ciscoip Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 So I was interested in using a Glock 17 frame that was drilled for a SJC C-More mount and using a spare G35 top end for Production. Is the fact that the frame has a couple extra holes going to make this illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Frame lightening :roflol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 I sure hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 So I was interested in using a Glock 17 frame that was drilled for a SJC C-More mount and using a spare G35 top end for Production. Is the fact that the frame has a couple extra holes going to make this illegal? I sure hope not. Yep --- drilling holes in the frame is not on the list of approved modifications..... Enter in production, welcome to competing in Open..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scirocco38s Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 I would send John Amidon an email and explain. Maybe you could put black setscrews in the holes and fill them and they let that go. I would hope some common sense would prevail here and see that this isnt a mod for performance gain but a reuse of an existing frame and realize there is no advantage gained. But I have been wrong before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chirpy Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 You might try JB Weld also. Let us know what you find out. Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 It is illegal to have extra holes (even if filled) on the exterior of your Production gun. I don't think it's a matter of common sense or the fact that they don't do anything...it just that that is where the line in the rules was drawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uscbigdawg Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 (edited) It SHOULDN'T matter and I'd get a ruling because people can't often look past the obvious and will think that it actually does matter. I'll say this about our sport, when it comes to some of the scared "chicken little/sky is falling" rules, that after watching our local long precision/sniper rifle club match today.....shooting the pistol is no longer looking like fun. Rich Edited 'cause I love Kyle. Edited January 5, 2009 by uscbigdawg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 ...because people in our sport are stupid... You can leave that talk at the front door, brother. - Admin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciscoip Posted January 5, 2009 Author Share Posted January 5, 2009 It'd be nice if there were a "competitive advantage" caveat in the rule book... I'm not about to fill the holes up permanently with JB weld. I was just wanting to shoot Open, Limited, and Production with one frame and multiple top ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Hefta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I don't think that it is legal to use a G35 slide on a G17 or G34 frame, at least in Production? So to make a long story short you will need to get a Production/Limited gun and use the drilled gun for Open. I had just a little piece of grip tape on my G34 in the wrong spot at Nationals and I got thrown into open. They are picky but it is all for a good reason, rules are rules if you don't like them you're in the wrong sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDM Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Hefta Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). True, but in his case you would see the holes in the slide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). So does that make it legal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDM Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 (edited) Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). So does that make it legal? I didn't mean to imply that I think it is legal or that I condone breaking the rules. I just said you can't tell the difference between the frames of the three models. What's the difference in switching frames among those three guns and getting a replacement frame for whatever reason from Glock? Edited January 6, 2009 by SDM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EkuJustice Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 (edited) I would say the putting a 35 upper on a "17" frame wouldnt be a problem if it didnt have the holes. The frame is the exact same frame for the 17, 17L, 22, 24,31, 34 and 35. There is absolutely no difference in the frames what so ever. The frames are not marked per model number so there really is no way to know what the gun originally was without a call to glock. I know I have seen used guns for sale where the serial number didnt match so who is to know what that gun originally started out as. If you crack your frame, and get it replaced they are going to give you a full size, small frame which is a generic frame there is really no such thing as a 17, 17L, 22, 24,31, 34 and 35 frame as there is no markings on the frame only on the slide Edited January 6, 2009 by EkuJustice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). So does that make it legal? I didn't mean to imply that I think it is legal or that I condone breaking the rules. I just said you can't tell the difference between the frames of the three models. What's the difference in switching frames among those three guns and getting a replacement frame for whatever reason from Glock? The difference is the replacement frame is legal and switching frames is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). So does that make it legal? I didn't mean to imply that I think it is legal or that I condone breaking the rules. I just said you can't tell the difference between the frames of the three models. What's the difference in switching frames among those three guns and getting a replacement frame for whatever reason from Glock? I'm not saying that it should be illegal. I'm just saying that it's not allowed under the current rules. It is one of those areas that seems silly to me, however the line has to be drawn somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 I don't think that it is legal to use a G35 slide on a G17 or G34 frame, at least in Production? This is legal. The stripped lower used with the G17, G22, G34 and G35 are exactly the same, and carry the same part number. I had confirmation of this from JA several years ago. Shooting a Glock that has external non-factory modifications other than the ones approved is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciscoip Posted January 6, 2009 Author Share Posted January 6, 2009 (edited) Unless you research the serial numbers you'll have a hard time telling the difference between a 35, 34, or 17 frame (assuming ejectors are changed). So does that make it legal? The frame is the same part for the 17, 34, and 35, so swapping them is legal. It would be like ordering a replacement frame for a Glock...they're all the same. The issue isn't putting a 35 top-end on a 17 frame, it's that the 17 frame might have a couple extra holes in it from an SJC mount. Edited January 6, 2009 by ciscoip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 (edited) You are allowed to put a G35 upper on a G34 frame or vice versa. You just can't put in a conversion barrel to make a G35 upper shoot 9mm. Edited January 6, 2009 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDM Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 I believe we are driftng a little. I was only commenting on the question below. The frame with the mount holes wouldn't be legal in production. I don't think that it is legal to use a G35 slide on a G17 or G34 frame, at least in Production? ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 Has John verified the above statements of legality of switching uppers since the 2008 rule change????? The new wording seems pretty clear that its not, but John's surprised me before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EkuJustice Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 If it matches the profile of the gun then its legal. The lone wolfs wernt because they had forward serrations. If its a glock lower, with a glock upper who really cares if its bought that way, or put together that way. So this glock 34 is legal because its bought factory, but this one thats the exact same isnt because he ordered the frame and slide seperately online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 I would send John Amidon an email and explain. Maybe you could put black setscrews in the holes and fill them and they let that go. I would hope some common sense would prevail here and see that this isnt a mod for performance gain but a reuse of an existing frame and realize there is no advantage gained. But I have been wrong before. I'd really like to hear JA's take on this. 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