Production Legality Issue

[Micah]

What is the ruling on the following question based upon actual fact:

I have damaged the magwell on my Glock 34 through dryfiring to the point that its angle has changed. Although it was not intended, and no advantage is gained, this is an external modification, and thus bars my Glock 34 from Production.

How do I go about fixing this issue? Am I able to purchase a new Glock 17, which has the exact same lower, and replace the deformed lower on my Glock 34? Or must I purchase a new Glock 34, and use that lower as a replacement?

[Chris Keen]

I thought different Glock models could not be interchanged between each other in Prod. division. A Glock 35 & 34 lower / upper cannot be switched between each other ... obviously. But can a 17 & 34 lower / upper be interchanged ?

What about the ethics of knowingly putting a 34 upper on a 17 lower ??? The gun didn't come from the factory that way. In my mind, this would be an external mod.

Is the chrono-man gonna catch it ? Probably not.

Is it right ? Probably not.

[chrisa006]

I am not sure if this is an answer, but my 34 was sent back to Glock due to a frame warrenty issue and what was sent back was a 17 frame with my 34 upper. They than had to send me an extended slide release to get me back to the point I had started at. I shot this gun in the 2005 production nats. My feeling is you are OK with the 17 frame based on my experience.

[Nik Habicht]

I can't find anything in the rules that prohibits a frame replacement. Much like I can't find anything that prohibits a Slide or Barrel Replacement if you happen to KB a gun. That said --- I'd ask DNROI John Amidon. I'd be careful on how I phrased the question......

And I'd make arrangements for a loaner --- just in case....

[SA Friday]

Pharaoh, I would like to see pic's of what you are talking about. I have a feeling it falls into the category of normal wear and tear. Send pics when you ask the question.

As for changing the frame, all the frames are exactly the same in the full size small frame series (17, 17L, 22, 24, 34, 35, etc) I have a hard time believing that swapping one unaltered production frame for another could be considered an illegal mod on a production gun. I mean no disrespect, but as for it being unethicial, I don't think swapping out the frame out from a G17 would be unethical either. If it gave you an advantage of some sort, then I would. But in this case, there isn't one. The only advantage is saving about $100.

[GeorgeInNePa]

In IPSC switching frames would be a huge no-no. So would using G31 mags (.357 sig) in a G22 (.40) even though the only difference is the caliber stamp on the back of the mag.

*It should be fine in USPSA. In fact, if you had a G35 and switched the ejector, slide and barrel from a G34, you would not have broken any of the rules. All parts are factory Glock, offered on factory produced models, and sold to the general public in the numbers and time required. Same with using a G17 frame on your G34.

*My opinion only.

Edited April 9, 2007 by GeorgeInNePa

[fryeg7]

i'm not so sure about the technical rules violations involved, but i really don't see how replacing a worn out factory production part with another factory production part that is identical functionally, even if it is the frame of the pistol, is gaining an advantage in any way other than saving the shooter a few bucks. i don't find it 'unsporting' at all.

hell, i think people who practice enough to wear out frames should get preferential treatment and a little patch for their range bag .

frye

[Micah]

I can't find anything in the rules that prohibits a frame replacement. Much like I can't find anything that prohibits a Slide or Barrel Replacement if you happen to KB a gun. That said --- I'd ask DNROI John Amidon. I'd be careful on how I phrased the question......

Per Gary Stevens, I have emailed Mr. Amidon, and will, of course, abide by his decision.

Pharaoh, I would like to see pic's of what you are talking about. I have a feeling it falls into the category of normal wear and tear. Send pics when you ask the question.

As for changing the frame, all the frames are exactly the same in the full size small frame series (17, 17L, 22, 24, 34, 35, etc) I have a hard time believing that swapping one unaltered production frame for another could be considered an illegal mod on a production gun. I mean no disrespect, but as for it being unethicial, I don't think swapping out the frame out from a G17 would be unethical either. If it gave you an advantage of some sort, then I would. But in this case, there isn't one. The only advantage is saving about $100.

