Glock Frame Change

[00bullitt]

Ok......I bought a new G22 RTF. I took the frame and played switcharoo. The frame that was on my production gun is badly worn in the magwell area and needing replaced. I used that as an excuse to buy the new RTF(Rough Texture Frame) so I switched frames around. I took my G34 slide and 9mm KKM barrel and put it on the RTF frame and have been shooting Production for the past month or so with it. I see nothing wrong with it except that the RTF is not listed on the approved production list. The RTF is dimensionally the same as the other frames except for the texture. I am still within the 2 ounce rule and stippling is allowed in production. There is no markings on the small frame Glocks that indicate what they are or what caliber they are supposed to be. I asked Amidon at the '08 LPR Nats if it was ok to change frames if one is damaged or needs to be replaced. He told me yes because the serial numbers no longer had to match. My logic tells me its fine but I'd like to know if someone can quote the exact rule and your idea of the interpretation for me. If I am doing somethin illegal.....I will return it back the way it was. And yes....I plan to send Amidon an email to get a ruling. I just wanted to discuss it here first.

Thanks!

Other thread in the Glock sub forum where this discussion originated

Edited March 8, 2009 by 00bullitt

[ima45dv8]

Unless some radical departure the frame is the serialized portion, thus making that 'the gun'. Wouldn't they have to be on the approved Production gun list published by NROI? I suspect that would mean specific configurations of the frame mated to certain uppers would have to be approved, as well.

I think this could be classified as a prototype until then.

Edited to reflect I had no idea what an RTF frame was (!).

[00bullitt]

Unless some radical departure the frame is the serialized portion, thus making that 'the gun'. Wouldn't they have to be on the approved Production gun list published by NROI? I suspect that would mean specific configurations of the frame mated to certain uppers would have to be approved, as well.

I think this could be classified as a prototype until then.

Thats the only rule I could think I would be breaking. But I do know some 10k were produced as they were released.

[ima45dv8]

OK. I thought the RTF was an aftermarket part. A small amount of research later I see it is not. It's a textured frame offered as an option by Glock (I know you knew this, Tod - I include this only to educate other ignorant folks like myself).

The question then becomes whether the texturing extends to any area not normally covered by grip tape, as currently allowed.

Item 21 in Appendix D4 (Production) currently states,

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix E4)

E4 has photos showing where grip tape and/or texturing are allowed.

The pictures I've found of the RTF on the web don't do a great job of showing just which parts of the frame are now textured. If it's anywhere outsides the lines drawn in the pictures in Appendix E4, I'd bet they probably will be disallowed as a competitive advantage/unauthorized modification.

Just my opinion, which at current markets rates is worth at least three times what you paid for it.

[00bullitt]

The RTF texture definitely does not extend into the areas of the outline. Glock basically uses very small conymids in the same areas of their previous pebble type finish.

And thanks for that expensive advice. In todays economy....I can use all I can get for that price.

[ima45dv8]

The RTF texture definitely does not extend into the areas of the outline. Glock basically uses very small conymids in the same areas of their previous pebble type finish.

And thanks for that expensive advice. In todays economy....I can use all I can get for that price.

In that case, you're probably good to go. Let us know what John A. says about putting the 34 top end on it.

[kwrangln]

Just my $.02 as a newbie M&P guy.

I have closely followed the approval process for the M&P 9PRO as it reached towards the 2000 units sold to be approved for production class. Once it reached this number it was approved, but, the M&P 9L was not untill it had also reached the required 2000 units sold. The only physical differences between the two models are a fiber optic front sight, performance sear, and a slight relief on the front of the slide, everything else is identical. You would think that since they were so close they would be viewed as the same, but that was not the case. Since they were sold as seperate models, each version had to reach its production numbers to be approved.

I see this as applying specifically to your case if the 4th gen is being referred to by name as a different version of the gun. If there is a G22, and a RTF G22, then they are different guns and must meet the approval process. Swapping an approved slide on to an unapproved frame does not a legal gun make.

Where this gets confusing is the specific clause that says production parts are allowed, I believe the IDPA rules specifically state that an extended slide stop is allowable in SSP because it is a stock item on the G35, but that part is a far cry from slapping a slide on a new frame.

My initial reaction on reading your post was to think not legal. Since the frame is the gun, your G34 is long gone, you are now shooting an RTF G22, and you have changed the caliber, the slide, and barrel, all no no's according to the rules. I get the feeling that you are looking at it as you are still shooting the approved G34 and just swapping frames, but the frame is the gun since that is what is serialized.

This will be interesting to watch unfold, specifically to see if things are equal across the board as far as approval for new guns.

Edited March 8, 2009 by kwrangln

[Flexmoney]

This is the open thread on the rules question about the Production legality of the textured Glock frame (similar to grip tape or stippling, but as new from the factory).

We had another rules mess that was split off from a regular old thread about the gun in Glock section. I split it off and closed it...it was a bit of back and forth and not so much about the rules...and we have this open thread going already.

I am just going to delete the other thread. There isn't much positive in it.

Please play nice and stay on topic.

- Admin.

[Nik Habicht]

I found this on the Production Gun List, following a long list of Glock model numbers and weights:

(L models are not approved) C models are allowed providing that the barrel is non-ported and the other requirements are met. Short Frame (SF) verisons of models approved.

(Emphasis mine.)

Given that, I'd expect to see the same language approving RTF frames......

[vluc]

I found this on the Production Gun List, following a long list of Glock model numbers and weights:

(L models are not approved) C models are allowed providing that the barrel is non-ported and the other requirements are met. Short Frame (SF) verisons of models approved.

(Emphasis mine.)

Given that, I'd expect to see the same language approving RTF frames......

But until the language comes, it's not mentioned and as a result, I'd guess not approved?

[Nik Habicht]

I found this on the Production Gun List, following a long list of Glock model numbers and weights:

(L models are not approved) C models are allowed providing that the barrel is non-ported and the other requirements are met. Short Frame (SF) verisons of models approved.

(Emphasis mine.)

Given that, I'd expect to see the same language approving RTF frames......

But until the language comes, it's not mentioned and as a result, I'd guess not approved?

Barring an official NROI Ruling, or an addition to the list, that would be interpretation, especially for models other than the G-22 RTF......

[Chuck Anderson]

Glock 22 RTF should be okay. Glock 22RTF frame with 9mm upper, no-no. Glock has never made a 9mm variant with the RTF frame. Therefore you are changing the caliber of the gun and that is a no-no.

[00bullitt]

OK....just got a response from Amidon.

RTF is not yet approved(Glock still has not submitted the compliance paperwork)and there are new rulings that are going to be posted in the next couple of days about using different top ends on different frames.

So as of now....it is a no go. I will just convert back to the old frame until it is legal. Which sounds like it will be.

As for the RTF frame......Glock is going to make all calibers available with the RTF with the next gun being the 17.

[BayouSlide]

Glock 22 RTF should be okay. Glock 22RTF frame with 9mm upper, no-no. Glock has never made a 9mm variant with the RTF frame. Therefore you are changing the caliber of the gun and that is a no-no.

As Chuck said. IIRC past rulings have directly addressed that, for Production, top ends from one caliber can't be switched to receivers from another caliber, even in the cases where the receivers were the same externally, such as G22/17 ect.

Curtis

Edited March 9, 2009 by BayouSlide

[00bullitt]

Alrighty then.....looks like the new rulings for Production were pretty clear then. Guess its back to old and busted wore out frame on the 34.