170 mag extension

[L-10_shooter]

I am having issues with a TF extension on factory Glock 22 mags. With a full mag (24 rounds) I will get a hang up sometimes 5-6 rounds into the mag. Mag is a full metal lined with a #8 follower. I have tried beveling the top of the base pad and the bottom of the mag. Any other ideas? Does any one else have a .40 170mm mag that runs with out fail? The mag works great with 28 rounds of 9mm but not so with .40

[Jesse Tischauser]

Mine did the same thing when I changed it from 9 to 40 so I could shoot my limited gun in Open.

[MarkCO]

I am having issues with a TF extension on factory Glock 22 mags. With a full mag (24 rounds) I will get a hang up sometimes 5-6 rounds into the mag. Mag is a full metal lined with a #8 follower. I have tried beveling the top of the base pad and the bottom of the mag. Any other ideas? Does any one else have a .40 170mm mag that runs with out fail? The mag works great with 28 rounds of 9mm but not so with .40

If you are using a flat nosed bullet and loaded over 1.135", I have found that to bind up on occasion in this combination.

[EkuJustice]

Is the back plate cranked down too hard on the mag? I have had troble with that on the 140 tf extentions I had. Backed off the screws some and it went away. Went to the dawsons in the 140 and no problems since(not an option for the 170)

Edited November 30, 2010 by EkuJustice

[L-10_shooter]

I am using truncated cone bear creek moly bullets loaded to 1.145. I guess I can load shorter, anyone figure out where the rounds are catching on the bottom of the mag? I assembled the mag without the spring & follower and can see a lip on the front of the mag. Thanks for the input.

[Whitefish]

I am using truncated cone bear creek moly bullets loaded to 1.145. I guess I can load shorter, anyone figure out where the rounds are catching on the bottom of the mag? I assembled the mag without the spring & follower and can see a lip on the front of the mag. Thanks for the input.

Based on my experience, you can get away with loading at 1.145 with 9mm, primarily because of the bullet profile and the way the bullets stack with the aftermarket basepad (below the original mag body). With TC 40 bullets, I have been successful at an OAL of 1.135 with TF, Dawson, and Arredondo basepads and either Arredondo followers or Glock (mostly #8). Again, the 40 bullet profile is likely the culprit at an OAL of 1.145. The Glock mags generally will accept an OAL no longer than 1.150 in 9mm, so back that off for a measure of piece of mind. With the 40's the bullet profile and stacking profile won't allow 1.145 with TC bullets and the aftermarket basepad no matter how much you bevel the basepad, mag, and or follower. Your experience may vary.

[MarkCO]

Ditto Whitefish's explanation!

[L-10_shooter]

thanks gary

[Biloxi23]

I had that problem with a Glock 35 and 140mm Dawson baseplates and found that it seemed to be a combination of things. One was the 180 grain truncated cone jacket bullets. The second was a combo of the mags having excess plastic flashing that the follower and/or srping coils would hang on, and the last thing was an extractor that was too tight (where the rim of the casing would slide under the extractor). Correcting all of them helped, but the biggest thing that seemed to fix the problem was changing bullets. I went to Precision 185 moly coated bullets loaded to 1.128-1.130 OAL. I think that the precision bullets profile is more conducive to smooth feeding on a finicky pistol. I load the moly bullets over WSF and have lo0aded 4.8 grains to 5.4 grains with success.