Guide Rods: Steel vs Stock (plastic)

[socman777]

To begin, thanks in advance for your help and observations.

Background: I bought a G-34 for range & self defense, soon to be followed by a G-26 (carry). I truly love these two pistols. I've left the G-34 as is except for a light polish on the trigger, etc. I added only a captive SS guide rod with the stock spring. I now envision this pistol for the range, maybe some IDPA to improve and maintain my defensive skills. The G-26: 3.5 lb Glock connector, NY#1 spring, with a Glock's extended slide release and extended mag release. And Wolff hardened steel, non-captured guide rods/tubes, again using stock springs.

My main concerns are my use of the steel guide rod(s) in these pistols. My goal was strength, smoothness and reliability first, and improved accuracy & reduced muzzle flip second. I do know that the plastic rods have been known to wear, chip and break.

First question: will the steel rods serve these goals? Are there any negatives to using them?

Next, I have read two interesting claims: first, that the stock plastic guide rods are designed to flex, and it is claimed that this flex serves to promote harmonic balance. It was claimed that a steel rod has the opposite effect, ie to cause harmonic imbalance and perhaps damage the slide in some way, say pounding for example.

Second, I also saw one report that the hole in the stock plastic rod is purposeful, and somehow acts as a cool air pump! If true, I'm not clear what effect a steel rod would have. My own sense is that these two rare claims have little validity, except for the fact that both were made by seemingly competent resources (Remtek and Robar guns).

So in sum:

1. Will the steel guide rods add reliability and strength?

2. Will they aid accuracy?

3. Will they reduce muzzle flip?

4. Are there any reasons to avoid steel, eg damage to the gun?

5. Are the claims re the stock plastic rods adding flex and harmonic balance, or cooling air valid?

Again, my sincere thanks. These matters are of concern to many ordinary shooters.

[Joe4d]

1 The factory ones are pretty reliablle and will last a long long time.

2. No, acuracy is a function of barrel to sights repeatable lockup. The barrel to cam, barrel to slide lockup isnt gonna change by using a different material in the guide rod.

3. Yes. More weight up front.

4 Yes, more weight up front,, You bought the 26 cause it is light for carry use, now you wanna add weight ? other than that no disadvantage.

5, Sounds fishy to me, the plastic most likely is nothing more than a cost saving feature.

[kmitchl]

Glocks run fine with the factory guide rods. I've never seen one stop due to a guide rod failure. Doesn't mean it has not happened, however, not very common even with high round count guns. I use a SS uncaptured guide rod in my G34 because I don't use factory recoil springs and I have not found a satisfactory captured rod.

To answer your questions: I see no change in reliability or accuracy. Only the tungsten guide rods which add weight will reduce mizzle flip, however, they are not legal for IDPA. I see no difference in performance between plastic and steel.

[socman777]

Thanks for your replies. Couple of comments.

I use a SS uncaptured guide rod in my G34 because I don't use factory recoil springs and I have not found a satisfactory captured rod.

Does this mean you favor SS over the stock plastic? If so, what led you to use the SS? If not, I know that Dave Sevigny stated that when he shoots IDPA/SSP he uses the stock plastic rod with the cap removed so that it is, in effect, uncaptured. Otherwise he uses a SS guide rod in almost all other events: USPSA Production, Limited, Limited 10, IDPA CDP, Tactical Shooting Association Full Size and Steel Open.

I have to believe that his choice to use SS guide rods must surely be for good reason, and one would have to assume improved reliability, smoothness and accuracy must surely play a role.

Oh, and as an aside, I picked the G-26 more for it's size, accuracy and reliability. Needless to say it is a relatively light and compact weapon. The addition of the SS rod is unnoticeable, at least to me. Whatever trivial weight it adds only makes it more desireable to me in terms of balance, recoil and flip.

Edited July 19, 2009 by socman777

[lugnut]

I think you know that the SS is not allowed in IDPA SSP. Since I play both games I just use a plastic rod. I don't notice much difference with the SS rod to be honest with you. Maybe a little heavier but not a huge difference.

IMO the only advantage of SS is weight and maybe reliability.. I don't buy any other theories.

[Joe4d]

Good reason ?

I have a gunsafe full of guns and guns with parts that were put on for really no good reason other than chasing a rainbow. I think some people myself included buy parts cause we wanna see what happens then convince our selves there is an improvement. One thing I did notice about your posts, I would strongly recommend doing away with the extended controls on your carry piece. Generally they do more harm than good. Not sure about Glocks but I have seen quite a few other guns with extended mag releases get bumped and the mag fall out during a stage. I have also seen extended slide stops get bumped and cause premature slide lock also.

[HighVelocity]

I install an SS uncaptured guide rod in every Glock that I get. I like the stock spring, though, and usually remove it from the plastic rod and use it on the SS rod. If I shoot an IDPA match, I sign up as ESP.

I see zero performance benefit. I just don't like the idea of having a plastic recoil spring guide rod. Could be an OCD thing.

[socman777]

Joe, your point about "accidents" emanating from extended slide and mag releases is well taken, and one that I must reconsider. For now, and for whatever reason, my hands - which are on the smaller side - seem to be safely distant. In my own case, I really have to work at it to get to, and operate them. But I can see where these can be very valid concerns.

I'd like to throw in another consideration: slide looseness.

I'm sure most of you are aware of this issue. Glocks, by design, have a slide that is a bit loose. On trigger pull, it has been observed that the slide will drop slightly when the trigger bar contacts the connector, and moves up and down as the bar moves down the connector. On my nearly new G-34 I checked this and could see a noticeable drop. Robin Taylor ("Glock in Competition") estimates the looseness at about 20 thousandths, "noticeable in fine aiming".

In short, a designed in tradeoff - a loss of a bit of accuracy for a gain in reliability.

Some competition shooters will tighten their slides for this reason. This is a delicate matter, better left for the pros, no way for me. But I made an interesting observation. I decided to recheck my G-34: with an Arotek captured SS rod, using the stock spring, the slide movement is now gone! Or at least so small I can no longer see it. Believe me, it was quite noticeable with the stock plastic rod.

Here's what I'd speculate. It may well be that the plastic rod is a reasonable compromise in cost vs performance for Glock. A very small loss in accuracy for a (plastic) rod that is very (but not completely) reliable. Inexpensive and easily replaced as a kind of maintenance item. It is hollow - to stiffen it - but as most know it is still flexible. And you can be sure it flexes in operation. There is no practical way to predict in what direction the plastic rod will flex - before, during and after the shot - and in conjunction with the loose slide, voila! Acceptably - but reliably - bit less accuracy.

All fine for a duty weapon.

I'm beginning to believe that a SS rod - ala Sevigny - is an awfully inexpensive and simple upgrade for the purposes of reliability, smoothness, consistent function and accordingly, a tad more "fine accuracy".

BTW, this opinion and a buck buys ya a cuppa java...

Edited July 19, 2009 by socman777

[SA Friday]

It comes down to tuning the gun to the shooters preference by adding or subtracting weight to the front and reliability.

A SS guiderod will add some weight up front, but there is little evidence that it adds accuracy to a glock. Most shooters do this for the convienience of changing recoil springs, and eliminating any potential for plastic to chip off the back section of the plastic guiderod while shooting. I've seen a few OEM guiderods have a piece chip off the back; it's pretty damn rare though.

pumping air? uh, no. I'm pretty sure the hole is there so you can insert a rod the size of a wire coat hanger down through the rod and pop the retainer plug out to swap recoil springs. I know that's what I've used it for.

harmonics? no again...

Slide movement; non-issue and what little there is isn't removed by a SS guiderod. Sevigney, Flex, Vogel, etc make long accurate shots because of practice, not guiderods or slide tightening.

[G-ManBart]

There really isn't much you can do, at least along the lines of what you're talking about, to make a Glock more reliable or accurate than it is out of the box. Even if a factory guide rod has a chunk taken out of it (almost always because the gun was reassembled improperly) it will almost always still run. Our gunsmiths find them like that in guns that have gone many thousands of rounds without failure.

I don't know about any harmonic balance issue, but I have seen super high speed video of Glocks being shot from a Ransom Rest and the guide rod flexes so much it touches the barrel! No kidding. The frame and slide gap gets so large you can see daylight clearly though it as well, but the guide rod doing the hula is a total trip to watch! They shot the video to determine, exactly what the slide speed was with various duty loads....fun stuff

[Joe4d]

