Joe D Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Just thought you guys need to know there are some quality issues with the CCF frame. The frame I received from them is deffective. When I installed a Glock G35 slide and barrel on mine I noticed that the slide was canted to the left pretty badly. To some this might not be an issue, but to me it is. I tried several other Glock slides just to make certain my slide was not the problem. Four other slides had this same cant. I returned the frame to CCF fully expecting them to replace it. That was not the case. I was told that the frame is within specs. Excuse me, I don't know of anyone that wants a gun with a canted slide. My advise to any prospective purchasers of this frame is to buy it through Brownells, not directly from CCF. As most of you know Brownells has a no questions asked return policy - a lesson CCF needs to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric nielsen Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 (edited) I found the exact same thing as Joe found, but am keeping my frame. It's just disappointing. I was also told that frame rails 0.010" higher on one side than the other was "actually far below Glock's original specs" which I suppose could be true. But I measured the height of my OEM Glock frame rails and they are identical within 0.001". Guessing the Glock tolerance is probably 0.010 mm, which would be 0.000393" - or 25 times smaller than .010". [This is how NASA crashed a $billion probe into Mars] Open your calipers to less than .001" and hold them up to a light. Then open them to .010" and hold them up to a light. Which amount of error would you prefer in YOUR gun? Edited August 20, 2007 by eric nielsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mscott Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Wow, that pretty much sucks. That can't be good with parts sliding and bumping against each other. I think I'll wait a little longer before buying one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glockster35 Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 JoeD, They refused to work on it and/or replace it? Is there a fix that your or your local gunsmith can make to stop it from canting? What do you plan to do with it now then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted August 20, 2007 Author Share Posted August 20, 2007 I actually am a gunsmith. I have been building guns (1911) for over 30 years. Been working on and modifying Glocks since they came out. I have never done it as a full time job as I realized early on that I am too much of a perfectionist to make a living at it. There is not an easy cure for this defect. I am going to look at trying to even up the rails when I get the frame back. Bottom line is a consumer should not have to spend time and money fixing something that should have been done right the first time. I will post some pictures of the canted slide when I get the frame back. It stands out like a sore thumb. I am going to call a friend of mine at Glock tomorrow to find out what their specs are. I suspect it is as Eric posted. As I stated before, if you want one get it from Brownells. Let them fight with CCF. I suspect that fight will be a short one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Keen Posted August 20, 2007 Share Posted August 20, 2007 Bummer. Another good idea gone bad. Perhaps we should leave "Perfection" ....... as it is ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpmwfo Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 I will have to check mine when I get back home. I didn't notice this problem, but it probably is. I'll try to post pics this weekend. Has anyone else seen this on their frame? It would be nice if Larry from CCF would address this issue on this forum (since he already has the post about his winner's circle). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Well thats sucks. I'll hold off until I see a proactive response from CCF. Obviously this needs to be fixed. I will say this, if you can see the defect with the unaided eye, their "specs" aren't worth the paper they're printed on. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircooled6racer Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Hello: Being a tool and die maker and machinist. There is no excuse for bad machining or quality control. It is either within specs or not. Bad ones get rejected not sent out and hopefully not returned. As you can tell I have had to deal with this before on other products. Hope it works out for you guys. Thanks, Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atmar Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 (edited) this is disappointing ....sad really. Edited August 21, 2007 by atmar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 My advise to any perspective purchasers of this frame is to buy it through Brownells, not directly from CCF. As most of you know Brownells has a no questions asked return policy - a lesson CCF needs to learn. One interesting thing about Brownells - if customers return product, Brownells returns it to the supplier and gets credit, or a refund, for the price. A supplier does not generally get to argue fault with Brownells - just decide if they wish to continue to deal with Brownells, returns and all, or not. In effect, Brownell's acts as a rather powerful negotiating agent for the retail consumer and gives you a LOT of leverage you don't have when dealing directly with the supplier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircooled6racer Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Hello: Don't underestimate the power of the internet. The force is with you Joe. Thanks, Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glockster35 Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 I agree, buying through Brownells is a good thing, I can think of at lest one company who went out of business, because they got too big for their britches, and began creating less than acceptable products. As I recall, Brownells and several oither parts supply stores refused to sell their gear, and they went bankrupt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted August 21, 2007 Author Share Posted August 21, 2007 (edited) The really sad thing is I had several long conversations with one of the CCF owners. I gave him some of my thoughts and ideas about Glocks. He asked me if his engineer/partner could call me and pick my brain a little about Glocks. My response was I would be happy to help. I did not expect anything in return. When I ordered my frame from him they gave me a small discount that was appreciated. It is not about the money. At this point it is all about CCF doing the right thing. They have chosen not to. Let the buyer beware. Edited August 21, 2007 by Joe D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cny025 Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 The really sad thing is I had several long conversations with one of the CCF owners. I gave him some of my thoughts and ideas about Glocks. He asked me if his engineer/partner could call me and pick my brain a little about Glocks. My response was I would be happy to help. I did not expect anything in return. When I ordered my frame from him