Jump to content

Stark Arms Glock 17 GBB


Squad 701

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Obviously, that gap isn't a deal breaker for me.  Sure, I would like it to be flush, but this is airsoft and rarely is something EVER perfect.

 

Yes exactly, nothing is perfect in Airsoft ! Except my Prime Kimbers ;) - Only Kidding, I could find faults in them too.

 

Anyhow the TMC shot seems to make it look perfectly acceptable, but the angle in the picture underneath (BBgunworld) is nasty,

maybe it varies a bit between batches/runs ?

Hopefully like NonEx said there might be an improved run soon, but equally there may be no more at all, who knows.

 

Here's a couple of pictures of my TM G17 (Prime/Guarder) and you can also see its not as flush as some couplings.

 

IMG_9111_zps40a83f38.jpg

 

IMG_9109_zpscaee5507.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, got mine today (no time for photos yet).  Here is the deal with the gap.  If there is no mag inserted, the slide is flush with frame.  Insert mag and rack slide, you get the gap.  I can push it almost all the way forward with my thumb but not quite.  Looking at the mag, it appears the front of the feed lips is causing the problem as I am seeing quite a bit of wear and shavings peeling off.  I think taking off just a tiny bit will allow it to sit flush.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this L2E, I just picked up the last one I believe, (since they are no longer listed on their site!) and this is welcoming news. I have several Glock mags that work with the TM system so I'm curious to see if those will remedy the issue or make it worse. I'll post up my findings once I get it unless someone here else beats me to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, this model does not have the happy switch on the bottom of the slide.  I just assumed it would since the G19 did.  And I only have Stark Arms branded mags so I have no other mags to test with for slide to frame gap.

 

Edit: even with no mag inserted, a manual racking of the slide almost alway doesn't doesn't return the slide all the way forward as it gets really tight/rough about 1 inch into moving forward.  However, there is no problem at all when firing with gas as it is quick and snappy.  My guess is it needs some break in.  It doesn't fit in the CAA Roni kit without modification to where the rear of the glock slides into the kit.  Looks like just a tiny bit needs to be filed off for proper fitment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I eventually got a look at the CNC version of the Stark Arms (VFC) Glock 17 today,

unfortunetly I can't post any shots as my main PC has had a HD failure.

But anyhow it is a very nice piece complete with steel barrel, so it weighs about 20g heavier than my Guarder/Prime TMG17 @ 785g,

the small difference in the weight seems more, probably because the extra weight is all top heavy.

The top of the steel barrel-chamber has some roundly swirls due to whatever way it was machined,

it doesnt detract from the overall feel of the gun and adds character, so isn't really a problem.

As Clover predicted earlier the grip texture is much smoother that the Guarder or SA Glock 19 frames.

The frame and slide at the front is not flush compared to the Glock 19, but this small discrepancy can be ignored easily,

it also doesn't have the step effect on the trigger that the Glock 19 has, but I'm not too sure if the RS has this either,

so maybe someone can confirm ?

I'm sure anybody who picks one up as a first Glock purchase, will be more than happy for what they are getting for their money.

The SA G19 seems to be sold out everywhere, and I'd say there are only a handful of SA G17s left,

so it will be interesting to see if more batches arrive soon.

I have not had a chance to fire it yet and compare it with the TM G17 and SA G19,

as I'm tied up with fixing my PC, pretending I know about primary partitions and logical drives ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad 701 - can you confirm my comments above about the frame being flush with the slide if there is no magazine inserted?

Hi L2E,

Sorry not perfectly flush, very little in it though.

I'm hoping to take a few shots of a TM, WE and Stark G17 for comparrison,

it'll show how little is in it between them.

The magazine thing I never noticed in any other brand, I tried TM mags and the same effect,

if you notice it though ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are a few comparison shots between a few Glock 17s,

its actually quite difficult to reproduce the slight uneveness at the front of the Stark,

without either making it look worse than what it is or unoticeable !

Anyhow to replicate the problem yourself on your own particular brand of G17,

press the front of the slide back ever so slightly until your finger-nail will rest on the plastic frame underneath,

this will give you a better idea of what it looks like in the real world.

Probably for the cash involved this would have definetly have been one of the best replicas of the G17,

so hopefully future batches will be modified.

 

(Stark Arms - TM/Prime/Guarder - WE/HK3)

 

Glock10_zpsbfaa1bb6.jpg

 

Glock12_zps5973a037.jpg

 

Glock08_zpsbe4da9c7.jpg

 

TM/Prime/Guarder - Stark Arms - HK3/WE (Flush)

 

Glock13_zps7fc9a329.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

TM on the left compared to Stark on the right.

 

SAg17_zps9a244844.jpg

 

I found the highlighted areas rub on the magazine feedlips and cause the slide to move back slightly. Tested with TM, WE, AABB, and Stark magazines, all of which caused the strange slide issue sitting too far back at full battery. So, I removed the blowback housing unit and took a dremel to the highlighted areas. I ground them down to look more like the TM's blowback housing unit and now the slide is more or less flush with the frame.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Got one of these in today, couldn't help myself.

