stagpanther
New member
OK--after yesterdays' debacle I decided to do some real close looking and study to try to figure out why my barrel was having so many jams and FTF's. What follows are merely my findings and hypotheses--I don't claim to be an expert or that what works for me necessarily works for anyone else. I post this only in the interests of helping someone else who encounters the same problem(s) (which I figure is very likely if they buy one).
Took the slide assembly apart and noticed two things that clued me to something was amiss in the actual recoil--the barrel itself had substantial abrasions on the top and bottom that would be analogous to being wedged against the barrel opening in the slide during recoil. The other thing I noticed was that the Wolf 22# spring on the rod guide--when compressed--bulged so much that the effective column width was much higher than a standard Glock spring. Part of that I figure is due to the higher spring tension--but I believe the fact that the Wolf spring is "round coil" as opposed to "flat coil" like the Glock's OEM likely has something to do with it as well. Whether due to the pressure of the spring, or the inability of the barrel to ride smoothly due to the width I cannot say--but what is obvious is that even racking the slide upon reassemble is difficult.
As an experiment to verify my suspicions I decided to test two things today.
First, using the FD barrel I returned the OEM guide rod and spring and fired both mild and full-power loads. Everything shot without a problem--so that told me the problem was very likely due to the after-market guide rod/spring combination.
Next, I replaced the 22# wolf spring with a 20#--and everything immediately changed. Assembly and dry-cycling was smooth and effortless with dummy rounds. Next I went to test fire and was happy to see both mild and high-power loads cycled and fired without a single problem. Whew! glad to see I didn't waste the money after all.
If I were to start over again, I would recommend the ISMI springs instead of the Wolf since they are made "flat coil" like the original Glock's. Interestingly, the felt recoil with the 20# spring seemed to me to be less than that of the 22#--so I'm guessing there's a "point of diminishing returns" when replacing these springs.
After all that hassle many people might think the barrel is one to steer away from--that's certainly the way I felt as of last night. But a little more research last night revealed some very interesting results which may warrant giving these barrels a second look.
I took the fired cases from the OEM, Lone Wolf and Fire Dragon and measured and compared them.
Firstly, the 10mm is not truly a straight-wall case (or constant-diameter if that's a better way to put it)--it actually tapers from the head to mouth. I'm totally new to this cartridge--but it is one dang powerful one (off the top of my head I can't think of any other pistol cartridge as powerful in such a small case and powder charge). To me, it's really a "mini-mag" and the use of large pistol primers reinforces this impression.
Going up to the full-power potential involves issues of building pressures at the web/head of the case. The more support by the chamber, the less likely the bulging/brass flow will presumably be. EFK produces the Fire Dragon to "match grade tolerances"--which is another way of saying you'll likely need to polish the chamber to get it to chamber a round without it getting stuck (especially a greater diameter lead cast bullet). I was able to easily do this without any special equipment.
But here's the thing--measuring the fired brass revealed the brass fired through the EFK barrel was showing consistently less expansion at the head/web than either the stock or LW barrels--by as much as .003" I may be completely off-base--but my conclusion is the FD barrel possibly offers better brass life and reduced likelihood of rupturing, especially with full-power loads.
Took the slide assembly apart and noticed two things that clued me to something was amiss in the actual recoil--the barrel itself had substantial abrasions on the top and bottom that would be analogous to being wedged against the barrel opening in the slide during recoil. The other thing I noticed was that the Wolf 22# spring on the rod guide--when compressed--bulged so much that the effective column width was much higher than a standard Glock spring. Part of that I figure is due to the higher spring tension--but I believe the fact that the Wolf spring is "round coil" as opposed to "flat coil" like the Glock's OEM likely has something to do with it as well. Whether due to the pressure of the spring, or the inability of the barrel to ride smoothly due to the width I cannot say--but what is obvious is that even racking the slide upon reassemble is difficult.
As an experiment to verify my suspicions I decided to test two things today.
First, using the FD barrel I returned the OEM guide rod and spring and fired both mild and full-power loads. Everything shot without a problem--so that told me the problem was very likely due to the after-market guide rod/spring combination.
Next, I replaced the 22# wolf spring with a 20#--and everything immediately changed. Assembly and dry-cycling was smooth and effortless with dummy rounds. Next I went to test fire and was happy to see both mild and high-power loads cycled and fired without a single problem. Whew! glad to see I didn't waste the money after all.
If I were to start over again, I would recommend the ISMI springs instead of the Wolf since they are made "flat coil" like the original Glock's. Interestingly, the felt recoil with the 20# spring seemed to me to be less than that of the 22#--so I'm guessing there's a "point of diminishing returns" when replacing these springs.
After all that hassle many people might think the barrel is one to steer away from--that's certainly the way I felt as of last night. But a little more research last night revealed some very interesting results which may warrant giving these barrels a second look.
I took the fired cases from the OEM, Lone Wolf and Fire Dragon and measured and compared them.
Firstly, the 10mm is not truly a straight-wall case (or constant-diameter if that's a better way to put it)--it actually tapers from the head to mouth. I'm totally new to this cartridge--but it is one dang powerful one (off the top of my head I can't think of any other pistol cartridge as powerful in such a small case and powder charge). To me, it's really a "mini-mag" and the use of large pistol primers reinforces this impression.
Going up to the full-power potential involves issues of building pressures at the web/head of the case. The more support by the chamber, the less likely the bulging/brass flow will presumably be. EFK produces the Fire Dragon to "match grade tolerances"--which is another way of saying you'll likely need to polish the chamber to get it to chamber a round without it getting stuck (especially a greater diameter lead cast bullet). I was able to easily do this without any special equipment.
But here's the thing--measuring the fired brass revealed the brass fired through the EFK barrel was showing consistently less expansion at the head/web than either the stock or LW barrels--by as much as .003" I may be completely off-base--but my conclusion is the FD barrel possibly offers better brass life and reduced likelihood of rupturing, especially with full-power loads.
Last edited: