Anyone have Glock dimensions? N00b questions

P

patrickiv

Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
36
Likes
3
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
I'm trying to design a 9x19 carbine that accepts Glock magazines and I'm looking for this info:
-What's the mass of a Glock 17 receiver?
-What's the thickness of the barrel wall at the chamber?
-Alternatively, what is the minimum acceptable barrel wall thickness at the chamber for standard loads; is there a different value for SS barrels?
-Does anyone have a schematic for a Glock 17 magazine? If not, what are the basic dimensions of the magazine(length, width, height, size/position of notch)?

Admins feel free to move/delete this thread if it's in the wrong place.
 
designing something w/o actual item to design around? that a tough proposition.
if no one comes up with the specs i will take time once i get back home to my glock and measuring tools.
 
Depending how its handled ...
Mech tech
qahe4yhe.jpg


But you still have the problem of the fact you need a glock/wolf frame. If you could get a dealer to transfer one into
the state you might be able to convince them to file the paper work as a rifle. But you could never buy a slide and make it a pistole, not sure even with tax stamps etc..... It's def a mess .

You say your too young for a pistole doesn't that mean your limited to guns with out mags etc?
 
My goal is to create an entirely new carbine, not convert a Glock to a carbine. I only want the Glock receiver mass because I'm curious as to how it compares to the mass of my bolt design. Does anyone know the chamber wall thickness or bolt mass for a STEN?
 
All Glock frames are registered as pistols. Since he is under 21 that is a no go. The Lone Wolf frame... Maybe... If you could find a shady dealer.

Yeah, once a rifle, always a rifle.

warwickben said:
But you still have the problem of the fact you need a glock/wolf frame. If you could get a dealer to transfer one into
the state you might be able to convince them to file the paper work as a rifle. But you could never buy a slide and make it a pistole, not sure even with tax stamps etc..... It's def a mess .
Click to expand...
 
looks like you are planning on inventing a bicycle. make that re-inventing. this has been done some many times. not to say you shouldn't do it, just maybe help us understand what are you envisioning for your 9mm carbine. How will it be different from all other 9mm carbines. your idea/goal can have merit, but most likely already has been designed and implemented and we can advice/spare you some time and/or frustration. but if you are doing it just for the heck of doing it, then props to you, making/designing guns is fun and is truly american pass-time and totally fun thing to do. i'm with you on that.

as for weight of the bolt - it's not as crucial to get it exact same as sten. i can tell you that bolt in ANY blowback sub gun needs to be in the ballpark of 1 pound or so (depending on the caliber). but you still will need to play around with return spring pressures to get it cycle reliably AND smoothly. my PPSh-41 bolt weighs 14oz (400 grams) glock frame will be roughly half that.

as for glock receiver weight it's very light. assuming by receiver you mean frame. glock frame is made of nylon and weighs just a few ounces - very light compare to steel framed pistols.

judging from your questions, however, you might be interested not in glock receiver/frame weight, but rather in weight of a slide. it's to say, significantly more than the frame, but still fair amount lighter than sub-gun's bolt.

moreover glock is a locked breech design, meaning that chamber is mechanical locked/sealed during firing, while with sten (or any other sub-gun) breech is not sealed and bolt is free to move backwards during firing. only reason it doesn't blow into shooter's face is a combination of bolt's heavy weight + spring that hold breach sealed long enough for bullet to leave the barrel and for chamber pressure drop to a safe level. Level that is sufficient only to cycle said firearm (extract spent case and reload new round) and not embed bolt in shooters face.

most of 9mm (and other high pressure handgun rounds .40s&w, 10mm, .45acp) use locked breech design.
low pressure handgun rounds i.e. .380acp, .32acp, 9x18 Makarov can be safely chambered in handguns w/o locked breach - i.e. blowback operated.

only exception being is Hi-point C9 that is only handgun that i know of currently produced that fires 9x19 and is blowback operated. however slide on that gun weighs over a pound, something in the viscinity of 17-18oz
 
Last edited:
dnepro-mike thank you for that info. Yes I'm designing this just for the experience of it(drawing inspiration from the semi-auto PPSh and STEN builds that I have seen here). Right now the layout is a lot like the MP5, but with simple blowback operation instead of delayed-blowback. I plan on using an AK FCG and an AR pistol grip. My CAD software calculates the bolt at 0.365kg(0.805lb), and I have room to adjust that. The only aspect of the Glock that I am interested in retaining is the magazine.

