Also, what filler did you actually use?
Sent from my SM-G900T using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
I see no reason why a welded up and recut barrel shouldn’t be more accurate. It was standard practice in shooting sports for years, until the games changed, plastic type guns were introduced, and accuracy standards changed with the games (ppc vs ipsc)
I have a fitted Jarvis barrel on a .45 Glock, and its definitely more accurate than the factory barrel, which was actually pretty darn good.
Most folks won’t believe it, but a Glock can be a tackdriver if done properly and utilized by a person who can take advantage of the capabilities of the platform.
Well Im a machinist for a living and had someone who is a TiG welder for a living weld it, so I’ pretty sure it will be fine. I also Rockwell tested it before and after the weld process and its the same so that being said I don’t see how the slide will have any issue with possible breaking.
Sorry but I wont tell you what filler rod I used.
Very interesting, Thanks for taking the time to experiment. What was the factory clearance (hood fit) ? What clearance did you re-fit to? Maybe its just the pictures but almost looks mig welded.
Mark-the hood fit factory was .005" and I have it now at .001 I had my father use the TiG welder on it.
That is awesome, good work sir. I had one Gen3 G19 that had a pretty bad lock up at .008 That got replaced with a Storm Lake barrel I fit to .002-.0025.
Thanks, I do my best. Ive done fitted barrels in other polymer guns using oversized barrels but I figured “what the hell” and wanted to try some old school ideas on this one.
A couple of questions -
-
Why weld the hood and not the forward portion of the barrel where it hits the front of the slide? From what l have seen that is the part that gets fitted with a custom barrel.
-
Does anyone know what Glock specs the slide to barrel clearance out at?
We used to weld up the locking block on the older model Glock’s until the later pentagon stamped barrelled models started getting tighter.
It cut group sizes down significantly.
Ez-not -sure where your seeing that done at (welding the front of the hood) lets see here…put heat into the area that has all the pressure and where the camber/barrel connect. The only thing I could see in doing that there is the person would not have to worry about possible head space issues but when your talking about .002-.004 your not going to to have any issues with it. All the research and work that I have done over the years on fitting Glock and M&P barrels its always been done off the back of the hood.
Glock specs are all over the place. I’ve seen Gen4 guns with fits from .002-.007 It depends on the barrel and slide that day and which ones get stamped to mate with the other. When I was talking to a Glock sales rep about the idea he pointed out that they are left a little on the loose side to allow for dirt and such to not affect the operation of the weapon. That being said he also stated that it made sense to him what I did as its old school 1911 work.
To clarify, I am not seeing anyone welding at the front.
I have been looking at aftermarket barrels and how to fit them. The videos/info I have found say to remove material from the front and not the back.
Again this is due to the head space being set from the rear. What manufactures have you looked at? I have not seen anyone say to remove from the front. On Glock and M&P’s you have more material to remove from the front AND a longer distance to make sure you keep straight.
Might want to look at how they have been done in the past.
This video is from Bar Sto -
Yeah you might want to look at other reviews on those. Hood fit is what is the factor in making a striker gun work. 1911’s depend on hood, lug, and link fit. Bar-Sto is talking about having your barrel fit tight on the under side of the slide and the hood. Thats a bad combo on a polymer frame pistol. Again I must not be making the point enough-when you remove material from the front of the hood your not affecting the chamber and head space. Most people do not have chamber reamers and head space gauges so they make their barrels so the lowest common denominator moron can fit one without calling up with either light primer strikes or a blown up gun.
Sorry to be rude but you might want to look a little deeper into this subject.
I haven’t seen a Gen 3 9mm that couldn’t shoot into 3" rested at 25 yds stock. I haven’t seen a Gen 4 9mm that couldn’t do quite a bit better than that, stock.
But my sample is only about a dozen or 15 guns.
did this change point of impact at 25 yards?
sometimes stock glocks have a problem where they impact higher at 25, larry vickers attributed this to premature unlocking. if you modify the gun to lock up tighter, it should remedy this problem. was this the case?
Yes this does change the issue of impact shift. I noticed a nearly 3" difference in impact shift at 20 yards.
A looser fitting barrel will unlock early causing the barrel to “rise” while the bullet is still in the barrel which is why Glock pistols shoot high. This is also why guns with a decent impact/point of aim at 25 yards will notice that they are shooting higher as the recoil assembly gets old due to the same thing. End of the day a loose barrel fit in a Glock can and will lead to impact shift-shooting high at distance and will lead to groups opening up at distance too due to inconstant lock up.
Think of it this way-if you can press down on the barrel hood with the gun in battery and the barrel moves or drops then this is happening every time you pull the trigger. If the barrel does not move then it is staying tight until the slide is moving backward causing it to unlock. This too is an old 1911 trick to check and see if the barrel lock up is good, tho on 1911’s you depend on both the barrel link and the hood fit. With polymer guns you only have the hood fit on most platforms.
I have done this treatment to 4 Glock pistols now (Gen4 G19 Gen3 G23 and 2 Gen3 G26’s) and all have the same results from stock barrel to after the work was done. I even did the same thing to another friends M&P9C for the fun of it and guess what…the same results. It brought the impact shift down and greatly improved the accuracy of the said firearm. Down side of the M&P is that the cute little chamber indicator hole was filled in and is no more.
Interesting thread, thanks for sharing