Causative link. Your missing a causative link. As in there are more DUI arrests since the invention of color TV therefore color TV's cause drunk driving. Your slide movement observations have no causative link to accuracy of the actual round hitting a target. Slowly squeezing the trigger and causing .020 movement isnt gonna effect accuracy unless the gun is in a vice. Then only if the sights are lined up before moving the trigger. I doubt your hand can keep .020 while squeezing, your gonna pause before the shot breaks and reline up the sights the .020 movement of the slide is irrelevant. Even if it was the trigger would move the slide the same amount every time and the zero would take that into account. And even if it was relevant the measurement that matters is the relation ship of the barrel to the sights, The frame to slide fit is over rated to accuracy. The relationship that affects accuracy are the barrel to the sights. In some guns, specifically the Glock a little frame to slide slop doesnt affect the barrel to sights relationship. Tightening the frame on a Glock is some gunsmith appliing what helps on one design to another without taking into account the design differences. In order to establish a causative link you need to ransom rest or seriously sandbag the guns and fire multiple groups with both guide rods.

[socman777]

Great stuff here guys. Entertaining AND informative, thanks.

G'man, I was confident the plastic rod flexes, but the video you cited really opened my eyes! The amount of flex you describe is quite astounding. And certainly Glock is aware of this. Could it be that this flex is an important design feature? Maybe the qualified observation that "flex is important for harmonic balance" may indeed have some validity. Could it be the flex softens the recoil a bit (like special rod designs that add a secondary spring)? Is pounding a problem without it?

Hmm.

Joe, your hypothesis that a loose slide has no effect on accuracy is worth examination. On the surface, it sure seems to have merit. And I know 20/1000's doesn't sound like much. It sure isn't at the barrel. But out 25 yards? Correct me if I'm wrong but after dusting off my HS algebra, I come up with 3.6 inches of variance. Of course that's assuming there isn't a last moment correction for the 0.20 play. But do we really need yet another factor to correct at the last moment? There's a good case to be made for reducing error, assuming reliabilty is maintained.

And there are some secondary effects. Some of the top pros do tighten their slides. They believe there is a very minor but real improvement in fine aiming. But that's not all. Perhaps more importantly, by tightening the slide they get rid of the trigger slop and get a crisper, more controllable break. Result is more and reliable accuracy. It's the same reason trigger polishing improves accuracy.

And last we all need to consider the microseconds the bullet spends in a recoiling gun. How does this affect accuracy? Does the heavier rod - SS, and esp. tungsten - reduction of recoil and flip, however minor, reduce any inaccuracy resulting from these factors? I think we really need to go to school on the Sevigny's, et al. In IDPA SSP, Sevigny uses a stock plastic rod without it's retainer - in effect, uncaptured - to meet the rules. And if he chose to, he could use this uncaptured, stock plastic rod for all his events.

But he doesn't. As soon as the rules allow, the plastic is gone and he changes mostly to SS, and occasionally to tungsten. You can be sure its all about accuracy, consistency, smoothness and reliablility. So it really isn't so simple I think.

And please recall that a simple change to the Arotek SS rod eliminated the play in my newish G-34. I continue to be surprised and pleased by that. I know this: I haven't hurt or damaged this gun by doing so. I am confident it won't break, chip or fail. The play is gone. And if I get some minor improvements to recoil and flip, or a slightly crisper trigger - that's some nice gravy on my Idaho mashed...

Again, great comments, great discussion, thanks...

[Graham Smith]

The G-26: 3.5 lb Glock connector, NY#1 spring, with a Glock's extended slide release and extended mag release. And Wolff hardened steel, non-captured guide rods/tubes, again using stock springs.

My suggestion is to tweak the G34 all you want but leave the G26 as close to stock as you can. I would not do any of the things you have listed here because they add almost nothing to the performance and can actually impede you.

The stock guide rod is just fine. You don't want the extra weight anyway.

The changes to the trigger spring don't really make for a crisper trigger but do retard the very positive reset you get with a normal trigger. And you don't want a lighter trigger on a carry guy so using the 3.5 connector alone is out.

The only thing and extended mag release does on a carry gun is to snag on clothing. As for the extended slide release, stick with the standard slide lock (the standard equipment is a slide lock not a slide release) and train to chamber a round by pulling back the slide. The extended release is too easy to hit with your thumb on a subcompact which will lock the slide open while you are shooting.

Just remember, you are not going to be using this gun for bullseye shooting. This is a close range combat gun that, if it is used at all, will most likely be fired by point shooting. Don't get all hung up on making a G26 into a pseudo-race gun. Spend the money on ammo and range time because it is considerably different to shoot than you G34.

Disclaimer: I am not a gunsmith or a Glock armorer and I don't play one on television.

These comments are based on what I have learned from professionals who carry guns for a living.