The main thing that I am concerned about is the chamber wall thickness. I want this to be minimized as it affects the dimensions of the entire design.

 
thickness of the barre at the chamber?
glock: .600
sr9: .597

minimum acceptable barrel wall thickness at the chamber for standard loads; is there a different value for SS barrels?
i'm pretty sure my SR9 has SS bbl and it's thickness actually less than glock's. see above

you might also need chamber length - the thicker portion of the barrel which is 1.25

glock 17 mag gen.4 dimensions:
0.888 width
1.304 long
4.510 tall (excluding thickness of base plate) measured by the length of the back.
forward lean is 71.8 degrees

glock mag.gif
 
Last edited:
Next question: What's a better way to attach a trunnion to the sheet metal receiver, welds or rivets? Right now the design allows for 3, 6mm dia. rivets(0.232in) or 94mm(3.70in) of weld.
 
rivets require a press and possibly a specialized jig.
welding on other hand is requires just welder. I would say welder has my vote.

however something to consider:
rivers are less permanent solution than welds. they are much easier to remove and disassemble than welded part.
i don't know how important this consideration is to you.

on other thought you may reconsider creating trunnion altogether.
assuming your design is not tied-down to some particular barrel with per-existing dimensions? that would mean that it has to be made from scratch from a $30 barrel blank which come in 1.25" in diameter rounds, so you can use that extra thickness to make barrel in camber area over-sized to your design specs and rivet barrel directly to a receiver. i wouldn't use welding in this scenario and you can probably use larger rivets too, now that you are not constrained by dimensions of trunnion.
 
Last edited:
I have access to a press so that would work, but I'd actually prefer the more permanent arrangement. By taking out the rivet holes in the trunnion design, I can reduce the height of the receiver by 18mm(0.709in). The only thing that I would like to be removable is the barrel, via threads or a pin.

After welding/riveting a receiver together, is it standard practice to heat-treat it?
 
well if barrel needs to be removable than there is no other way around but preserving trunnion.
since it's a sub-gun and there is no terrible recoil from 9mm i think you can get away with just simple sex-bolt type of pin that can be easily removed without press. making a flange on the barrel for ease of headspacing down the line wouldn't be a bad idea either.

alternatively threaded trunnion/barrel with jam nut will be fine solution as well.

also if you have means to machine aluminium you can approach barrel mounting in the same manner as it's done in ar-15.

for stamped receivers it is a normal practice to harden receiver parts post-forming(receiver sheetmetal) or post-machining(trunnion). since in both cases alloy is in the annealed state (for ease of working/machining it) and is too soft to withstand punishment of gun-firing. it is for rifles anyways. for sub guns it will be not as crucial, although not a bad thing to do to have things run better longer. even unhardened AK receiver will take few thousand of rounds of punishment before things chew themselves apart.

hardening can be done before you rivet everything together
 
Last edited:
Could you elaborate on "retaining trunnion"?

An AR-style barrel nut would be a bit out of my machining capabilities. I would like a threaded barrel/trunnion arrangement but I have no idea how I would index the clearance cut for the extractor.

Would this work?: Pinned barrel with pin exposed to outside of the receiver, (possibly weld the pin in place)
This would allow me to drill out the pin if I ever wanted to replace the barrel.
 
patrickiv said:
Could you elaborate on "retaining trunnion"?
Click to expand...
bad choice of words. all i meant is that if you want threaded barrel than you need to leave(retain) trunnion as part of the design.

An AR-style barrel nut would be a bit out of my machining capabilities.
Click to expand...

you can always re-use ar-15 barrel nut and plan for it in your design

I would like a threaded barrel/trunnion arrangement but I have no idea how I would index the clearance cut for the extractor.
Click to expand...
you either can count threads and makes sure that each round start and finishes at the same o'clock position and do the same for barrel. but this would be hard to achieve w/o CNC

alternative solution would be thread trunnion and barrel. put both of them together as per design. then mark location of the extractor on the breach face with 'Sharpie', unscrew barrel and cut extractor clearence.

Would this work?: Pinned barrel with pin exposed to outside of the receiver, (possibly weld the pin in place) This would allow me to drill out the pin if I ever wanted to replace the barrel.
Click to expand...
9mm carbine has very mild recoil and you don't need to pin it as strong as AK barrel, nor you need to weld it. AFAIK even heavy 3/8 or 1/2 inch spring pin would be plenty hefty to hold it in place.

watch this video here and at minute 2:07 pay attention how he dismounts barrel and barrel shroud that held together just by one sleeved split-pin. and they don't use any threads at all. PPSh-41 is as simple of a gun as it could possibly be. PPS-43 being slightly simpler example.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow that barrel just slides right out - didn't expect that. More questions: Is the PPSh's feed ramp built into the barrel or the trunnion? How about for the STEN? Does the STEN barrel install from the front or back end of the trunnion?

