So I shot cast bullet in my factory glock barrel...

I have been shooting lead through my GLOCK's for over a year exclusively, clean after use, myth dispelled, money in your pocket.
 
theshootist said:
So does anyone have concerns about the unsupported chamber? Re-use your cases?
Click to expand...

i reload steel case and aluminum cases so clearly i don't care about safety :) but seriously i wouldn't worry about it and don't. i have noticed i see more cracked cases from 40's then 9mm or 45acp. as long as you spot the crack before you load it i see no reason for concern.
 
I just notice that the cases can come out after firing with a bulge that is visible the naked eye. I've read in a Lyman manual that that risk comes from the chance of that bulge being fired again in the unsupported position of the breech, increasing the chance of rupture. I will run them through a lee bulge buster after firing but still I wonder whether the case wall is being weakened through case hardening, etc. Like you say, perhaps I worry too much. It just sucks to see the warning written in black and white.
 
ThurnYTaxis said:
A newbie question, but if you are seeing bulged cases doesn't that indicate you are going over pressure?
Click to expand...

The bulge they are talking about in this thread is caused by the design of the Glock barrel. There is a notch in the chamber end leaving a small amount of the case unsupported, upon firing there is a slight but noticeable bulge near the base of the brass.
 
The bulge comes from glock's incomplete supported chamber, not unsafe reload pressures. Even factory loads will create bulged cases. That's why there are dies made for reloaders to bring the cases back to factory dimensions. It isn't the polygonal rifling that I don't like, its the incomplete chamber support. In my opinion I think Glick cut a corner it shouldn't have.
 
theshootist said:
The bulge comes from glock's incomplete supported chamber, not unsafe reload pressures. Even factory loads will create bulged cases. That's why there are dies made for reloaders to bring the cases back to factory dimensions. It isn't the polygonal rifling that I don't like, its the incomplete chamber support. In my opinion I think Glick cut a corner it shouldn't have.
Click to expand...
From the information a gather its to insure better feeding as the glock is more of a tank more then a race car. Tolerance are made a lot looser on purpose. As well as the geometry of the feeding ramp.
 
There is a similar thread in the pistol forum. As I stated there, I've been shooting lead rounds out of my Glock 19 since 1993. I'm north of 48k rounds so far with zero issues. I cast my own. I use straight air cooled WW sized to .357with Lars Red lube. I often go 400 rounds between cleanings as there is almost no leading IN MY GUN. You will need to experiment and closely monitor to find what works in your Glock. As for the bulge, I don't find it an issue with my 9mm's. I have had some brass so long and loaded it so many times, it's hard to make out the headstamps. My Glock 23 is a different story. It is an older gun (1991) and definitely shows the bulge.

Auggie D.
 
Leading issues in a Glock polygonal rifled barrel is myth. I used a second hand Gen I 17 LC in the early 90s to shoot IPSC Major (185 PF in those days) using the factory supplied ported barrel (no external comp). Between myself and the original owner, the factory barrel saw 10s of thousands of high velocity .355 and .356 cast bullets without gas check. Plated or jacketed were only used for competition due to costs associated with the volumes we were shooting.

I saw not a single leading issue with the factory barrel. Only noticed excessive leading issues when I 'upgraded' to a high dollar 1911 open custom in the same cartridge - Nowlin barrel and comp as I recall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom