Guys, I have gotten so many great help from this site. I currently own a MP Shield and a MP 9C. I love both except the stock triggers are awful compared to Glock's Safe Action. The reset on Glock's are just way better. But I read many disturbing articles that Glock had many extraction issues because of MIM parts. I know some will argue MIM is not a problem but they said Gen4's seem to have reliability issues. I think Glock has fixed all this right? But even so can anybody confirm is Glock's quality gone down since its' first conception?

What about the MP Shield and 9c? Do they use MIM parts? Do you all think both MP and Glock, quality is similar, inferior, or superior? I hope Glock's are still high quality. I had my eyes set on getting the G19

glock had some problems with the 4th gen guns with the recoil springs and extraction, but I understand that they have fixed the problem.
it is strange to me they had a product that worked perfect and they "improved it to the point where it did not work.
I have 12 diferent 3rd and 2nd gen glocks and never had any problem.
also I was an glock armourer before retirement.

My daughter had an early G19 gen4 which was finicky with some light load ammo.
She installed a replacement recoil spring assembly, provided by Glock RSA recall, which corrected the intermittent (ammo based) problem. No other problems I'm aware of and family members currently own several gen 4's in various calibers as well as numerous friends and local PD members.
For a combat handgun, I think the Glock is hard to beat. I'm not aware of any other parts issues but maybe there are. If I were limited to only one fighting handgun, based on reliability, dependability, ease of operation & maintenance, etc., it would likely be the G17 in current configuration.

Largely nailed by johnnie gore and jack the toad: the issues centered around the Gen4 rollout, and some Gen3s made simultaneously. Weak extraction, brass to face, stovepipes. Primarily the full size and compact 9mms. Recoil spring mechanism and ejector named as culprits and replaced.

Lot of theories why, none confirmed. Glock took care of its customers with few questions asked and no charge, like a company's supposed to when it made the mistakes.

They run like Glock's now -- combat accurate and extremely reliable.

I bought one of the first G19s and I had intermittent ejection issues with quality, factory ammo. I replaced the spring guide with a steel guide I made myself and the problems vanished.

Yes, guns can be "improved" to the point where they work best as a paper-weight. But, Glock, arrogant at times, keeps its ear to the ground and gets on top of reliability issues. With all the competition competing for market share, failure to address reliability issues amounts to product suicide.

I own and use two Glocks and an S&W M&P and I have no plans to sell any of them.

M&P did it: offering a comparable pistol with interchangeable grip sizes (rightly) forced Glock's hand. Caused a change in the geometry Glock had perfected, and they sent it to the market before thorough testing; like too many products these days, it seems the consumer gets to be the R&D and QA departments.

I love Glocks, but I think the best Glock ever made is the Walther PPQ M2. Glock needs to play some serious catch up and come out with something more innovative than the 42.

(M&P is obviously a great gun given its success, it just doesn't do it for me, personally)

my main concern was with the mim parts like extractor that is known to break, firing pin. Does anybody know if this is true?

I know some point to Glock's MIM switchover as the culprit, but it's speculative. Might want to wander over to Glock Talk for more in-depth discussion.

S&W has been using MIM for most of their revolver action parts for a while now(15 or 20 years I think). People fight and argue over whether they're better, but at the end of the day I haven't heard of rashes of broken hammers or other MIM parts on S&Ws.

I wouldn't get too worried about MIM or lack thereof on any gun these days...

The Gen 4 Glocks seem to have a "lazy" extraction method...meaning they dont throw the brass far at all, and sometime tosses it straight up and it bounces off your gun, your arm...a few have bounced off my head. The older Glocks used the throw it with authority but the new ones just sort of dribble brass out and then end up at your feet or just a foot or so away. With that said, my Gen 4 has never failed to eject or failed in any way so it's been 100% reliable. I'm not complaining, but I wonder what changed to cause the lazy ejection as I call it. I'm guessing recoil spring. Some people really dislike this ejection method...if you search for "Glock to the face" you'll find all the haters. Again, it's not an issue for me but it's a characteristic I noticed of the Gen4 that didn;t seem to be there with the earlier generation Glocks. As for MIM parts, I could care less as I haven't seen any failure rate increases over cast or forged so...no worries there for me at least.

glock did screw the pooch when they changed a perfectly good design. they did the RTF on guns before and didn't need to change. that said, i have a gen 4 17, and a gen 4 41. both have seen heavy use with all sorts of different ammo. aside from every 3rd-4th spent case bouncing off the top right side of my head, they have been flawless. the 42 i have heard some bad news from people about but mine have been great.

I also have a Glock 42, have not shot it much but works fine. No jams or misfeeds. My Shield does eject the brass right into my face almost every 5 shots. I don't understand why.

It's claimed that Glock made some changes to improve reliability.

Glock Appears To Have Made Changes To The G42 | LooseRounds.com

I just wish I still had my second-generation G19 and G22. If it ain't broke, etc.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

I used to own a M&P 9mm full size. The reason I bought it was because I was an early Gen4 adopter. I'd rather put up with the stock M&P's trigger than the early production Glock Gen4 9mm full size and compact's brass to the face, head, shooting glasses, over the pistol to the left ejection. I got tired of being beaned by hot brass. The Gen3 grip doesn't fit my hand. The M&P's grip felt better.