Right now I'm leaning towards pinning the barrel with a press-fit pin(something you would need a vise to insert) with the feed ramp built into the barrel.
 
there is no need for feed ramp if barrel bore axis just few mm out of line with magazine.
don't know about sten but ppsh has no dedicated feed ramp that protrudes out of breech face.
you can jut file/round in bottom of the chamber to be sort of like a ramp.
do you have any renderings or drawings of what you have so far? i can offer my technical expertise if i have something to look at.
another thing - google-up tons of pictures of ppsh and look at tall the pictures.
carefully look over those pics forum threads where people building ppsh from scratch. weaponeer, homegunsmith, here (boris has a ppsh building thread too), akfiles, etc
 
Okay so I've done a bunch of revisions and this is looking a lot like a STEN with the addition of a removable barrel and different grip placement. I also changed it from a rectangular to a round receiver/trunnion. The trunnion will thread into the receiver tube(not sure what to call it) and will be secured with a tack weld. The barrel will slide in and have a flange that will index with the trunnion. The trunnion will also be threaded to accept a barrel nut. First I will turn and thread the trunnion, then I will turn, thread, and mill the receiver tube. Next, I will screw in and weld the trunnion to the receiver tube. Lastly, I will mill the indexing slot into the trunnion. This should take care of any indexing issues I would face with the previous design.

I'm planning on welding on a picatinny rail for optics but a rear ghost ring and an AK-style front post would be cool too.

It's still early in the process to be buying parts but I figured it couldn't hurt to buy a barrel blank, so I bought this one:
http://www.thedealershowroom.com/catalog/item/1707946/4773202.htm

Total with shipping was $70.50. I chose this over cheaper ones because it was already chambered for 9mm Luger; the extra charge is much cheaper than buying the equipment to chamber it myself. Got a cardboard tube in the mail last week with one of the plastic endcaps cracked open and nothing but packing peanuts inside(that's all I could see through the crack, not opening it until I talk to them). I assume it was dropped by USPS and the blank punched through. Also, it was shipped to my billing address, not the shipping address as indicated on my receipt. Hopefully I will hear back from them on Monday.

Also thanks to the gun ban scare, I can't find a Glock mag anywhere, so I may switch to a different magazine. I really don't want to use a STEN mag. Any reason why MP5 mags are curved and Glock/Sten/Uzi mags aren't? 9mm Luger is clearly tapered so I would think it would need a curved magazine.
 
9mm case has very slight taper, so if making appropriately curved mags anti-tilt follower then can be used, making mag nearly 100% reliably.
straight mags can not have anti-til followers, because taper of the 9mm case will cause follower to tilt in the straight mag the more rounds you stuff in it. because of inheritly tilting follower straight mags are presumed to be less reliable because followers can potentially get hung-up on the walls of the mag, if magazine is not well-cared for - dirty, sandy, dried up grease gunk etc.

virtually all 9mm sub-gun of WW2 era have straight mags. reason - simplicity of manufacture compared to curved ones.
mp5 is not a war-time gun and therefore mass production and cheapness was not a subject of the matter and manufacturer did it right way - curved.

in Mass you are stuck with 10-rounders anyways. curved or not - 10 is a capacity that will function just as fine in straight mag as in curved one.
 
Last edited:
Update on the order:
I called John at Dealer Showroom and he said they recently had another similar shipping problem and were trying to figure out what was wrong with the shipping system. He gave me the option of either refunding the order or paying an extra $3.00 for insurance to send a replacement barrel. If I had been in a worse mood I would have bitched about the charge but he seemed like an honest guy so I sent the $3.00.

Still trying to find a suitable magazine that isn't ridiculously overpriced.
 
winter said:
All Glock frames are registered as pistols. Since he is under 21 that is a no go. The Lone Wolf frame... Maybe... If you could find a shady dealer.
Click to expand...

You can't do this anymore because all bare frames/lowers/etc transfer as handguns under the federal side. (Well, the box says "Other" but the legal requirements for age, residency, etc, are the same as handguns. )

In order for something to transfer as a rifle/shotgun it must transit and leave the FFL as a completed rifle or shotgun.

-Mike
 

Similar threads

Colt vs. Glock AR-9
Replies
4
Views
212
jayhitek
jayhitek
Anyone know a skilled woodworker in Boston Metrowest area?
Replies
0
Views
120
hminsky
H
Glock Gen 3 Gen 4 Lower Parts
Replies
0
Views
357
akma
A
Anyone have a metal oem safety for a mossberg 500
Replies
3
Views
500
mac1911
M
Picatinny rail dimensions...
Replies
6
Views
538
Mesatchornug
Mesatchornug
Back
Top Bottom