Yondering

Got mine in - it didn't do much to keep brass off the RMR with mild loads. This gun never had an issue with mid-range or hotter loads anyway, and that didn't change.

I've never had a problem with the small rifle or pistol primers either, or heard of one. It has always been the large primers with the problem, usually the large rifle primers but I've experienced the problem with large pistol primers myself. CSEMARTIN, honestly, you got off really easy on that slide. That damage is just cosmetic, most of the damage I've seen is far worse with only 2 or 3 leaking primers.

I'm surprised you haven't heard of this issue with Winchester large rifle and pistol primers that's been going on for the last 10+ years. It's a really common occurrence with some batches of Winchester primers, with information about it all over the web. Winchester keeps claiming they've fixed it, but the issue keeps cropping up again. The primer cups are too hard/brittle and are prone to cracking, often resulting in gas cutting of the breech/bolt face. You'll see a little ring of soot around the primer on fired cases that did this; carefully punch out some of those primers and examine them, you'll find a vertical crack running from the mouth of the cup into the exposed rounded corner that sits against the breech face. Winchester will at least replace your current primers, and might replace the slide but be prepared to spend some time on the phone with them. I had 3 different bolts and one slide pitted from these primers (like you said, it happens very fast), but opted not to have them replaced because it was more hassle than it was worth. IMO the damage on yours is probably not enough to impact function, but it's your decision whether to push Winchester about it.

Sorry man, wish I could help, but I just can't take on any new work at the moment. Bummer to hear about the optics issues. I know Vortex optics have a good reputation in some circles, but I'm really not a fan of them, for a lot of the same reasons as your experiences. Pretty much any optic can break, but I've had the best results with the Trijicon RMR for carry and the Leupold DPP for competition. A mounting plate as shown above might be your best bet if you're wanting to move away from the Razor.

I am a machinist, and disagree (assuming you're talking about the OP's pistol). It does look like someone milled more angle into it than necessary, but if the optic can be zeroed, it's fine. If it can't be zeroed (POI will remain too high at max adjustment), a good machinist can fix it. I'd expect the OP will need to pay full price of a milling job, or more, to have that done though; fixing someone else's mistake is generally harder than doing it right the first time.

Where did you buy that ejector? Rockyourglock is the only place I found that actually specifies that number, so I ordered one to try in my gen 4 19. Thanks for the tip, I hadn't heard about it yet.

Is that with very mild loads as well or just factory ammo?

Nope to both of those sentences. Crimp does very little to affect combustion or bullet pull in semi-autos, and if you are relying on crimp to prevent setback, you need to improve case neck tension. As a general rule in 9mm, just enough "crimp" to remove the case flare (leaving the case straight) is plenty. Done right, that doesn't apply a crimp at all. This gives best results for coated, wax lubed cast, and plated bullets, and works just as well with jacketed. Most jacketed bullets can tolerate a lot more crimp, but it's unnecessary if the case is sized right and has adequate neck tension. The wasp waist in a loaded round between the bullet and case head does far more to prevent setback than a crimp does.

Yep, seating straight is important. I prefer to machine my seater plugs to match the bullet; in 9mm I have a separate plug for each bullet I use. For those without a lathe, you can probably find a local machinist who'd be willing to do the work, they should be able to do it with just your seater plug and one of the bullets. The other option is to use epoxy in the seater plug and "bed" it to match the bullet, just make sure to use release agent on the bullet. Johnson's Paste Wax works well for that.

I think you're right in returning the slide to Glock; if they'll replace it for a reasonable price, that's your best bet, and just chalk up the cost to a lesson learned on bad primers. (Same as many of us did with Winchester.) However, if the replacement cost is more than you want to spend, you may be able to smooth the sharp edges on that damage enough to get it working right again. (I wouldn't do this before returning it to Glock, it'd probably change the way they respond to you.) I would use a pointed cratex (rubber abrasive) tip on a dremel and attempt to carefully polish & smooth the sharp edges in that damage without touching the rest of the breech face. Keep in mind though - a dremel is a really fast and easy way to ruin a gun, so be careful and don't do it unless you're confident in your skill & ability. You could also try just going back to the factory recoil spring and continuing to use the same load. It may work acceptably well; you just won't get the benefits of the lighter spring but that's still less recoil than moving up to a hotter load. Hope that helps.

Sure, that's excellent advice. Ignore the problems the gun has, and let's pretend it's normal for Glocks to not cycle milder loads. Let's also ignore that his gun did work fine before the breech face damage... I'll say it again - if your G34 won't cycle with the OP's load, either you're limp wristing it or there's something wrong with the gun. Both can be fixed. The breech face damage the OP showed in his picture tells us everything we need to know about this malfunction, and completely explains why it happens. Using a hotter load forces the case to ride over the rough area, but that's just masking the problem. Using the factory spring with the OP's load may accomplish the same thing with less recoil.

