Carlos Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Clark?Is he the guy that was seeing what it took to blow various guns up? I think he posted here for a bit. Do you have a link to the THR forum and some of his threads? Clark has been around for a few years posting his experiments on "overcharges" in handguns. He keeps upping the charge wights just to see what will happen (ie don't buy a used handgun from Clark!). Then he posts his findings. In sum, most modern handguns we use in USPSA or IDPA are very strong and they are built with significant safety margins to protect the shooter. On the one hand, he is subjected to the same criticism we USPSA shooters have endured for years when we reject the watered down data in published reloading manuals (which are often written by liability lawyers and intended for sheep). He is also good enough to share his experience with us (thank you for that Clark). On the other hand, Clark's goal is to test to destruction - which is the opposite goal of a USPSA shooter/reloader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldog234x Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 The locking block broke in my CCF yesterday. I have a G22C slide and barrel mounted (factory stock) and have only shot 180 grain .40. Larry at CCF told me before I purchased a frame that the 180 grain .40 needs a little frame mod to run right. A .100 to .110 cut needs to be made to shorten the extension the slide bumps into upon full recoil. The CCF locking block appears to be a modified Glock locking block. The front extension needs to be removed and then it fits fine. We'll see what happens when I fire again........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bear23 Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 Any bets on how many fingers Clark has remaining? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ormondopen Posted January 24, 2008 Author Share Posted January 24, 2008 The locking block broke in my CCF yesterday. I have a G22C slide and barrel mounted (factory stock) and have only shot 180 grain .40. Larry at CCF told me before I purchased a frame that the 180 grain .40 needs a little frame mod to run right. A .100 to .110 cut needs to be made to shorten the extension the slide bumps into upon full recoil. The CCF locking block appears to be a modified Glock locking block. The front extension needs to be removed and then it fits fine. We'll see what happens when I fire again........... did you replace the block yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 The locking block broke in my CCF yesterday. I have a G22C slide and barrel mounted (factory stock) and have only shot 180 grain .40. Larry at CCF told me before I purchased a frame that the 180 grain .40 needs a little frame mod to run right. A .100 to .110 cut needs to be made to shorten the extension the slide bumps into upon full recoil. The CCF locking block appears to be a modified Glock locking block. The front extension needs to be removed and then it fits fine. We'll see what happens when I fire again........... So not only does the frame not work with aftermarket barells but wont work with the most common .40 caliber round. And if the part breaks it's $125.00 to replace it. Sounds like a great product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 I gotta be honest...after talking to the owner of the CCF company and testing out his product, I was impressed. Now that the customer service and product are wavering...I am dramatically unimpressed. I would encourage all of you who have breakage issues to CALL the manufacturer until you have satisfaction! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atmar Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) Sounds like a great product. hahahaha im happy i didnt jump into the bandwagon. Its not just for stock barrels. Were talking about a "race"frame, not a oem-type frame.Gunsmith fit barrels as well as those made as drop it are fine for the ccr frame, provided you get it fitted. If you are looking for a heavier stock, gun, Id epoxy some lead up in the backstrap and call it a day. sir, take a look at my avatar....i think i did more than epoxy some lead into the backstrap....but now that you've mentioned it hhhmmmmmmm. Edited January 25, 2008 by atmar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJONES5 Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 The locking block broke in my CCF yesterday. I have a G22C slide and barrel mounted (factory stock) and have only shot 180 grain .40. Larry at CCF told me before I purchased a frame that the 180 grain .40 needs a little frame mod to run right. A .100 to .110 cut needs to be made to shorten the extension the slide bumps into upon full recoil. The CCF locking block appears to be a modified Glock locking block. The front extension needs to be removed and then it fits fine. We'll see what happens when I fire again........... So not only does the frame not work with aftermarket barells but wont work with the most common .40 caliber round. And if the part breaks it's $125.00 to replace it. Sounds like a great product. I don't know about the 40,but I installed a KKM in 9mm for a friend and with 3500k it is running just fine. pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgibson Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 The locking block broke in my CCF yesterday. I have a G22C slide and barrel mounted (factory stock) and have only shot 180 grain .40. Larry at CCF told me before I purchased a frame that the 180 grain .40 needs a little frame mod to run right. A .100 to .110 cut needs to be made to shorten the extension the slide bumps into upon full recoil. The CCF locking block appears to be a modified Glock locking block. The front extension needs to be removed and then it fits fine. We'll see what happens when I fire again........... So not only does the frame not work with aftermarket barells but wont work with the most common .40 caliber round. And if the part breaks it's $125.00 to replace it. Sounds like a great product. That is sort of what I was thinking! I just got one for my 17L with "fluffy" loads, so I hope it doesn't break right away. I am using all stock parts in it though, so if it does break, I am going to squeal like a pig going down a waterslide!! TG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 I know