Glock "generation N" - What does it mean?
- Thread starter rick_reno
- Start date
juliet charley
New member
I am a long ways from a Glock expert, but I believe the differences between the first and second generation was primarily internal to correct some problems that surfaced as Glocks went into general LE usage (e.g., G19 could slam-fire and go full-auto and the frame binding preventing firing)--most first generations Glocks were refitted to second generation internals via a "voluntary upgrade." The second to third generation differences were primarily external and cosmetic (accessory rail and finger-grooves).
I have 3 first gen Glocks, G21, G22 & G23 with between 6,000 to 25,000 rounds thru them and have never heard of slam firing to full auto, nor frame binding. A known problem is frame battering ahead of the forward rail insert. Course I'm no Glock expert either, I only own 7 of them that I shoot competively and the most rounds thru any one is only 75,000. Maybe something will happen after 100,000 rounds...
juliet charley
New member
9x45 -
The first generation G19s could slam fire and go full automatic--that does not mean they all did it. The frame of the first generation Glocks (G17s anyways) could bind the the long piece that basically runs from the trigger to actuate the stiker (sorry, I don't have a parts diagram with me, but if you are familiar with Glocks you will know what I'm talking about)--again it does not mean that it happened to all Glocks all the time. I'm glad you were lucky with your's even though I don't understand the mentality that has to deny that it is possible to have any problems with any Glock handgun. There were problems and Glock did fix them, so what?
The first generation G19s could slam fire and go full automatic--that does not mean they all did it. The frame of the first generation Glocks (G17s anyways) could bind the the long piece that basically runs from the trigger to actuate the stiker (sorry, I don't have a parts diagram with me, but if you are familiar with Glocks you will know what I'm talking about)--again it does not mean that it happened to all Glocks all the time. I'm glad you were lucky with your's even though I don't understand the mentality that has to deny that it is possible to have any problems with any Glock handgun. There were problems and Glock did fix them, so what?
JC, I don't deny that this problem occured, I just said I never have heard of it. And I was just yakking about G19's with Chris Edwards at the last GSSF match out here. And you are the one who said you are not a Glock expert, but..... So where is the link that documents your claims?
The part you are trying to name is the trigger bar, but that is not a problem with 1st gen G17's. What gets to me is that "you are no Glock expert" but there you go. Do you actually own any Glocks, or have actually shot any?
I don't have a problem with messed up Glocks, in fact, I have blown up a G34 and broken other Glocks. I do have a problem with anyone who says what you say without backup.
The part you are trying to name is the trigger bar, but that is not a problem with 1st gen G17's. What gets to me is that "you are no Glock expert" but there you go. Do you actually own any Glocks, or have actually shot any?
I don't have a problem with messed up Glocks, in fact, I have blown up a G34 and broken other Glocks. I do have a problem with anyone who says what you say without backup.
juliet charley
New member
9x45 -
I was answering a general question in general terms (and largely off the top of my head). I was not writing a treatise on the development of Glock pistols (complete with footnotes, references and a bibliography), nor was I claiming in final word/authority on the issue of the various generations of Glocks. I believe I fairly accurately anwered the original poster's questions, and I don't see where you've added anything to further answer the question or clafiry the issue (and to be honest, I don't know what your "issue" is with my response). It would be nice to be able to answer a simple a question without having it turn into a "Glock Debate." Do you have any further specific information on the changes between the various generations of Glocks?
Actually, I have owned and shot several Glocks including the 17, 23, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32 and 33. There's a lot I like about Glocks, and there's some things I don't like about them, but I absolutely do not have the blind faith in them that is so common among glockaphiles. I really regret selling my 17 (a nice factory refurb that came with two hi-caps, I had two more)--I thought I wanted something smaller. I don't miss the 23--even from a rest the best group looked like a modified choke shotgun pattern. I liked the concept of the 26/27/33, but the geometry/ergonomics are just plain wrong for me (believe me, I tried). The 31 couldn't get through a magazine (10-round or hi-cap) without two or three FTEs (probably had the wrong ejector as a guess). I liked the 32 even--in fact, I sold it to my brother, along with three hi-caps, several years back when he got his carry license. He loves it, carries it almost everyday, and I still get to shoot it occassionally. So, yes, I have actually owned and shot Glocks (and I remember the "voluntary upgrade"). BTW, I don't consider the problems I had with the 23 and 31 typical of Glocks, but just a couple of bad specimens (the 31 was a very early issue of that particular model).
FWIW, here's one link for you. It took me about 30 seconds to find it, and that's about all the time it is worth to me. I would suggest in the future you might try to do your own research.
http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/glock/gz-gupgrade.html
I was answering a general question in general terms (and largely off the top of my head). I was not writing a treatise on the development of Glock pistols (complete with footnotes, references and a bibliography), nor was I claiming in final word/authority on the issue of the various generations of Glocks. I believe I fairly accurately anwered the original poster's questions, and I don't see where you've added anything to further answer the question or clafiry the issue (and to be honest, I don't know what your "issue" is with my response). It would be nice to be able to answer a simple a question without having it turn into a "Glock Debate." Do you have any further specific information on the changes between the various generations of Glocks?
Actually, I have owned and shot several Glocks including the 17, 23, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32 and 33. There's a lot I like about Glocks, and there's some things I don't like about them, but I absolutely do not have the blind faith in them that is so common among glockaphiles. I really regret selling my 17 (a nice factory refurb that came with two hi-caps, I had two more)--I thought I wanted something smaller. I don't miss the 23--even from a rest the best group looked like a modified choke shotgun pattern. I liked the concept of the 26/27/33, but the geometry/ergonomics are just plain wrong for me (believe me, I tried). The 31 couldn't get through a magazine (10-round or hi-cap) without two or three FTEs (probably had the wrong ejector as a guess). I liked the 32 even--in fact, I sold it to my brother, along with three hi-caps, several years back when he got his carry license. He loves it, carries it almost everyday, and I still get to shoot it occassionally. So, yes, I have actually owned and shot Glocks (and I remember the "voluntary upgrade"). BTW, I don't consider the problems I had with the 23 and 31 typical of Glocks, but just a couple of bad specimens (the 31 was a very early issue of that particular model).
FWIW, here's one link for you. It took me about 30 seconds to find it, and that's about all the time it is worth to me. I would suggest in the future you might try to do your own research.
http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/glock/gz-gupgrade.html
Last edited:
