fastarget Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Obviously you're not getting enough energy to reliably cycle the action. Why not just bump the load a few tenths and call it good? Yes will work up a load this week to try, I might try a 12 to help diagnose the problem, but I have to balance the performance of the gun, the load to keep the PF legal, yet, be within her recoil comfort zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin-ster Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Also, to add-- If you're shooting around a 130 PF, any differences experienced from one manufactured barrel to the next (in terms of velocity/back pressure anyway) should not be enough to throw off the cycling of the pistol. Given, you might be on the hairy edge and this would be true-- but I can run powder puff loads through my G17 that are far short of the power floor and work the action just fine. (Brass comes out in a trickle, though-- so you know you're getting closed to FTE/FTF issues.) That's was with a 15# spring, BTW. And I'd wager they'd work the factory weight as well. The mystery deepens.......here we are using an ismi 13. No odd wear, smooth hand cycling better than oem. And no unusual wear at frame-to-slide contact points, eh? Hrm. I just remembered how hard it is to diagnose these things over the Interwebz! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 It's not hard, at least not in this case. The OP is running a load that, depending on how an individual's musculoskeletal system absorbs recoil, is right on the ragged edge of cycle reliability. It's not surprising that it occasionally dips below the ragged edge of cycle reliability. Bump the load, the gun will begin working flawlessly. Carl, I sincerely doubt your wife will be able to tell the difference between a 130 and a 135-140 pf load - but your gun will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin-ster Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 It's not hard to identify an obvious fix. (Obvious fix is obvious, haha.) But it's even easier to ignore the "why". There are plenty of 130 PF loads, many identical to his, that cycle G34's just fine-- for men, women and children alike. There are just as many putt-putt loads that do the same. So why is it different for this particular gun? Is it common to all Gen 4s, even after the Jager/ISMI swap? Or is it something particular about this specific pistol, that may be solved with some fine tuning in another area (as per the OP's original intention). It might even be a manufacturing defect, tolerance stacking (in the wrong direction), or perhaps something as mundane as a burr that'll wear away with time. You can fix a lot of problems with a hammer, but is it always the best tool? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastarget Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 It's not hard, at least not in this case. The OP is running a load that, depending on how an individual's musculoskeletal system absorbs recoil, is right on the ragged edge of cycle reliability. It's not surprising that it occasionally dips below the ragged edge of cycle reliability. Bump the load, the gun will begin working flawlessly. Carl, I sincerely doubt your wife will be able to tell the difference between a 130 and a 135-140 pf load - but your gun will. There will be a selection of bullet weights and loads to run the gun with in a couple of days, I may take it out in secret and run a few hundred WWB through it. It maybe something as simple causing the issues now that may resolve with some break-in time, new rod, spring, new gun,etc. Duane is correct, most of the issue is slide cycle speed, after that is resolved, I will be able to judge the extractor better. It was interesting to watch her shoot it on sunday. You could tell she is getting frustrated trying all she knew, yet.......her splits were faster with this gun so was her second shot accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 There are plenty of 130 PF loads, many identical to his, that cycle G34's just fine-- for men, women and children alike. There are just as many putt-putt loads that do the same. So why is it different for this particular gun? I would hazard a guess it's not the gun or ammo per se, it's the way both your bodies absorb recoil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexer Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Also check out the ejecter as a possible problem. There is a newer model, they are replacing the '336' in problematic gen 4's. I saw something about it on M4carbine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin-ster Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 There are plenty of 130 PF loads, many identical to his, that cycle G34's just fine-- for men, women and children alike. There are just as many putt-putt loads that do the same. So why is it different for this particular gun? I would hazard a guess it's not the gun or ammo per se, it's the way both your bodies absorb recoil. My thoughts are that some break in and wear could solve the issues as well. Rough rails, rough locking block/lugs, tighter-than-normal recoil spring-- the list goes on. I agree that especially in the OP's lady's case, a lot of it has to do with the shooter. That's often where I look first whenever I encounter a problem (that's not obviously mechanical), and my sole response is to "train it away". Under the circumstances, that might not be viable-- but in the greater scheme of things, it'll serve her throughout the rest of her life. Food for thought at least. I'd definitely wear that puppy in with a few hundred more rounds and see what happens. It'd be at least convenient to have a load that works both guns reliably and still hugs the safety margin of the power floor. Keep us updated-- now I'm fully invested in what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirLoin Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I set up this poll to get some first-hand data from other shooters on whether their bullets go slower out of a Glock OEM unsupported barrel than out of a supported, traditional rifling barrel: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=139536&pid=1569715&st=0entry1569715 If bullets shoot slower out of a Glock, then that could potentially explain why you experience cycling issues with your weak loads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastarget Posted November 12, 2011 Author Share Posted November 12, 2011 Poll is interesting, I will go vote in it. I am suspecting with the help of a chrono that the barrel of the 34 is slightly faster than our S&W and S-I variety by about 15-20 fps. Others are 5", the glock 5.3, maybe that is the discrepency. OK, took the glock and had Michele start off with 100 rnds of WWB. No Problems ejecting about 3 feet. Duane was right. Next came our same load with Berrys instead of zero and .1 less powder, No problems, ejecting about 2-3 feet. I chronoed these at 132 PF consistantly. So hmmm maybe the zero RN is not creating enough pressure. She is a happy camper, put 200 down range before the cold front came through. As long as I can replicate the Berrys load, she thinks, the Glock is a keeper. So we found what it likes, I suspect a slightly lighter spring would have also helped. Now I need to solve the Zero RN mystery. Thank you all for your help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirLoin Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Good to hear that. Stupid question: what does WWB mean? Poll is interesting, I will go vote in it. I am suspecting with the help of a chrono that the barrel of the 34 is slightly faster than our S&W and S-I variety by about 15-20 fps. Others are 5", the glock 5.3, maybe that is the discrepency. OK, took the glock and had Michele start off with 100 rnds of WWB. No Problems ejecting about 3 feet. Duane was right. Next came our same load with Berrys instead of zero and .1 less powder, No problems, ejecting about 2-3 feet. I chronoed these at 132 PF consistantly. So hmmm maybe the zero RN is not creating enough pressure. She is a happy camper, put 200 down range before the cold front came through. As long as I can replicate the Berrys load, she thinks, the Glock is a keeper. So we found what it likes, I suspect a slightly lighter spring would have also helped. Now I need to solve the Zero RN mystery. Thank you all for your help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeborn Man Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 WWB = Winchester White Box ammo bought from Wal Mart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastarget Posted November 13, 2011 Author Share Posted November 13, 2011 Winchester White Box from walmart, good stuff for practice, used to be 12-14 box of 100.....at least last time I bought ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirLoin Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Thanks for the WWB explanation! Unfortunately here in NJ, Walmarts don't sell ammo. Good thing there's BVAC: .40s cost $11/box after shipping and taxes (you just have to buy 10K of rounds, so helps to know other folks who don't reload!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ck1 Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 Good to hear that. Stupid question: what does WWB mean? Poll is interesting, I will go vote in it. I am suspecting with the help of a chrono that the barrel of the 34 is slightly faster than our S&W and S-I variety by about 15-20 fps. Others are 5", the glock 5.3, maybe that is the discrepency. OK, took the glock and had Michele start off with 100 rnds of WWB. No Problems ejecting about 3 feet. Duane was right. Next came our same load with Berrys instead of zero and .1 less powder, No problems, ejecting about 2-3 feet. I chronoed these at 132 PF consistantly. So hmmm maybe the zero RN is not creating enough pressure. She is a happy camper, put 200 down range before the cold front came through. As long as I can replicate the Berrys load, she thinks, the Glock is a keeper. So we found what it likes, I suspect a slightly lighter spring would have also helped. Now I need to solve the Zero RN mystery. Thank you all for your help. WWB = Winchester White Box, as in the 100rd "value packs" from the local Wallymart. My $0.02 to this thread is this: While it certainly sounds like a classic example of your wife "limp-wristing" the gun now and then, as a guy who tried 4 different Gen4 9mm's and experienced all sorts of different problems with them after putting at least 1k through each of them (about 5k through one of them)... My opinion is that the Gen4's engineering is f'ed up, whether it's the recoil assemblies, the extractors, the ejectors, or all of the above, I'm still seeing threads about issues with them, and personally mine gave me all kinds of headaches I've never experienced with owning 10 different Gen3 specimens... and Glock Inc. seems to be still tinkering around trying to figure it out fully which isn't very encouraging. IDK, it's such a simple design that it could even just be the newer/different/stiffer polymer they're using with them, but their timing isn't the same and the Gen4's just tend to F' up a lot more than what most of us long time Glock guys are used to... Honestly, it's not just the 9mm's either, 3 guys in my agency went back to their old Gen3 22's after getting too many hiccups while practicing for our yearly qualification, and this is with full-house duty JHP's... While I don't exactly love them, if she really needs a smaller grip, I'd see how she does with an M&P Pro with the small backstrap... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastarget Posted November 13, 2011 Author Share Posted November 13, 2011 (edited) Well, as far as today is concerned it is looking up, with a gen 3 recoil rod. She has an M&P Pro, she uses the medium and has used the large backstrap, but never felt it fit her. Today we started with the standard frame (small) but she felt she could control the gun and recoil better as soon as I put the medium strap on it for her, and I mean right away. She seems to think the gun is getting back on faster than the Pro. But I need to put her on a timer. Now that she is using the medium strap (should be same as gen 3 size, although those did not feel "right"), and if the gun is better for her, We may sell the Pro and look for a gen 3, for her back-up. Edited November 13, 2011 by fastarget Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoleroJesse Posted November 13, 2011 Share Posted November 13, 2011 One thing, the new Gen4 trigger bar has a nub that rides on the inside of the slide next to the firing pin block and some people claim it drags on the slide while in recoil. You could try a Gen3 trigger bar if you have a spare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike's m&p Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Bringing up the old issue again. I have a gen 4 model 34 bought for my kid 15yr old for uspsa. We shot 2 matches so far with it and have nothing but problems with it. The cases are just dribbling out if it even cylces. Ran wwb thru it problems ran federal value packs all from walmart problems. These both chronod at a pf of 130-135 out of the gun. Tried the dual recoil spring, changed it out to a gen combo of a wolf 12lb still problems, also slide wouldn't go foward all the way so switched it to a ismi 13lb spring at least the slide went forward all the way but cases still dripple out and fte. My kid is getting frustrated at least he is getting good at clearing malfunction. Had a very experienced shooter shoot it, it cycled but rounds just cleared the slide. Will try my reloads at 138pf see if that helps, with ismi 13 flat spring on ss guide rod, my extractor is the newer one. Got the gun in nov. 2012 only has about 450 round thru it. My limited gen 3 model 35 runs flawless this 34 is driving me crazy. HELP any more suggestions . Thanks Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastarget Posted February 20, 2013 Author Share Posted February 20, 2013 Hello Mike, Please tell us everything that has been done to the G34, as far as mods and springs. Ammo needs to be at least 133pf or higher for reliability. Brass barely ejecting is something I see alot of with competition glocks, so going back to my situation, I would also want to know how big is your 15yr old, and can a limp wrist be part of the problem? We also noticed that the barrels seem to be fitted tighter on the gen4 and needed a K of break-in. Our Gen4 34 has been running flawless since the writs, pf, and springs have been balanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike's m&p Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Fast target. My boy weighs 115 lbs, yes we were thinking he was limp wristing it. But like i said the other shooter i had shooting it cycled but the brass would just trickle out. On sat match in am ran a 13lb ismi spring with gen 3 guide rod, titanium plunger 3 1/2 lb disconnect, stock fire pin spring, and federal red box 115 grn rn walmart value pack ammo. Then in the pm went with my reloads of a pf of 130 with same setup for one stage and same problem so switched out recoil spring to stock dual spring then back to factory federal ammo with the same problem brass would trickle out and some times a stove pipe and fte. So I'm thinking upping my reloads to about 138pf, keeping the 13lb spring in, changing out trigger bar to a gen 3 or file that button off on the stock one because I think that was the prblm why the slide wouldn't fully go forward. My gen 3 has alot smoother trigger then the gen4, really questioning this bump in the trigger bar even hand cycling and dry fire theres a big difference. Both trigger pulls are close to weight 3 1/2 to 3 3/4 on the 34. i can live with that. I just want reilability like my 35 and 19 which are gen 3's with no issues. Hope this helps to clarify my problems. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBP55 Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Sounds like weak ammunition, try some 124gr. NATO ammunition and let us know how the G34 works. I use quality factory ammunition with zero issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike's m&p Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I have another match this sunday. Going to bump the loads up to 138pf, might try a gen 3 trigger bar, and will use the 13 lb spring and see what happens. The guy i'm going with is going to let my kid shoot his g17 gen 3 to see if he has any problems with that, so we can narrow it done to either gun or shooter. Will take any more suggestions to try and solve this problem. Will report back after match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike's m&p Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Well match is over guns cleaned and reporting back with good news. My kid had no malfunctions with the ge4 34 gun today. He was happy and said it was a great time not having to do malfunction drills. What we did different was change out the trigger bar that came with the gun the one with the bump on it to a gen 3 smooth trigger bar. Ran it with a 13lb recoil spring ss rod, 3 1/2lb disconnect, lighted striker and spring, titanium plunger and spring. Loads were .124 grn berrys rn bullets with 4.3 grns of w-231 power factor 135, fed primers. Everything ran great, when we got done even tried the 130pf loads and ran with no prblms. I really think most of the issue was the trigger bar with the bump on it. That is really the only change made from last week, I think it was slowing the slide down, dragging on it. Will try another match in a few weeks with the 130pf loads and if all is good then i know for sure its that trigger bar. Thanks guys for all input, hopefully the bugs are worked out and i got another relieable shooter. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now