[1911vm]

With the cost of ammo is it legal for me to put a 9mm barrel in my glock 22 or do need to get a 17???

[Jim Watson]

You may not shoot a 9mm barrel in a .40 gun in SSP.

Opinions vary as to whether it is allowable in ESP.

I doubt anybody would care on a local basis.

[prreed10]

From my discussions with Robert Ray, it is a no go in SSP or ESP. It is also a no go to run a G17 slide and barrel on a G22 frame.

[Ryan]

how would anyone tell that it was a g22 frame and not a g17 frame? they are the same frame, except for the early gen 1 frames of course. I would think that most match directors would apply the intent of the rule and allow a g17 slide on a g22 frame.
Ryan

[Jim Watson]

The MD is not likely to do a tech inspection that would disclose a G17 slide on a G22 receiver.
So nobody will know except the shooter. Matter of ethics, maybe.

[freeidaho]

I believe the original question was about a barrel, not a whole slide and barrel.... kr

[Duane Thomas]

I understand the rule, but since a G22 frame IS a G17 frame - they come out of the same mold at the factory and everything - I really can't get too wrapped about the axle over this one.

[EmanP]

The only difference between a G22 frame and a G17 frame is the ejector, and that's a changable part. Otherwise there is no marking anywhere that would make it belong to a specific caliber. Therefor, one might say that it's not the frame that determines the caliber, but the slide on the frame.

[freeidaho]

EmanP, on Aug 14 2009, 11:43 PM, said:

The only difference between a G22 frame and a G17 frame is the ejector, and that's a changable part. Otherwise there is no marking anywhere that would make it belong to a specific caliber. Therefor, one might say that it's not the frame that determines the caliber, but the slide on the frame.

Actually, if one wants to pick nits (and I don't) I believe the caliber is encoded in the serial number of the frame. That is, with a serial number you can look up the date range of manufacture and the model of gun it was originally.

None the less the original question was about a barrel swap, which has been ruled a no-no in any division for Glocks.

kr

[Glock3422]

Could someone direct me to the rationale in the rules for prohibiting:
A-Putting a 9mm barrel in a G-22 for use in ESP.
B-Putting a 9mm slide on a G-22 for use in ESP.

I know what was reported from a conversation, but it doesn't seem to be supported by the rules.

Thanks

[mpolans]

Glock3422, on Aug 16 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Could someone direct me to the rationale in the rules for prohibiting:
A-Putting a 9mm barrel in a G-22 for use in ESP.
B-Putting a 9mm slide on a G-22 for use in ESP.

I know what was reported from a conversation, but it doesn't seem to be supported by the rules.

Thanks

You're assuming that the decision is rational . . . that's your first mistake . . .

I think someone claimed that the conversion barrel would be like bull barrel and reduce recoil compared to a G17. However, if you measure the difference in weight between a conversion barrel and a G17 barrel, it's negligible. Certainly not enough to provide a competitive advantage. So, if you want to 9mm, you'll need to get a whole new gun instead of just spending $100. Or you could get a G17 top end and just keep quiet about the bottom end being from a G22.

[Glock3422]

mpolans, on Aug 19 2009, 07:38 PM, said:

Glock3422, on Aug 16 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Could someone direct me to the rationale in the rules for prohibiting:
A-Putting a 9mm barrel in a G-22 for use in ESP.
B-Putting a 9mm slide on a G-22 for use in ESP.

I know what was reported from a conversation, but it doesn't seem to be supported by the rules.

Thanks

You're assuming that the decision is rational . . . that's your first mistake . . .

Your first mistake is playing the game of the uninformed.

IDPA shooters are trying to have a reasoned discussion about the rules. Your sig line betrays your bias, but thanks for stopping by.

IDPA has a rule book and it exploded to 82 pages of large print in April 2005. You should read it sometime. It only takes about 30 minutes.

Now, can anyone who has actually read the rule book point out the rationale for the conversion prohibition in ESP?

[ima45dv8]

Quote

You're assuming that the decision is rational . . . that's your first mistake . . .

Attitude
Please be polite. Or if not polite, at least respectful.
No bickering. Regardless of the subject matter.
Antagonistic, offensive, or quarrelsome tones are not acceptable.


So sayeth the Forum Guidelines, conveniently located at the top of every page of the forum for your viewing pleasure.
Civil and respectful discourse is a requirement.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation...

[Steve Koski]

I think it's an attempt to avoid an equipment race, and to keep guns closer to stock configuration.

[Jim Watson]

That is a reasonable thing in SSP and might well be carried further.
For example, I think a Glock with a 2 lb trigger pull and Bomar sights is an excessive departure from stock. But there they are in SSP alongside the box stock guns.

On the other hand, there are disallowed "enhancements" and "customizations" that strike me as reasonable in those Divisions. We went a long time while common sense moved a caliber conversion as per the OP moved the gun from SSP to ESP. I still think that appropriate, but pressure for an official policy statement got it banned. I would be happy if all an ESP or CDP had to do was fit The Box and not have lenses in the sights or excess holes in the barrel. Wouldn't change what I shoot.

[Steve Koski]

Yep. The decision makes sense for SSP, but I agree it is a little odd for ESP.

[kct45acp]

of course ther is the fact that a conversion barrel doesn't work very well.
Or didn't in my G22 at any rate, even with a 9mm extractor

[Duane Thomas]

Interesting. How was the gun malfing on you?

[rupie]

kct45acp, on Sep 8 2009, 10:23 PM, said:

of course ther is the fact that a conversion barrel doesn't work very well.
Or didn't in my G22 at any rate, even with a 9mm extractor

I have a conversion barrel for my g35 to 9mm and it has never missed a beat, i do nothing but drop it in and change magazines and its as dependable as my 35 is. I agree the rule is silly, why make someone buy a top end when there is no advantage in a conversion barrel.

[Steve Koski]

Steve Koski, on Aug 19 2009, 10:18 PM, said:

I think it's an attempt to avoid an equipment race, and to keep guns closer to stock configuration.

There you go rupie.

[kct45acp]

Duane Thomas, on Sep 8 2009, 10:51 PM, said:

Interesting. How was the gun malfing on you?

Duane, I had the full run of extract and eject malfs with the combo I was running.
I was trying to get the reliability bugs out before i built an Open gun out of it, but I sold the G22 and bought another G34 to do it with

[Ted Murphy]

When headquarters made the ruling against using a 9mm conversion barrel in a .40 caliber glock, I called and asked why. Their answer was it was a liability concern. Apparently Glock was pretty objectionable to the idea of using a 9mm barrel in the .40 cal guns and it was believed that if a shooting organization legalized the use of a modification that the manufacturer had this much concern about then said organization may well be found liable in a civil suit if there was an incident involving the use of this product.

Ted Murphy
A02127

[jmorris]

This one is kind of interesting to me. I too understand the SSP part but not allowing it in ESP seems goofy. My SV is set up in both 9mm and 45 acp, I’ve shot it in both configurations (ESP/CDP) at nationals no one has ever said a word. I guess if you wanted to switch calibers in a glock you would just need to get an aftermarket slide so there is no way one can tell what the factory configuration was.

[Steve Koski]

Ted Murphy, on Sep 21 2009, 04:43 AM, said:

When headquarters made the ruling against using a 9mm conversion barrel in a .40 caliber glock, I called and asked why. Their answer was it was a liability concern. Apparently Glock was pretty objectionable to the idea of using a 9mm barrel in the .40 cal guns and it was believed that if a shooting organization legalized the use of a modification that the manufacturer had this much concern about then said organization may well be found liable in a civil suit if there was an incident involving the use of this product.

Ted Murphy
A02127

That's pretty funny! The logic is full of all kinds of holes.

Conversion barrel = bad 'cuz Glock dissapproves them and it could be unsafe and expose everyone to liability.
Aftermarket 2 lb trigger = ok because Glock approves them and they couldn't possibly be unsafe or expose anyone to liability.

This post has been edited by Steve Koski: 21 September 2009 - 01:30 PM

[Glock3422]

The funniest part is that it is specifically permitted by the rules for ESP (now except for Glocks).

I can see the next rule book growing considerably to address specific guns and situations. Clarity would be nice, consistency would be better.

It is odd that Berryville would outsource rule making to the individual manufacturers. So much for stability of the rules when a manufacturer's sales or legal department can cause a shift. There would seem to be quite a few now illegal guns based on recent developments. Nationals should prove interesting.