, jhgtyre said:

Okay, so I see what you are saying.  If the gun is stock and Glock just changed up something then these rules wouldn't apply, right?

 

The rule applies to ALL guns. That is how the match officials know if a gun is stock or not. Or safety has been compromised. Like I said, poorly written. IDPA assumed that this procedure will work with ALL handguns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Agent #1911 said:

 

The rule applies to ALL guns. That is how the match officials know if a gun is stock or not. Or safety has been compromised. Like I said, poorly written. IDPA assumed that this procedure will work with ALL handguns.

Gotcha.  You are right this is a poorly worded set of rules.  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Note that those are Guidelines, not cut and dried rules.

I have a Gen 3 G34 and just purchased a Gen 5 G19.

With the slide locked back on both the g34 striker can not be pushed forward so the fp extends past the breech face.

The Gen 5 g19 can at that point.  BUT releasing the slide and allowing it to travel only a quarter inch engages the fp block and then the fp will NOT go forward past the breech face.

On neither can you actually see the fp block unless you disassemble the firearm.

That is why they are guidelines.  The SO has to be aware, be made aware or experienced enough to figure this out without a paint by numbers attitude.

Sounds a lot like the old range nazi attitude IDPA had issues with in it's early days.

If I knew I had not tampered with the safeties, I think I would have had to get the RM, MD (whatever IDPA calls them) involved.

Take the slide off and show everything is as it should be, hopefully someone would see reason.

Edited by pskys2
added content
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...