The Gen4 issues only plagued the full size and compact Gen4 pistols. IMO, the issue with the early production Gen4 Glocks is that they tried to share too many small parts between the Glock 22/27 Gen4 and the Glock 17/19 Gen4 to cut overall production costs.

Fast forward a few years. The Gen4 9mm full size and compact erratic ejection pattern issue is fixed. Glock now issues a beavertail backstrap. I'm back to owning a G17 and G22 Gen4. M&P 9fs is gone.

I learned my lesson. Don't be the early adopter guinea pig.

(I'd buy a G19 Gen4, but I want to see how the H&K VP9 shakes out for early adopters over the next year.)

__________________
-John

It's only the late 3rd and early 4th gen 9mm. They changed the angle of the extractor. And they never failed, they just had erratic extraction. It would start to extract more to the shooter's face. They never failed. The problem has since been addressed

I don't own a Gen 4 but I have sold a pile of them and many to LEOs.

We had a 42 that had problems but that one seems to be more of a break-in deal and we had a Gen 4 19 come back with a case stuck in the chamber. I got the case out and it was Russian steel. He has been shooting brass case stuff now and has no further problems.

For us anyway we haven't had much of a problem at all.

__________________
Mike
USMCR 84-87, USAF 87-07

Many manufacturers have had this problem. Too many new models and desk jockeys pushing to ship more product.

__________________
Stay safe people!

Bought my wife a G-42 and went to the range with a box of Winchester 92 gn FMJ. Had a lot of FTE.
May be due to not enough rounds down the tube for break in.??
Had a partial box of Lawmen 95gn TMJ and shot 12 rounds no problems. Will try again next outing.

I found my G42 wouldn't run with WWB at all, could not get thru 1 mag without a problem..
Runs 100% with Magtech 95 gr FMJ and Speer Gold Dot 90gr JHP.

As to the OP, I favor my Gen 2 and 2.5 Glocks.
Although I've owned several Gen 3s and 1 Gen 4, I never had an issue with any Glock I've ever owned (counting about 15 now).
Maybe I'm just lucky...

Also I care not if it has MIM parts or not.
It works, that is all that matters....

To answer the OP's main question, I don't think that the "quality" of Glock has gone down hill. We have Gen 4 G19 and G17 at my job. They work fine. Much ado about nothing is made about MIM. I have several guns with MIM parts. They work fine. Gun makers run in to problems with updates in designs that have narrow performance windows. Meaning parts, subsystems etc have specified sizes. There is a specific size that every part needs to be. Since guns are complex machines, they cycles of function in which everything has to happen within a specific time. There will always be a difference in what it is supposed to be and what it actually is. Some guns run with big differences in things. Some are not tolerant of much variance at all. I will use the mighty G Lock as an example only because that is the gun that I have the most professional experience with. Glock's change in manufacturing method and design spec for extractors resulted in a slightly different sized and shaped extractor. Think late Gen 3 and Early Gen 4 9mm Glocks. Add a little wear or a faster extraction due to spring wear and a once functioning gun became an intermittently functioning one. Another would be the G22s reliability, or lack thereof, with a WML. Same as the reliable G17 in design and parts. But, stiffer frame due to WML installation = higher slide velocities = guns out running their magazines = weapon malfunctions. This was the theory at least and some G22's ran well with lights. The G22 has a narrower performance and is less tolerant to changes in timing. Less to do with quality than manufacturing and engineering.

With regard to the trigger(s) on your M&P pistols, have you checked out the Apex duty trigger kits? Los cost and they really make the trigger feel "glockier".

Doctor Gary Roberts has posted some excellent standards for reliability for pistols in other forums. They are, in my opinion, a solid benchmark that a defensive pistol in any caliber should be able to meet.

There's two words not normally used together...Glock & Quality! Reliability...Iffy. I'll stick to S&W N-frames.

There's nothing inherently poor about the MIM process. But just like everything else you can make very good parts all the down to lousy if your process and quality control aren't right.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Largely agreed, but would add that unfortunately there were failures -- lots of them. I can speak from personal experience with a Gen4 17 and 19, and boatloads of research looking into other user experience.

Prevalent symptoms were erratic and weak ejection (lots of complaints about brass to face), but stovepipes and double-feeds were also common.

It's never long before a polite and informed Glock discussion becomes...less so.

ht
Need to find a spring for light load ammo, Glock intended for standard load ammo and +P ammo.

Don't know...Don't care...Never owned one.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I carry a G17 (GEN/2/3/4) since 1994. All of my Glocks are in 9mm. Carry on duty , off duty , shoot them A LOT. Never had a problems with any of my Glocks.

PS. Soon after I buy a new Glock , I change all the magazine springs to Wolff springs.(except for G43).I only use premium JHP ammo or NATO BALL. No Walmart stuff and no reloads.

Been a Glock owner since 1994, never had any serious issues, bad firearms get through from time to time from any manufacture, companies that makes parts for them usually the problem?

Holy two year old thread resurrection Batman!

__________________
-John