You and I are on the same page as this being a valid swap-out. My major hang up, as I agree with Chris Keen, is that following the rules is more important to me than winning. Although I am gaining no competitive advantage, I would gain absolutely NO joy in obtaining a division win with a gun that's divisional compliance is questionable. Again, I'll just wait for Mr. Amidon's response to my email.

Here are several pictures of my magwell:

[Matt Cheely]

Miss your reloads much?

[Micah]

Miss your reloads much?

I have never missed a reload, rather discovered 100,000 ways not to do a reload

Edited April 9, 2007 by Pharaoh Bender

[Matt Cheely]

Mr. Magwell, a.k.a. Matt Cheely' post='538364' date='Apr 8 2007, 11:26 PM']

Miss your reloads much?

I have never missed a reload, rather discovered 100,000 ways not to do a reload

What you tryin to say ?

Edited April 9, 2007 by Matt Cheely

[Micah]

Mr. Magwell, a.k.a. Matt Cheely' post='538364' date='Apr 8 2007, 11:26 PM']

Miss your reloads much?

I have never missed a reload, rather discovered 100,000 ways not to do a reload

What you tryin to say ?

Oh nothing

Edited April 9, 2007 by Pharaoh Bender

[Chris Keen]

Oh ... something

[Carlos]

I would not deem that to be a frame modified for competitive advantage.

Rather, its obviously the result of dry-firing. Instead, I would deem that: "a good start; keep up the good work!"

[vluc]

That raises an interesting point that I had not thought of.

Recall the glock frame replacement (upgrade?) that went on a few years ago due to the issues with the rear rails shearing off. Some people received a 3 pin G34, while others received the original 2 pin frames.

Similar question - if a shooter sends their 2 pin frame to glock in exchange for a 3 pin, have they done a no-no? Can't see how.

The GLOCK Corporation has identified an issue with a very small percentage of GLOCK pistols produced between September of 2001 and May of 2002. The specific issue that has been identified is the potential of breaking a rear frame rail in pistols manufactured during this time period. Within the specific range the breakage rate has been less than 0.0188%. So, while the actual percentage of rails reported broken is within any accepted manufacturing tolerance, it is not an acceptable situation to the GLOCK Corporation. It is also important to note that under most conditions GLOCK pistols will continue to function with three rails. A routine maintenance check after each time the pistol has been taken out and used would immediately indicate if there is a problem.

We are, therefore, concerned that a limited number of customers will not get the product we have promised them and what we have always delivered, the very best pistol on the market, in short, a GLOCK.

For these reasons, we have made the decision that in the interest of customer service, replacement frames will be offered to anyone who has a firearm in this range and decides to take advantage of this offer. The replacement frames will have identical serial numbers to our customer's original firearm except the numeral 1 will be added as a prefix. If you believe your firearm is within this range, please call 1-866-225-4098 to take advantage of the ultimate in customer service.

Nothing less than the best for our customers is acceptable to GLOCK and, as always, we will continue to work towards Perfection.

[sfinney]

Thats alot of reloads!

Its obvious the majority of the wear from the pics is from wear..... however....

The problem is that it looks pretty significantly different than stock, and even if there were "no significant advantage gained", its still modified from stock config. Someone out there will say its an extrernal mod and say its illegal (as indeed, someone at the local level already has).

But I'd argue further from the pics that that magwell is eaiser to hit at speed than a factory fresh Glock, and that that would be some advantage gained. This is coming from a guy who has huge trouble hitting Glock mag changes without a plug, slug, or magwell attached.... that mag well area just looks alot "friendlier" to me.

Sorry man, I bet the ruling ends up being "get a new gun or frame"..... but of course I could be wrong. Amidon and I rarely seem to agree on things......

[Chris Keen]

The Glock 34 is not the only frame tht has 3 pins. My new 17 has 3 pins, and the same locking block as the 34.

2 pins ...... 3 pins ....... dosent matter

[racerba]

I believe all newer Glocks (22, 35, 24, 17, 34, 17L) are now the same frame (3-pin). There's no way of telling unless you run the serial number. Previous runs, the 22, 35 & 24 were on the same frame (3-pin) and, likewise, the 17, 34 and 17L were the same frame also (2-pin).

Edited April 9, 2007 by racerba

[Carmoney]

Sorry man, I bet the ruling ends up being "get a new gun or frame"..... but of course I could be wrong. Amidon and I rarely seem to agree on things......

I sure hope not. If simply being "beat to shit and butt ugly" takes a gun out of USPSA Production Division, then the terrorists have won.

[Matt Cheely]

My opinion is you might as well get a new 34 for $100 more than a 17, now your have your practice gun and match gun.

However, if you were to use a 17 frame to "fix" your gun, I can see how it wouldn't be within the rules. Sucks, but that's how I read it. I bet you would be hard pressed to find someone that thinks you have an advantage by doing so...

[Micah]

The Glock 34 is not the only frame tht has 3 pins. My new 17 has 3 pins, and the same locking block as the 34.

2 pins ...... 3 pins ....... dosent matter

"Red coat green coat...who gives a $hit"

Sorry man, I bet the ruling ends up being "get a new gun or frame"..... but of course I could be wrong. Amidon and I rarely seem to agree on things......

I sure hope not. If simply being "beat to shit and butt ugly" takes a gun out of USPSA Production Division, then the terrorists have won.

+10!

[Carmoney]

By the way, Pharoah, my recommendation would have been to shoot the gun and not worry about it for one second. If somebody actually complained, I would simply stare at them until they went away.

Even asking John Amidon about it has the tendency to dignify the issue.

[sfinney]

Sorry man, I bet the ruling ends up being "get a new gun or frame"..... but of course I could be wrong. Amidon and I rarely seem to agree on things......

I sure hope not. If simply being "beat to shit and butt ugly" takes a gun out of USPSA Production Division, then the terrorists have won.

+10!

+100

Hey, I think we have to many rules already

I didn't say I agree that a worn frame shouldn't be legal, just playing devil's advocate for how some people would probably interpret the rules.... as currently written.

We can talk all day about "advantage gained" and spirit of the division, and intent of rules, etc.... but until we have a MAJOR revision of how Limited/Lim10 and Prod are written, we will continue to have these piddly little minor points come up that may or may not make any gun on any day "legal". Tyc had much less wear on his CZ frame, and was arbitrated at the World Shoots (which he won, "normal wear and tear"). We shouldn't have to write to Amidon every time we have an issue about whether a gun is legal or not, we should be able to figure it out ourselves, with good rules and a BOX.

Its a condemnation of our current rules that every Front Sight has more and more Amidon "interpretations" and "rulings", about the most benign things that should be obvious if you read the rules and use common sense.... but I understand why the questions are being asked, everyone is gun shy because some of the "rulings" don't always seem to really match the current rules (at least how many of us interpret them), or common sense lately.

And I agree with Carmoney, don't ask Amidon if you won't like the answer.

Edited April 9, 2007 by sfinney

[Flexmoney]

By the way, Pharoah, my recommendation would have been to shoot the gun and not worry about it for one second. If somebody actually complained, I would simply stare at them until they went away.

Even asking John Amidon about it has the tendency to dignify the issue.

That would have been the advice I'd have given, but we know of a local shooter that got bumped to Open at a Major when he went to the chrono stage (inspection), under what I understand to be similar circumstances.

So...that becomes...why chance it ?

[LPatterson]

The problem is that common sense has gone the way of the dial telephone just as we now have to press one for english. The rules have been beat to death by people putting emphasis on a word and not the whole sentence. Or as I complained in my ro recert post is is in 1 rule number but it isn't in another rule number. Should it matter if it is wholly or partially penetrated and why should there be an outer scoring border any way?