we are all used to Glocks, but is it really supposed to be a drop in install, or is it billed as a gunsmith job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atmar Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 you're right flex, i thinks john nagel has a few tricks up his sleeve to make that frame work...... and last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suburban Commando Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) The locking block broke in my CCF yesterday. I have a G22C slide and barrel mounted (factory stock) and have only shot 180 grain .40. Larry at CCF told me before I purchased a frame that the 180 grain .40 needs a little frame mod to run right. A .100 to .110 cut needs to be made to shorten the extension the slide bumps into upon full recoil. The CCF locking block appears to be a modified Glock locking block. The front extension needs to be removed and then it fits fine. We'll see what happens when I fire again........... So, basically, with the Raceframe, you'll end up with gunsmith fit pistol, just like those other guys shooting the pistols with sliding triggers? Ugh!! Forget it! You won't catch me buying one until they come with seeds for a money tree, or they make them more drop-in friendly. Edited January 25, 2008 by Suburban Commando Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoMiE Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) I know we are all used to Glocks, but is it really supposed to be a drop in install, or is it billed as a gunsmith job? from CCF website... Will the parts from my pistol have to be fitted? While original Glock® components are a "drop in" fit, WE STRONGLY RECOMMEND the installation of the components into the new replacement frame be performed by a certified & qualified Glock® armourer. All safety & functionality inspections MUST be performed by a certified Glock® armourer, as would be the case anytime you are re-assembling a pistol frame. Folks, please don't take shortcuts on this for the sake of convenience. CCF also advised to try to not remove the locking block or remove the pins or you will damage the frame. So what do you do when the locking block breaks? Edited January 25, 2008 by HoMiE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulldog234x Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 I milled a stock Glock locking block to the same dimensions as the CCF locking block and installed it myself as a test. I should know more later today after I get the chance to do some test firing. I will keep a round count to test durability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ormondopen Posted January 27, 2008 Author Share Posted January 27, 2008 Instead of sending my frame back to CCF and spending 125 bucks I had an extra locking block and decided to take the plunge and break out the dremel and files and see if I could modify it to work in the CCF frame. IT WORKED! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmedley Posted January 28, 2008 Share Posted January 28, 2008 (edited) Thats good to know. For what its worth I noticed that CCF is now offering slides and magwells on their website. Hopefully their costumer service/quality control will improve. Edited January 28, 2008 by dmedley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cledford Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 Any new news on this issue? I picked one of these up yesterday (waiting on it to arrive at FFL dealer) and am going in with open eyes (seems like there is still some debugging to take place) however see a huge market for these frames if they become "race capable" given that outside of sport use I could imagine why anyone would want one. To sum that, up CCF please cater to us, the sport shooters as we're going to be your biggest market. Back to the issue, I’ve noticed in a couple of other threads that ‘smiths are hogging out the frame to set the locking block lower, ie back to OEM position. Anyone know how this is faring? I guess it will all make more sense to me once the frame arrives and I can look it over. -Calvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNuc Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 I have been seriously considering one of these for my 35. I have read about several issues that are concerning. However, lets just say that I have no problems with locking blocks breaking and I can find a shock buffer that lasts 2500 rounds.....is it worth it? Do you actually notice a performance improvement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmedley Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 I have been seriously considering one of these for my 35. I have read about several issues that are concerning. However, lets just say that I have no problems with locking blocks breaking and I can find a shock buffer that lasts 2500 rounds.....is it worth it? Do you actually notice a performance improvement?Yeah it is simple physics. You increase the weight of the base and it doesn't move as much under recoil. They shoot very soft and flat. Could probably get them even flatter shooting with lighter moving parts/slide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suburban Commando Posted February 13, 2008 Share Posted February 13, 2008 given that outside of sport use I could imagine why anyone would want one. I took me a while but eventually I decided that I'd rather carry something that I shoot really well, rather than something that's really comfortable to carry. It's the comforting vs. comfortable thing. If CCF can get the bugs worked out, and offer the stainless frames IDPA ready for a G17 slide, I'd consider one for carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cledford Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 given that outside of sport use I could imagine why anyone would want one. If CCF can get the bugs worked out, and offer the stainless frames IDPA ready for a G17 slide, I'd consider one for carry. I'm not sure what the future bodes for you. I went back tonight and read all the posts in the initial 11 page CCF thread here and put together a little timeline. The more I look into this the madder I get. It appears that the owner of the company seems to know better than everyone else what they want and moves at a glacier pace in making changes whatever the case. Let's see - a frame that from outset