It seems there is a class action suit against glock. Something about safety of the chamber design (all calibers?)? Not sure if real or not. Or what the suit is really about and what is bring sought. Trying to find more info. Anybody know anything about it? Another gun control attempt to remove glock from the market?

Wonder if it has something to do with the supposed "unsupported chamber" issue?

What’s an unsupported chamber? How is glock different from sig or hk? Excuse my ignorance.

I'm not a Glock expert, but my understanding is that some barrels have an enlarged area of the chamber wall that acts as a kind of supplement to the feed ramp. It's alleged this unsupported area weakens the chamber, and can lead to issues with larger calibers, even kabooms.

Yep. This unsupported section of the chamber where it met the feed ramp was an issue on some .40 caliber Glocks back in the 1990s and early 2000s. It's what led to the reputation for "Glock kabooms", since an overpressure cartridge was more likely to rupture its case at that unsupported section.

But that hasn't been a thing for over 2 decades now.

If that is the reason for the suit, I wonder why they would have waited so long to file it.

Interesting. Never heard of anything along these lines.

Glock suit? I’ll stick with Armani. I have a beautiful shadow stripe.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
Glock suit? I’ll stick with Armani. I have a beautiful shadow stripe.

Yes, but can you throw the whole thing in the washer and dryer and have it come out like new?

You guys never heard of full metal jackets?

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
You guys never heard of full metal jackets?

quote:

class action suit against glock

Perhaps a little more information? Is this the one you are referring to?

Link

If you purchased any Glock pistol designed to shoot the following calibers: (1) 10mm, (2) 40 S&W, (3) 9mm, (4) 45 ACP, (5) 45 GAP, (6) .380, and (7) .357 Sig. in California, a lawsuit may affect your rights


SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 2, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- A class action lawsuit known as Johnson v. Glock, Inc., et al., Case No.: 3:20-cv-08807-WHO is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Glock Ges.m.b.H. and Glock, Inc. (together, "Glock" or "Defendants"). The lawsuit alleges that the design of the chamber in the Glock pistols identified above renders the pistols unreasonably dangerous and unfit for their intended use, and as a result, consumers who purchased any Glock pistol designed to shoot the following calibers: (1) 10mm, (2) 40 S&W, (3) 9mm, (4) 45 ACP, (5) 45 GAP, (6) .380, and (7) .357 Sig. in the State of California overpaid for their Glock pistol. This lawsuit alleges violations of laws regarding consumer protection, failure to disclose information, unfair business practices, and false advertising, not personal injury or property damage.

Glock denies the legal claims in this lawsuit and says that the design of the chamber does not render the pistols unreasonably dangerous and unfit for their intended use. However, if you are a member of the class, your legal rights are affected, and you have a choice to make now.

Who is Included? You are a class member if you are an individual consumer who purchased any Glock pistol designed to shoot the following calibers: (1) 10mm, (2) 40 S&W, (3) 9mm, (4) 45 ACP, (5) 45 GAP, (6) .380, and (7) .357 Sig. in the State of California since introduced into the stream of commerce by Defendants. Individual consumer means a natural person, not a business entity or governmental agency.

I overpaid on two glocks (26 & 17) in the last year, but it had nothing to do with glock, it had to do with the 11% excise tax that those GDCs in Sacramento added. Somebody ought to sue them.

quote:

If you purchased any Glock pistol designed to shoot the following calibers: (1) 10mm, (2) 40 S&W, (3) 9mm, (4) 45 ACP, (5) 45 GAP, (6) .380, and (7) .357 Sig. in California, a lawsuit may affect your rights

Except for .22 LR, that's every caliber Glocks were ever made in. Coincidence?

My G20/G29 has unsupported chambers. Lots of hot Underwood through them and yet, I have not exploded!

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
…If that is the reason for the suit, I wonder why they would have waited so long to file it.

Ambulance chasers running out of lunch money.

Many manufacturers have the same basic chamber look at the base of the feed ramp.

Pic is very helpful. I think I get it now. I think that’s the gist of the lawsuit but not sure if glock looks any different than other integrated feed ramps.

Not sure what happens if the suit wins.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
My G20/G29 has unsupported chambers. Lots of hot Underwood through them and yet, I have not exploded!

Yeah, but about the gun?

Oh No!! Am I going to die by Glock?

The guns are fine. I figure any ka-booms that may occur will probably take me out too. 10mm power, you know!