 

Couple of things to note!

 

Unfortunately the slide to frame fit has not been corrected even on this what I assume to be later batch. But as mentioned the problem is non-existent without the magazine in the gun. So it is something with the feed lip of the magazine, I think the rear of it. Shave off 0.25mm and it should be good. Will look into this.

 

Slapped a WE/HK3 Glock magazine in it, fit alright and the missmatch of the slide to frame fit was gone. Mag lip on WE mag is smaller compared to Stark magazine. Have not fired gun at all yet thought.

 

Chamber has the mentioned machine marks, slightly annoying but no deal breaker.

 

Sound of racking and realeasing the slide is nice.

 

Trigger pull and break is nice and crisp. Trigger stays in the rear position when pulled, as does my HK/WE Glocks. (GEN3 not so reliably though)

 

Magazine sits more flush to the frame than I expected. From the Glock 19 pics I had expected the typical RS Glock magazine to frame gap, there is none on this model. Zero-tolerance fit.

 

Love the more realistic look of this with all the little extra details. Perfect markings, realistic looking internals (locking block, frame guide rails in silver etc.), actual dual pin design in the frame.

The debossed trademarks in the frame are more glossy than the matte finish on the WE. But the overall frame material I would have to give the upper hand to WE. Frame texture in comparison seems like a non-issue.

 

Also I like the slide to frame fit of the Stark better (horizontal fit so to speak, long side.), being a little less tight. The TM/WE etc. look really strange with that zero tolerance fit.

 

I think the Stark slide is slightly shorter in height than the rest, or it's the above mentioned gap that is playing a trick on my mind.

 

Non-threaded outer barrel is a plus for me, looks more real and I don't use threaded barrels much anyhows.

 

Rear sight slides off as mentioned, but mine came off a little too easy. Not like it fell out but required less force than expected, pushed it out with my thumb.

Have ordered RS Glock 17 sights to try and fit :D

 

Magazine has pinned bottom, big no-no for me. Hate working on pinned magazines.

 

Dual spring recoil guide system feels weird when you rack the slide, last 1-2cms get really stiff. Would have preferred a linear spring more close to RS Glock 17 GEN3.

 

Seperate extractor is a nice touch, as is the realistic serial number plate instead of the retarded safety on the TM/HK/WE (can be replaced though)

 

I initially thought this gun felt a little fat like the WE Glock 17 which is Glock 20 like in size, but measuring them and comparing the Stark seems a little slimmer... I am a little tired now so maybe my conclusion is not consistent.

 

Either way, I think for the overall appearance, attention to detail and realism the Stark wins. But it's closer than I thought between this and the WE/HK Glock.

 

Got a Stark 19 and 18C on the way as well :D

Fully traded of course!

 

Well I think that is enough for now.

 

I am glad I got this and it's a nice addition to my collection for sure! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually. Regarding the frame texturing on this. As I was playing with it a bit last night the grip panel texture on the sides is noticably softer compared to the HK/WE, as seen in the pictures above. However the rest of the frame is acceptable. Slightly off but not so much so that you go WTF?

 

Also, spring guide rod is plastic as per the real steel, just wondering how well the Stark one will hold up.

Would be interesting to know what options could fit and replace the spring assembly... :o

 

Squad, did you do any measurements of comparison in terms of thickness of the frame etc? I think the Stark is slimmer but I don't know. Will have to bust out my calipers again and double check.

Just ordered a G17 / G19 leather holster so hope that works :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Just got me a package from Midway and can confirm 100% from first-hand experience that RS Glock front and rear sight are a drop in fit. Rear sight is slightly too narrow so there is about 0.25mm (if that) more "space" on either side of the sight compared to the width of the slide. Had a look at pics on Google and this is actually as per the RS Glock so...

Also rear sight fit was not as tight as I wanted to added two layers of duct tape underneath it, seems to do the trick!

 

Front sight I got was the screw on type with the flat hex-screw bottom. Fits like a glove.

 

Also RS Glock baseplates are almost a drop in fit. Tight to slide on and at first the detent pin wouldn't set in the hole of the baseplate. So just burred up the inside of the baseplate hole with a knife and then it worked no problems.

 

RS Glock magazine catch also fits and appears to hold the mag in place very well. However due to design differenses this cannot be held in by the spring in the frame. There is a cutout missing in the catch and I think it will be diffitult to modify to get it just right, but might give it a try.

 

Got a Glock 19/17 leather holster and at first glance it seems _really_ tight. I have no experience with proper fitting leather holster so maybe this is normal but I dunno. Maybe this one needs the Glock 20 holsters as well...

 

Oh yeah almost forgot! Can also confirm that my suspected fix of shaving off some material from the backside of the magazine feed lip will fix the 0.5mm gap between front of slide and frame!

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.