Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  

Home | Load data | Articles | Ballistic Calc | Energy Calc
Handguns
 Handloads.Com Forum : Handguns
Subject Topic: Variations Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message << Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
John Van Gelder
Senior Member


Avatar

Joined: November 09 2004
Location: NE Oregon
Posts: 2193
Online Status: Offline
Posted: January 16 2019 at 6:17am | IP Logged Quote John Van Gelder

The polymer 80 frames have polymer rear slide rails, which are more fragile than the little metal tabs that Glock has embedded into their frames, if they break you need a new frame. It is a nice idea, to have an un serialized gun, but there are some difficulties in getting them to function reliably. If you do not properly machine the rear rails, you have to start over.

Glocks have gotten to be the Harley Davidson of the firearms industry over priced and under engineered.
Back to Top View John Van Gelder's Profile Search for other posts by John Van Gelder
 
Slick
Senior Member


Avatar

Joined: July 25 2005
Location: Leftist Coast
Posts: 8323
Online Status: Offline
Posted: January 16 2019 at 7:04am | IP Logged Quote Slick

John Van Gelder wrote:
The polymer 80 frames have polymer rear slide rails, which are more fragile than the little metal tabs that Glock has embedded into their frames, if they break you need a new frame. It is a nice idea, to have an un serialized gun, but there are some difficulties in getting them to function reliably. If you do not properly machine the rear rails, you have to start over.


My bad - I should have mentioned that I didn't get into the game until they came out with the "PF940v2" frame. It has metal rails front AND rear (unlike the earlier version). The first version had the plastic rails and required a lot of careful work to complete into a functioning pistol. I too passed on building the first version because of this perceived shortcoming.

The new "V2" version has metal rails front and back and the "machining" is limited to simply removing material to complete the frame.

Of the 3 PF940v2's I've built, the first two required no fitting or special work to run. The last one I did had a too-tight slide to frame fit that was solved my removing a few thousands of material from the top rear of the locking block rails. After that, it cycled freely and so far has ran 150 rounds of el' cheapo steel case Russian 9mm and 50 rounds of couple flavors of my reloads.

As far as serial numbers go, I mark mine since it's not like they're registered or anything, but if stolen can be reported as they have an embedded metal plaque for engraving a number..

__________________
The only time you have too much ammunition is when your house is on fire...
Back to Top View Slick's Profile Search for other posts by Slick
 
RT58
Senior Member




Joined: August 04 2009
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 671
Online Status: Offline
Posted: January 16 2019 at 10:08am | IP Logged Quote RT58

I'd never heard of 80% frames for Glocks, so I went and checked them out. Not because I want to build one, but because the ATF doesn't acknowledge the term "80% finished", they either are or aren't legally a firearm frame.
Back to Top View RT58's Profile Search for other posts by RT58
 
turbo1889
Senior Member


Avatar

Joined: August 08 2006
Location: Montana, U.S.A.
Posts: 1815
Online Status: Offline
Posted: January 16 2019 at 6:47pm | IP Logged Quote turbo1889

RT58 wrote:
. . . the ATF doesn't
acknowledge the term "80% finished", they
either are or aren't legally a firearm
frame.


Officially that is true and the "80%"
thing is just an industry description of a
piece of metal or plastic that gets as
close as possible to being a firearm
without officially being one but leaving
as little as possible for the home builder
to finish.

That said there is at least one case on
file where the ATF raided a place for
selling "more then 80%" receivers as 80%
non-firearm receivers. They were polymer
AR receivers that were exactly like other
80% polymer receivers with the only
difference being they were molded out of
two colors of plastic instead of one color
and one color was the part you needed to
drill, router, broach, Dremel, grind,
file, etc . . . to remove to make it a
full functional receiver. So basically it
was the exact same amount of work you
needed to do to finish it and make it a
functional receiver you just didn't need a
jig or pattern it was it's own pattern you
just removed all the plastic of one color
and left the other.

During the raid on the companies close
circuit security video and on cell phone
recordings the ATF agents were straight up
saying the reason for the raid was that
the receivers we're "More then 80%".

Now it is true that in the actual legal
paperwork the ATF never used that specific
wording but it was straight up the party
line all of their agents were using when
they raided that place and you can still
find some of that video online.
Interestingly the ATF ultimately dropped
the charges against that manufacturer and
we're eager to make that court case "go
away" in exchange for that manufacturer
agreeing that using the two tone plastic
trick was going too far and surrendering
all claim to all those lowers that the ATF
seized in that raid, any more they had
that the ATF might not have found in the
raid, and the plastic injection molding
and jig for making the two tone version of
their 80% lowers.

So at least for the ATF agents on the
ground they do seem to at least in some
cases be using the 80% industry standard
to the point of using "Those are more than
80% completed" as justification for a raid
and sezure. But don't really seem to want
to actually go to court afterwards.

They probably don't want a court ruling on
their hands that actually acknowledges the
"80%" terminology even if it's favorable
to the ATF initially as in saying the what
the ATF agents on the ground that a
specific unit being sold as an 80% was
more tgen 80% and thus legally a firearm
because that would make a president that
80% or less would actually not be a
firearm and would acknowledge the 80%
industry standard which is from the
industry not the government.

__________________
What part of, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be INFRINGED" don't you understand ?!?!?

To the most serious charge of "ARMING WOMEN" I plead guilty on multiple counts.
Back to Top View turbo1889's Profile Search for other posts by turbo1889
 
John Van Gelder
Senior Member


Avatar

Joined: November 09 2004
Location: NE Oregon
Posts: 2193
Online Status: Offline
Posted: January 17 2019 at 11:18am | IP Logged Quote John Van Gelder

The 80% frames with front and rear slide rail inserts, would be a good investment.. I priced some of those at Brownells and they were around $80.00.

The first generation of Ruger polymer frame guns had polymer frame rails front and rear.

They now have two chassis guns, the American with a steel chassis and the Security 9 with an aluminum chassis. I am not sure about how keen I would be about the aluminum, but it has worked well in the aluminum frame of the Beretta 92, and several other aluminum frame guns.

Back to Top View John Van Gelder's Profile Search for other posts by John Van Gelder
 

Home | Load data | Articles | Ballistic Calc | Energy Calc

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login
If you are not already registered you must first register

<< Prev Page of 3
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum

Powered by Web Wiz Forums version
Copyright ©2001-2008 Web Wiz Guide

This page was generated in 0.1250 seconds.