won't make weight in IDPA. A frame in which they decided to change the locking block from Glock OEM dimensions to their own, precluding the use of aftermarket barrels other than their own - without gunsmith fitting. And we buy Glock why? Personally, I do so I don't have to have everything fit by a gunsmith... This major design change was made by two guys, only one an engineer, while Glock has a TEAM of engineers who set the timing and dimensions in the first place... The change alters the timing for the whole gun. They put a picitinny rail on a gun that has never had one (before the 21SF) so 99% of the accessories out there - DON'T FIT. So the rail, which contributes to the overweight issue also serves no valid function either. Other examples include the fact that realize that they have a problem with short-stroking and buffers (over a year and a half after the frames debuted and 6 months after being released for sale to general public) and owner states publically (here on this board in a post) that last Oct that he would have newly designed, more dependable buffs available “soon.” This was almost 6 months ago. I spoke to him last week, no mention of new buffs at all. we are about to release our own polymer buffer and it will be fabricated using a denser and more abrasion resistant polymer as well as a plastic recoil rod to enable users to employ custom tension recoil springwe are currently selling buffers sourced from Buffer Technology and apparently their buffer employs a fairly soft polymer He did mention their new guide rod assembly (which looks to be very nice) that will be available “soon” that does nothing more for the problem then come apart easier then the stock – so that you can more readily add washers from Home Depot. (and how many police agencies are going to buy gun parts at Home Depot?) I was told regarding my issue (failure of buffer in less than 100 rounds) to buy a 20lb ISMI spring and ship the gun off to Glock Jockey to fix the stroke issue. When directly asked if they would be fixing it at the factory I was told "no, we are set up for one off work." When I directly asked about the frame cut, was told "if we decide to do it and that is not a given, it would not happen for at least 6 months." That last bit tops all. The rest of it I can chalk up to someone who thinks he knows better than his customers, but not instituting a fix for a *known* issue that has been out in the public realm for more than 6 months as soon as possible into production? That is pretty lame. If they aren't willing to make that change, then how likely are they to redesign a whole mold for a cast frame so users can really use the “race” frame in competition? I'm piecing together slowly but surely a picture of some guys who have a great idea, have produced a very nice frame, but failed to understand their market and the impact of design changes they made. Now that problems are cropping up they don't want to be responsible for them and instead want to have the customer fix the issues on their own time and expense. This is because their true intent is to somehow make it big by marketing these to the law enforcement market. They are so focused on this they are missing the people who really want the darn things. I still think the frames are very cool and have HUGE potential. However, after reading through the old thread tonight, seeing that the frames actually debuted back in 06 and that the owner of the company has known (publically) about the stroke issue for at least 6 months and they are still not prepared to do anything about nor willing to even mention it to purchasers *ahead of time" or in the manual or on the website is very deceptive. I don’t think it was an accident anymore that no one mentioned to me when my credit card number was taken that the far and away most commonly found .40 factory ammo was having issues. I shouldn’t have read the thread as now I’m angry about the issue. Before I thought this was something fairly recent – now I see that it’s been out there for a while and frankly should have never occurred in the first place if they had tested the thing correctly. Who *doesn’t* test a product with the most commonly commercially available ammo? -Calvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sc0 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Could always mill the frame to accept a GLOCK OEM locking block... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nphd2000 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 I have been seriously considering one of these for my 35. I have read about several issues that are concerning. However, lets just say that I have no problems with locking blocks breaking and I can find a shock buffer that lasts 2500 rounds.....is it worth it? Do you actually notice a performance improvement?Yeah it is simple physics. You increase the weight of the base and it doesn't move as much under recoil. They shoot very soft and flat. Could probably get them even flatter shooting with lighter moving parts/slide. I have been tinkering with this platform of G35 with CCF frame. I considered the heavy bottom with lightened top (see pics). I think it's a great combo and the sights track very well for me. I am disappointed in the CCF frame with all the problems that keep coming up but I am lucky that my friends and I work through most of them. I realy wanted to build a Limited / Lim 10 gun based on a G24 slide w/CCF but the stock slide beats up the buff and recoil rod too much (broke the head off the plastic guide rod). I either have to lighten the 24 slide (like the 35) or stick to the 35 platform for a while. I'm a little disappointed in the frame but it's too late to turn back now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unleashed Posted March 20, 2008 Share Posted March 20, 2008 I just bought one of these yesterday and then spoke with Steve at S&J to find out about all the problems. I guess finding out after I bought it isn't as bad as finding out after I shot it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric nielsen Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Good post Cledford. I agree with pretty much all of it. Stopped playing with mine when it failed to extract on about 60% of shots fired. Bullets are waaay too expensive now to waste on stuff like that. 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