they gave me a small discount that was appreciated. It is not about the money. At this point it all about CCF doing the right thing. They have chosen not to. Let the buyer beware. This is an opportunity that can make or break a company's reputation and future. Now is the time to do the right thing. The public is now just starting to get excited about the potential of this new product. Bad press and unhappy customers can throw all that out the window. It is really to bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Precision Designs Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 I have been reading about and observing this "newfangled" CCF frame, ready to purchase one to play with and extend it's potential. But it is my nature to be patient and wait. I usually frown upon buying/getting "the first one" out of the assembly line, for reasons/facts such as this. Not always is this true, of course, but I have found that first generation production runs very often contain some flaws that were allowed to get through to meet deadline schedules. Manufacturers eventually will correct these flaws, at an even higher cost to them, that is if they have the financial reserves needed. Otherwise they will founder. Yes, it is sad when a desirable product such as this lets a noticeable flaw in a critical area through. Make no mistake about it, the alignement between striker/sear point in the slide must be indexed evenly with the frame components, otherwise uneven wear and its consequences could lead to functioning problems, some even dangerous. Unfortunately for CCF, the firearms competition community is very demanding and exacts optimum performance from their tools/toys. It would behoove CCF to find a quick fix for this problem ASAP. This would indeed catapult confidence and loyalty back into their product line and any future offerings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric nielsen Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 (edited) If you figure the tangent of 0.010" height and 0.900" width, you get an angle "theta" of 0.636 degrees or about 2/3 degree tilt to the left. This can and should aggravate every right-handed customer that CCF ever has. Last I heard, righties make up 6/7 of the population. I was a calibration tech and incoming tooling inspector for 8 years and I can't remember any dimension in steel EVER having a tolerance of more than 5 thousands of an inch. Much more common for SS or tool steel was .001 to .003" tolerance. I can remember many parts made out of plastic or fiber resins held to a tolerance of .005", which is very good considering they were shaped with carbide or steel cutters that compressed the plastic as it was cut. I shoot my Open gun with a tilt of maybe 1 degree. As I told Joe, if they had made this boo-boo on the other side I might consider it a plus. The PITA is that they cut it away from what any righty would want, same as the horrible Super Sight cuts that EAA put in their slides years ago. I can't see any way to fix mine short of cutting and re-welding the frame rails, and for new frames the fix - might require [edit] - new tooling. Not my favorite thing, to be a public grouch, but their QC and their attitude is a problem. Edited August 21, 2007 by eric nielsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 ??? The frame rails are cast in place, not machined in a 2nd op? Shirley, you must be joking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric nielsen Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 I'm glad you said that. Yes, seems like they could reset their CAD program if it's a machining cut they do after casting. There's a 1st cut on the top and a 2nd "under" cut that makes it tough to fix once it's already done. You could reduce the height on top of a frame like mine but then it would just rattle a lot more on the right side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 I've never seen one in the wild, but it would sure seem like this is actually a fixturing issue. Or maybe it is a mold issue depending on where they index the frame for the milling op. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFD Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 Any issues should have been taken care of long before they finally released these frames. I hope Joe D, and any others affected here gets treated right once CCF realize they had better get into "damage control" mode ASAP. This is one group of potential customers I wouldn't want to piss off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 I'm going to close this for now, so that it doesn't turn into a customer service issue/debate (which we don't allow on the forum). If there is any relevant info to add, please PM me or another moderator. Thanks, Kyle F. Forum Administrator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 21, 2007 Share Posted August 21, 2007 CCF wanted to respond. This will have to be the end of this discussion here on this forum. We don't do the back and forth between customers and businesses here on Brian's forum. Admin. We initially were not going to respond to this posting as getting involved is usually a “lose lose” situation but unfortunately I believe the facts presented are “out of context” & somewhat myopically focused.When Joe first contacted us regarding his frame and described it, I asked if there had been any functionality or accuracy issues and his response was negative. By his own description above, none are mentioned. I had him send the frame to my partner, Ray Harms, the engineer that designed the frame and has managed the tooling development on this project, for inspection. Ray’s inspection found nothing out of print specs – all dimensions are to specs. While our measurement of the described issue was lower than Joe’s indication, even the 11 – 12 thousandths Joe describes is considerably less than the tolerances original Glock® frames demonstrate – for those that haven’t noticed, take a Glock® and shake it from side to side and notice how much the Glock® slide wobbles or how much play the slide demonstrates. I’m uncertain how a cant of less than one degree over the width of a slide is a defect, compared to a varying cant of greater angle on the original product. For a reference on the dimension Joe is offering, a human hair is 6 thousandths in diameter so we’re talking, by Joe’s measurement, a difference in slide rail height of 2 human hairs. But the real issue came down to the fact that we cannot accept a product back that has been shot, rather extensively, and modified. The pictures linked below are of the very frame. Guys, I ‘m not aware of a manufacturer that will accept any product back that is to spec AND that has been used much less modified. http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004...eckeringmod.jpg http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004...llbevelshot.jpg http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004...ingbeenshot.jpg http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-1/6133...eckeringmod.jpg http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-1/6133...llbevelshot.jpg http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-1/6133...ingbeenshot.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts