Why I'll Never Buy A Glock or Recommend Them Ever Again

Tecolote · October 12, 2002, 11:21 AM

I don't mean to bash Glocks or to insult Glock owners but just to make clear that I'm not at all happy with How Glock Inc is handling what they know to be a defect. In case you haven't heard Glock has contacted LE agencies with a warning that all models with serial numbers EAAXXXUS to EZZXXXUS may have failures in the rear frame rails. According to Glock the problem may or may not render the pistols unworkable bt preventing the slide to travel fully rearward. There may be even earlier serial numbers affected. Non-LEOs have to get the information by either calling Glock directly or reading reliable information on the web. If you doubt me do a search over at GlockTalk where LEOs have kindly posted the information. Glock knows its market and it knows that contacting LE agencies is a good move, but I don't see why it has kept the information from non-LE customers. An ad in the gun rags with pictures announcing to customers what to look for and how to go about getting service if necessary isn't that big of a deal. Other companies have taken out ads before when they've had problems crop up with their products. SIG Sauer even took an ad warning people not to manually decock its pistol. This reminds me of Glock's 1993 firing pin "upgrade" that Glock refused to call a recall. The same thing all over again, secrecy and denial.

Glock will replace defective frames with properly manufactured frames at their cost. Sure, your Glock in the serial number range it may or may not have problems, there's something like a 1/20.000 chance of failure. That may seem small, but do you want to be the 1/20.000 when you're staring at the elephant?

I won't give my money to a company nor will I recommend that others give their money to a company that puts CYA before the safety of their customers. Yes, I know that a business exists to profit, but there are ethical and unethical ways to handle a problem.

When Glock QC isn't out to lunch they make a reliable, accurate, light, and tough product. When QC is asleep their products are unreliable especially for those that stake their lives on them. I cannot take this chance and I honestely don't know of anyone that can.

629 shooter · October 12, 2002, 11:33 AM

Well you convinced me Tecolote! No , wait , I never liked Glocks to begin with!

PeteyPete · October 12, 2002, 11:40 AM

Hmm....my G17 has a serial: EZTXXXUS , should i be concerned?

Hard Ball · October 12, 2002, 11:59 AM

Yes, your pistol is in the serial number range.

Dave Mo · October 12, 2002, 12:31 PM

Mine's a 19 with #EPD----. Is that in there too?

lonegunman · October 12, 2002, 12:59 PM

How long have they been notifying law enforcement agencies of this?

It may take a month or two to get ads out in magazines.

New_comer · October 12, 2002, 01:15 PM

Quote:

EAAXXXUS to EZZXXXUS

Any serial that begins with an "E" is within the range.

EPD sure is...

krept · October 12, 2002, 01:17 PM

Well, from the above post, it looks like everything starting with an E is affected.

From what I have read it sounds like Glock is doing a poor job with this if that large a series of pistols in question. I wonder if they are contacting people that filled out warranty cards.

Triad · October 12, 2002, 01:58 PM

Thanks for the heads up.

Kentucky Rifle · October 12, 2002, 02:41 PM

I just checked and my 27's ser. number begins with a "C". What caused the problems with the "E's" anyway? Are ALL calibers affected?

KR

croyance · October 12, 2002, 03:19 PM

I believe in judging a company not only by its products, but by the actions they take. Reading the posts about Glock defects lately, I have noticed that Glock seems to have known about various defects that lead to critical failures before LEA's ask them. To say the least, this alarms me. Unfortunate, because I was looking at the G34/35.

Baron Holbach · October 12, 2002, 05:42 PM

Tecolote, thank you for the heads up.

kahrma · October 12, 2002, 06:19 PM

I just bought a Glock 21 today and the SN# starts with an E! This bites!

ScottFrench · October 12, 2002, 07:11 PM

Seems the problem would vary by model. Any specific information? If not, then it is hard to believe all models with serial numbers in such a large serial number range are affected. Especially since the frames vary for full size, compact and subcompact.

Please provide specifics.

Scott

aquapong · October 12, 2002, 07:29 PM

I'm not sure what part of Glock's procedure for dealing with this you don't like. They contacted Leos to tell them of the defect and check their guns. They will be contacting people who filled out their warranty cards by mail sometime in the next month. If you didn't fill out your warranty card, then you should have. A mass mailing will not happen overnight. You need some people to figure out what lots of pistols could potentially have the problem, draw up a letter, pamphlet, or whatever, get them to the printers, and mail them out. They are busy enough handling leo agencies, which btw are still the bulk of their business, and then they will move on the private owners. Their business started with, is, and always will be about leos, not citizens. The fact that we like Glocks as well is just a bonus. If you don't trust your Glocks, sell them to other Glockers, I'm sure they'd love to take them off your hands for a reasonable price.

FWIW...I have a Glock 19 with the serial EGZ***. I'm not sweating this one bit. I've never noticed anything peculiar about the rear slide rails, nor do I expect to.

AKurat · October 12, 2002, 07:58 PM

EAAXXX - EZZXXX is ALOT of guns!

Think about it. Thats:
EAA, EAB, EAC, etc
EBA, EBB, EBC, etc
and so on...

thats 26 * 26 possible letter combinations = 676
with 999 possible number combos EACH (I.E. ERU618, ERU619, etc....ERV341, ERV342,etc.)

676 * 999 = 675,324

So, as Tecolote said...every 1/20,000 has chance of failure.

That means a grand total of 33.7 would be affected.

Mo_Zam_Beek · October 12, 2002, 07:59 PM

ScottFrench -

1. This started with NYPD and a mysterious failure that came to be known as a phase 3 malfunction. These were primarily noted in model 19's.

2. Yes, all models that begin with "E" - I have a 30 that will need to go back.

3. This is the second major recall of their product. The first was again prompted by the LEAs - hard to loose your biggest customer.

4. You can bet that when LEAs begin to have KB problems we will another recall.

dsk · October 12, 2002, 08:25 PM

Glock has an overall excellent product. I don't think there's a gun design on the planet that hasn't had a failure or component issue somewhere.

Glock the company, well that's a different matter. I don't think I've ever seen a company more concerned with maintaining an elitist image at all costs before.

juliet charley · October 12, 2002, 08:36 PM

Here's the link to the GlockTalk thread:

http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=107305

Evidently, the Glock knew about the problem as early as May and is just now getting around to notifying LEAs (talk about taking your customers' cheaply) with no real plan to notify non-LE customers.

As with the first generation slam-fire/full-auto problem, Glock is not issuing the needed recall. The firs generation slam-fire/full-auto problem was handled by a "voluntary upgrade." Evidently Glock is handling the most recent problem by calling it a "precautionary upgrade." Talk about "PR-speak" (and/or blatant dishonesty).

You talk all you want about 1:20,000, but Bernalillo County SD (Albuquerque NM) has already had four (and they don't have 80,000 Glocks). The failures were all catastrophic (weapon was unservicable after failure).

Hoss · October 12, 2002, 08:58 PM

Both of my Glocks, a 27 and a 30, are within this serial number range. While I will examine them thoroughly for anything that looks peculiar, I'm not worried about either of them failing if/when I need them.

Now....if all of this is true, I most likely will not be purchasing another Glock. Not because I don't trust their product, but because of the way they are apparently handling this.

Tecolote · October 12, 2002, 09:05 PM

I don't have any more specifics than do the rest of non-LE customers. All I know is what I read from reliable folks that don't have any axes to grind. The problem is with all Glock models in that serial number range. Glock knew about this in May or earlier, that's plenty of time to contact consumers. I'm not saying Glock should replace all frames in the defective range, but at the least it should contact consumers to advise them of what to look for when inspecting their Glocks. Ads in gun rags aren't that big of a deal for a company that has made millions of dollars in profits. I don't expect anything from Glock other than being upfront with customers. Everyone is bound to make a mistake, it's how a company handles a mistake that sets it apart for good or bad.

Robby from Long Island · October 12, 2002, 09:39 PM

I never bought a Glock because it was not only the ugliest gun I ever saw but also had the worst feel of any gun I ever picked up. Felt like a piece of 2 X 4.

Now I have another reason not to like them. Treating their customers like they didn't exist.

Flip · October 12, 2002, 09:43 PM

Actually, Glock never notified my agency about this (500 man+ dept, 2nd largest user of Glocks in state).

Last week we had a G35 come up with the left rear rail separate. A call to the local GLock rep reveals that they have had "some" occurrences of this. No mention whatsoever of it being a bit more wide spread. Also, no mention of a recall or "upgrade" in progress.

Last Tuesday, I attended a Glock armorer school for recert (5thor 6th time so far). No mention in the school.

Thursday I read about it on Glocktalk. I call Glock on Friday morning, learn that there is a team set up with that toll-free number to handle calls. I leave a message with them to call me, explaining I have around 400 dept guns I need to know about.
I then call this same local Glock rep and ask him about it. Like pulling teeth, he offers nothing, but answers my questions as I ask them. He states he knew something about it last week, when we called about the G35, but says he really got the word on Thursday. I asked him why we weren't the second call he made that day (with the larger metro dept nearby being the first call), since we use so many Glocks. I also pointed out that the only reason I was talking to him on that Friday morning was because I CALLED HIM. I let him know we were not too thrilled with his service. I wonder how long it would have been before we heard from him. I called friends on four other agencies, none had heard from Glock about it.

I like their product, they dropped the ball on this, customer service-wise. They tell me they will take care of all of the guns, LEO and non-LEO.

krept · October 12, 2002, 11:35 PM

Thanks for sharing the all the info guys.

I have a G27 in the D range but still have to wonder if the tooling or whatever supposedly was changed happened to be changed just for the "E" series.

Either way, it the same pistol I've had for X amount of time and it hasn't failed me yet. Yet another reason to have a plan C, D, E, F... etc.

Blackhawk · October 13, 2002, 01:02 AM

Thanks for the viewpoint, Tecolote. Since I've personally "won" with odds of 1:20,000 against me several times (usually by my deliberate intervention to change those odds), anything like them in a gun I MIGHT use for SD is entirely unacceptable ESPECIALLY if Glock KNOWS of the problem and solution.

It's similar to the situation with Taurus and their cracked frame problems on their PT-145s. It's STUPID to think you can do business in the U.S. by lying and denying to consumers.

October 12, 2002, 11:21 AM	#1
Tecolote Senior Member Join Date: November 25, 1999 Posts: 1,999	Why I'll Never Buy A Glock or Recommend Them Ever Again I don't mean to bash Glocks or to insult Glock owners but just to make clear that I'm not at all happy with How Glock Inc is handling what they know to be a defect. In case you haven't heard Glock has contacted LE agencies with a warning that all models with serial numbers EAAXXXUS to EZZXXXUS may have failures in the rear frame rails. According to Glock the problem may or may not render the pistols unworkable bt preventing the slide to travel fully rearward. There may be even earlier serial numbers affected. Non-LEOs have to get the information by either calling Glock directly or reading reliable information on the web. If you doubt me do a search over at GlockTalk where LEOs have kindly posted the information. Glock knows its market and it knows that contacting LE agencies is a good move, but I don't see why it has kept the information from non-LE customers. An ad in the gun rags with pictures announcing to customers what to look for and how to go about getting service if necessary isn't that big of a deal. Other companies have taken out ads before when they've had problems crop up with their products. SIG Sauer even took an ad warning people not to manually decock its pistol. This reminds me of Glock's 1993 firing pin "upgrade" that Glock refused to call a recall. The same thing all over again, secrecy and denial. Glock will replace defective frames with properly manufactured frames at their cost. Sure, your Glock in the serial number range it may or may not have problems, there's something like a 1/20.000 chance of failure. That may seem small, but do you want to be the 1/20.000 when you're staring at the elephant? I won't give my money to a company nor will I recommend that others give their money to a company that puts CYA before the safety of their customers. Yes, I know that a business exists to profit, but there are ethical and unethical ways to handle a problem. When Glock QC isn't out to lunch they make a reliable, accurate, light, and tough product. When QC is asleep their products are unreliable especially for those that stake their lives on them. I cannot take this chance and I honestely don't know of anyone that can. __________________ “I've been beat up, I've been thrown out, but I'm not down.” The Clash

October 12, 2002, 11:33 AM	#2
629 shooter Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2002 Location: IN , USA Posts: 967	Well you convinced me Tecolote! No , wait , I never liked Glocks to begin with! __________________ "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."

October 12, 2002, 11:59 AM	#4
Hard Ball Senior Member Join Date: November 28, 1999 Location: California Posts: 3,925	Yes, your pistol is in the serial number range. __________________ "I swear to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemeis domestic or foreign WHOMSOEVER."

October 12, 2002, 01:17 PM	#8
krept Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2000 Location: AZ Posts: 1,363	Well, from the above post, it looks like everything starting with an E is affected. From what I have read it sounds like Glock is doing a poor job with this if that large a series of pistols in question. I wonder if they are contacting people that filled out warranty cards. __________________ the tallest blade of grass is the first to greet the lawnmower blade

October 12, 2002, 02:41 PM	#10
Kentucky Rifle Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 1999 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 2,687	That would certainly mean a LOT of pistols. I just checked and my 27's ser. number begins with a "C". What caused the problems with the "E's" anyway? Are ALL calibers affected? KR

October 12, 2002, 11:40 AM	#3
PeteyPete Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2002 Location: Guam Posts: 208	Hmm....my G17 has a serial: EZTXXXUS , should i be concerned?