Edited July 20, 2009 by Graham Smith

[Nik Habicht]

The G-26: 3.5 lb Glock connector, NY#1 spring, with a Glock's extended slide release and extended mag release. And Wolff hardened steel, non-captured guide rods/tubes, again using stock springs.

My suggestion is to tweak the G34 all you want but leave the G26 as close to stock as you can. I would not do any of the things you have listed here because they add almost nothing to the performance and can actually impede you.

On the whole I agree.

The changes to the trigger spring don't really make for a crisper trigger but do retard the very positive reset you get with a normal trigger. And you don't want a lighter trigger on a carry guy so using the 3.5 connector alone is out.

The one part I see break with some regularity on a Glock is the trigger spring --- switching to the NY1 spring (a leaf spring) fixes that issue, but slams the trigger pull weight up. Coupling the NY1 with a 3.5 lb. connector results in a trigger with a slightly higher pull than 5.5+coil trigger spring, while increasing reliability --- in my opinion....

The extended release is too easy to hit with your thumb on a subcompact which will lock the slide open while you are shooting.

I've run Glock 20/21 mag releases on carry and competition guns for years without issues. The slide release should get swapped back to standard --- it's really a matter of when, not if.....

[G-ManBart]

G'man, I was confident the plastic rod flexes, but the video you cited really opened my eyes! The amount of flex you describe is quite astounding. And certainly Glock is aware of this. Could it be that this flex is an important design feature? Maybe the qualified observation that "flex is important for harmonic balance" may indeed have some validity. Could it be the flex softens the recoil a bit (like special rod designs that add a secondary spring)? Is pounding a problem without it?

Hmm.

I honestly have no idea whether Glock was aware of the amount of flex in the guide rod. It sure made my jaw drop when I saw it! Consider that they developed the plastic rod before really high speed video was commonly available and it might just be one of those things that worked out that way and has proven reliable. To add a little more to the picture it came about when some of our folks asked Glock what the acceptable slide speed range was for certain models. This happened after a reliability problem with a particular load in testing. Glock felt the problems were slide speed related, but they couldn't provide an actual range of what it should be...which was surprising. So, I'm not so sure they've done much high speed video work or they'd already know the answer to that question. All very interesting stuff

[Anthony Lombardo]

G'man, I was confident the plastic rod flexes, but the video you cited really opened my eyes! The amount of flex you describe is quite astounding. And certainly Glock is aware of this. Could it be that this flex is an important design feature? Maybe the qualified observation that "flex is important for harmonic balance" may indeed have some validity. Could it be the flex softens the recoil a bit (like special rod designs that add a secondary spring)? Is pounding a problem without it?

Hmm.

I honestly have no idea whether Glock was aware of the amount of flex in the guide rod. It sure made my jaw drop when I saw it! Consider that they developed the plastic rod before really high speed video was commonly available and it might just be one of those things that worked out that way and has proven reliable. To add a little more to the picture it came about when some of our folks asked Glock what the acceptable slide speed range was for certain models. This happened after a reliability problem with a particular load in testing. Glock felt the problems were slide speed related, but they couldn't provide an actual range of what it should be...which was surprising. So, I'm not so sure they've done much high speed video work or they'd already know the answer to that question. All very interesting stuff

Glocks are susceptible to slide speed problems because there is no hammer to crease resistance gainst slide unlocking. One reason the slide and barrel are so heavy and they really need that flat fire spring, in my opinion. I have also noted that Glocks work better with stock plastic rods. I think the rod bending creates a braking effect that slows the slide a bit. This a atotal WAG by the way (Wild Assed Guess).

[socman777]

Once again some great stuff, and thanks to all. We're exploring some interesting concepts here.

The changes to the trigger spring don't really make for a crisper trigger but do retard the very positive reset you get with a normal trigger. And you don't want a lighter trigger on a carry guy so using the 3.5 connector alone is out.

One of the reasons I went to the NY#1/3.5 connector was to increase the pull. Ayoob performed an interesting study wherein he measured pull (1) at the tip of the trigger and (2) at the middle. These two points will differ based on leverage.

Std Glock (5 lb connector): ....... 4 lb 2 oz at the tip, 6lb in the middle.

NY#1 with 5 lb: ........................ 6 lb 1 oz, and 7 lb 2 oz. (well worn)

3.5 connector: ......................... 3 lb 4 oz, and 5 lb 1 oz.

NY#1 with 3.5: ......................... 6 lb, and 8 lb. in the middle (new).