Then use a more powerful load. Your slide is most likely short stroking for some reason, either a weak load, stiff spring, or something interfering with slide movement (could be your weight or finger contact from your grip. If you changed something, change it back. The other possibilities are weak magazine springs or loads that bind up in the mag (too long).

I only gauge the match ammo, practice ammo doesn't need it. (Unless someone has a really hard time with good die setup, lol.) If you had a case gauge that matched your barrel that would be ideal, but I'm not going to waste time gauging a bunch of ammo with a gauge that's tighter than I want my ammo to be. (Especially for coated lead bullets, which is 99% of what I shoot.)

I check match ammo in the chamber of the gun it’ll be used it. Don’t care if it fits a min spec gauge or not, that’s irrelevant. i don’t bother to check practice ammo at all other than a visual inspection when loading mags.

Yes exactly, and the barrel is the important test. The gauge means very little in comparison; it's place to start (for some) but making your ammo fit the case gauge should not be the ultimate goal, especially if you're loading for one specific barrel.

AA7 is not the same as Silhouette. Silhouette is the old WAP powder, which Ramshot took over when Winchester discontinued it in favor of Autocomp. AA7 is similar but not the same, easy to see when you load similar loads of each.

Lots of good info in that post. That last bit is something I experienced with an RCBS 454 Casull die and lead bullets; even with no crimp being applied, the ID of the seater die was tight enough to completely remove the case flare and cause lead/coating shaving. This was evident by the lack of flare after pulling the round back out of the die. Switching to a different brand seater die fixed that issue.

Agreed, for bulk bullets like that, a ~1 gr range of variation is not a big deal for pistol ammo. If you were shooting 1,000 yard rifle competition it would be worth addressing, but for our application it'll work great. I'm more interested in your graphic actually. It's a nicely laid out presentation of the data. What software did you use to generate that? (I am one of those weenie engineers that likes numbers and stuff too. )

This. It's load dependent. In my Glocks, light 9mm loads toss the brass up just far enough for the optic to hit them when the slide returns forward, and the brass gets thrown forward. With hotter loads, the brass gets thrown out of the way faster and doesn't touch the optic. Milled slides and RMRs on mine.

Most of the time I use an RCBS seater and Lee taper crimp die; both can seat and crimp but I do them in separate operations. (Separate stations on a Dillon 550) Sometimes I use a Lee FCD when appropriate but not usually. You really don't want to seat and crimp in the same stage with lead bullets (cast/lubed, coated, etc), that's a sure way to get lead shavings around the case mouth. If your crimp die is a Lee taper crimp and not the FCD, it sounds like you have the same dies for seating and crimping? Easy to tell, the FCD has a carbide sizer ring at the opening, but the standard seat/crimp die does not. If you're seeing brass shaving with that crimp die, it's probably a bit rough inside. It should not do that. Try swapping it with your seater die (if they are both the same die), maybe that one has a smoother crimp taper. You'll have to re-adjust each one for seating and crimping respectively of course.

This has nothing to do with vertical movement the OP asked about; what you describe is a totally different thing, and it's pretty specific to Glocks anyway with their partial double action trigger. That vertical movement the OP asked about is just a result of loose slide/frame fit and the sear pulling away from the striker.

If that .390" measurement is on the outside of the case, that's still not a lot of case flare. Consider trying quite a bit more; you should be able to see and feel a noticeable flare at the case mouth. Also make sure you are seating and crimping in separate steps as mentioned above, otherwise you should definitely expect lead shavings if doing both with one die.

This is a really good post, and worth reading twice for anyone having issues with this stuff.

As long as it’s a traditional seat/crimp die (I.e. no sizer ring like the FCD) it doesn’t matter too much what brand. Only one I’ve had trouble with was RCBS. Hornady, Dillon, or Lee work fine, just back out or remove the seater stem and use it just for crimping. On those rounds in your pic above, I can see the flare at the case mouth and the sharpie rubbed off there. I think that’s probably your problem. The other possibility is seating depth with that bullet profile and size. Try some test rounds seated down to 1.00 to verify. Im not convinced that mark you’re seeing is an issue, and it doesn’t make sense for it to bulge there after seating bullets unless you have a wildly compressed powder charge. I’d fix the crimp and make sure the seating depth isn’t an issue first, since those are the most obvious suspects.

I don’t think your troubleshooting is telling you what you think it is, but it also doesn’t sound like you’re following the good advice this thread. for starters, the bullets don’t seat as deeply as those marks, so they aren’t causing that issue. Run your sizer die all the way down hard against the shellholder or try a different die. Looks like the gauge problem is that you’re leaving too much flare on the case mouth, that’s probably causing your case gauge issues. Give it just a little more crimp. But as we said earlier, if it fits the barrel, why worry about fitting the gauge? Also, there’s not much point in using larger diameter .357” bullets if you’re going to size them down again in the Lee FCD. It’s good for jacketed bullets, not for cast. Do yourself a favor and get a different crimp die.