quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:

quote:

Originally posted by smithnsig:

I have a new g26 with a thin finish that wears easily but the trigger is fantastic. I have an older model gen 4 g19 with the tough frying pan finish but a gritty stiff trigger. Guess Which one I enjoy shooting more.

Do the $.50 trigger job! You'll like it even more!

Just did it on the 19. Wayyy better. I polished everything that moved and touched something. I have had differing results doing this but 'tis 19 was in bad shape. It's much better now.

While haunting the last gunshow I came across a Glock 27 gen 2.5 BWF date code.
Priced at $350 I bought it and according to the dealer it belonged to a now retired U.S. Deputy Marshall named Lou Vaughn who worked ESL.
Don't know about that but this is one fantastic little hideout .40!
Dale

quote:

The new finish shows cosmetic wear more quickly, but the metal itself is still just as protected as before.

The latter: not from my experience. Glocks these days rust far more easily than with the older Tenifer-treated guns.

quote:

Originally posted by soggy_spinout:

quote:

The new finish shows cosmetic wear more quickly, but the metal itself is still just as protected as before.

The latter: not from my experience. Glocks these days rust far more easily than with the older Tenifer-treated guns.

Yep, it finally happened to me, too. I switched to my gen 4 for carry and stuck the gen 2 in the safe some nine months ago. It's been fine until the other day, I did a morning chamber check and there was some rust on the top right corner of the slide between the chamber and the slide serrations. It's established enough that it couldn't just scrape it off with my thumbnail.

It's one of the newer gen 4's with the easily scratched finish, a 2015 with a gray frame. I know I could get it refinished at some point, but I don't have to worry about that with my Gen 1 and 2 pistols. Has me rethinking carrying the Gen 4 for carry, my sweat seized up several Sigs, I know what it can do and partly why I carry Glocks in the first place.

Tenifer is not the outer finish. It's the metal treatment.

Glock slides have two different "finishes". (Or more accurately, a "treatment" and a "finish".)

1) The metal treatment of ferritic nitrocarburizing, a form of nitriding (more well-known by the Tenifer/Melonite brand names)

2) The outer coating, which has changed at least three times over the past few decades.

The outer finish is different on the newest Glock slides, but the underlying metal still has the rust-resistant nitride treatment. The slide would still be protected from corrosion by the nitriding, even if all the outer finish was gone. Hence my statement that while the new outer finish will show more cosmetic wear, the metal itself is still just as protected as before.

The hubbub about Glock switching from Tenifer a few years ago simply means that they switched the way that they achieved the ferritic nitrocarburizing metal treatment. They went from salt-bath nitriding to plasma gas nitriding. Different chemical process, but same end result. They just don't use the Tenifer-brand process to achieve the nitriding any more.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RogueJSK,

Just be careful with the gen2 frames cracking I learned a recent lesson the hard way.

if I were to get another one which I will it will be a Vickers or the latest greatest gen 4.

I shoot them very well, at least I think so.

I'm not so sure the gaseous nitrocarborizing is as effective as the old salt bath process.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Tenifer is not the outer finish. It's the metal treatment.

Glock slides have two different "finishes". (Or more accurately, a "treatment" and a "finish".)

1) The metal treatment of ferritic nitrocarburizing, a form of nitriding (more well-known by the Tenifer/Melonite brand names)

2) The outer coating, which has changed at least three times over the past few decades.

The outer finish is different on the newest Glock slides, but the underlying metal still has the rust-resistant nitride treatment. The slide would still be protected from corrosion by the nitriding, even if all the outer finish was gone. Hence my statement that while the new outer finish will show more cosmetic wear, the metal itself is still just as protected as before.

The hubbub about Glock switching from Tenifer a few years ago simply means that they switched the way that they achieved the ferritic nitrocarburizing metal treatment. They went from salt-bath nitriding to plasma gas nitriding. Different chemical process, but same end result. They just don't use the Tenifer-brand process to achieve the nitriding any more.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Tenifer is not the outer finish. It's the metal treatment.

Thanks, Rogue. I know all that. I've also heard it's the same end result. The rust on my Gen 4 says otherwise.

Well, I finally did. I bought a Glock. Sigh. And I like it, too. G26 gen 3. It's accurate, reliable, concealable.

Stupid ugly-cute little Glock.

I think I already know the answer, but I think I just need a nudge off the cliff.

I own a 17, three 19's, and a 42 currently.

I think a 34, 17, 19, 26, and 42 makes a lot more sense.

I carry the 19 every day, but wouldn't mind being able to opt for a 26 on warmer days. I wouldn't mind having a 34 or 17L with a light on it for a dedicated house gun.

Thoughts?


Also, Rogue, if you read this, I apologize for my previous reply. It reads far more snotty than I ever intended it to. I'm just disappointed that whatever they're doing, it's inferior to what they were doing twenty or thirty years ago. I dumped a glass of Coke over into my Gen 1 17 not long after I got it. A cat was involved. Anyway, it went into the sink, I slathered it in dish soap and sprayed it clean. Left it in the dish rack to dry. Lightly lubed and reassembled. Next thing you know, boom! Four years later, zero problems. I have no such confidence with the current metal treatment and finish process.

I used to be like you, except with 3 17s instead of 19s


I know own the 34, 17, 19, 26 and 43 (in various multiples)


Used to carry a 17 every day, lately been carrying the 26


It lets me fool myself into thinking I have variety


Also, with regards to th metal treatment issue, my understanding is there was a bad batch or two...maybe contact glock? I've got both new and old and haven't had any problem with any, and it's not like Virginia is known for its arid, dry climate

The rusting issue with post-2010ish production Glocks doesn't affect all guns, only those owned by "toxic" people...like myself (sigh). I've got both Gen3 and Gen4 guns with rust issues across different models made at different times and years.

Walther boldly advertises that it uses Tenifer. So why not Glock these days? One big surmised reason: saving money. To get to final finish from raw steel to finished slide involves more steps with Tenifer than, say Melonite, Tenifer's kissing cousin. Dunk something in Melonite and let soak, take it out and it's finished in black (usually). Glock's bean counters...dey be bery, bery happy.

Best 'fix' is to find oneself a solid holster with an ample, impervious sweat shield to keep the ferric bits away from said "caustic" person, either direct skin or saturated/contaminated clothing. This past year I've had a couple of Kydex IWBs custom fabricated to take this into consideration. Seems to work pretty well; my EDC G23G4's rusting and pitting has slowed if not stopped altogether. Bery, bery happy I am. But not at Glock for creating this mess to begin with.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
I think I already know the answer, but I think I just need a nudge off the cliff.

I own a 17, three 19's, and a 42 currently.

I think a 34, 17, 19, 26, and 42 makes a lot more sense.

I carry the 19 every day, but wouldn't mind being able to opt for a 26 on warmer days. I wouldn't mind having a 34 or 17L with a light on it for a dedicated house gun.

Thoughts?

...

What do you want your accumulation to be? Right now, you have a carry/shooter's accumulation: 17 for the house, a 19 each for carry, training & match, and spare, and 42 for backup/deep concealment. If that is what you want from it, you're done. Buy ammo and go shoot and be happy.

If the 17 doesn't have a rail, swap it for a 17 or 34 that does. If you just want a 26, or have yourself convinced you need one, add one.

If you want a collection that has an example of every 9mm variant ever made by GLOCK, you've got a ways to go.

Got my wife a 42 today.

Sigh. The madness. I has it.

I broke down and bought ANOTHER Glock... This time I went with a G43 TALO to go with my G19 Gen 4, G17 Gen 4, and my G17 Gen 2. I decided this is going to be the summer of shorts and flip flops so the 19 was a touch too big. Ran about 500 rounds of ball and 50 rods of defensive ammo with no hiccups so she is good to go for carry.

8 years, 439 pages, not even about a SIG...

The longest running thread should be about the P210, P220 or something that is actually a SIG.

quote:

Originally posted by RioGrande481:
8 years, 439 pages, not even about a SIG...

The longest running thread should be about the P210, P220 or something that is actually a SIG.

If there was that much interest, I'm sure there would be. The point is that while one may be a sig fan, eventually you'll probably buy a Glock.

In my opinion, one of the finest handguns out of the box is a 229. I have several. 226 if you like the full grip. I carried a P239 for several years.

To this day I still see double-action/single-action as an answer in search of a question, or an apology for liability minded law enforcement management. For my own use, I want a handgun with nothing between me and the trigger. Not a half-baked dual action system, not a change in pull, not a manual safety. Just a consistent, short pull with no safety.

I carried Berettas, Sigs, etc, and I own a number of 1911's and other handguns, most all of which I quite like. I steered clear of Glock for quite some time, and finally ended up choosing the brand as my own personal carry. It turned out that despite my views for many years, Glock met my needs and wants, and I'm very happy with the choice. I didn't want plastic pistols. Too many horror stories about Glocks exploding, stovepiping, odd grip angles, etc. I thought they were ugly. I had a G27, didn't like the way it shot.

Turned out that I needed to lear how to shoot it. The Glock went from unfriendly to friend, and I'm a lot more comfortable with them. I haven't quit liking Sigs. I love the P220. But I carry a Glock. I own quite a few, and will be buying more. So yes, a long running thread about the Glock is not out of order, given the number of participants.

5 19s and counting, need a second 17 and a first 34

quote:

Originally posted by Gundawg:
need a second 17 and a first 34

Or a 34 with a spare 17 slide assembly.

(That's what I did for my "second 17 and first 34".)