It can be assumed that a well-worn/polished NY#1/3.5 should perform in the 5.5 to 6.5 lb range. In other words the NY#1/3.5 combo is close to stock pull (slightly heavier), but is often used as it is known to be crisper/smoother. It pulls more evenly and is known to be heavier from the get go, gets rid of some mushiness, and the standard's light pre-load.

Glockmeister measured it differently: Peak Take Up and Final Break.

Std Glock (5 lb): .............. 3 lb, 5.25 lb

NY#1 w/5 lb: ................... 4.4 lb, 7.6 lb

3.5 connector: ................. 3 lb , 4 lb

NY#1 w/3.5 lb: ................ 4.4 lb, 6 lb

The Glockmeister results confirm Ayoob's rough tests. Bottom line: the NY#1/3.5 combo comes in just a bit heavier than stock. Pre-load is heavier. There are many, many users who swear by this combo for carry. They believe it's firmer, smoother, crisper and more predictable for LE work. Although there are many reports of std springs breaking, the NY's are respected as bulletproof (pun intended).

I find the trigger reset to be just clear, strong and clicky crisp. Can't really tell the difference from stock.

I do agree about the extended SR and MR on the G-26, depending on the size of your hands and grip. It might be better to be safe than sorry, I agree. And in retrospect, I wouldn't have changed the standard guide rod and spring. It was only after I cut it that I realized the larger diameter spring guide is metal, and only the inner is plastic. On the G-26 this is a very, very sturdy setup. I should have left it alone.

The G-34 is a horse of another color. The rod here is long, all plastic and I could easily flex it easily with my hands. G'man's amazing video citation says it all. There was noticeable slide movement on trigger pull, and the Arotek SS rod somehow got rid of it. No movement either on the G-26, post Wolff steel rods.

The one part I see break with some regularity on a Glock is the trigger spring --- switching to the NY1 spring (a leaf spring) fixes that issue..

BTW the original NY#1 was a leaf spring; the newer one (which I installed) is a captive coil spring in a plastic housing, like a car's shock absorber. No "ears" that are know to wear and break.

It is also noteworthy that the top competitors could use a de-capped stock plastic rod - now uncaptured - for the purpose of changing out springs easily - but they don't. Their goals are, or should be, the same as ours - reliable accuracy. That they use SS or tungsten whenever they can is meaningful.

[socman777]

I said:

There isn't a competitor alive who doesn't have one and the same ultimate and immutable goal:

Reliable fast accuracy.

And I would have bet my first born on this being the reason for most competitors installing steel or tungsten. I was dead wrong, at least so far as Dave Sevigny is involved. And I quote:

Question to Dave: do SS/tungsten rods improve your accuracy? Sevigny:

"The short answer is not particularly. For as much shooting as I do, I prefer the rods for the reasons mentioned earlier. I leave my carry guns as they come from the factory except for the sights... Also, the steel Wolff rod is easier to reassemble and fit into position versus the polymer stock rod with the end cap removed."

I wouldn't feel right without straightening my own butt out. No less than Sevigny told me that the accuracy is NOT the primary reason for his going to SS. Most do it, but it may just be that ease in spring changes - not ultimate accuracy - is the primary motivator. I also had a chance to talk with Glock. Of course they gave the standard "we don't recommend aftermarket parts" talk; but they added that the plastic rod flex is intentional and considered an important part of their design/goals.

Reality bites, and I got bit. I do everything 110% and screwing up is no exception. I'll likely go back to stock plastic. But it's been a fun thread, and I sincerely thank all who both agreed and disagreed with me.

To your health!

[JF1]

I don't know about any harmonic balance issue, but I have seen super high speed video of Glocks being shot from a Ransom Rest and the guide rod flexes so much it touches the barrel! No kidding. The frame and slide gap gets so large you can see daylight clearly though it as well, but the guide rod doing the hula is a total trip to watch! They shot the video to determine, exactly what the slide speed was with various duty loads....fun stuff

Do you have a link to that video? Thx.

[racerba]

they make a SS guide rod for a G26? And springs?

This topic may be mute...

BTW - i dno't know of anybody changing out the guide rod for improved accuracy. The primary purpose of changing the guide rod is for recoil control.

Edited October 1, 2009 by racerba

[G-ManBart]

I don't know about any harmonic balance issue, but I have seen super high speed video of Glocks being shot from a Ransom Rest and the guide rod flexes so much it touches the barrel! No kidding. The frame and slide gap gets so large you can see daylight clearly though it as well, but the guide rod doing the hula is a total trip to watch! They shot the video to determine, exactly what the slide speed was with various duty loads....fun stuff

Do you have a link to that video? Thx.

Not yet. It was't posted online, but I'm trying to get a copy and permission from the owner to reproduce (don't see a reason that would be an issue). R,

[Duane Thomas]

The one part I see break with some regularity on a Glock is the trigger spring

That has also been my experience.

switching to the NY1 spring (a leaf spring) fixes that issue

BTW the original NY#1 was a leaf spring

Both incorrect, sorry to say. The NY-1 is not a leaf spring, and the original leaf spring part was not called the NY-1.

There have actually been four different units in this series over the years. Originally there was the New York Trigger, a leaf spring inside a plastic body (black) that upped trigger pull weight to a nominal eight pounds. The New York Trigger Plus (white), rarely seen (I have one in my collection but it's literally the only unit I've ever seen with my own eyes), was also a leaf spring unit but upped trigger pulls to a nominal 12 pounds. After the New York Trigger and New York Trigger Plus were phased out, they were replaced with the coil spring NY-1 (OD green), the equivalent to the old New York Trigger, and NY-2 (bright orange), the equivalent to the New York Trigger Plus - you don't see the NY-2 that often; it's not that they're that hard to get if you want one, it's just that most people don't.

but slams the trigger pull weight up.[ Coupling the NY1 with a 3.5 lb. connector results in a trigger with a slightly higher pull than 5.5+coil trigger spring, while increasing reliability --- in my opinion....

In my guns, running a New York Trigger (yes, I use the original, black plastic, leaf spring unit in my guns because, in my experience at least, it gives slightly lighter and smoother trigger pulls than the coil spring NY-1) and a factory Glock 3.5 pound (excuse me, 4.5 pound is the new factory approved terminology) connector and polished trigger components brings the trigger pulls in at 5.5 pounds according to my NRA weight set.

I agree about the "greater reliability" i.e. greatly increased durability of the New York Trigger or NY-1 versus the stock trigger spring. I've gone back and forth about running either a New York Trigger or a trigger spring. I very much like the durability of the New York Trigger but I could shoot better with the lighter trigger pulls I got with a trigger spring. Recently I've said the hell with it and just gone for the New York Trigger. The entire purpose of my getting involved in USPSA/IDPA was to get good with my carry gun. I trust the gun more with a New York Trigger than the breakage-prone trigger spring. If I find the heavier trigger pulls require a tad more work to master, well, that just means I need to suck it up and get with the program.

[Duane Thomas]

Correct me if I'm wrong but after dusting off my HS algebra, I come up with 3.6 inches of variance.

If you think about it, it doesn't matter if the slide moves up a bit during trigger pulls, as long as it moves upward the same amount every time. If the gun is zeroed, it will hit the same place every time, and that takes the slide movement into account. IOW, if it hits POI/POA with the slide movement, it will hit POI/POA with the slide movement. Therefore the slide movement doesn't matter.

And last we all need to consider the microseconds the bullet spends in a recoiling gun. How does this affect accuracy? Does the heavier rod - SS, and esp. tungsten - reduction of recoil and flip, however minor, reduce any inaccuracy resulting from these factors?

The amount of muzzle flip really has no affect on accuracy. It's only important that you have the same amount of muzzle flip every time.

[Duane Thomas]

BTW the original NY#1 was a leaf spring; the newer one (which I installed) is a captive coil spring in a plastic housing, like a car's shock absorber. No "ears" that are know to wear and break.

I'm not sure what you mean by "ears".

[cnote]

Good reason ?

I have a gunsafe full of guns and guns with parts that were put on for really no good reason other than chasing a rainbow. I think some people myself included buy parts cause we wanna see what happens then convince our selves there is an improvement. One thing I did notice about your posts, I would strongly recommend doing away with the extended controls on your carry piece. Generally they do more harm than good. Not sure about Glocks but I have seen quite a few other guns with extended mag releases get bumped and the mag fall out during a stage. I have also seen extended slide stops get bumped and cause premature slide lock also.

or the opposite with the slide release, in the heat of the moment on a mag change, you ride it and drop the slide on an empty chamber, now you have to rack the slide, takes precious sec. or two for hands to catch up to brain, and lose stage by a sec. Lots of times, with a firm mag insertion, the silde will drop automatically and your not quite sure which happened.

Edited October 2, 2009 by cnote