|December 9th, 2011, 04:13||#1|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Review: TM Glock17 ("Cansoft") [COMPLETE] 56k=death
Hey guys. I've been lent a cansoft TM Glock17 to review.
As of Thurs 8 Dec 2011 this review is incomplete.
It's getting late tonight but I'll hash out my thoughts and results all tomorrow or at least get a large chunk of it done. Right now I'm going to be doing the headers for the main topics that I'll be discussing in my review.
Update: Fri 9 Dec 2011:First impressions section added. Pics and more of my review to come later.
Update: Sat 10 Dec 2011: Review finished and pics added. If you have any questions or requests about more tests that I can do on the gun please post here or PM me. If the pics go down please PM me and I can reup them.
Update: Fri 16 Dec 2011: Did a bit more testing and redid my KSC mag test. Also added "hot weather" test and wear and tear observations. I'll have pics up sometime this weekend, I also took a pic of the gun with a mag inserted and it honestly looks pretty good since it's black as opposed to having no mag and being able to kind of see through the frame. I will also hopefully eventually get to doing 2 more (or more) accuracy tests with the hop up turned off and on this time and we'll see if that improves the grouping. I probably should have done a few repeats of the tests to make sure that my methodology and results are solid and repeatable (like any good scientist should be doing). This is actually my first "legit" review so I'm putting together a framework of what I should be testing for and looking for. I have taken inspiration from other reviews I've read so hopefully it's a good review already (and it seems like I'm getting a lot of positive comments about my review).
I'm going to be comparing it to my trusty KSC Glock19 "Heavy Weight" version. I know not a direct comparison between 2 guns of the same model but close enough IMO and really this review is moreso about the TM Glock and not TM vs KSC or anything like that.
The box itself:
The top of the box is matte feeling cardboard thats slightly waterproof on one side but definitely won't take a soaking. I found this out when I accidentally splashed some of my glass of water on the box. The box itself is your standard styrene box with cutouts for the gun and whatever else comes with it.
In the box you get:
- TM Glock
- 1x mag
- Instruction Manual
- Some BB's (that lets be honest, does anyone ever use these?)
- unjamming rod
- some cool Night sights in a nice plastic case. I didn't fit them on but they're included and held in place like the regular "black" TM Glock's with a screw on the slide. No windage adjustments though. They work decently well, you need to charge them for the GITD to work but that's acceptable. If you want otherwise, I'm sure you can fit those fibre sights onto the gun or a host of other special sights for low light easier target acquisition.
Finish of the gun and materials:
Here are both guns against a white piece of paper, note the slight transparency of the TM, but on the field at field distances no one will really care if you shoot them with a cansoft gun or a black gun a hit is still a hit and it's not like they can tell at the distances you're shooting them at anyways.
The upper slide appears to be your standard TM slide. The lower however is obviously smoked clear. Since I can't compare it to a "black" TM I'm going to compare the build material against my KSC Glock. The TM Slide at least to me feels nice, it's got more of a matte/slightly rough feel to it compared to just "flat" plastic. It's hard to describe but if you go to an electronics store (say Future shop) and check out the laptops there, there are two kinds of keyboards you're likely to come across. The "matte" and slightly "rough" style like my brothers HP laptop and others that have a "smooth" almost "shiny" keyboard (but still black and not totally reflective) like my Toshiba laptop. Anyways the slide feels nice and if anything is probably the same part as the black version.
Now just looking at the lower frame, it's tinted and IMO looks pretty good. It's not black obviously but not clear like the Canadian Tire stuff. I suspect they come from the same moulds as the regular ABS TM frames with just a different formulation for the plastic to make it smoked/tinted. I can't say about the "toughness" of the gun and how it will take to drops and rough handling but due to a different plastic formulation to make the frame clear chances are that it will have a different "toughness". Probably only being slightly weaker (obviously there has to be a minimum quality otherwise TM probably wouldn't put their name on an "inferior product" that will break running duster through it) and that's just an intuitive guess. Since I'm not Materials Eng. I can't give any exact numbers anyways, especially only being allowed to do NDT testing so I can't smash it with my trusty rock hammer or anything (and chances are it would break even the black ABS frames since it's used by Geologists and GeoEng's to smash rocks).
As an aside, knowing what I know about the manufacturing process it honestly would be cost prohibitive to make new moulds just for clear lowers especially for a smaller market like Canada (34M pop. and general cultural stance against "guns" of any kind limiting the proportion of Canadian players (estimate 5% means 1.7M players due to the "antigun" stance/culture) vs. the US where they have 307M and a more "pro gun" stance giving them more proportion of players (here we'll estimate 10% because of a more "progun" stance/culture giving us 30.7M players). tl;dr Chances are it's the same moulds as the black guns to save retooling and dev costs.
KSC on left TM on right:
If you care about markings, they look to be exactly the same as it's standard black TM counterpart and that would make sense if they use the same moulds for the lowers and only change the plastic to conform to Canadian standards and the same off the shelf OEM parts for everything else. I've only looked at online reference pics to compare against so this may not be the case for everything but it looks exactly the same as the reference pics I've been able to find. Note that my KSC is the version that does not have proper Glock trades, some KSC's do have the proper Glock logo and such but mine doesn't, I suspect it's because of after the trouble with Glock and them being sued, however another player that I know who owns a KSC Glock does have proper trades on his.
Using a kilogram scale accurate to .01 kilos +/- .005 kilos. I've measured the following:
TM no mag: .42 kg
TM with mag (gassed, no BB's): .71 kg
KSC Glock 19 "Heavy weight" version (more compact than the Glock 17, after all it's a compact version of the 17 in real steel)
KSC no mag: .48 kg
KSC with mag (gassed, no BB's): .78 kg
Considering that my Glock 19 is smaller and it is the "heavy weight" version the weight of the TM Glock is pretty good but honestly holding it in my hand it doesn't feel as nice. I know it's subjective but the way the weight is distributed is different and it doesn't feel as right. Maybe it's because I'm used to my KSC more and that's what I expect but. I wouldn't give up on a TM just because of that reason though but it's your call on how important this is. I highly recommend that people feel one in person at a game or a local retailer or something before making the decision.
KSC on top TM on bottom:
KSC on top left TM on bottom right:
Solid Internals from a look at them. This is obviously to be expected if they use the same off the shelf parts at the factory. They're not going to retool all their other machines and make a new line of internal parts just for a gun that has one slightly different part. Comparing to reference pics the internals look to be more or less the same maybe slightly newer/updated parts from small tweaks and revisions but it's all the same internals.
Mould marks are a bit more noticeable on the TM Glock OOTB compared to my KSC but then again my pistol has been used extensively. I would expect the TM to wear nicely and the mould marks to be minimal after some amount of use.
Testing with mastercraft calipers (taken 10 measurements and a median average of frame thickness) I found the exterior of the TM frame to be slightly thicker. This is standard even amongst the black TM Glocks. People who have black TM Glocks will attest to this since they usually have trouble with moulded "friction lock" holsters (eg. FOBUS Level I retention holsters). My KSC is better for fitting into specially moulded hard holsters.
NB: The above test shows that the FPS of the KSC Glock went up. No I did not mix the numbers or reverse them, this is not a mistake. I don't know why that happened but that's what the data shows. Obviously you'd expect cool down effects and that's what I expected as well but I don't want to "doctor" the data so these are the raw numbers I got.
Update 16 Dec 2011: Redid the KSC Glock test (as "requested" by racingmaniac) and these are my results, more or less they were the same conditions ~19.5C, mag left to warm up, 1 sec between shots; the only thing that I changed was to lower the hop up setting to none. It looks like they went up slightly as you would typically expect since hop up can lower the velocity of the BB slightly depending if it's no hop or full hop:
FPS testing was done using Xcortech X3200 chrono and 5 Matrix .20g BB's. Mags were filled to full and let to "warm up" for ~15 minutes to ambient temperature (~19.5C). Shots were taken aprox 1 sec apart from each other.
* When the picture and results get posted please note the one outlier on the TM grouping. I accidentally slipped and the benchrest moved but if it hadn't I would have expected a good relatively tight grouping. Also note that the TM was taken straight out of the box with no fiddling around while my KSC has had it's hop up "tuned" and set for .25's to be as straight and as accurate as possible.
Accuracy test was done indoors in an environment where all wind effects have been minimalized at a distance of ~22 feet (too short to get anything of real value but at least it's something and hell I shoot targets with .177 pellet rifles at ~30 feet so 22 feet for an airsoft grouping isn't bad but obviously larger distances like 30-40 feet would be ideal). Target used was printed off a printable 8-1/2x11 shooting target from "Cold Steel" found here. Ambient temps of ~19.5C, using 5 shots of Matrix .25g BB's taken approximately 1 second after each other. A simple benchrest was used to try and minimize human interference/variance between shots.
TM "Hot Weather"/rapid fire test:
I loaded up the TM mag full with gas and BB's (24 BB's). Put it against a space heater for about 30 seconds to simulate hot weather then dumped the mag through the chrono doing it as a decent speed of what you'd normally shoot a pistol at (well at least for me). It looks like from start to finish that the FPS was max 300 of and a minimum of 270. So 30 FPS drop from the cool down of "rapid fire". The gas in the mag couldn't finish the BB's in the mag, though at the end I had 3 BB's left in the mag. Either I didn't fill it to full capacity or gas consumption is significantly decreased during "rapid fire" (I've heard people able to get like a mag and a half out of stock TM pistols with plastic slides, can anyone confirm this?).
Wear and tear observations:
Took the slide off and it looks like the frame is holding up pretty solidly after probably ~100 BB's through it (but we'd obviously like to see more like 10,000 BB's through it). There are no places of abnormal wear I can see. Typical internals that you'd expect to show some wear from metal on metal or metal on plastic contact are showing. Mag is starting to get some light vertical streaks. Photos to come sometime this weekend.
So take my review for what it is. I can't say whether this gun is for you or not, you'll ultimately have to make the decision but I hope that this helps you guys out who are thinking of picking one of these up or something else or just looking and comparing different sidearms.
Hopefully my last edit; anyways here's a pic of the gun with a mag in it;
No flash and with flash:
As for internals after about 100-200 BB's no points of abnormal wear except in the last pic where it looks like the finish on the tip of the thing on the top centre that moves left and right, doesn't look like it's hard wear or anything just a bit of rubbing. Everything else is self explanatory. Also sorry for blurry pics I didn't have the greatest lighting and sometimes the focus was off, but at least they're not crappy cellphone pics they're from a 7 year old Point and shoot camera.
ಠ_ಠLess QQ more Pew Pew
READY TO >> RACE
Last edited by L473ncy; March 15th, 2012 at 22:29..
|December 14th, 2011, 02:10||#2|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Calgary AB
finally finished reading this. definitely an A+ review! thanks for contributing time on it.
I bet the writer has some academic background in arts or some related field?.
Last edited by sortie39; December 14th, 2011 at 13:49..
|December 14th, 2011, 13:39||#3|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Very nice review...much appreciated.
As it's reasonable to assume that the "only" difference between a stock TM glock and this clear-lower version is the lower...perhaps you could focus some "wear & tear" tests that would highlight any strengths/weaknesses of that part.
- simulate hot weather and lots of shooting....warm mags and rapid fire...while shooting BBs would be best, blank firing would add a lot of wear and tear.
- be "energetic" with inserting/changing mags
- lots of field stripping/reassembly
...make note of odd wear marks, loosening of cross-pin holes, loosening up of the areas of the frame that capture/hold lower mechs, cracks or discolouration lines that may indicate a stress point
|December 15th, 2011, 01:17||#4|
Join Date: Oct 2004
I'll get to work on that soon. I've been a bit busy lately.
Someone also wanted me to snap a pic of the gun with the mag inserted. If you see this, I haven't forgotten you and I'll get to work on that as well probably tomorrow if I can manage it.
One thing I did notice though was that the mag appeared to be a bit tight against the magwell. Almost too tight like the inside of the magwell was thicker but maybe that's just me expecting a "looser" fit than it actually should be OOTB. I fully expect it to wear down from the metal on plastic rubbing after the buyer does a bunch of mag changes. As for wear and tear I'll try to do my best without breaking the gun cause otherwise I'd have to buy it. NDT is the name of the game here, if I had the specialized NDT equipment available to me I'd totally test for microfractures and strength of the materials all that but I'll do the best I can.
ಠ_ಠLess QQ more Pew Pew
READY TO >> RACE
Last edited by L473ncy; December 15th, 2011 at 01:22..
|December 15th, 2011, 11:41||#5|
Join Date: Sep 2006
TM Glock's magwell generally takes some wear in to be "loose". You'll notice some paint wear on the mag itself on the side, and around the catch area overtime.
I am also assuming you are shooting with propane? The KSC G19's FPS number seems low, the TM number seems pretty bang on. They are never that great with out and out power, even when tuned. I sorta expect the accuracy to be better though.
It'll be interesting to see how the clear frame deals with the common TM Glock issue with the frame cracking at the front inner frame screw area...
|December 19th, 2011, 05:01||#6|
|December 27th, 2011, 00:59||#7|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
I really appreciate the time and effort you've put into the review, pictures and updates.
After a ton of reading all over the place, trying out some stuff on the field, starting a big thread in another part of this forum (with lots of advice from you guys), and finally, reading this review, I've pulled the trigger on one of these (no pun intended). I won't get terribly many chances to really put it through its paces this winter (except perhaps a couple upcoming indoor games), but when I do I'll try to remember to drop a note in this thread with my experience.
Now you know
|January 28th, 2012, 18:54||#9|
Join Date: Jan 2009
I still filled the weak point in the trigger gard with epoxy putty (might as well while changing lowers, it is after all more of a design flaw than a problem with the ABS and takes 5min to do) and it should completly resolves any cracking issues you might encounter in the futur. Once filled in, you can tell that part is now rock solid. I have yet to see someone that did this mod have an issue afterwards.
|January 28th, 2012, 18:59||#10|
|January 28th, 2012, 19:00||#11|
|February 5th, 2013, 12:16||#14|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Centre Mass
...and with almost any plastic gun.
The TM 5-7 is notorious for having a weak slide, for example, even thought it has an inner slide for added protection like the real steel counterpart. THe problem is, that inner slide is also plastic. I replaced mine with an aluminum inner made by Prime.
For the screw casing, the Guarder one doesn't really fix it. It just takes longer to break. You'll need to add extra support to it as some above posts have already suggested and then dampen the recoil power.
For me, the cansoft frame just serves as a temporary replacement. And even in the short time of its service, it breaks....
Nevertheless, very good review. Thumbs up!
"May you fight with the strength of ten full grown men."