October 12, 2002, 12:31 PM	#5
Dave Mo Member Join Date: August 27, 2002 Location: SW Florida Posts: 62	Mine's a 19 with #EPD----. Is that in there too?

October 12, 2002, 12:59 PM	#6
lonegunman Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2001 Location: deep in georgia Posts: 1,724	How long have they been notifying law enforcement agencies of this? It may take a month or two to get ads out in magazines.

October 12, 2002, 01:58 PM	#9
Triad Senior Member Join Date: June 20, 2001 Posts: 129	Thanks for the heads up.

October 12, 2002, 03:19 PM	#11
croyance Senior Member Join Date: March 30, 2001 Posts: 3,604	I believe in judging a company not only by its products, but by the actions they take. Reading the posts about Glock defects lately, I have noticed that Glock seems to have known about various defects that lead to critical failures before LEA's ask them. To say the least, this alarms me. Unfortunate, because I was looking at the G34/35.

October 12, 2002, 05:42 PM	#12
Baron Holbach Senior Member Join Date: July 10, 2002 Location: Maryland Posts: 238	Glock defect Tecolote, thank you for the heads up.

October 12, 2002, 06:19 PM	#13
kahrma Senior Member Join Date: June 26, 2002 Location: The jungle Posts: 369	I just bought a Glock 21 today and the SN# starts with an E! This bites!

October 12, 2002, 07:11 PM	#14
ScottFrench Senior Member Join Date: March 1, 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 121	Every model? Seems the problem would vary by model. Any specific information? If not, then it is hard to believe all models with serial numbers in such a large serial number range are affected. Especially since the frames vary for full size, compact and subcompact. Please provide specifics. Scott

October 12, 2002, 07:29 PM	#15
aquapong Member Join Date: September 27, 2002 Posts: 72	I'm not sure what part of Glock's procedure for dealing with this you don't like. They contacted Leos to tell them of the defect and check their guns. They will be contacting people who filled out their warranty cards by mail sometime in the next month. If you didn't fill out your warranty card, then you should have. A mass mailing will not happen overnight. You need some people to figure out what lots of pistols could potentially have the problem, draw up a letter, pamphlet, or whatever, get them to the printers, and mail them out. They are busy enough handling leo agencies, which btw are still the bulk of their business, and then they will move on the private owners. Their business started with, is, and always will be about leos, not citizens. The fact that we like Glocks as well is just a bonus. If you don't trust your Glocks, sell them to other Glockers, I'm sure they'd love to take them off your hands for a reasonable price. FWIW...I have a Glock 19 with the serial EGZ***. I'm not sweating this one bit. I've never noticed anything peculiar about the rear slide rails, nor do I expect to.

October 12, 2002, 07:58 PM	#16
AKurat Senior Member Join Date: April 9, 2002 Posts: 128	EAAXXX - EZZXXX is ALOT of guns! Think about it. Thats: EAA, EAB, EAC, etc EBA, EBB, EBC, etc and so on... thats 26 * 26 possible letter combinations = 676 with 999 possible number combos EACH (I.E. ERU618, ERU619, etc....ERV341, ERV342,etc.) 676 * 999 = 675,324 So, as Tecolote said...every 1/20,000 has chance of failure. That means a grand total of 33.7 would be affected.

October 12, 2002, 07:59 PM	#17
Mo_Zam_Beek Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2001 Posts: 308	ScottFrench - 1. This started with NYPD and a mysterious failure that came to be known as a phase 3 malfunction. These were primarily noted in model 19's. 2. Yes, all models that begin with "E" - I have a 30 that will need to go back. 3. This is the second major recall of their product. The first was again prompted by the LEAs - hard to loose your biggest customer. 4. You can bet that when LEAs begin to have KB problems we will another recall.

October 12, 2002, 08:25 PM	#18
dsk Senior Member Join Date: June 19, 2001 Posts: 1,603	Glock has an overall excellent product. I don't think there's a gun design on the planet that hasn't had a failure or component issue somewhere. Glock the company, well that's a different matter. I don't think I've ever seen a company more concerned with maintaining an elitist image at all costs before.

October 12, 2002, 08:36 PM	#19
juliet charley Senior Member Join Date: November 11, 1999 Posts: 2,501	Here's the link to the GlockTalk thread: http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=107305 Evidently, the Glock knew about the problem as early as May and is just now getting around to notifying LEAs (talk about taking your customers' cheaply) with no real plan to notify non-LE customers. As with the first generation slam-fire/full-auto problem, Glock is not issuing the needed recall. The firs generation slam-fire/full-auto problem was handled by a "voluntary upgrade." Evidently Glock is handling the most recent problem by calling it a "precautionary upgrade." Talk about "PR-speak" (and/or blatant dishonesty). You talk all you want about 1:20,000, but Bernalillo County SD (Albuquerque NM) has already had four (and they don't have 80,000 Glocks). The failures were all catastrophic (weapon was unservicable after failure). Last edited by juliet charley; October 12, 2002 at 09:13 PM.

October 12, 2002, 08:58 PM	#20
Hoss Junior Member Join Date: June 21, 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 7	Both of my Glocks, a 27 and a 30, are within this serial number range. While I will examine them thoroughly for anything that looks peculiar, I'm not worried about either of them failing if/when I need them. Now....if all of this is true, I most likely will not be purchasing another Glock. Not because I don't trust their product, but because of the way they are apparently handling this.

October 12, 2002, 09:05 PM	#21
Tecolote Senior Member Join Date: November 25, 1999 Posts: 1,999	I don't have any more specifics than do the rest of non-LE customers. All I know is what I read from reliable folks that don't have any axes to grind. The problem is with all Glock models in that serial number range. Glock knew about this in May or earlier, that's plenty of time to contact consumers. I'm not saying Glock should replace all frames in the defective range, but at the least it should contact consumers to advise them of what to look for when inspecting their Glocks. Ads in gun rags aren't that big of a deal for a company that has made millions of dollars in profits. I don't expect anything from Glock other than being upfront with customers. Everyone is bound to make a mistake, it's how a company handles a mistake that sets it apart for good or bad. __________________ “I've been beat up, I've been thrown out, but I'm not down.” The Clash

October 12, 2002, 09:39 PM	#22
Robby from Long Island Senior Member Join Date: January 20, 2001 Location: North Babylon, N.Y. Posts: 157	I never bought a Glock because it was not only the ugliest gun I ever saw but also had the worst feel of any gun I ever picked up. Felt like a piece of 2 X 4. Now I have another reason not to like them. Treating their customers like they didn't exist. __________________ Robby

October 12, 2002, 09:43 PM	#23
Flip Member Join Date: November 25, 2001 Posts: 26	Actually, Glock never notified my agency about this (500 man+ dept, 2nd largest user of Glocks in state). Last week we had a G35 come up with the left rear rail separate. A call to the local GLock rep reveals that they have had "some" occurrences of this. No mention whatsoever of it being a bit more wide spread. Also, no mention of a recall or "upgrade" in progress. Last Tuesday, I attended a Glock armorer school for recert (5thor 6th time so far). No mention in the school. Thursday I read about it on Glocktalk. I call Glock on Friday morning, learn that there is a team set up with that toll-free number to handle calls. I leave a message with them to call me, explaining I have around 400 dept guns I need to know about. I then call this same local Glock rep and ask him about it. Like pulling teeth, he offers nothing, but answers my questions as I ask them. He states he knew something about it last week, when we called about the G35, but says he really got the word on Thursday. I asked him why we weren't the second call he made that day (with the larger metro dept nearby being the first call), since we use so many Glocks. I also pointed out that the only reason I was talking to him on that Friday morning was because I CALLED HIM. I let him know we were not too thrilled with his service. I wonder how long it would have been before we heard from him. I called friends on four other agencies, none had heard from Glock about it. I like their product, they dropped the ball on this, customer service-wise. They tell me they will take care of all of the guns, LEO and non-LEO.

October 12, 2002, 11:35 PM	#24
krept Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 2000 Location: AZ Posts: 1,363	Thanks for sharing the all the info guys. I have a G27 in the D range but still have to wonder if the tooling or whatever supposedly was changed happened to be changed just for the "E" series. Either way, it the same pistol I've had for X amount of time and it hasn't failed me yet. Yet another reason to have a plan C, D, E, F... etc. __________________ the tallest blade of grass is the first to greet the lawnmower blade

October 13, 2002, 01:02 AM	#25
Blackhawk Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2001 Posts: 5,040	Thanks for the viewpoint, Tecolote. Since I've personally "won" with odds of 1:20,000 against me several times (usually by my deliberate intervention to change those odds), anything like them in a gun I MIGHT use for SD is entirely unacceptable ESPECIALLY if Glock KNOWS of the problem and solution. It's similar to the situation with Taurus and their cracked frame problems on their PT-145s. It's STUPID to think you can do business in the U.S. by lying and denying to consumers.