Bardstown police replacing Glocks after cracks found

[phylodog]

I'm not a Glock engineer and haven't been exposed to their testing but a worn our RSA is likely to cause a frame to flex more than intended resulting in wear and/or failure. Since Glocks will continue to run well beyond when an RSA should be changed I can only assume the recommendation to change them is based on preventing damage to the gun rather than creating stoppages.

 

[Robjps]

I'm thinking that paying someone to maintain the pistols would cost much more than buying new ones when they wear out.

As small as they are you are likely correct. Is it too much for the officer to handle it?

 

[Drail]

When you buy cheap tools you get to buy them over and over again. Ask any mechanic. Some tools are designed to last and work hard for a long time - and some are only designed to sell.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm just glad everyone was able to find something to be angry and/or offended about.

 

[Robjps]

When you buy cheap tools you get to buy them over and over again. Ask any mechanic. Some tools are designed to last and work hard for a long time - and some are only designed to sell.

This is more like you bought nice stuff then just left it outside in the mud.

 

[BE Mike]

As small as they are you are likely correct. Is it too much for the officer to handle it?

Most cops aren't gun guys. They don't like to qualify or clean their weapons. Getting them to do a parts exchange would require close personal supervision and some way to readily identify the new part(s). It's not likely that the individual officers would be motivated to closely inspect their sidearms (or even know what to look for) to head off any problems. Usually problems, as in this instance, appear during qualification. 15 years is a long time for a piece of police equipment to last.

 

[Grelber]

I'm just glad everyone was able to find something to be angry and/or offended about.

The work is done here time to move on to the next thread .

 

[Robjps]

Most cops aren't gun guys. They don't like to qualify or clean their weapons. Getting them to do a parts exchange would require close personal supervision and some way to readily identify the new part(s). It's not likely that the individual officers would be motivated to closely inspect their sidearms (or even know what to look for) to head off any problems. Usually problems, as in this instance, appear during qualification. 15 years is a long time for a piece of police equipment to last.

I already knew the answer.

 

[Clay]

Bardstown? surely someone could come up with something bourbon related??

like maybe they should keep those glocks away from the Makers Mark distillery?

 

[Mike Elzinga]

I'm curious what routine maintenance would be suggested, I'd be shocked if any of these guns had any significant round count through them. Keeping them lubricated would be the only thing I could think would be important until they had some notable amount of rounds through them.

 

[VERT]

I'm curious what routine maintenance would be suggested, I'd be shocked if any of these guns had any significant round count through them. Keeping them lubricated would be the only thing I could think would be important until they had some notable amount of rounds through them.

Honestly do not know how much the Bardstown KY officers shoot. But 100 rounds a month plus a couple hundred for qualification would be over 20k in 15 years. That is more then just cleaning a lubrication.

 

[LCSOSgt11]

From some of what I have heard, frames cracking is one thing. Some of the other issues, however, may be lack of proper maintenance and/or replacement of springs, etc. at recommended intervals. I would agree that LEO pistols may get some wear and tear, however, regular inspection and maintenance is crucial to proper function. I would be surprised to see their weapons shot more than 1000 rds. per year. We qualify six times a year, and we're ahead of most departments in our area. We have practice days alternatively to qualification days. From the article, I would guess that their maintenance and inspections were not conducted in a timely and frequent fashion.

 

[Drail]

"Maintenance and inspections? What's dat?"

 

[88E30M50]

I can't say I agree with this. Cars today have a longer life expectancy. I don't see that many 1955 Chevys being driven on a daily basis. Same for guns, they are machines and eventually wear out. These Glocks will get refurbished and resold. A new Glock for a department is probably $400-$500. Let's say the old ones are worth half that then it makes sense to get rid of the old guns and buying new.

I was thinking more from the Cuban perspective in that a 1955 Chevy is simple enough that it can be maintained for decades if need be. A modern car, like a BMW, will have to have factory parts from time to time and when those become unavailable, the car will no longer be able to function the same. If the computer that controls the transmission goes out in 20 years and no spares are available, it becomes a parts car to someone. Sooner or later, almost all modern electronically dependant cars will sucomb to the scrapper even though they may have little rust or decent engines. While that happens, the old iron will still be maintained and drivable.

As related to guns, I am thinking that there will come a time, maybe 50 to 100 years, maybe sooner, that folks will recommend against shooting that Gen 1 Glock because you could ruin the collector value if the then brittle plastic frame cracks. You kind of see that to a degree today with older steel framed pistols but more due to lack of heat treat combined with modern power ammo. I'm guessing that in the year 2065, my great grandkids will feel better shooting my 10mm 1911 than they will shooting my .40 cal Glock 23.

But, it's all just conjecture on my part based on experience with plastic car parts becoming brittle and failing. I have a 45 year old Fiat that is still running it's original radiator where as I've had two of my BMWs experience the upper radiator hose neck breaking off while driving. I now replace the radiators with plastic components every 10 years or 100k miles, no matter how nice they look on the outside.

