Picking up this old Glock. Questions about casting- loading for it.

Mitty38

Mitty38

Well-Known Member
Petrol & Powder said:
Mitty38 - I think you're on solid ground.

You got a lot of valuble information from that gunsmith and probably came out ahead in the end.
Click to expand...
Know, he probably made out on the slide, and the G5 aftermarket trigger. but he is in the business to make money, every once and a while. Think he pretty much sold me the lower, at cost.
Well worth it to me. This guy took about 2 hrs going thru and explaining everything to me plus let me take notes.
So, what's his time worth.
 
Last edited:
Mitty38

Mitty38

Well-Known Member
Well I think he just invested his time in a new lifelong customer.
 
Last edited:
Mitty38

Mitty38

Well-Known Member
So as far as the casting and loading goes. Guess we will more then likely be doing it for 9mm now, unless I come up with a good 23 upper at a price I can not refuse.

I already have 9mm dies, and a trimmer, just have to dig them out. Plus I load for .380, already.

I have a Lee 358-150-1R. It casts at a narrow .358 so it has been sitting on the bench so to speak.
So a .356 or 7 sizer and I should be good to go.
I have loaded these bullets, at .358. Powder coated. For the worn out Maverick 9mm (Pre-High Point) and they do well.
Should be an easy transition for me.

The Gun smith says I should go with a land and groove barrel for lead.
He said Polygonal, it is not as big a deal as most people make out. If you watch pressures. Especially in 9mm, as long as they keep their barrel clean. Develop and stick with a proper load, That does not lead in the first place. Most problems come from production lead bullets. Being the wrong size or too hard. (sound familiar?)
Sizing and keeping things at proper pressures matters, period. Especially with Polygonal.
But.... with land and groove, less variables. I will be working with a riffling type, I am already familiar with, and is more forgiving. Especially, If I want to start using the same load for 2 or more guns.
I could probably just re size the Bullets for my High Point load to .357 and use that load for both guns.

Well, we will see I am getting ahead of myself again.
 
Last edited:
P

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
From the time that Glocks landed on American soil I've been hearing that polygonal rifling and lead bullets are dangerous. I think the greatest danger comes from the presence of idiots. The tools in the possession of those idiots have little effect on the level of danger.

When people do stupid things they look to place the blame somewhere other than on themselves. So when people damaged Glocks, that damage couldn't possibly be their own fault. It must have been the polygonal rifling, or the relative position of Venus and Mars, or the atmospheric pressure in Timbuktu that day, or ......

I have no doubt that damage has occasionally occured in the presence of both polygonal rifling and lead bullets. There is a correlation. However, there is a difference between a correlation and a cause and effect relationship.
There is a direct correlation between fire truck sightings and fires but that doesn't mean fire trucks cause fires.
 
Last edited:
Ian

Ian

Notorious member
Petrol & Powder said:
I think the greatest danger comes from the presence of idiots
Click to expand...

Yes.

I also dislike Glunks and have turned down several really good offers over the years. They work well and are easy to operate if you haven't spent half a lifetime shooting and sometimes competing with 1911s. The P80 frame may help but they look like a cross between an XD and an M&P. I have several M&Ps and hold them in the same regard as jack handles and utility knives.. cheap tools I don't have to baby and won't cry if it gets scratched.

Unique and Red Dot will feed the 9 and 40 alike. I prefer slower than Unique for the .40, though any load in the .40 is choosing between evils IMO. I'm NOT a fan of that stupid little cartridge.
 
L

Loren

Member
No they are not 1911's but can be fun to put together and create a little more character than a factory option. The design is just as genius as Browning's 1911, just in a different way.
 
Last edited:
Brad

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
Spoke with a customer once who was a cop in town, canine unit.
He owned and really liked his 1911 but carried a Glock. Mentioned that as a canine unit he did lots of vehicle inspections in all kinds of weather. Climbing in and put and under vehicles.
Why scratch a nice 1911 or have it rained and snowed on when he could carry a Glock and not worry near as much.
They are a truly utilitarian tool. And no, I don’t own any.
 
Ian

Ian

Notorious member
You know, Loren, the one with the camo slide and the cobalt blue one couls change a fellow's opinion a little. Those are the best looking Glocks I've yet seen.
 
L

Loren

Member
I do not see myself buying a Glock, but the P80's let you build some character into one, and have what I would call a semi-custom job. Just something else to have in a collection.
 
Mitty38

Mitty38

Well-Known Member
Well, now I have a completed Poly 80 lower that can be become a 40 or a 9.
With all my horse trading I am into it for around a hundred. I have tested it with 2 known good slide assemblies and magazines, from another person's guns.
It worked well with both the G23 slide and the G19 one. Now just to wait and see what comes my way.
 
RBHarter

RBHarter

West Central AR
No bugs I've found in an XD40 . Yep the 40 is half way in-between . 2.5" delivers a 175 gr TC at 940 fps over a jacketed max load of Unique . Way ahead of a 9 and not really all that far behind the 45 especially in a 2.5" barrel .

Got a little baby 42 I don't shoot it well or it doesn't like me much . It is a sight more shootable than the Ruger LCP though . I've kept an eye on it I don't see much of issue as far as leading goes but it's a 380 so it's probably almost as forgiving as a 38 special .
 
Mitty38

Mitty38

Well-Known Member
From what the Glock Armorer was telling me. Most of the lead- polygonal issues he has dealt with come down to user neglect. If it is a lead bullet issue it is usually caused by carelessness by someone who has no business loading for their self in the first place. His words not mine.
Like I mentioned earlier I may just go with land and groove, at his sugestion. It is a format I know. Plus according to him is a bit more forgiving.
I am probably going to end up buying a barrel seperate, any way.
 
Last edited:
CWLONGSHOT

CWLONGSHOT

Well-Known Member
I gotta say guys, your "prejudices" are not allowing you the good time you could be experiencing. :oops: ;)

EVERYONE says "not as nice as my 1911". SO WHAT!! Who told ya it was supposed to!?!?? :headscratch:

Loren as well as Brads customerI carried a are getting it. It is just a tool, a means to an end. Not its not as nice as a favorite 1911 or a '50's S&W or Colt Python. But my point is IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE!!!
Bottom line, They shoot, and they can shoot well. They are made to work under a wide range of ammo. Many tuned 1911's cannot make that claim. PLUS many hours of work to make them reliably feed some styles. Usually not the case with the Glock.

I equate it to automobiles, we have small cheap and large expensive. As well as many many in the middle right most of us reside. We have likes and dislikes but rarely will make such comparisons between them as we do with these pistols. Why? Cause its meaningless. If ya have shot and dont like fine. There certanly have been some I like more then others but nearly all were enjoyable.

I carried a Commander for many years. Training otgers in fundamentals making regulation and improving the way they shoot. Countless times I was asked why I teach Glock and carry "a 45" I liked to just say cause the dont make a "46". Dropping a 9mm Cartridge down my barrel and explaining how a 9mm "MIGHT" expand but that 45 will never ever shrink. But I did eventually loose the argument shortly after the 40 was a thing. I realized that it did what the 45 claimed. Namely a 180 @ 1000 fps. So I bought my first G23. (Today I have three. Various generations) I have grown quite fond of it and do absolutely trust it for life and limb. If they was "as bad" as you lot claim. They surely wouldn't be what they are today!

In the end its OK to like and shoot them. Its Ok lo prefer another model or brand. We dont need to condem others to sing the praise for our choices.
CW
 
Last edited:
P

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
Anytime the word Glock appears on an internet firearms forum you're going to get strong opinions. That's fine and probably healthy.

Glocks get bashed a lot and that is a bit unfair.
I never hated Glocks, but it took me a while to warm up to them. However, once I did warm up to them, I recognized their strength is their simplicity. They work! In fact, they work amazingly well.
They don’t have finely polished steel and beautiful bluing. They don’t have attractive wooden grips, in fact they’re not attractive at all. They don’t have crisp triggers, but the trigger isn’t as horrible as some would lead you to believe.

They go bang when you want them to go bang. They are monotonously reliable. They can take incredible abuse and still work. They can take incredible neglect and still work. They are very durable. Their strength is their simplicity, and in that simplicity there’s a different kind of beauty.

As for the grip angle, I actually prefer the more rakish grip of guns like the P-08 Luger, Ruger Standard Pistol and H&K P7. It feels more natural, and they point better for me. And yes, I’ve trained with and shot a lot of pistols with more vertical grips like the 1911 and the Beretta 92. I just don’t think the grip angle is a deal breaker.

The polymer frame is another non-issue. Yep-it’s as ugly as it can be. But it’s light, it can’t rust, it’s strong and it works. It’s not traditional but it’s here to stay.

Some people love to hate Glocks and that’s fine. They get to do that.

I choose to not hate them.
 
P

Petrol & Powder

Well-Known Member
By the way, if you are interested in a little history on Glocks, there's a good book on the subject:
"Glock - The rise of America's gun" by Paul Barrett.

It's a quick read and while not real strong on technical details, it does shed some light on development history and marketing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.