Why Not Glock


PDA






navyretired 1
March 7, 2010, 06:34 PM
I just read a post where every other person trashed the Glock, Why?
I've had a Glock 17 since they first imported, I've been to Glock Armorer's class, and I've got probably 12-13K rounds through it, some of the worst trash to hit these shore's surplus some of it subgun stuff and hot.
I've never had a problem, failure of any kind and the only part ever installed was a 3 1/2 Lb G17L connector.
So how about some reason's for this negitivity with provable and confirmable points. I consider fugly as a objective reason not a real reason. There are a lot of LEO's and solder's as well as sportsmen love them.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why Not Glock" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MisterMike
March 7, 2010, 06:41 PM
It comes down to this: those who don't own one are envious because they don't own a perfect pistol. :D

Wildyams
March 7, 2010, 06:42 PM
A lot of people don't like them because they have no character.. everyone and their cousin has one.

There isn't a gun out there that someone won't hate on, some have good reason some don't.

General Geoff
March 7, 2010, 06:44 PM
I just read a post where every other person trashed the Glock, Why?

Your Glock is not everyone's Glock. Due to the massive number of Glock pistols on the market and in the hands of Americans, there are bound to be some lemons that slip by. The squeaky wheel is the one that's noticed, so on gun forums, you're more likely to hear about the one guy whose Glock exploded from a partially supported case, or whose pistol failed to eject once, instead of the five thousand guys on the forum who have had trouble-free usage from their Glocks for years.

MattTheHat
March 7, 2010, 06:44 PM
It's the same as with 1911s. Some people love them (and hate evil plastic guns) and some people hate them (and love evil plastic guns). :)

Personally, I don't care for the grip angle of the Glock. But many years ago, I had a 19 that I shot the heck out of. I was young and I'm sure I mistreated her substantially, yet she never complained once that I recall.

Add to this the fact that many people just seem to need to bash others' belongings and preferences. Still haven't figured that out. If I care for this or that, I just try to keep my mouth shut. :)

-Matt

LeontheProfessional
March 7, 2010, 06:46 PM
It is polymer and it is the most popular handgun in the world. That is why people don't like them. The steel framers hate them because they are polymer. The other polymer guys hate them because they are more famous than their polymer gun even though their polymer gun is probably based on the Glock design.

navyretired 1
March 7, 2010, 06:47 PM
Mr Mike it can't be just that as they are almost pathological hate. Yet at the same time every swinging Di(K manufacturer is trying to copy them and guy's are tripping over each other to by the other plastic guns.
Nice to see someone who agrees with me, thanks Mike

jcart
March 7, 2010, 06:50 PM
I used to be one of these that could not stand them. One day I got my hands on a G19. I have come to realize they work. They do what they are designed to do. I have been thru 1911's. Sigs, S&W, XD's to name a few. The Glock is my go to.
I think alot of the hate comes from traditionals... wood, steel, blue finish. Looks pretty to show friends.
The Glock flat out works, is very easy to repair. Anything made by man will fail, however I have met far to many people like you that have put 100k, 200k thru the guns, some of the worst ammo they had and the Glock still works, rain or shine.
Kinda of like an AK rifle- it works.
As a friend once told me,, caveman simple... the AK and the Glock.
When the moment comes, do you want pretty and fussy or do you pick up what you can without a doubt depend on.
Fancy guns you show to your friends
The Glock is what you show to your enemy.

Not quit what you asked for but....

General Geoff
March 7, 2010, 06:51 PM
Also, the Glock pistol is the Honda Accord of the gun world. Affordable, reliable, ubiquitous; it is an appliance gun.




Lots and lots of people hate Hondas, because it is an appliance car. As someone mentioned previously, it has no character. I suspect that is why a lot of people who have no better excuse, dislike Glocks.

navyretired 1
March 7, 2010, 06:52 PM
Wow apparently the rest of us don't speak up enough because this is what I would expect. By the way If I remember right from school the grip angle the same as government model. Good stuff guy's, exactly what I was talking about.

LeontheProfessional
March 7, 2010, 06:53 PM
Don't worry it will only be a matter of time before the hatters chime in.

Zundfolge
March 7, 2010, 06:58 PM
Main reason I don't own any Glocks is because they just don't fit my hand well.

I got no hate for the Glock but I got no love either ... no reason to own a gun you don't love.

General Geoff
March 7, 2010, 06:58 PM
By the way If I remember right from school the grip angle the same as government model.

The Glock has a far more raked grip angle than a 1911.

KBintheSLC
March 7, 2010, 06:59 PM
Over time, you will learn to ignore the Glock hate threads as I have. Whether or not you like Glock's, you ought to at least respect what they have done for the industry. They were not the first poly-frame handgun... just the first successful one.

DannyZRC
March 7, 2010, 07:00 PM
reasonable criticisms of glocks : personal disagreement with the interface paradigm, personal disagreement with trigger qualities, personal disagreement with aesthetics and ergonomics. mostly personal disagreements.

the only functional criticisms of glocks I can really find are that the .40 models are, by consensus at least, more likely to KB than other .40 pistols. (I won't stand behind that as fact).

I think most glock disparaging types agree with consensus that they are reliably functioning guns that are, if not the absolute top mfg, certainly in the top tier for quality of manufacture and design.

but the reasons they dislike glocks are every bit as reasonable as the reasons fans like them.

so it goes.

Justin
March 7, 2010, 07:01 PM
Glocks are perfectly acceptable handguns for defensive, concealed carry, and some competitive applications.

General Geoff
March 7, 2010, 07:02 PM
Yes, Glocks are perfectly cromulent handguns. :D

JTQ
March 7, 2010, 07:03 PM
navyretired 1 wrote,
By the way If I remember right from school the grip angle the same as government model.
Not if you are referring to Government Model as used by the US government as in Colt Government Model (1911).

The Glock grip angle is more like the Luger.

There is lots of Glock love on this and other sites. You pretty much can't have a day go by without somebody mentioning "Glock" and "perfection" in the same sentence or referring to some wild torture test that most would never subject their guns to.

That is probably what causes all of the "disdain" for the Glock. People just plain tired of hearing how great they are. Same for the 1911 haters.

I believe they are fine pistols. Some like them, some don't.

navyretired 1
March 7, 2010, 07:03 PM
And the movers too,
I've been gunsmithing since 1999 when I retired from Navy and I've never had to repair a Glock, I've put sights on them, extended slide releases, trigger connectors and cleaned guns not cleaned for 100's or 1000's of rounds but I've not replaced even one broken part?

MIgunguy
March 7, 2010, 07:06 PM
LOL, I told someone the other day an Accord is the Glock of the automotive world.

ATBackPackin
March 7, 2010, 07:11 PM
I don't hate Glocks even though I don't own one and probably never will. When I was first looking to get a pistol they were the very first gun I picked up. Unfortunately they simply do not fit my hand right and I say unfortunate because they are a super reliable and reasonably priced. You know when you pick up a gun if it is for you or not and Glock just didn't do it for me. But just because it is not for me doesn't mean there is something wrong with the gun. I recommend them to people if I think it fits their criteria.

My problem however, and I would suspect a lot of people have the same problem, is that when someone is asking for opinions about a different brand(s) or about something where a Glock would not fit their criteria at all, somebody will say "Get a Glock"........................

........That's it! No rhyme or reason. I know Glocks are really good guns and I would have to imagine that most reasonable people know so as well, but that doesn't mean they are the only good gun. If they want to suggest a Glock, that is fine but please at least give a reason or show how it will fit their needs. What I hate is when someone runs in and says, "Get a Glock, you won't regret it" and then poof, they're gone.

But I say again I do not hate Glocks, just the opposite actually.

Just my 2 cents worth......................and no I do not want my change.;)

Shawn

shockwave
March 7, 2010, 07:13 PM
Speaking just for myself, I find it hard to get a good grip on a Glock. I've fired a half-dozen or so from compact to full-size, 9mm to .45. They all seem to be really light in the front, so there's muzzle flip with them I don't get with heavier framed autos and revolvers. I've seen guys in IPSC shoot very well with them so accuracy isn't an issue and they seem rugged and well made. A Glock wouldn't be my first choice in a handgun, but they aren't bad weapons.

navyretired 1
March 7, 2010, 07:15 PM
Sorry just put protractor on them and the Glock is approx 6 degrees steeper that GM, Hey that's my first mistake ever. LOL

earlthegoat2
March 7, 2010, 07:16 PM
If I were issued one as a LEO I would be quite happier with the Glock than an M&P or an XD.

As it is since I dont have to have one, I find them to make me yawn.

It doesnt help that every other manufacturer has basically copied them. M&Ps, XDs, and Glocks all look the same and they make me go color blind when I do look at them.

Anyway, call it jealousy or stupidity that is my reason.

Prion
March 7, 2010, 07:20 PM
My frustration with Glock is simply the lack of evolution of the design from an ergo standpoint. Seems a lot of companies are figuring out how to make super-reliable and ergonomic guns. Glock ignores the complaints for quite awhile then gives us the Gen 4 with backstraps that do nothing to alleviate the 'hump'. How about just expanding the line a little bit by offering a less rakish frame without the hump along with the standard grip for those who like it? If it was a $350 new I could see it just staying the same but for the money I'd like to see some other options.

Still, I'll pick up a gen-3 G-19 soon. Undeniably one of the greatest small-arms in history.

9mmepiphany
March 7, 2010, 07:24 PM
i'll try this one.

just so you know i'm not a hater, i own a G19 and think everyone should...just so they understand what folks are talking about when they give an opinion. many of my opinions aren't very popular, but they are based on experience rather than "hearing about it or reading about it". i try out most guns because i teach pistol craft and it is unfair to a student to not be familiar with whatever they choose.

A. the most common complaints about the G17, i'm going to use it as the standard, has to do with the grip.
1. the grip angle is different - for folks brought up on the 1911 grip angle, it just points wrong. the European angle (that's what it is) comes from the fencing grip and is easier to adapt to if you don't have previous experience. the American grip is more akin to that used for a hammer
2. the grip is too large - this is borne out by the fact that there is a avid market for either straight grip frames or frame work to straighten out the grip. te arc of the backstrap makes a normal grip feel somewhat stretcthed

B. the trigger is marketed as being DAO. this was very clever of Glock to be able to compete for LE contracts that spec'd DAO pistols. the argument can go on forever, but i don't consider any trigger action that doesn't allow 2nd strike capability as DA at all...there is a feeling of "cheating" here

C. the trigger is mushy- this doesn't mean it can be controled, just that it won't give you that "glass rod" break...which we've been taught is the desired goal

D. they set themselves up for criticism by marketing as "perfection" rather than letting the market give them that title. (changing models here) it's hard to claim perfection when generous chambers caused blown cases, slide stops wore the slide stop notch and weapon mounted lights restricted frame flex to the point that it was causing mis-feeds...you do have to give Glock credit for correcting the first 2 and installing a stop gap for the 3rd.

E. the dis-assembly procedure is designed for a military contract and has an inherent safety issue in the civilian market...it is not tolerant of a mis-step. yes this is a training problem, but it isn't shared with other guns

F. an objective reason is by definition as "real " reason, reguardless, the Glock has the soul of a Honda Accord or a Toyota Camry...it works, but it's just boring.

i'm interested in the claim that "a lot of...soldiers...love them"...has any major military, other than Austria (i'm being generous), adopted the Glock?

also "based on the Glock design" is a bit misleading, my experience has shown the Springfield XD and certainly the S&W M&P are product improved products.

what i find amusing, is the ire raised when i say that the Glock is the modern day 1911

M2 Carbine
March 7, 2010, 07:27 PM
Personally I dislike the Glock to the point that I have turned down a new free G17 and G26.

The same person that tried to give me the new G17 tried, some months ago, to give me the G26.
Since I had already refused the G17, after keeping it about six months, I kept the G26 and shot it for a few weeks.
I tried to like it, I really did, but I gave it back to him.

I've shot the Glock 17, 19 and 26 a good bit and have taught people to shoot them.
They are a simple point and shoot gun. Fairly accurate and fairly reliable but they do fail,as I have witnessed a number of times.

Since I make it a point to not bash a gun that I don't own, I'll just leave it at, I don't like the gun.

navyretired 1
March 7, 2010, 07:55 PM
9MM Epiphany I ment to say subjective not objective my bag, good catch. BTW all the people who say the grip angle and girth is difficult, I agree, I own a G21 but can't shoot it worth a damn because of the size of the grip, I've got small hands. I can't get rid of it because it's my favorite caliber and I bought mag ban hi-caps @ $125 each X 3 so there is no way I can afford to sell it.
I never said they were perfect and they are boring but they shoot.

ms6852
March 7, 2010, 08:08 PM
I would not mine owning a Glock, the problem I have with them is that I am a lefty and the magazine release button gets in the way of my trigger finger. It just extends too far out and has really sharp edges which become very noticeable with recoil after a couple of mags have been fired.

cjl8651
March 7, 2010, 08:09 PM
I would think that personal preference has an impact on a person's choice of handgun. Humans by nature aren't completely objective. I picked the P99 over the Glock because as illogical as it may seem, aesthetics do matter to me. It's only a range handgun, and can't be used for defensive purposes in my country. That behind said however, I will eventually get a Glock, but only a Gen 4 model, as I find the Gen 3 grip too thick and uncomfortable. But then with anything, each unto their own.

mcdonl
March 7, 2010, 08:13 PM
A lot of people don't like them because they have no character.. everyone and their cousin has one.

Are we talking Glock's or 1911's?

Come on man... they are guns. Some are black with striker fired mechanisms and some a blue or shiny with external hammers.

Someday. I will own one of both.

NJGunOwner81
March 7, 2010, 08:54 PM
Hey Navy!

For me it's just an aesthetic personal preference. I have nothing bad to say about Glock and from what I have read through many forums the Glock line of pistols are very light, reliable, and durable but for me I just don't like the way they look or they feel in my hand.

Glocks are very blocky and toy-looking to me. Ever since I starting looking at guns I was just drawn to the sleek lines of the 1911s.

I just hope everyone likes and enjoys their firearms no matter what they are or who makes them.

Take Care & Be Safe

Frank
NJGunOwner81

searcher451
March 7, 2010, 09:16 PM
The question can as easily be asked this way: Why Glock?

It's not that I have anything against Glock, mind you. For me, the answer to the question -- either question, yours or mine -- is a trigger that I find to be on the mushy side. In fact, it's safe to say that I have tried very hard to like Glock, and I have failed. :( I have no problem with those who love their Glocks. Beauty is always in the eye of the gun-holder.

ohioshooter
March 7, 2010, 09:24 PM
Going into this am I had 4 glocks (21 is the wifes). Now I have 2. Sold a G31 and a G22 today. Only got rid of them because I wanted to fund more 1911's and/or any type of .45 to my liking. I alternate carry between a G19 and a Kimber 1911. To make a long story longer, The only Glock that I'll ever own is a G19 because it works and I shoot it well..its a boring gun and it gets scratched from holter wear etc. so I really don't care what happens to this gun because it's nothing to look at. It's boring like other posters have said but it simply works. Am I a fan, nope, but do I have one, yep.

Doug S
March 8, 2010, 02:51 AM
LOL, I told someone the other day an Accord is the Glock of the automotive world.

I guess I'm with the Honda, Glock guys. Glocks are my favorite handgun, and Honda my favorite auto (only I prefer my Element to the Accord).:cool:

Glock and Honda Element both = function over form. That said, once most people try them they tend to become more fond of the form because of the excellent function. How's that for circular reasoning.:confused:

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 03:41 AM
A. the most common complaints about the G17, i'm going to use it as the standard, has to do with the grip.
1. the grip angle is different - for folks brought up on the 1911 grip angle, it just points wrong. the European angle (that's what it is) comes from the fencing grip and is easier to adapt to if you don't have previous experience. the American grip is more akin to that used for a hammer

Good assessment.


2. the grip is too large - this is borne out by the fact that there is a avid market for either straight grip frames or frame work to straighten out the grip. te arc of the backstrap makes a normal grip feel somewhat stretcthed

The overwhelming majority of Glock owners/users leave their grip stock. No one complains about the Beretta/CZ/Hi-Power/M1911-A1/Etc. that has the same backstrap profile.


B. the trigger is marketed as being DAO. this was very clever of Glock to be able to compete for LE contracts that spec'd DAO pistols. the argument can go on forever, but i don't consider any trigger action that doesn't allow 2nd strike capability as DA at all...there is a feeling of "cheating" here

The Glock is pre-set Double action only. Second strike capability has nothing to do with it.


C. the trigger is mushy- this doesn't mean it can be controled, just that it won't give you that "glass rod" break...which we've been taught is the desired goal

The Glock has arguably the best trigger in its class. Not to mention its unbeatable reset.


D. they set themselves up for criticism by marketing as "perfection" rather than letting the market give them that title.

The market has.


(changing models here) it's hard to claim perfection when generous chambers caused blown cases,The majority of problems are due to reloads. slide stops wore the slide stop notchIt is a "slide stop lever." However Glock fixed the slide stop notch in the late 80's. and weapon mounted lights restricted frame flex to the point that it was causing mis-feeds...That was a magazine problem and has been fixed with the newest magazines. Look for a "1" or "2" on the back of .40 mags.you do have to give Glock credit for correcting the first 2 and installing a stop gap for the 3rd.


E. the dis-assembly procedure is designed for a military contract and has an inherent safety issue in the civilian market...it is not tolerant of a mis-step. yes this is a training problem, but it isn't shared with other guns

100% training issue. Also, many pistols require the trigger to be pulled for field stripping.


F. an objective reason is by definition as "real " reason, reguardless, the Glock has the soul of a Honda Accord or a Toyota Camry...it works, but it's just boring.

Illogical reason to hate something.


i'm interested in the claim that "a lot of...soldiers...love them"...has any major military, other than Austria (i'm being generous), adopted the Glock?

The Glock is one of the most widely used military pistols in the world.


also "based on the Glock design" is a bit misleading, my experience has shown the Springfield XD and certainly the S&W M&P are product improved products.

While the three pistols are much different from each other I certainly would not call them "improved." .....

JoeSlomo
March 8, 2010, 03:52 AM
Glocks are great guns.

Not for me though.

The ergonomics don't fit my hand well, and I HATE the triggers.

9mmepiphany
March 8, 2010, 04:17 AM
The overwhelming majority of Glock owners/users leave their grip stock. No one complains about the Beretta/CZ/Hi-Power/M1911-A1/Etc. that has the same backstrap profile.
i would say since most Glock users are LE, that they do not have the ability to modify their grip, but there must be a market or the service wouldn't be offered. i would say that the backstrap of of the Glock, Beretta, CZ, P35 and 1911-A1 might be similar but not "the same"...they certainly don't feel the same

The Glock is pre-set Double action only. Second strike capability has nothing to do with it.
with the striker at rest...having been release, but not discharging a round...the Glock action would be the same as that of the 1911...which was what the original LE specs of DAO was intended to avoid. as i've said Glock did an outstanding marketing job

The market has.
now that is certainly arguable, other wise we wouldn't be having this discussion

weapon mounted lights restricted frame flex to the point that it was causing mis-feeds...That was a magazine problem and has been fixed with the newest magazines
how does one "fix" a frame flex problem, with new magazines?...that "fix" is the stop gap measure that i referred to. perhaps it is again an example of their strong marketing efforts

Illogical reason to hate something.
i don't hate the Glock, i'm quite fond of my G19...the statement was that it is boring. choice between boring and interesting is a personal one

While the three pistols are much different from each other I certainly would not call them "improved."
my statement was in response to the assertion that the other pistols were just copies of the Glock. i think that if they fit my needs better, that would make them an improved product

my objection isn't to the Glock design, because i think they did a great job of advancing the handgun market...as Kimber did in their time. my objection is to the kool-aid drinkers who can't admit that it has faults

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 04:56 AM
but there must be a market or the service wouldn't be offered.
It is a small market.
the Glock action would be the same as that of the 1911
No. Second strike capability has nothing to do with determining if a pistol is double action.
as i've said Glock did an outstanding marketing job
Para/Kel-Tec/Ruger/S&W/Caracal/Styer/Walther/Taurus/Etc. are the same.
now that is certainly arguable,
Glock owns the market.
how does one "fix" a frame flex problem, with new magazines?
It never was a frame flex problem. Cartridges were nose diving because Glock used the same 10 coil 9mm mag spring in the .40. The new 11 coil spring fixed the problem.
i don't hate the Glock
It was a general statement.
my objection is to the kool-aid drinkers who can't admit that it has faults
Most things people bitch about are not faults.

seanie!
March 8, 2010, 05:09 AM
I dislike Glocks for multiple reasons, and I'll list them in order of "slightly bothersome" to "downright irritating", with the first the least annoying, the next slightly more-so, and so on:

I don't like how they look.

I don't like how they feel in my hand.

I don't like the triggers.

I don't like the term "Glock leg" and what it implies.

I don't like the fanboys.

That seems about right. Honestly, they're not bad guns, they're just not for me. I like manual safeties, personalization(because let's face it, even personalized Glocks look just like everyone else's personalized Glocks; i.e. Lone Wolf barrels, slides, etc.), and character. That's not saying every gun I own follows all of the above, but most of them do. While I think any gun that can be buried for a year, dug up, shaken out, and shot is a pretty good reason to like them, it's just not a good enough one for me to buy one.

nullcontext
March 8, 2010, 05:23 AM
I think a lot of it has to do with glock owners lording how superior it is as a handgun. I've gotten kind of tired of glock and 1911 bashing from both sides. Both are good guns, they have advantages/disadvantages, and then of course there is personal preference.

The glock, is simple, it's the AK of the pistol world.... cheap, reliable, simple and easy to clean, and durable. But for accuracy the trigger is tough to get used to and the safety being in the trigger itself kinda sucks. I love the lighter trigger pull but some have complained that it has a long trigger pull. I actually want a lighter trigger.

Whatever, it's simple, easy to clean, and cheap, and doesn't jam that often.

It's a worthwhile gun to own as part of your collection, my personal preference, own them all if you have the money.

Because you can learn to love the ugliest quirkiest crap as having it's own unique charm... it's what loving something is all about.

I haven't shot a firearm yet that I haven't enjoyed. :D

9mmepiphany
March 8, 2010, 05:25 AM
It never was a frame flex problem. Cartridges were nose diving because Glock used the same 10 coil 9mm mag spring in the .40. The new 11 coil spring fixed the problem.

are we talking about a different set of issues?

i'm referring to officers experiencing feeding failures with the G22s when they attached their weapon lights to the rails during qualifications...causing the guns to be taken out of service

i understand that Glock's "fix" was to increase the strength of the magazine spring to bring the rounds up the tube faster.

but if the problem was a result of attaching the weapon lights to the frame, how would that not be a frame flex problem...the guns were feeding fine before, weren't they?

RP88
March 8, 2010, 05:32 AM
the grip angle is not the most ergonomic; the gun naturally points up a tad too much. The finger grooves are also not to some people's liking since they force your hand, so some people can't make a Glock fit their hand the way they want them to. It really is ironic that this is so, since the whole point was so the gun WAS ergonomic (it isn't horrid, but it is made pretty much for the in-between on hand size and not much else). The trigger is not TOO heavy, but it is a short break, with all the weight being right before the trigger actuates the rest of the gun (i.e. it has more of a 6lb break than it does a 6lb pull). The trigger safety can also have a tendency to slap your trigger finger. A lot of people dislike the plastic recoil spring rod, the blocky appearance, and the mag release. They also complain that, for $475-500 or so, you're getting ripped off on a gun that doesn't even cost $80 to make. There are also people who either experienced or have heard from people who have a bad taste in their mouth and a scar on their hand due to the unsupported chamber + .40 or reload/lead bullet + KB! panic that plagued Glock for a couple years.

...did I miss anything? Not all of these are faults, but even I notice them and I'm the kind of guy who can hold an AK or FAL and be like "hmmm, it feels great!"

Anyways, I chose a Glock 17 as my first handgun and haven't regretted it. it's simple, reliable, affordable, accurate if you do your part/get used to it, light and compact, comfy to carry, etc. etc. etc.

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 05:49 AM
but if the problem was a result of attaching the weapon lights to the frame, how would that not be a frame flex problem..
It is really hard for me to explain the physics of it. Here is an article from Streamlight:
Q: Are there Issues Using Tactical Lights on Glock® Pistols?


A: Some Glock® .40 caliber pistols, models 22 and 23, exhibit feeding malfunctions, either nose down or nose up (stovepipe), when used with tactical lights. The problems tend to occur with individual guns, with some pistols becoming totally unreliable while other identical, even close in serial number sequence, guns have no problems. Most models 22 and 23 are reliable.

A sensitive gun may malfunction with any tactical light - the TLRs, the older M models, and even Glock®’s own brand. There is evidence that the problem sometimes develops with use, and may progress until the pistol is unreliable even with no light attached.

On the basis of testing by Streamlight, we believe the problem is magazine related. It appears that the rounds are unable to rise fast enough for proper cycling. We have observed proper feeding for the first few rounds, consistent failures at mid-magazine capacity, and a return to proper feeding of the last few cartridges in the magazine.

We have tried both stronger and weaker recoil springs, and compound-action recoil buffers, all without success. Sometimes new magazine springs, either new Glock® or Wolff, will cure the problem. In one case of a pistol which was totally reliable when new but progressed to malfunctioning on every magazine, even with no light installed, we found two solutions which restored reliability, but which might not be acceptable to some users. The first was using 10 round capacity Glock® magazines. The gun will not cycle reliably with 15 round mags with their steeply stacked columns but works flawlessly with 10 round mags. The second solution was a new magazine follower from Brownells®, their part number 069-000-006. When used in a 15 round magazine with a new spring, reliability was restored. However, the follower would not lock the slide open after the last round.

Ammunition is also a factor with any weapon. Some brands and weights may be totally reliable while others jam repeatedly. Make sure your gun is thoroughly tested with your duty ammo.

Brownells® is a registered trademark of Brownells®, Inc.
Glock® is a registered trademark of GLOCK Gesellschaft mbH.
http://www.streamlight.com/faq/

memphisjim
March 8, 2010, 06:06 AM
too much reading i didnt do it but the beginner of the thread didnt shoot a 10mm so he doesnt own a glock

DannyZRC
March 8, 2010, 06:39 AM
I have to imagine that the impediment to function with the light attached is frame flex.

the physical result of having the light attached during firing would be to damp the pistols oscillation in the up/down directions. in a sufficiently stiff assembly, the slide/frame/magazine should all move as a unit, so the movement of the whole unit through space shouldn't affect the feeding mechanism. my suspicion is that a pistol with a less rigid frame might experience increased friction in the magazine as it is stressed from those flex loads, and that increased drag on the rounds would impede proper feeding.

if the increased mag spring tension solves the issue, I would have no reason to assume that the slight bit of flex that caused the problem in the first place is indicative of any long term concerns.

JTQ
March 8, 2010, 08:18 AM
Isn't the main reason for the Gen 4 Glocks is to fix the "weapon's light problem"?

Bohemus
March 8, 2010, 09:17 AM
I dont like their grip, same probem with 1911 - its like holding a brick. I like the look and relibility, I dont even mind the trigger..

easyg
March 8, 2010, 12:36 PM
I really don't get the grip angle complaint....it just seems like a rather lame excuse to dislike Glocks.


I've shot AR's, AK's, FAL's, 1911's from quite a few different makers, Brownings, HK's, CZ's, Glocks, Ruger autos and Ruger revolvers, S&W autos and S&W revolvers, Kahrs, Sigs, Walthers, SA XD's, Taurus autos and Taurus revolvers, Colt revolvers, Shotguns from quite a few makers, and some that I just can't remember right now....

I've used many different types of hammers, wrenches, drivers, drills, saws, etc....

And I have never had any problem with my hand adapting to the weapon or tool.

And I've yet to see any competent shooter pick up a Glock, even for the first time ever, and fail to put lead on target.

thorn-
March 8, 2010, 01:09 PM
I think a lot of it has to do with glock owners lording how superior it is as a handgun.

Agreed. After awhile it's like opening your door to check the mail and seeing 20 people standing outside who can't wait to tell you how great their religion is.

I've owned a Glock. There were things I liked, and things I didn't. I liked the availability of parts. It was very easy to clean, and even completely detail strip. The price is nice; mags are easy to find and affordable.

I didn't like the trigger. It was mushy and creepy. Yes, it has a great reset - but that's less of a big deal to me than the actual pull. The grip felt like a bar of soap. The mag release wasn't good for my hands... replacing it with a larger aftermarket button improved it, but I find lever releases (HK, Walther) to be nicer. The grip angle was no big deal to me, honestly.

After 18 months of owning a G19, I was still consistently hitting to the left. The first time I shot a P99, I hit the 10 ring several times... I'm willing to admit it was me, and not the Glock - but I suppose we weren't a good fit, and I sold it.

I drive a stickshift. It's fun, and I like the control it offers me in terms of RPM vs gearing. I've never owned a car with an auto trans. Doesn't mean i never will, but for now it's what I'm happy with. Has never occurred to me to jump on a web forum and start trying to educate people on the superiority of it.

If you ASK me my opinion on a particular gun vs another, I'll be happy to offer my observations on A & B. But that's much different than all the... Glock evangelists running around quoting Tommy Lee Jones, or jumping into unrelated threads about 1911 reliability and mentioning for the Nth time that you can drop a Glock from orbit into a pit of lava and it will still hit the X at 25 yards.

The fanboy koolaid crowd just gets old after awhile. We get it: you love your Glocks. You think it's the coolest gun ever, and better than anything else on the planet. Great - glad you've got a handgun that you enjoy... everyone should. Now go shoot it, and stop trying to convert the rest of us.

thorn

RonBernert
March 8, 2010, 02:06 PM
:D:what: So which is better, 9mm or .45? :neener::evil:











I'll be ducking in the corner over here.....:scrutiny:

Boats
March 8, 2010, 02:25 PM
I freely admit to being a "hater." I might as well since I'd be called one anyways for disagreeing with cultists.

I won't buy a Glock because:

They have those stupid finger bumpers, or grooves, or whatever they are, but they hit me wrong all over. Allegedly this is "my problem," and not a stupid "one size fits some" design shortcoming.

The trigger is too short reach for my tastes and there is nothing to effectively be done about that.

There's the hump at the bottom of the back strap that is rather unlike anything else I have ever fired. It's absolutely ridiculous that Gen 4 Glocks only change the level of annoyance at this "feature" but do nothing to eliminate it.

The trigger guard/front strap is unrelieved to any degree I'd call usable. Glocks rub me the wrong way literally on my middle finger.

The brake pedal on the bang switch is irritating. I won't own an XD or a SR9 due to this "feature" either.

The nearly non-existent slide release lever forces overhanding or sling shooting of the slide and I like having the option to use a real slide release.

The squarish magazine catch is tremendously annoying and not well blended into the frame. Now they've made it even bigger.:rolleyes:

And none of the above even touches upon the idiotic grip angle. Oh, wait, the Still Fat and the Really Thick Founder, and the "Generation 4" of "perfection" are futilely trying to address many of these "non-issues."

Some shooters I respect like Glocks, because they apparently fit enough and they are fairly reliable. Lots of idjits I cannot respect are drool monkeys for their Fuhrerpistole all over the internet concerning these "combat weapons." Never mind that they were designed by a non-shooting curtain rod manufacturer for a non-shooting conscript filled army which hasn't been seen "fighting" anyone since it was last capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago. Yeah, compared to just about everyone else in the world, Austrians know what design characteristics best go into a combat pistol.:rolleyes:

Poor ergonomics is issue 1a. Semi-retarded Glock evangelism is 1b. We're all supposed to be impressed by ol' Gaston basically giving away his misshaped lumps to gain domestic cop market share through currying favor with bean counters who couldn't say no to such cheap-ass deals.?

I guess I have higher standards than that.

Fiv3r
March 8, 2010, 02:31 PM
I like pretty much every other gun in my collection more than my Glock. They either have sentimental value or a neat milsurp history or feel so great in my hands.....but I'll be damned if a Glock isn't on my hip today as i type:confused:

It's a tool to me and nothing more. I'm not the kind of guy that gets too bent out of shape what kind of phone he carries or car he drives or what have you. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of days I switch my my carrying options based on mood;) However, my G36 simply works. Eats what I feed it, doesn't need to babied or tinkered with, doesn't seem to want to rust, and was inexpensive enough that if I should break it I won't cry too much. It's just a dependable part of my daily carry. I'm not a fanboi or kool aide drinker, it just works as a soulless product that serves my basic need of self protection.

Keys, phone, watch, wallet, knife...and my Glock.

9mmepiphany
March 8, 2010, 05:20 PM
On the basis of testing by Streamlight, we believe the problem is magazine related. It appears that the rounds are unable to rise fast enough for proper cycling. We have observed proper feeding for the first few rounds, consistent failures at mid-magazine capacity, and a return to proper feeding of the last few cartridges in the magazine.

We have tried both stronger and weaker recoil springs, and compound-action recoil buffers, all without success. Sometimes new magazine springs, either new Glock® or Wolff, will cure the problem. In one case of a pistol which was totally reliable when new but progressed to malfunctioning on every magazine, even with no light installed

I have to imagine that the impediment to function with the light attached is frame flex.

the physical result of having the light attached during firing would be to damp the pistols oscillation in the up/down directions. in a sufficiently stiff assembly, the slide/frame/magazine should all move as a unit, so the movement of the whole unit through space shouldn't affect the feeding mechanism. my suspicion is that a pistol with a less rigid frame might experience increased friction in the magazine as it is stressed from those flex loads, and that increased drag on the rounds would impede proper feeding

i don't think Streamlight had the facility to analyze frame flex and arrived at a cure for the effect, not the cause...as did Glock. my LE source told me that they were promised, by their glock rep, that Glock would address the flex problem in upcoming modifications.

apparently the flex affects the geometry of the feeding cycle by moving the flex point back toward the vertical grip frame, binding the magazine body...that's why the issue arises at mid-mag. stronger springs will "push though" the bind but it doesn't address the cause.

it reminds me of the story about the development of the M1 Abrams tank. drivers were finding that they could reverse direction faster...getting in and out of hides...by not waiting for the tank to completely stop before shifting the transmission between forward and reverse. this was hailed as great resourcefulness of the drivers and could save lives...the downside is that it was hard on transmissions...so they asked for a fix. the manufacturer decided to disable the ability rather than strengthen the transmission...so they stopped the problem rather than fix the flaw.

the Glock frame flex wouldn't even be such an issue, except for the marketing of the G22 to LE. these issues don't seem to come up with the Glocks chambered in 9mm..and surely there are more 9mm Glocks on the market than .40 Glocks

Fishslayer
March 8, 2010, 05:28 PM
No hate for the Glocks here. Never handled one, no real opinion.

But it IS an absolute fact that a pistol should be made of metal and it should have a hammer...

Other than that...:D

Then there's the Glock "image"

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/homeboysights.jpg

Locnar
March 8, 2010, 05:37 PM
Personally, I don't care for the grip angle of the Glock.

^ This

easyg
March 8, 2010, 05:55 PM
...Fuhrerpistole...

...for a non-shooting conscript filled army which hasn't been seen "fighting" anyone since it was last capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago...

...Yeah, compared to just about everyone else in the world, Austrians know what design characteristics best go into a combat pistol.

I think your hatred of Glocks goes way beyond the mere design of the pistols.
Remarks like these speak volumes about your mindset.

I guess you also hate Italian designed weapons too (Berettas for example).
After all, Italy really hasn't fought any more shooting wars than Austria.

And of course you probably hate those German made weapons as well (HK and Walther) being designed also by those "capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago".

And you must really hate FN and Browning pistols!
After all, Belgium couldn't even defeat the Austrians, Italians, and Germans.

And of course you must also hate the Swiss designed weapons (Sig), designed for non-shooting conscripts of a nation that did the banking for the Austrians and Germans about 60 years ago.

navyretired 1
March 8, 2010, 06:31 PM
This post took off faster then I thought it would but the answers were exactly as I expected. Several people listed things they didn't like about Glock and then said but they had and carried it. There are several things I don't like about the Glock also but I'm not going to foam at the mouth with instant dislike whenever Glock is mentioned as a couple of these on this post.
Some people think that they have to spend $X++++ like all the other sheep and have the guns that the magazines say the "operaters use", people I have a flash "Operators" in our Military can use any weapons they want individually. A very significant portion of them choose Glock, who the heck do you think proved they could be fired under water. A weapon which seldom if ever malfunctions and will fire anything stuffed in the magazine shouldn't be denigrated every time it's mentioned, But it happens all the time. I noticed several people said " I just don't like the feel of them", hell that's a good reason not to own but not to getting crazy with hate when talking about them.
What was funny was the guy's who list what they don't like about them and then admit they were on their hip most of the time and I admit I think it feels like a block of wood in my hand but I would carry it into combat any time any where.
BTW I love Colt's Government Model and own 9 of them. When I was in Combat I carried a 1911A1 and the damn magazines would malfuction if you didn't strip and clean every night or day.

J Lazy H
March 8, 2010, 06:37 PM
I must admit that I had a hand full (pun intended) of problems with the 1st few Glocks I have owned. My 2 favorite carry guns were the G30 and the G23. At first I was so discouraged with my ability to fire either one with any degree of accuracy I sold or traded both and kept searching for the perfect carry gun for myself. I own Sigs, Colts, XD's and so the list goes. I just couldn't find the one I felt I could bet my life on. All I knew was at this point I hated Glocks. About 2 years ago a shooting/trading buddy of mine had traded into a Glock that he said I had to try. But I'm a "Glock Hater". I gave it a run anyway and have carried it for almost 2 years now. Here's the deal. It is a G23 2ND Generation. What a difference it made for me. No finger groves, very little hump and no rail. I still can't believe the difference it made in my ability. Since, I have searched out a few other 2nd gen Glocks and like magic, I love the darn things.

swampboy
March 8, 2010, 06:38 PM
Boats wrote:
I freely admit to being a "hater." I might as well since I'd be called one anyways for disagreeing with cultists.

I won't buy a Glock because:

They have those stupid finger bumpers, or grooves, or whatever they are, but they hit me wrong all over. Allegedly this is "my problem," and not a stupid "one size fits some" design shortcoming.

The trigger is too short reach for my tastes and there is nothing to effectively be done about that.

There's the hump at the bottom of the back strap that is rather unlike anything else I have ever fired. It's absolutely ridiculous that Gen 4 Glocks only change the level of annoyance at this "feature" but do nothing to eliminate it.

The trigger guard/front strap is unrelieved to any degree I'd call usable. Glocks rub me the wrong way literally on my middle finger.

The brake pedal on the bang switch is irritating. I won't own an XD or a SR9 due to this "feature" either.

The nearly non-existent slide release lever forces overhanding or sling shooting of the slide and I like having the option to use a real slide release.

The squarish magazine catch is tremendously annoying and not well blended into the frame. Now they've made it even bigger.

And none of the above even touches upon the idiotic grip angle. Oh, wait, the Still Fat and the Really Thick Founder, and the "Generation 4" of "perfection" are futilely trying to address many of these "non-issues."

Some shooters I respect like Glocks, because they apparently fit enough and they are fairly reliable. Lots of idjits I cannot respect are drool monkeys for their Fuhrerpistole all over the internet concerning these "combat weapons." Never mind that they were designed by a non-shooting curtain rod manufacturer for a non-shooting conscript filled army which hasn't been seen "fighting" anyone since it was last capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago. Yeah, compared to just about everyone else in the world, Austrians know what design characteristics best go into a combat pistol.

Poor ergonomics is issue 1a. Semi-retarded Glock evangelism is 1b. We're all supposed to be impressed by ol' Gaston basically giving away his misshaped lumps to gain domestic cop market share through currying favor with bean counters who couldn't say no to such cheap-ass deals.?

I guess I have higher standards than that.

Well, Boats, I can't say that I agree with much of what you said, but I give you an A+ for sarcasm and hyperbole. I enjoyed the rant.:D

Madcap_Magician
March 8, 2010, 06:46 PM
The reasons I don't own Glocks anymore:

1. Ergos are terrible for me.
2. Sights are hard for me to use and... plastic.

The reasons I respect Glocks:

1. The vast majority of them are extremely reliable.
2. The design is simple and easy to use.

christcorp
March 8, 2010, 06:49 PM
I've shot 5 different glocks, from friends, multiple times. I don't like the way they feel. I don't like the trigger pull. I don't like that it feels like it was made by Mattel or Hasbro. I'd own one for target type shooting, but I'd never carry one for defensive purposes. I want a gun with a decocker. I want one that is SA/DA. Glock is neither a SA or a DA. And it doesn't have double strike capability. Yes, for a range gun or plinker; maybe. If my life depended on it? No way.

Boats
March 8, 2010, 07:05 PM
I guess you also hate Italian designed weapons too (Berettas for example).
After all, Italy really hasn't fought any more shooting wars than Austria.

Here's a key difference: Pietro Beretta, Nazi hostage between late 1943 until freed by Italian Partisans in 1945.

Gaston Glock? Just a Nazi 1944-45 and suspected Nazi sympathizer not too long ago.

And of course you probably hate those German made weapons as well (HK and Walther) being designed also by those "capping enemies of the state behind the ear or stuffing them into cattle cars 60 years ago".

Regardless of their stupidity for jumping in on World War One and becoming Nazis for WW2, there's no denying they actually participated in those wars.

]And you must really hate FN and Browning pistols!
After all, Belgium couldn't even defeat the Austrians, Italians, and Germans.

FN's BHP soldiered on for the good guys more than for the bad guys.

And of course you must also hate the Swiss designed weapons (Sig), designed for non-shooting conscripts of a nation that did the banking for the Austrians and Germans about 60 years ago.

Nah, the Swiss know a lot about shooting, unlike an old Nazi working in his basement.

I'd buy a Glock that fits. That isn't going to happen though. Nevertheless, you should be able to identify the gratuitous insults of Herr Glock that were heaped upon totally legitimate design criticisms for what they are. Someone got that they were hyperbole.

Skillet
March 8, 2010, 07:23 PM
I dont HATE glocks, I just am uninterested in them. I don't really like the grip angle, I think they are kinda ugly, and everybody and their dog owns one. And their motto. Perfection. ug. No mechanical object will last indefinately and will fail at least once.

Some people are just weird, how they pretty much hate an inanimate object. Proves that hate is abound everywhere.

fastbolt
March 8, 2010, 07:24 PM
Somehow this thread hasn't been all that surprising considering the topic. ;)

Glock makes a rather simple, utilitarian and serviceable defensive pistol which can suit the needs of a number of folks.

As a Glock armorer I've certainly had the opportunity to replace a number of broken, damaged and worn parts in working LE Glock pistols. I can say the same for some other firearms for which I've been trained as an armorer. Hardly a surprise. Things can break. That's one of the reasons they make spare parts, you know.

As a matter of fact, this thread (and another one like it elsewhere) have reminded me that I need to put together a parts order for Glock. I haven't had the parts needed for some repairs for some Glocks that have been brought to my attention in recent months. My stock of parts slowly dwindled while my attention was occupied elsewhere, it seems.

Anyway, personally I tend to prefer Glocks chambered in 9mm.

I do own a G27, but only because it came to me for a price not likely to be repeated and I thought I'd give it a try. I decided to keep it, but it has been slightly less reliable when it comes to feeding issues than the G26. I think the brisk recoil of the .40 S&W cartridge requires more of the shooter than the 9mm cartridge, especially when fast-paced, difficult and complex courses-of-fire are involved, but I feel that way about other .40 guns, as well (and I own 5 pistols chambered in .40 S&W). I've run over 10,000 rounds through my G27 and have only experienced maybe over a dozen feeding issues (a couple of which were obviously ammo-related, so they can't really be attributed to the gun itself) and I can accept that for my needs.

I've handled and shot (and repaired) some Glock .45's, but the design just hasn't appealed to me enough when chambered in ,45 ACP for me to buy one of my own. I thought the G37 I handled and tried was interesting, but I don't need yet another cartridge in my personal collection.

Ditto the .357 Sig model/cartridge.

Matter of fact, ditto that for the G20, although when I tried one of the early ones imported in '90, using the standard Norma ammo of the time, I felt it was an interesting offering.

I suppose it would be fair to say that I've seen fewer problems in 9mm Glocks, and have heard of fewer problems reported in 9mm models by other LE armorers with whom I've spoken, than in other caliber offerings.

The tac-light issue affecting some .40 guns (G22/23's) is real enough to the folks who have experienced it. I know of an agency where a friend worked, and for which I met their armorer, and their G22's were still experiencing erratic feeding issues when their folks attached lights to their guns. Last I heard they were going to try some brand new mag springs on their guns to see if that helped (and yet their guns were only 4-5 years old and should have come with the 11-coil mag springs when new).

I also listened to another armorer in my last Glock armorer class asking for some direction to get his own G23 reliably feeding when he attached a light. the advice he was given in the class? Try some different ammunition.

Maybe the new Gen4 guns will be another step along in hopefully resolving issues like these. Locking block, mag spring and mag follower revisions haven't seemed to have completely done the trick, yet.

I was sort of hoping that Glock would increase the slide mass of the .40 models at some point, since you can only go so far when increasing recoil spring rates, especially if you're going to use the same springs in 9mm guns. Unfortunately, that would also probably mean the slide profiles would be affected and new guns wouldn't fit in existing holsters for .40 models, which would probably be a marketing concern for both Glock and the holster makers. Dunno. Just idle speculation.

I'll be keeping my pair of subcompact Glocks.

For that matter, I'll also be keeping my pair of SW99's and my pair of M&P's.

The next plastic framed pistol I buy will be another M&P, though.

I've been to 6 armorer classes spread among the Glock, 99 and M&P pistol lines, and I don't really feel inclined to 'play favorites' among them. They all work well for their intended roles.

Bottom line?

Glock makes a fine and serviceable pistol.

It's just a handgun.

Just my thoughts.

Kingofthehill
March 8, 2010, 07:44 PM
I own glocks, and although they have been good to me and work like they are supposed to... im not going to sing their praises.

there ARE better, and there ARE polymer guns better than glocks like the M&P... but Glocks just have a huge fanboy following that gets old after a while. Just like those grumpy all metal 1911 fanboys and the Sig/HK Preppy's.

damn near every gun serves a purpose and is better in 1 area than another. Glock fits in that race as well, but it doesn't cover all bases, no guns do.

JOe

saturno_v
March 8, 2010, 07:56 PM
Very short and simple

I respect Glock for their accuracy and reliability.

I would never buy one because:

1) I do not like polymer pistols (I "tolerate" just my P-11 because it is pocket piece)....probably is not rational but I just do not like them

2) Their functionally primitive firing system...I know, it is for simplicity and cutting costs, etc...however, it is more limited and more prone to mishandling compared to a SA/DA decocking design, it is an undisputable fact.

3) I personally find them ugly...not a strong reason but a reson anyway...

J Lazy H
March 8, 2010, 08:06 PM
There have been many here that "just don't like the looks" of a Glock.:eek: I have to agree 100%. That said, I don't pull my ccw G23 2nd gen. out all the time to show it off. To me it's a tool, (I guess I am too).:neener: I have some Colts, Browning's and a few others in my safe with all the bling that I go to, to impress my gun buddies. Some with grips that cost more than my Glock, one with an internal laser that looks so cool on my Kimber I still almost wet myself every time I show it off.:cool: It would only be my night time gun or indoors gun because you can't see the dot in the bright sunlight. Oh well, it looks cool. All joking aside now, I didn't at first just start shooting one hole with this G23. It aims different, recoils different, has a different trigger feel than any of my other hand guns and so it goes. I give it a run at the range at least twice a month just to keep it second nature for me when and if I need to use it to defuse and or stop a threat. I wonder if a bg (bad guy) would feel embarrassed if he/she was shot by an ugly gun? :rolleyes:

easyg
March 8, 2010, 08:10 PM
Here's a key difference: Pietro Beretta, Nazi hostage between late 1943 until freed by Italian Partisans in 1945.
Regardless, Beretta supplied the Italian army with weapons to kill the allies in WWII until 1943.

Gaston Glock? Just a Nazi 1944-45 and suspected Nazi sympathizer not too long ago.
He was 15 years old.
How politically "in the know" was the average 15 year old in the 1940's?
This is really lame.

Regardless of their stupidity for jumping in on World War One and becoming Nazis for WW2, there's no denying they actually participated in those wars.
You don't believe that Austrians fought in WWII???
:scrutiny:

FN's BHP soldiered on for the good guys more than for the bad guys.
And the same is true of Glocks.
By far there are more "good guys" carrying Glocks than "bad guys".

Nah, the Swiss know a lot about shooting, unlike an old Nazi working in his basement.
I would guess that the average Swiss conscript is no more competent with a handgun than the average Austrian conscript.


Nevertheless, you should be able to identify the gratuitous insults of Herr Glock that were heaped upon totally legitimate design criticisms for what they are. Someone got that they were hyperbole.
Sure....right....;)

ForumSurfer
March 8, 2010, 08:13 PM
Personally, I don't care for the grip angle of the Glock.

I don't either. I think they are far, far from perfect. I think they are far from aesthetically pleasing. It's a tool, nothing more.

Yet I just bought one. :neener: I respect it for what it is. I don't feel it is perfect or superior to other designs. I simply felt no collection was complete without one. :rolleyes: If I ever get accustomed to this grip angle thing my gen4 17 will become my night stand weapon.

captain awesome
March 8, 2010, 08:56 PM
Well, I don't hate them, I don't own one, I don't own a 1911, I do own an XD, and here is why. Growing up, my dad/family was never all that into hand guns, mostly just rifles and shotguns, although we did have a couple single action revolvers. As I grew up I began to really appreciate the revolvers, I absolutely love the way thy look, feel, and handle. Never did gain a fondness for the black plastic semi autos.

A year and a half ago I was looking for a second job, and went into armed security. They wouldn't supply my side arm, and wouldn't allow me to carry a revolver, so I had to buy one and was on a budget. I looked at glocks and honestly they were too expensive. I found the xd I bought for about 2/3 the price of a comparable glock at several of the gun stores I went to so I settled on that. it was quite a package for a decent price I thought. I have since fired several hundred rounds through it never had a misfeed, it is fairly accurate, but I have never really loved it.

I was of the decision that when I had more money i would buy a glock, the reason being that the accessories and add ons for them were cheaper and everywhere. But I never warmed up to them enough to do it. I came to the conclusion that they are over priced pieces of plastic, how ever reliable they may be. They have no style IMHO and everyone else has one, and they all pretty much look the same.

I would much rather have a nice stainless 1911. they may be over priced as well, but they feel better in my hand, I like the look better, and while every one has one of them too, I have seen some beautiful custom 1911's, and they have quite a history. I shot my great great uncles 60 year old 1911 on Saturday. Have you ever shot a 60+ year old glock?

Not badmouthing them, they just don't excite me, and I will probably never own one because of that. to many of my fellow guards just wont shut up about their glocks as well. If I try and get a word in edge wise about my xd I am promptly cut of or "educated" on their guns superiority. What ever.

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 09:08 PM
Have you ever shot a 60+ year old glock?
Are you suggesting the Glock will not last 60+ years?

Mike J
March 8, 2010, 10:26 PM
I do not own a Glock. I have nothing against them. The ones I have shot were accurate & handled well.
However the Glock Kool Aid Corps I find very annoying.

Mitch from LA
March 8, 2010, 10:32 PM
Yes, Glocks are perfectly cromulent handguns. :D
A noble pistol embiggens the smallest man

J Lazy H
March 8, 2010, 10:32 PM
"Glock Kool Aid Corps" ????

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 10:35 PM
However the Glock Kool Aid Corps I find very annoying.

Someone has to spread the truth. I still don't understand how people can deny Glock Perfection.

It's "Flavor-Aid" BTW...

Mike J
March 8, 2010, 10:47 PM
The Kool Aid Corps responds to a thread asking questions about another gun, "get a Glock, You'll thank me later. They will respond to a thread seeking a metal framed DA/SA pistol with, "get a Glock" or the infamous "Glock Rulez". They are just annoying.
They think Glock is the only gun. I don't really mind Reaper. I might not always share his opinions but he is thoughtful & articulate.
You beat me to the post Reaper. Almost makes me want to delete that last bit.

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 10:55 PM
You beat me to the post Reaper. Almost makes me want to delete that last bit.
You're not picking up what I'm puttin' down, man. http://www.ar15.com/images/smilies/icon_smile_wink.gif

christcorp
March 8, 2010, 11:00 PM
Glock makes a rather simple, utilitarian and serviceable defensive pistol which can suit the needs of a number of folks.

So does hi-point. Oh yea, they don't cost $500 so they must not be any good.

In all seriousness, there isn't anything wrong with a glock..... for SOME people. It's only when some of the fan club tries to convince you that the glock is the best; that there are no better guns available; and that glock is the future of guns; that it gets really old. There is no "best" pistol out there. Anyone who thinks they know one that is, is an idiot. The vast majority of reasons that people here said they wouldn't have a glock, are the same exact reasons some people chose the glock over the XD, S&W, Ruger, etc... ergonomics, weight, how it held, grips, etc... It's all about personal preference. There is absolutely no difference in quality; in my opinion; for those who like the glock compared to those who like the XD, S&W, and a number of others. They are all even in the same price range. Granted, there are those that are in the higher price range such as HK and Sig, but that can be debated for other reasons. Price aside, there are going to be some people that just don't like a certain gun.

You're never going to make a grip, trigger, weight, etc... that everyone likes. Some people think that the glock being so light is a great selling point. Maybe for some, but never for me. I like metal guns. Not that there can't be some poly in them, but I like a metal gun as much as possible. Especially when I'm carrying it and have to rely on it. But we're not debating plastic vs metal. I'm stating that some of the attributes that people claim make glocks so good, happen to be some of the things people don't like about the glock. And you can't change that.

Mike J
March 8, 2010, 11:03 PM
I got it but I had to pick a little anyway.

Boats
March 8, 2010, 11:07 PM
You don't believe that Austrians fought in WWII???

Hitler was an Austrian.;) Lots of Austrians are still down for his cause. Glock has been suspected of being one and he's certainly politically dialed in these days.

REAPER4206969
March 8, 2010, 11:17 PM
Hitler was an Austrian.
Say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism Boats, at least they made excellent firearms.

Isher
March 8, 2010, 11:59 PM
All -

And, to me, this really kicks into the original intent of THR.

You can argue top fuel dragsters vs nascar vs formula 1

Until the cows come home.

In the cold heart light of reality

Very nearly all of us are daily drivers,

Not race drivers.

I get into a 10 year old Ford truck every day of this world.

We have the family budget

And we get up and go to work in the morning.

Me? I very much like CZ,

And dislike Glocks.

Because, for me, CZ's fit and Glocks don't.

Doesn't mean that Glocks are a ****ty gun.

Or that CZ's are the cat's meow.

It is simply what works for me.


isher

Boats
March 9, 2010, 12:07 AM
Say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism Boats, at least they make totally overrated firearms.

There, fixed it up.

easyg
March 9, 2010, 12:23 AM
Say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism Boats, at least they make totally overrated firearms.

There, fixed it up.
Boats: the epitome of the "vocal minority".

:p

AnObfuscator
March 9, 2010, 12:45 AM
I wonder if a bg (bad guy) would feel embarrassed if he/she was shot by an ugly gun? :rolleyes:


I can't speak for BGs, but I know I would feel particularly insulted were I to be shot with a Hi Point... ;)

ForumSurfer
March 9, 2010, 01:01 AM
"Glock Kool Aid Corps" ????

Just pick up a copy of Glock Autopistols mag. I thought it may be some amusing porcelain throne material and I may learn a few things while I was considering buying a Glock. It was like a 32 page Glock add. I couldn't go an entire without spotting the phrase GLOCK Perfection. Naturally I expected biased articles, but I was hoping for something above regurgitated Glock adds.

Kool Aid Corps exist for Glocks, 1911's, sigs, xd's or whatever. If you purchase a gen4 like I did, they all dislike your firearm choice. A few hardcore Glock guys dislike any deviation in the design at all and will criticize anything new. :rolleyes: If you don't like it, don't buy it...just don't give me a hard time for buying whatever the heck I want.

Free2game
March 9, 2010, 01:03 AM
Don't like the trigger, don't like the grip angle, don't like the default sights, and I really don't like that hump on the back (by comparison I have a 10mm EAA witness and the grip feels loads better than the glock 20 one but with the same ammo capacity)

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 01:11 AM
Just pick up a copy of Glock Autopistols mag.
That is an annual reading mag put out by Glock. What did you expect?

Zundfolge
March 9, 2010, 01:12 AM
I guess I just don't get the hate.

I don't much like Glocks ... as a result I don't own one (nor do I own a Chevy, a computer that runs Windows or Tony Lama cowboy boots) but I still acknowledge these products meet other peoples needs just fine.

Its not like we're talking about Hi-Point or anything :neener:


In general "haters" and "fanboys" are both pretty lame.

captain awesome
March 9, 2010, 01:36 AM
Are you suggesting the Glock will not last 60+ years?

no, just that they haven't been around long enough to find out. Just out of curiousity, how old is the oldest glock anyone has here on the thread?

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 01:39 AM
The first Glock pistols made were in 1982. First imported into the US was 1986.

cchris
March 9, 2010, 01:51 AM
http://i47.tinypic.com/118hkyw.gif

:p:p:p

all in good fun.

diableri
March 9, 2010, 02:00 AM
I've always found any of these particular deeply passionate dislikes for certain firearms odd. I choose the guns that fit best for me. I shoot a G21 better than any other pistol I've tried so far. After a few thousand rounds through it, I was confident that it would fire when I pulled the trigger and that the round would land where I intend if I did my part.

If I ever shoot a gun that works better for me than the 21 (and now the 30) I will switch. Until then, my ugly, nazi, boring, appliance-like black brick will be my choice. :D

ZEN.45
March 9, 2010, 06:43 AM
I had a G30, but I didn’t like the grip, trigger, ‘plastic feel’, magazine release, bulkiness and I found it a boring gun.

Now I have a few 1911’s and a SIG P220 that don’t have any of these flaws. So, last week I decided I needed another .45 that is lighter, more compact, with a higher capacity. I also wanted it to be as reliable as my P220 and I wanted to be sure I could shoot it well … so I got a G30 :D ! I still don’t like the grip, trigger, ‘plastic feel’, blablabla...

MisterMike
March 9, 2010, 08:36 AM
I did my LEOSA qualification shoot with my G23 yesterday, and afterward, I found myself glowing with Glock Love. It occurred to me that my two Glocks are among the small number of devices that I own in which I have total confidence. They've never let me down. Having said that, I know that they don't work for everyone.

Fastcast
March 9, 2010, 10:17 AM
My experience is, most Glock owners I know personally (not THR folks) are NOT experienced gun folks. The Glock is their first and only handgun. They brag about them as if they're the best pistol ever but they don't own any other pistols. They haven't a clue how to safely operate a true DA/SA or SA pistol. As a matter of fact most don't know how to operate many firearms at all other than just rack slide and pull trigger. "it's safe, the safety is on the trigger, isn't that great" :scrutiny:....... Give 'em a rifle or shotgun :eek: "what do I do". :rolleyes:

............................................................................................................

Glock facts:

Doesn't look anything like a real pistol.

Doesn't feel anything like a real pistol.

Doesn't sound anything like a real pistol, when cycling the action.

Your average Glock owners are loud mouthed apostles for their one and only plastic pistol as they disparage all classic designs as obsolete crap. LOL

Many Glock owners are first time buyers that really don't know **** about firearms in general but they bought into the hyperbole so assume they own the best......LMAO

............................................................................................................

My rant doesn't pertain to THR members. This is just my experience with your average Glock apostle and than people here on the THR want to know why people don't like Glock?????

Other than the obviouse reasons, it's the average idiot that owns a Glock that turns knowledgeable, longtime gun folks away from the platform so as not to be categorized with such ilk. :barf:

Keep asking and maybe I'll let my real feelings be known! ;)

easyg
March 9, 2010, 11:35 AM
I found it a boring gun
This is another anti-Glock argument that I just don't get.

I shoot, it goes bang everytime, and I hit what I'm aiming at.....to me that IS exciting!
If you find that to be boring then it's time to hang up your guns and find another pastime (skydiving perhaps).



I guess their notion of exciting must be failure-to-feeds, failure-to-ejects, magazine failures, wondering if the pistol will actually work, wondering where the bullet went and what it hit, searching for days online trying to find parts and accessories.....

Yeah, I can see how that would be more exciting than a boring old Glock.
:rolleyes:

easyg
March 9, 2010, 11:40 AM
Glock facts:

Doesn't look anything like a real pistol.

Doesn't feel anything like a real pistol.

Doesn't sound anything like a real pistol, when cycling the action.
Unless your opinion of a real pistol is a revolver, then this is simply nonsense.

If you truly believe that Glocks don't look like real pistols then go and point one at a cop!


Easy

easyg
March 9, 2010, 11:50 AM
Many Glock owners are first time buyers that really don't know **** about firearms in general but they bought into the hyperbole so assume they own the best......LMAO
I personally have never said that Glocks are "the best", but one thing is for certain:
A first time gun buyer could sure do a lot worse than a Glock as his first gun.

At least that first time buyer is going to have a solid and reliable product that will not let him down.
And that first time buyer will probably not get turned off from shooting by having a lousy and unreliable pistol pushed on him by a slick salesman.
Glocks are great for first time buyers and new shooters.
They are very easy to learn how to operate and maintain, and they are very easy to shoot accurately as well.

And in case you're wondering, no, the Glock was not my first handgun.
I grew up shooting revolvers (mostly because I grew up in the 60's and 70's).
I didn't shoot my first auto until I joined the Army (the 1911).
And before I tried my first Glock I had tried Brownings, Rugers, and Smiths to name a few.

Fastcast
March 9, 2010, 12:06 PM
Unless your opinion of a real pistol is a revolver, then this is simply nonsense.

Oh, "nonsense"?......Real combat/defense pistols/revolvers use to only be made of steel.......Toy guns were made of plastic, hence the idea of not appearing real.

Glock and every other polymer for that matter IMO, looks like a toy, feels like toy, sounds like a toy when cycling the action......Of course we all know when they go bang they're not toys but I digress.

Boats
March 9, 2010, 12:12 PM
Don't mind easyg. He's one of those fellows riding his bicycle around the neighborhood in black trousers and a white shirt spreading the message of Glock love to anyone who will hear it.

Just slam the door on them a few times and they go away.;)

Lv4snobrdg
March 9, 2010, 12:16 PM
Seems that LE has moved toward the plastic guns but for a myriad reasons.

The most relevant to me is ease of use.

I don't think that some thing that is deadly dangerous should be easy to use. LE should be trained to highest level of competence with weapons they employ.

Revolvers are pretty straight forward while 1911's would probably be on the end of the spectrum.

Glocks are good guns, just not my cup of tea since I can't group with one at all. I always hit the paper. I know its me, so I don't need to be told, again, since I know my limitations I use a 1911 with a trigger break that I can squeeze instead of pull.

I group very well with a 1911.

easyg
March 9, 2010, 12:19 PM
Oh, "nonsense"?......Real combat/defense pistols/revolvers use to only be made of steel.......Toy guns were made of plastic, hence the idea of not appearing real.
Okay....but that was about 25 years ago.
Get with the times old man. :p

easyg
March 9, 2010, 12:21 PM
Don't mind easyg. He's one of those fellows riding his bicycle around the neighborhood in black trousers and a white shirt spreading the message of Glock love to anyone who will hear it.
Yep!
And I'm getting more and more converts everyday.
The cult...eh...I mean the family is getting bigger and bigger. ;)

easyg
March 9, 2010, 12:25 PM
I group very well with a 1911.
As do I.
But I'll bet you would also group very well with a Glock.
Most competent shooters can, which is one of the reasons that Glocks are so popular.

RonBernert
March 9, 2010, 12:36 PM
Geez.. Glocks are great guns. So are the 1911's, the Sig's, the S&W's, etc..

I agree that there are a number of Glock preachers out there, and a great number of them are one-gun or new gun owners. I have to be honest, it does put me off a little.. (ever talked to the Saturn car crowd??)

With some of those new gun owners, they have told me the virtues of Glock over (for example here) a 1911, and I have always asked "Have you shot a 1911?" and most of the time they say "no".

So how is it that they are an expert? I'm not bashing anyone at THR, it's just an observation of mine.

THEY ARE BOTH GREAT GUNS!! They both (ducking) do the same thing, and they both have their following..

I have owned several Glocks, I have owned several 1911's.. Right now, I have been shooting more revolvers. Maybe next week, I'll get bored with the revolvers and shoot something else..

The 1911 and Glock argument is pointless. Both win.

Now- back to my question on page 3.....

9mm or .45?:neener:

Fastcast
March 9, 2010, 12:38 PM
Okay....but that was about 25 years ago.
Get with the times old man. :p

LOL ...... True and they are fine if that's what you like. My biggest beef with Glock is not so much the gun at all. Different strokes for different folks.

I don't ever recall the high animosity level amongst the semi auto/revolver guys. It's the ignorant, loud mouthed, newbie gun owners preaching the gospel of Glock and disparaging the classic platforms as if they have a clue about them. That is what turns away old timers who may take a little longer to warm up to new ideas.

When the old timers were brought up on the classic platforms that have work wonderfully for 2-3 generations and saved our ass many times through out history, hear these ignorant, newbies ridicules comments it turns people off. :barf: ........ Not only from their inexperienced, exaggerated claims but also from the platform they so choose to use.

berrieberrie
March 9, 2010, 12:47 PM
While, on the whole, I agree with easyg's reply to Boats, I am compelled to make one correction:

After all, Belgium couldn't even defeat the Austrians, Italians, and Germans.

When the Austrians were here (beginning 18th century), Belgium didn't even exist yet - we were still Dutch then. And most Italians only arrived after WWII, to work in our coal mines.

easyg
March 9, 2010, 01:06 PM
It's the ignorant, loud mouthed, newbie gun owners preaching the gospel of Glock and disparaging the classic platforms as if they have a clue about them. That is what turns away old timers who may take a little longer to warm up to new ideas.
I certainly get what you're saying, and I agree to some extent.
But the blade cuts both ways....

For every newbie who bashes the classic platforms even though they have never even shot a 1911 or a BHP, there seem to be just as many folks who bash Glocks and other polymer-framed pistols even though they have never even shot one.
Countless times I have heard remarks such as "I've never shot a Glock and I never will....real guns are made of steel" or "I have no interest in even trying a Glock because I hate plastic guns"....etc...

I kinda pity those folks because they really don't know what they're missing.
Just too closed minded I guess.

basicblur
March 9, 2010, 01:16 PM
I really don't get the grip angle complaint....it just seems like a rather lame excuse to dislike Glocks.

Over the years I’ve picked up a number of reasons to pass on Glocks, but grip angle is what originally killed my interest in owning one. First polymer gun I bought was a Sigma (NOW we can talk ‘bout some hatin’). Mebbe the Sigma can’t be buried in the ocean for a year, Yadda Yadda Yadda, but they go BOOM every time I pull the trigger, and they sure felt good in my hand. Grew up on DA revolvers, so I never had to have the crutch of a 3oz. trigger (think these new guys learned trigger control on video games?). At one time I owned a number of ‘em (they were darn near giving ‘em away with free range/duffle bags and rebates), but am now down to one. I’ve moved on to other guns (but I wouldn’t say better), but kept one of ‘em for my bed gun since it does the job.

Anywho…I have nothing against Glocks-it ain’t personal-it’s just a tool.

The above experience is from years ago-today my reasons for not owning a Glock would be:
1. Grip angle (still)
2. Prefer some type of safety on a gun (grip, thumb, etc). ‘Fer those that say a gun doesn’t need a safety, just ask Plaxico, and we recently had a retired PD detective (amazingly, he taught PD gun courses) have the same thing happen in a local restaurant-6 patrons treated for shrapnel etc.
3. Don’t care for the looks-I can’t for the life of me see how some folks think a Glock is attractive. Realizing you don’t (mainly) buy a gun for its appearance, if you have a choice and one is better looking than the other…?

When new shooters approach me for recommendations these days, I don’t tell ‘em to buy one, but rather tell ‘em when they shop, ask “why should I buy this instead of an XD?”

AFA the M&P line, I got all kinds of grief when I once stated it looked pretty much like a gussied up Sigma. Reasons why it was MUCH better were very few (I don’t need changeable backstraps, the Sigma fit me just fine). ‘Course, I did just pick up an M&P 357 SIG-one of the locals that likes to buy high, sell low traded one in after looking at it for 30 days-don’t think he fired a round through it. Don’t know that I’ll keep it-kinda got it to play with and see what all the fuss was about.

Anywho-I remember when Glocks first came out-some of the folks who ridiculed it because it was plastic (I was interested, since they’re pretty much just tools to me), turned into Glock nuts.

People is funny like that… :confused:

easyg
March 9, 2010, 01:41 PM
Grew up on DA revolvers, so I never had to have the crutch of a 3oz. trigger (think these new guys learned trigger control on video games?).
Revolver shooters have been lightening the trigger of revolvers since revolvers have existed....the term "hair trigger" originated with revolvers.
And one of the greatest features of the legendary 1911 is its light trigger pull.
So I think that it's wrong to blame light triggers on "new guys" or video games or polymer-framed pistols.
It's not a "crutch" either.
There's no getting around the fact that a pistol with a lighter trigger is easier to shoot accurately for most folks than a pistol with a heavier trigger.

Boats
March 9, 2010, 02:01 PM
I agree with easyg. A light trigger pull is a staple of good shooting.

However, you can blame the new guys, video gamers and a certain infatuation with plastic laden striker subassemblies and whatnot, for claims that their sproingy triggers are "good," even when lightened, as if a short reset somehow makes up for an overall crappy trigger pull.

That's just ignorant.:cool:

basicblur
March 9, 2010, 02:24 PM
And one of the greatest features of the legendary 1911 is its light trigger pull.
Which has both a thumb safety AND a grip safety-neither of which the Glock has.
Do you really want a “light trigger” on a gun (which is primarily marketed for SD) with no safeties?

A light trigger pull is a staple of good shooting.
Au contraire…I’d say the exact opposite-a staple of good shooting is not having to rely on a light trigger pull.

Got a relative that’s a gunsmith-can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen folks show up and want a trigger pull lightened. He usually checks it out, asks them what they use the gun for, and if it’s for SD, advises them to leave it alone.

christcorp
March 9, 2010, 02:53 PM
Normal Gun Buyer: Pick up guns, find one that fits/feels/shoots right. Buy it.

Glockaholic: Pick up glock, doesn't fit/feel/shoot right. Convince yourself that it can't be the gun, must be the shooter. Force themselves to "make" the glock work. If not possible, look into medical surgery to make the hand/fingers/eye adapt to the glock instead of finding a gun that works with the person.

Boats
March 9, 2010, 03:50 PM
Au contraire…I’d say the exact opposite-a staple of good shooting is not having to rely on a light trigger pull.

Of course there are parameters. Given two 1911s, even for SD, I'd rather have one pulling at 4.25 pounds than 6.5 pounds. On a revolver's DA pull I'd much sooner have 10 pounds than 12.

Anyone running a 3.5 lb Glock trigger on a SD gun is a little crazy. If I could tolerate the things, I'd leave it stock.

Ben86
March 9, 2010, 03:58 PM
Some people hate them because they are soulless icky, black plastic guns with durability that beats the pants off their traditional metal framed guns for half the price. They are also made by a sinister foreign company. ;) I have a G17, 19 and 26 and wouldn't sell for anything.

basicblur
March 9, 2010, 04:08 PM
even for SD, I'd rather have one pulling at 4.25 pounds than 6.5 pounds.

Glass half full-glass half empty, eh?
What I see most often on the 'Net is "I'd rather have 3lbs than 4.25lbs". :uhoh:

And while I didn't get this from him (this was my belief long before I read his thoughts), I'll leave you with a little quote from Ayoob (I 'bout spewed Pepsi when I read it, knowing it was gonna tee some folks off!)-from page 53 of The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery:
"A light trigger pull is, more than anything else, a crutch for bad trigger technique".

Hey...ANYBODY GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?! :cuss:
Take it up with Mas! :D

EDIT: Don't EVEN get me started on 'Net discussions 'bout "trigger reset" on a SD firearm!

stchman
March 9, 2010, 04:08 PM
I personally don't hate or like Glocks.

I personally think they are a good handgun but a bit boring to look at.

I prefer American made gun made by an American company. I know that most of the poly frame pistols out there now have some form of Glock heritage and Gaston Glock knew what he was going, but I still prefer American guns.

If you want a Glock then get a Glock.

Boats
March 9, 2010, 04:35 PM
So why not run around with a smooth and long 14 pound child proof DAO trigger pull and rely on good trigger technique instead of the crutch provided by a lighter trigger?

Because high effort triggers are retarded, that's why. Just fire a Nagant revolver or a HK VP-70 and get a taste of what not even great technique can overcome for long.

easyg
March 9, 2010, 04:49 PM
However, you can blame the new guys, video gamers and a certain infatuation with plastic laden striker subassemblies and whatnot, for claims that their sproingy triggers are "good," even when lightened, as if a short reset somehow makes up for an overall crappy trigger pull.
I'm not sure what pistols you're referring to, but Glocks have great triggers.
Like any handgun, you just have to get used to it and practice with it.
The Glock trigger certainly beats the hell out of any heavy double-action revolver trigger that I have ever fired.
And I would much rather have the consistent Glock trigger rather than the infernal DA/SA trigger....the worse of both worlds IMO.

Do you really want a “light trigger” on a gun (which is primarily marketed for SD) with no safeties?
Yep!
With trigger discipline, a good holster, and a reasonable amount of trigger travel and weight, there should be no problem.

Au contraire…I’d say the exact opposite-a staple of good shooting is not having to rely on a light trigger pull.
Wrong.
Even the best shooter will shoot better with a lighter trigger than a heavier one in most instances.

Anyone running a 3.5 lb Glock trigger on a SD gun is a little crazy.
:uhoh:


"A light trigger pull is, more than anything else, a crutch for bad trigger technique".
But we must remember that not everyone who takes up shooting as an adult has the time or money to get as proficient with a heavy trigger as some folks.
I grew up shooting revolvers, and over the years I have shot thousands of dollars in ammo.
I wouldn't expect a young family man with little money, in this recession and political climate with ammo prices skyrocketing, to quickly become as proficient as I am with a heavy double-action revolver.
If a lighter trigger pull lets him keep the lead on target better where's the harm in that?
This is one of the reasons the military was so successful at quickly teaching novices to shoot the 1911 accurately in Basic and Boot....it had a light trigger.
The military didn't have years to train them to shoot, they had just a few weeks.



Easy

SwampWolf
March 9, 2010, 05:18 PM
Sorry just put protractor on them and the Glock is approx 6 degrees steeper that GM, Hey that's my first mistake ever. LOL

Geez, I wouldn't think a protractor was necessary to confirm the difference in grip angles between the Glock and a 1911. If a cursory first glance didn't give the obvious difference away, the first time you gripped them both certainly would. To me, the interesting thing is that most people who don't like Glocks will say that maybe the biggest reason they don't like them is the raked grip angle; yet I kind of like the Glock grip, even though I'm no Glock fan. Go figure. :confused:

Autolycus
March 9, 2010, 05:24 PM
I like Glocks for their simplicity and their ruggedness. They are ugly but they work. Others don't. To each their own.

Kingofthehill
March 9, 2010, 05:24 PM
The glock grip angle is legit. it doesn't just point straight for some instinctively. I happen to be one who can adjust to it but am not a huge fan of it.

JOe

cchris
March 9, 2010, 06:06 PM
I'll give a legitimate dislike I have of it, which is the thickness of the grip. I swapped my SIGs (P225, P228) for a few with a guy who had a G21 and an M9, and instantly loved the way the M9 shot, but the Glock just didn't fit my hand. The owner even stated himself that it was too wide of a grip for him to carry. Granted, my P228 has the same issue, but makes up for it with the all-steel frame. I do own a polymer pistol (S&W Sigma) but the Glock just feels more "plastic" to me.

Fastcast
March 9, 2010, 06:08 PM
I would much rather have the consistent Glock trigger rather than the infernal DA/SA trigger....the worse of both worlds IMO.



Could it just possibly be your "bad trigger technique" that makes it so difficult for you? ;)

christcorp
March 9, 2010, 06:38 PM
I've shot enough glocks to know that I don't "WANT" to have to get used to an inferior trigger/gun. Why should I when a Sig, HK, S&W, and Springfield are perfect right out of the box. And I don't need someone giving me some corny state about their 3 lb trigger pull vs my 4 lb or whatever. That's retarded. I've already said I didn't like the glock trigger. I also didn't like the way the gun felt in my hands. Sorry, but it "REALLY DOES" feel like a toy to me. I'm not saying the glock is bad for everyone. Just for me. Unfortunately, the glockaholics think glocks are good for EVERYONE. And that if you don't like them, then you're the problem. If they'd admit that glocks aren't for everyone, then we'd have nothing to debate. Because most gun owners admit that the gun that's right for you, isn't necessarily the right gun for your wife, kid, mother, friend, etc... That each person has different needs when it comes to a gun. It's very personal. However, the glockaholics believe that there is a glock for everyone. And yes, you might need a glock 19 instead of a 21, but if it's not a glock, then you're the problem. Not the gun. That's what makes glockaholics stupid. Not the gun. Just the belief that glocks are for everyone.

NMGonzo
March 9, 2010, 07:43 PM
I miss my Glock 35.

I sold it because I needed the money.

thorazine
March 9, 2010, 09:21 PM
I just read a post where every other person trashed the Glock, Why?

No clue.

Considering they make an excellent high cap 10mm (G20).

-and-

Their sub compacts (G26/G27/G33) are great firearms -- lot's of firepower in such a small package.

gmh1013
March 9, 2010, 09:48 PM
Every Rapper in the hood has one ......so that being reason enough I would NEVER own one. Im not into Gangsta Gear
Plus I would never buy an Auto without a hammer or revolver

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:22 PM
When the old timers were brought up on the classic platforms that have work wonderfully for 2-3 generations and saved our ass many times through out history, hear these ignorant, newbies ridicules comments it turns people off. ........ Not only from their inexperienced, exaggerated claims but also from the platform they so choose to use.
Most modern recreations of classic platforms are crap. Read any 1911/P-35/PPK/Etc. thread.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:24 PM
AFA the M&P line, I got all kinds of grief when I once stated it looked pretty much like a gussied up Sigma.
The M&P is nothing like the Sigma in anyway.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:26 PM
Do you really want a “light trigger” on a gun (which is primarily marketed for SD) with no safeties?
Yes.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:28 PM
Glockaholic: Pick up glock, doesn't fit/feel/shoot right. Convince yourself that it can't be the gun, must be the shooter. Force themselves to "make" the glock work. If not possible, look into medical surgery to make the hand/fingers/eye adapt to the glock instead of finding a gun that works with the person.
The Glock is designed the way a fighting pistol should be held; not the way some dirt shooter wants to hold it.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:32 PM
Anyone running a 3.5 lb Glock trigger on a SD gun is a little crazy.
3.5lb. connectors are not actually 3.5lbs. They are around 4.5-5.0lbs. The stock pull is 5.5-6.0lbs. In order to get a true 3.5lb. trigger you would need to install a lighter competition firing pin spring, which is unsuitable for serious use due to the risk of light primer strikes.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:34 PM
I prefer American made gun made by an American company.
I am not aware of any 100% American designed and made service class polymer pistol. The M&P was designed with help from Walther engineers. Maybe the Ruger SR9.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:37 PM
Sorry just put protractor on them and the Glock is approx 6 degrees steeper that GM, Hey that's my first mistake ever.
That is the nerdiest thing ever posted on a gun forum. Reading that turned me into a virgin. :p

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:40 PM
EDIT: Don't EVEN get me started on 'Net discussions 'bout "trigger reset" on a SD firearm!
Reset is the most important trigger characteristic of a fighting pistol.

REAPER4206969
March 9, 2010, 10:44 PM
but the Glock just feels more "plastic" to me.
Glock uses a polymer that contains no fiberglass impregnation. During testing the fiberglass reinforced polymer was causing cracking in extreme cold. That is why it feels more "plastic." It is...

Boats
March 10, 2010, 01:05 AM
I am not aware of any 100% American designed and made service class polymer pistol. The M&P was designed with help from Walther engineers. Maybe the Ruger SR9.

S&W hired away the M&P Project Lead Engineer Joe Bergeron from Colt. Project Engineers Brett Curry, Sean O’Clair and Gary Zukowski certainly sport the names of well heeled Teutonic gentlemen.

IOW, link or it didn't happen.

arizonaguide
March 10, 2010, 01:09 AM
Why Not Glock ?
Google: "glock kaboom" ;)





http://images.google.com/images?sourceid=navclient&rlz=1T4RNTN_enUS369US370&q=glock+kaboom&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=NCmXS5elAZHUMr_VzXo&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CCQQsAQwAw
Results 1 - 20 of about 8,970 for glock kaboom

joustin
March 10, 2010, 01:11 AM
I bought an XD because the grip fit me better, nothing wrong with Glock imo

REAPER4206969
March 10, 2010, 01:15 AM
S&W hired
Walther did help with the M&P, but I will give it to you. America has one service grade polymer pistol. Happy?

Boats
March 10, 2010, 01:24 AM
Just asking for proof is all. Bergeron was from Colt. Curry did ergonomics and O'Clair did the chassis. Walther and S&W worked together ironing out issues on .40S&W P99/SW99 models, but if you have ANY proof that the two companies worked together on the M&P just link your source.

REAPER4206969
March 10, 2010, 01:37 AM
I do not have postable proof. Smith & Wesson is Walther, so it's a stupid argument really...

Boats
March 10, 2010, 02:01 AM
If it was a stupid argument, why are you pitching Walther's "engineering involvement" as fact when you have no proof?

S&W has licensing, distribution, and customer care agreements in place with Walther, but the two companies are and remain separate corporate entities with their own agendas. Walther is not S&W and vice versa.

REAPER4206969
March 10, 2010, 02:36 AM
If it was a stupid argument
I said it was a stupid argument for starting it in the first place.
Walther is not S&W and vice versa.
Smith and Wesson is Walther USA. They manufacture many Walther pistols/parts. The PPK and PPK/S most notably.

http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/159456000/159456458/pix28405281.jpg

Boats
March 10, 2010, 03:08 AM
Yes, it's a licensed copy of a pistol designed in the 1930s built domestically to get around the ridiculous GCA 68 import ban.

To stretch that into Walther helped design the M&P?
:rolleyes:

GojuBrian
March 10, 2010, 06:20 AM
I don't like glocks because:

1. Grip angle.
2. Goalpost sights.
3. Gaston Glock is a ******bag.
4. They have the ghey
5. No safety (trigger thingy is not safe imo)
6. Trigger
7. Fanboys or glocksuckers.

REAPER4206969
March 10, 2010, 06:45 AM
I don't like glocks because:

3. Gaston Glock is a ******bag.
4. They have the ghey
5. No safety (trigger thingy is not safe imo)
7. Fanboys or glocksuckers.
Good, logical reasons.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 07:40 AM
I like Glocks because

1. Grip angle.
2. All the aftermarket night sights.
3. Gaston Glock is an Austrian.
4. They have the most lyrics in rap songs
5. No safety (trigger thingy is safe imo - unless your an imbicile)
6. Trigger
7. anti- Fanboys or American made suckers.

REAPER4206969
March 10, 2010, 07:42 AM
Well played.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 07:43 AM
Yes, it's a licensed copy of a pistol designed in the 1930s built domestically to get around the ridiculous GCA 68 import ban.

To stretch that into Walther helped design the M&P?

Not sure :confused: but I doubt S&W was capable of designing a gun like the M&P without European help. Certainly the products they offer are better since Walther has had some relationship with them.

Boats
March 10, 2010, 11:48 AM
I "heard" that Walther designed the S&W 500 Magnum too.:rolleyes:

legion3
March 10, 2010, 12:17 PM
I "heard" that Walther designed the S&W 500 Magnum too.


Well that's just crazy, you should get your information from more reliable sources. (try rumor and small children)

S&W was the premier wheelgun maker at one time, slipped a bit as did all its products, and except for silly key locks is a decent top wheel gun maker. But wheel guns are not bread and butter for any maker these days.

The original M&P 38 Revolver clearly an American classic, the modern polymer M&P, sure looks and acts like it has a lot of European 9mm and polymer know how in it.

Boats
March 10, 2010, 12:33 PM
. . . the modern polymer M&P, sure looks and acts like it has a lot of European 9mm and polymer know how in it.

It happens. Glock should watch out.

You guys should stay on reality based turf and say that S&W liberally borrowed from Glock (removing the striker subassembly is identical to brand G for instance), rather than make up conspiracies about secret Walther help.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 12:44 PM
It looks pretty clear that someone rendered aid to S&W, probably Walther but who knows, heck it could have been Taurus.

S&W liberally borrowed from Glock for the original Sigma and got successfully sued in court, so I doubt they went that route again, but who knows.
You might be right but I doubt it.

Looks like S&W probably learned its lesson and got direct help in furthering its polymer market.

Is the SW 1911 anygood? Walther probably had no imput on that project.

Boats
March 10, 2010, 01:08 PM
You are full of "clearlys," "probablys" and that stuff that comes out of the south end of a north bound bull.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 01:17 PM
You are full of "clearlys," "probablys" and that stuff that comes out of the south end of a north bound bull.

Well whatever? Clearly, I'm absolutely postive that its probably correct that S&W had help from some other manufacturer or they lured someone with such knowledge to work with them to get over the polymer hump they seemed to be unable to do for a while.

saturno_v
March 10, 2010, 01:20 PM
Glock supporters and fans should google "glock accidental discharge" and enjoy the reading....:D:what:

Boats
March 10, 2010, 01:23 PM
You take it easy. It was an analogy.:rolleyes:

Boats
March 10, 2010, 01:26 PM
Well whatever? Clearly, I'm absolutely postive that its probably correct that S&W had help from some other manufacturer or they lured someone with such knowledge to work with them to get over the polymer hump they seemed to be unable to do for a while.

Fertilizer by any other name.

saturno_v
March 10, 2010, 01:29 PM
You take it easy. It was an analogy.

Sorry Boats..corrected my post...it came out stronger than I intended....;)

saturno_v
March 10, 2010, 01:41 PM
The Glock trigger certainly beats the hell out of any heavy double-action revolver trigger that I have ever fired.
And I would much rather have the consistent Glock trigger rather than the infernal DA/SA trigger....the worse of both worlds IMO.


Ridiculous claim

Decades of excellent service record in the Military and Police Forces around the world for DA revolvers (S&W) and service grade DA/SA pistols (Browning HP, Beretta 92/96, SIG, etc..) is the proof of how good that design is. What about serious competition matches where DA/SA pistols are not inferior to anyone (Tanfoglio, Bersa, etc..).....

So a Glock trigger is better than my S&W 29-2 trigger?? I think you never fired a quality revolver in your life....

Boomm
March 10, 2010, 01:59 PM
Personally I think 1911's are some of the most battle proven, prettiest, most reliable, comfortable, badass, intimidating, and manliest firearms out there. It is my favorite design for all of these reasons.

Glocks, on the other hand, are reliable, durable, accurate, solid, ugly, stupid looking, uncomfortable, bulky, and awkward.

Having shot a few of both, I like my 1911 much better. I'll probably end up getting a glock in 9mm down the road for fun gun. I want to completely mall ninja it out (flashlight, 33rd mag, full auto, suppressor, dot sight etc) and mess around with it.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/08/22/sideways_gun_sight.jpg

arizonaguide
March 10, 2010, 02:30 PM
Glock unsupported barrels Blow Chips...(literally!)
http://images.google.com/search?q=glock+kaboom&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&rlz=1T4RNTN_enUS369US370&ndsp=20&ei=ZuKXS-zLGpfUswOGrNg_&oi=images_breadcrumbs_list&ct=images-breadcrumbs-list&cd=1

I don't like glocks because:
1. Grip angle.
2. Goalpost sights.
3. Gaston Glock is a ******bag.
I like Glocks because
1. Grip angle.
2. All the aftermarket night sights.
3. Gaston Glock is an Austrian.

LMAO! That's funny there, I don't care who ya are.

And my all time favorite GLOCK video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1_EoRZOVes&feature=related
You've got to be "prufeshional" with a Glock, that's a givin ;)

legion3
March 10, 2010, 03:10 PM
Well I don't know about all that (1911's and Jet fighter procurment) but S&W did not seem capable of building a successful polymer gun before the involvement with Walther and they were after. Clearly something rubbed off. And clearly S&W had to do something because if they were going to rely on wood and steel for their success they would have been left behind.

Strahley
March 10, 2010, 03:37 PM
They are awesome handguns, but not for everyone. There are a lot of people that hate on them who have never shot one though, which is a shame

Boats
March 10, 2010, 03:44 PM
Back on topic: Glocks are the Corey Haim of service pistols. Big in their hey day, now only newsworthy for dying.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 04:01 PM
Back on topic: Glocks are the Corey Haim of service pistols. Big in their hey day, now only newsworthy for dying.

LOL...did you think that one up all by yourself or like S&W did you have help?

Glock dying? I (and apparently the rest of the normal shooting world) didn't even know they were sick!

Boats
March 10, 2010, 04:27 PM
Glock isn't sick, it's just not self-aware enough to perceive that its number is up.

You keep on shoveling BS for the dinosaur of polymer. It's all you're good at.

Strahley
March 10, 2010, 05:25 PM
Glock isn't going anywhere anytime soon

Boats
March 10, 2010, 05:47 PM
Not going anywhere is the sclerotic Glock design philosophy. Maybe like Ruger Inc. was, Glock Inc. is waiting for the old man to kick off before becoming hungry again.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 05:53 PM
You keep on shoveling BS for the dinosaur of polymer. It's all you're good at.


Enjoy your German/Walther/Umarex inspired S&W M&P.


Not going anywhere is the sclerotic Glock design philosophy. Maybe like Ruger Inc. was, Glock Inc. is waiting for the old man to kick off before becoming hungry again.

Maybe, but the Ruger SLR9 is the only true domestically produced polymer pistol that did not need European help to make it work . Of course it was recalled so perhaps they should have given HK, CZ or Sig a call since Walther was busy working out the kinks in Springfield MASS!

easyg
March 10, 2010, 06:45 PM
Ridiculous claim

Decades of excellent service record in the Military and Police Forces around the world for DA revolvers (S&W) and service grade DA/SA pistols (Browning HP, Beretta 92/96, SIG, etc..) is the proof of how good that design is.
No, that is a ridiculous claim.
Shooting improved greatly in the military once the SINGLE ACTION 1911 was adopted.
And when police agencies switched from revolvers to auto-loaders scores went up, not down.
Shooting a light DAO auto trigger beats shooting a heavy double-action revolver trigger every time (all other things being equal).
And shooting a light consistant trigger DAO auto trigger beats shooting a heavy-SA/light-DA auto trigger as well.

A heavy DA auto trigger has nothing to do with ease of accurate shooting.
It's merely an ILLUSION of SAFETY.


What about serious competition matches where DA/SA pistols are not inferior to anyone (Tanfoglio, Bersa, etc..).....
What matches are you referring to?
SA pistols and Glock style DAO pistols rule the competition scene.

So a Glock trigger is better than my S&W 29-2 trigger?? I think you never fired a quality revolver in your life....
Yes, I've shot plenty of quality revolvers.
But there's just no getting around the fact that a 10 lbs. long-travel double-action revolver trigger does not compare to a 5 lbs. short-travel Glock trigger.

If you don't believe me then prove it to yourself....
Take someone who has never shot a firearm in their entire life.
Let them shoot a stock S&W 4" barrel .38 Special revolver double-action only, and then a Glock 19 9mm or a S&W M&P9c or a SA XD9.
I'll bet that they perform much better with the autoloaders.

cchris
March 10, 2010, 07:10 PM
Back on topic: Glocks are the Corey Haim of service pistols. Big in their hey day, now only newsworthy for dying.
LOL...did you think that one up all by yourself or like S&W did you have help?

Walther actually designed that joke.

saturno_v
March 10, 2010, 07:14 PM
And when police agencies switched from revolvers to auto-loaders scores went up, not down.
Shooting a light DAO auto trigger beats shooting a heavy double-action revolver trigger every time (all other things being equal).
And shooting a light consistant trigger DAO auto trigger beats shooting a heavy-SA/light-DA auto trigger as well.

A heavy DA auto trigger has nothing to do with ease of accurate shooting.
It's merely an ILLUSION of SAFETY.


Police (in Northamerica and Australia, in Europe autoloaders were already well established) switched to autopistols for only 3 reasons:

1) Higher capacity, since the introduction of the wondernines, in a more light compact package

2) Increased reliability compared to past designs that made the increased capacity appealing

3) Costs

Accuracy and triggers have nothing to do with it

A heavy DA auto trigger has nothing to do with ease of accurate shooting.
It's merely an ILLUSION of SAFETY.



A DA/SA design has increased mishandling safety..period, it is a fact, deal with it....and not all LE agencies switched to polymer hammerless stricker fired pistols...some agencies do not have budget problems yet ;)

Beretta and SIG are wildly popular LE and special forces choices.

What matches are you referring to?
SA pistols and Glock style DAO pistols rule the competition scene.



Check "Tanfoglio", "Bersa" and "IPSC"...;)


But there's just no getting around the fact that a 10 lbs. long-travel double-action revolver trigger does not compare to a 5 lbs. short-travel Glock trigger.


An old S&W revolver has a trigger smoothness that Glock (and many other pistols) can only dream of...and remember I can always fire in SA with a DA/SA design....

legion3
March 10, 2010, 08:37 PM
Walther actually designed that joke.

You mean the M&P?

Oh you mean the clever Corey Haim joke, the one that speaks ill of the dead. Walther would never stoop so low.

legion3
March 10, 2010, 08:57 PM
^^^^^^^

Boat's joke was better :uhoh: and that's saying something.

BlayGlock
March 10, 2010, 08:57 PM
Wow, lots of non-High Road attitude here.

Why not Glock?

If you do not want a reliable, combat accurate pistol with tons of aftermarket support and that that you can work on yourself with a minimal amount of tools and technical know-how then you should stay away from Glocks.

tkkr
March 10, 2010, 09:09 PM
Yes, you are correct legion3, had I seen his post I would not have said anything. ALL HAIL GLOCK.

Larry Ashcraft
March 10, 2010, 09:28 PM
Excuse me, I seem to have stumbled into the wrong forum.

I thought this was The High Road.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why Not Glock" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!