 

[VERT]

I was thinking more from the Cuban perspective in that a 1955 Chevy is simple enough that it can be maintained for decades if need be. A modern car, like a BMW, will have to have factory parts from time to time and when those become unavailable, the car will no longer be able to function the same. If the computer that controls the transmission goes out in 20 years and no spares are available, it becomes a parts car to someone. Sooner or later, almost all modern electronically dependant cars will sucomb to the scrapper even though they may have little rust or decent engines. While that happens, the old iron will still be maintained and drivable.

As related to guns, I am thinking that there will come a time, maybe 50 to 100 years, maybe sooner, that folks will recommend against shooting that Gen 1 Glock because you could ruin the collector value if the then brittle plastic frame cracks. You kind of see that to a degree today with older steel framed pistols but more due to lack of heat treat combined with modern power ammo. I'm guessing that in the year 2065, my great grandkids will feel better shooting my 10mm 1911 than they will shooting my .40 cal Glock 23.

But, it's all just conjecture on my part based on experience with plastic car parts becoming brittle and failing. I have a 45 year old Fiat that is still running it's original radiator where as I've had two of my BMWs experience the upper radiator hose neck breaking off while driving. I now replace the radiators with plastic components every 10 years or 100k miles, no matter how nice they look on the outside.

In that example I can see your point. Metal does not fatigue or weaken like polymer. I guess I don't worry about such things. My favorite carry gun is a light weight alloy frame and I do not expect to get the service life out of that gun like some of my others. The trade off is weight. Parts wear out, simple as that. Frames are not really that different.

Lets look at this from a different angle. As an example a Glock is $400. Forget the sights and magazines those are wear parts. So $400. I say the gun is good for 20k rounds with springs every 5k. Quick and easy math that is $0.02 cents a shot. Switching from 40 to 9mm alone will pay for new guns. But those old guns are worth something. Trade them off, re equip, save future budget. Unfortunately city councils don't think like this. So the department showed them a few busted guns and asked for money to replace. Public record and news reported. Call Glocks disposable if you want, far as I am concerned they are just that.

 

[Robjps]

pistol-training.com » Blog Archive » Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test: Week 36

50k rounds through a gen4 already.

 

[BE Mike]

pistol-training.com » Blog Archive » Glock 17 gen4 Endurance Test: Week 36

50k rounds through a gen4 already.

Apples and oranges. 9mm vs. .40.

 

[looney2ns]

Maybe they should not be using those glocks for hammers, or dropping them on a regular basis.

 

[88E30M50]

In that example I can see your point. Metal does not fatigue or weaken like polymer. I guess I don't worry about such things. My favorite carry gun is a light weight alloy frame and I do not expect to get the service life out of that gun like some of my others. The trade off is weight. Parts wear out, simple as that. Frames are not really that different.

Lets look at this from a different angle. As an example a Glock is $400. Forget the sights and magazines those are wear parts. So $400. I say the gun is good for 20k rounds with springs every 5k. Quick and easy math that is $0.02 cents a shot. Switching from 40 to 9mm alone will pay for new guns. But those old guns are worth something. Trade them off, re equip, save future budget. Unfortunately city councils don't think like this. So the department showed them a few busted guns and asked for money to replace. Public record and news reported. Call Glocks disposable if you want, far as I am concerned they are just that.

The world we live in today has embraced the disposable ideology. For some things, that sucks, but when done right, it makes sense. If a Glock is 'disposable', then it's disposability done right. The thing that has always attracted me to Glocks is the simple tool nature of them. They don't try to be anything other than a reliable shooting iron. You buy them, practice with them, carry them and when the time comes, dispose of them. If 15 years turns out to be the age of embrittlement with a Glock frame, that's pretty darn good for the value the gun delivered. I'm guessing it's a lot longer than that though. For non-department use, it's an even better deal if you can send the gun to Glock for a new frame.

I still prefer metal framed guns as the heirlooms to be passed down to family members, but do often opt for a Glock for carry (today, I have a G19 on my hip. But don't tell the CZ guys. They'll change the secret handshake and won't tell me what the new one is if they hear I'm carrying a 9mm Glock instead of my CZ 75)

 

[rhino]

There are lots of possibilities and variables here.

If I were involved in this caper, I'd want to know the following:

• What ammo brands, models, and lots were used, including round counts of each.
• The history of the pistols in questions at the time of manufacture. I'd want to know when they were made and if they all came from the same production lot. Only the engineers at Glock know what tiny tweaks and modifications were made to resolve then-current issue when those guns rolled out of the factory.
• How are the pistols stored when not being carried or used and at what temperatures?

My SWAG is that they're probably shooting carry ammo that is significantly hotter than most of the FMJ available. For instance, when I had the displeasure of owning a few .40 guns (two Sigmas, a G22, and a G23) I fed them some Winchester 155gr Silver Tips that were painful to shoot. I can see a similar load causing premature wear on a G22 or G23.