Glock trigger - Perfection or So-So?


PDA






Godsgunman
January 21, 2013, 11:54 AM
I recently purchased my first Glock ever, a gen 3 26. I finally had a chance to take it out to the farm and put some rounds through it. First off I'd like to comment on the fit and feel of the gun. I personally like the size of the 26 for a CC weapon. Even though the grip is short and and my pinkie goes under the magazine base, I find it fits my hand very well and have no problem gripping the gun. I find the 26 to point pretty naturally for me also. The grip texturing seems to be pretty aggressive, maybe a little too aggressive IMO as I found it a little rough on the fingers while shooting but nothing problematic. The sights are standard Glock sights which I will probably replace with nights. The gun is plenty accurate from SD ranges and even back to 15 yds I was able to keep all 10 shots within an area of 5", which is pretty good for me especially with a new gun. As expected from a Glock there were no FTF or FTE with a mixed bag of ammo from FMJs to HPs and differing weights 115gr + 124gr.
Now on to the trigger. I found the trigger to be un-impresssive at best. I am more of a hammer gun guy and love a smooth DA pull and a nice SA pull even better. He trigger pull on the Glock is neither, kind of in between the two. In all honesty the trigger pull kind of reminds me of a stapler. Ever open a stapler and squeeze the top part to "shoot" a staple at your buddy in school? To me it feels like that. You have a little "takeup" or "staging" and then you come to where it stiffens and "click" you fire the staple. Not "perfection" IMHO. Effective, yes. Consistent, yes. Gets the job done, yes. Perfection, no.
Overall a great reliable gun that goes "bang" everytime and one that you can count on when needed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock trigger - Perfection or So-So?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ny32182
January 21, 2013, 12:02 PM
Not "perfection" IMHO. Effective, yes. Consistent, yes. Gets the job done, yes. Perfection, no.


The trigger works perfectly to its design intent and philosophy... if you want a target/bullseye single action trigger you will need a different gun. You can lighten it if you want, but at the end of the day it is a DAO style trigger that will never break like a single action.

ball3006
January 21, 2013, 12:07 PM
Glock triggers are a bit different. However, once you get used to it, it is a non issue. Just like my C&R rifles. All the triggers are different so you just have to remember to use proper trigger manulipation, squeeze the trigger until it goes off. Once you understand that, things are fine....chris3

holdencm9
January 21, 2013, 12:08 PM
Your thoughts mimic mine with the Glock trigger, although it will probably smooth out a little bit as you put more rounds through it. Everyone complains about the S&W M&P trigger but personally I found it to be better than Glock, out of the box at least. That said, I manage to shoot all my friends' Glocks very well, even though I wouldn't say it fits my hand or points naturally, that doesn't really matter when you are just poking holes at the range. And like ny said, it is not intended to be a bullseye trigger. It will never compete with a single action on a good 1911, for instance.

Also trigger feel is pretty subjective for each person and also, there is probably a lot of variation within the same make and model of gun, so it is possible you got one that is a little on the gritty side.

ApacheCoTodd
January 21, 2013, 12:21 PM
It is exactly and specifically only the trigger which has not only allowed any past Glocks in my possession to pass on to other more appreciative owners but in fact hastened the sales.

While I recognize that they operate the way they were designed to operate - I as a consumer can't stand them (triggers) and don't care to "get used to them" at this time.

Outstanding guns, great industry support, exceptional array of products but just as with DA/SA, I'm not climbing on board.

I kinda look at it like my passion for motorcycles: there are a great many "classic" bikes I'd love to own save one or two features - if they have a right side shift or foot clutch - I'm not goin' there to avoid the new learning/familiarity curve required.

TMann
January 21, 2013, 12:23 PM
Using a Glock trigger is definitely less satisfying from an aesthetic point of view than a nice SA trigger (1911 or Ruger MKII) or even a smooth DA revolver. The mushy takeup and split-trigger design don't afford the same tactile experience as the other guns.

Despite that, I have always found the Glock to be a very easy gun to shoot. Once you get used to it, the Glock trigger is surprisingly easy to control. My main HD and carry guns are both Glocks, and I shoot them as well as any of my other handguns.

Choices are a good thing. If you like your Glock, stay with it. If you can't stand the way it feels, find something else that works well for you.

TMann

ku4hx
January 21, 2013, 12:40 PM
I own double action revolvers, single action revolvers, shotguns, black powder revolvers and long guns, modern rifles and modern pistols. They all have triggers and different types of guns have different trigger feel. That's not only true across all guns, but also within specific gun types.

As to pistols, Rugers, Glocks, Colts, Smiths and etc. all have a slightly different feel and action. But the same can be said of automatic and manual transmissions. You just have to learn to use what you want to learn to use. As for me, I like them all and don't arbitrarily limit myself based on how something feels at first blush. If I'd have done that in my dating years, I'd never have met my wife. Or most of the women I knew at one time.

As to Glock triggers specifically, meh ... no big deal. I like shooting mine and getting used to them was just a normal event in this shooter's life. I can say the same for my 1967 vintage Ruger Blackhawk, my BHP and in fact all the various types of guns I have. Glocks are Glocks and always will be. I chose to master them; wife prefers the Ruger SR series. We still get along famously.

Cesiumsponge
January 21, 2013, 12:47 PM
I find the gen3 grip texture insufficient and stippled mine more aggressively. The trigger pull smoothes out with the "25 cent trigger polish" or 5000 rounds, whichever comes first, but the fundamental pull doesn't change. Under stress shooting, minor quips like trigger smoothness are irrelevant. Having run 1911s and Glocks through training and stressfire drills, the only thing that matters is the trigger break. I actually do better with my Glock than my Kimber. The squishy Glock trigger still gets me a 80-90% hit rate on an IPSC at 100 yards.

BP Hunter
January 21, 2013, 12:55 PM
Of all the handguns I have handled and fired, the Glock trigger seems to fit me the best. As much as I like the clean break of the my Taurus 1911, the DAO Glock trigger somehow agrees with my trigger pull. It is the only trigger that allowws me to double tap successfully.

Ky Larry
January 21, 2013, 01:24 PM
I don't like any striker fired pistol. I like the feel of a hammer fired pistol. This is just a personal thing with me. Glock triggers feel likea handful of mush. However,they go bang just about every time and are accurate. There are enough choices out there that everybody should find something that works for them. I don't bash Glocks. They just don't work for me. You should shoot what works for you.

Godsgunman
January 21, 2013, 02:16 PM
Yeah I'm definitely not trying to Glock bash or anything like that. As I said it is definitely a quality reliable weapon and pretty dang accurate. Having put less than 150 rounds through it there's definitely plenty of time for me to get used to the trigger feel since that seems to be my biggest issue with it. There are worse problems to have I guess, since it is a reliable gun and built to last. Time will tell.

C0untZer0
January 21, 2013, 02:39 PM
StockGlock triggers are horrible

wally
January 21, 2013, 02:49 PM
StockGlock triggers are horrible

I'd agree with you, until gen 4. Prior Glocks I couldn't shoot worth a crap unless I put the 3lb trigger connector in, and then I'd be real leery of it as a carry pistol, but my Glocks are full size and range toys so its worked out OK (I've a 17 & 21 gen 2, 20 gen3SF, & 17L gen3).

The gen4 Glock 22 I could shoot great out of the box, just enough better trigger combined with the not so fat and blocky frame (no insert used) makes a world of difference for me. This one I would be comfortable carrying.

MrBorland
January 21, 2013, 02:51 PM
The Glocks I've shot with factory triggers had some wicked letoff. It was very obvious during dry fire, with the muzzle really jarring when the sear broke. Everything I've shot through them ended up going left, despite experimenting with grip, trigger finger placement, speed, etc. I recently shot a friend's Glock after he tuned the trigger to reduce the harsh letoff, and it made a big difference.

Sigokat
January 21, 2013, 02:58 PM
I recently purchased my first Glock ever, a gen 3 26. I finally had a chance to take it out to the farm and put some rounds through it. First off I'd like to comment on the fit and feel of the gun. I personally like the size of the 26 for a CC weapon. Even though the grip is short and and my pinkie goes under the magazine base, I find it fits my hand very well and have no problem gripping the gun. I find the 26 to point pretty naturally for me also. The grip texturing seems to be pretty aggressive, maybe a little too aggressive IMO as I found it a little rough on the fingers while shooting but nothing problematic. The sights are standard Glock sights which I will probably replace with nights. The gun is plenty accurate from SD ranges and even back to 15 yds I was able to keep all 10 shots within an area of 5", which is pretty good for me especially with a new gun. As expected from a Glock there were no FTF or FTE with a mixed bag of ammo from FMJs to HPs and differing weights 115gr + 124gr.
Now on to the trigger. I found the trigger to be un-impresssive at best. I am more of a hammer gun guy and love a smooth DA pull and a nice SA pull even better. He trigger pull on the Glock is neither, kind of in between the two. In all honesty the trigger pull kind of reminds me of a stapler. Ever open a stapler and squeeze the top part to "shoot" a staple at your buddy in school? To me it feels like that. You have a little "takeup" or "staging" and then you come to where it stiffens and "click" you fire the staple. Not "perfection" IMHO. Effective, yes. Consistent, yes. Gets the job done, yes. Perfection, no.
Overall a great reliable gun that goes "bang" everytime and one that you can count on when needed.
I love the Glock trigger. Once I got used to the break and the reset points, and learned to use them to my advantage, I became very accurate, and fast with the Glock pistols. The reset and break points are essential to shooting them accurately.

I think it's not as good as some 1911 triggers (like my Kimber Custom Target II), but somewhat better than others (like my Colt Government Series 80). The Glock just requires less trigger travel than the Colt. I also prefer the Glock trigger, by far to the stock Sig P226 trigger. The Sig has such a long reset compared to the Glock factory trigger.

2zulu1
January 21, 2013, 03:26 PM
I have three Glocks, don't care for their triggers. What Glocks should have evolved to can be found on the recent Steyr A1s, one advantage is the Steyr has a short learning curve.

My finger gets pinched between the bottom of the trigger guard and finger on my G20s, thus limiting range time to 70-100 rounds max. By comparison, I can go 400 rounds easily with 1911s in 45 auto or 38 Super, there's no comparison between Glock triggers and my three Colt 1911s, or even a Citadel for that matter. :)

the duck of death
January 21, 2013, 03:32 PM
Don't like the Glock trigger? Why not fix it, I did--2lbs with no take up.:D

2wheels
January 21, 2013, 03:36 PM
They work, I don't think anyone will debate that.

But growing up shooting DA/SA autos, DA revolvers, and SAO 1911s, the first time I shot a Glock the first thing I thought was "this isn't a firearms trigger!". I can shoot a Glock just fine, but I don't particularly enjoy it.

Certainly beats a stock Sigma trigger though.

amd6547
January 21, 2013, 04:46 PM
I like the Glock trigger very well, and I am pretty accurate with it.
Recently, I have heard good things about the combination of the NY-1 trigger return with a light pull connector. Parts are cheap, I may try it.

easyg
January 21, 2013, 04:51 PM
While the stock Glock trigger is not exactly awe inspiring, no one can blame the trigger if they can't shoot the Glock well.

greenlion
January 21, 2013, 05:11 PM
Yeah, thats why GLOCKS are by far the top pistol choice for pro shooters shooting IDPA matches and most of the Nation's Law Enforcement Officers, because they have bad triggers. It really helps to win trophies and defend your life if the trigger on your gun sucks. :rolleyes:

If you think GLOCK triggers suck, you MAY (I'm not saying absolutely, but MAY) have never spent the time to learn how they work.

wanderinwalker
January 21, 2013, 05:41 PM
While the stock Glock trigger is not exactly awe inspiring, no one can blame the trigger if they can't shoot the Glock well.

This sums it up pretty well IMO. To me there seem to be two kinds of shooters: 1) those who chase "the perfect" (trigger, grip angle, width, etc) and complain about anything that doesn't match their ideal (and use it as an excuse for poor shooting). 2) shooters who just grab whatever is given to them and make hits on target.

The Glock doesn't appeal to many in group 1, but that doesn't mean it won't work fine. To be fair, I'm not sensitive to grip angle/trigger/sight changes and hop from DA revolvers to Glocks and can handle a 1911 fine as well.

hq
January 21, 2013, 05:41 PM
For some weird, unexplainable reason, Glock triggers are downright horrible when you dry fire them, but they work in practice. For some (most?), that is; I recently found out that I'm one of them.

Godsgunman
January 21, 2013, 07:01 PM
WanderinWalker-
I, like you, generally find myself in the #2 category. I have owned and shot DAOs, SAOs, DA/SA and now the Glock style. I shoot them all pretty well and can adapt to angles and so on and so forth. I find the Glock trigger to just kinda fall into its own category as "different". As I stated in my review, its not for a lack of accuracy that I find it different but a lack of commonality for me. Hopefully I will learn to love the trigger as I break it in more since I do like the overall results of the 26 itself. Probably the best trigger I ever had was on a Taurus 908 but the darn thing was to unreliable with FTFs (beautiful gun to). Give me that gun with Glock reliability and I'd be in heaven ::sigh:: can't have it all I guess :p.

Plan2Live
January 21, 2013, 07:53 PM
As the saying goes, if you have to ask.....

chris in va
January 21, 2013, 08:13 PM
You could actually see the frame flex outward on my 21sf when the trigger was staged. Yuck.

pat701
January 21, 2013, 08:54 PM
I bought a gen4 21 35 days ago. Went to LGS clerk brought out 10 Glock21's out I tryed the trigger on all 10. I picked out 2 that i felt had the best triggers. As the clerk to check the triggers on the 2 i liked. He liked the same pistol trigger that was my pick. I have no complaints on my Glock trigger. I am also a DA/SA man. I couldn't pass up the 21 due to the blue label LEO price i got. $464.

RBid
January 21, 2013, 08:54 PM
There are certainly better triggers out there. The trigger on my PPQ, for example, is fantastic. Even the supposedly inferior Ruger SR series has a better trigger. The Glock trigger isn't going to make you say, "Ooooooohhhhh!" It's not going to make you run home to post about it on the Internet. It's also not going to get in the way of a good shooter, or hold you back.

1911 guy
January 22, 2013, 12:43 AM
While I'm by no means a fan of Glocks in general, I do have to admit that they are at least consistent. They aren't great, but they at least don't go from heavy to light like a traditional DA/SA does.

Pretty much, every trigger has it's compromises. If you like the pistol otherwise, I'd just learn to live with it. There are improvements that can be made with aftermarket parts. If, however, it's just another in a list of complaints, you may want to look into another type of pistol.

There are many people who for one reason or another have decided to dedicate themselves to the Glock platform. With a little effort, it can be used very well.

Drail
January 22, 2013, 01:24 AM
It is truly amazing what people are able to get used to and accept as far as "triggers" go. I still remember the first time someone brought a Glock onto our range, of course everyone had to shoot it. That was the first and last time I ever fired a Glock. I have several staple guns with better triggers. I would never have believed that the Glock would become the "standard" it has. Perfection? Not even close.

Jaymo
January 22, 2013, 01:48 AM
From the factory, absolute crap.
With a good trigger job, not bad.

Godsgunman
January 22, 2013, 11:14 AM
As far as trigger jobs go, I definitely would't want the pull lightened at all since the 5lb pull is as light as I feel comfortable with on a carry gun especially with no other safety features. What can be done to smooth it out, anything? Or just work it out over time?

Ankeny
January 22, 2013, 11:35 AM
Yeah, thats why GLOCKS are by far the top pistol choice for pro shooters shooting IDPA matches.... I didn't know there are more "pro" Glock shooters across the board than there are "pro" 1911 shooters in CDP and ESP. Then again, is your definition of "pro" a sponsored shooter? Why is it the classifier allows almost 10 seconds more time to make Master shooting a Glock in SSP than to make Master in ESP shooting a 1911? Just wondering.

eldon519
January 22, 2013, 02:04 PM
I actually rather like the Glock trigger. I just treat it like a two-stage trigger. If you are trying to pull it from its rest and fire each time in one fell swoop, yeah that probably would seem horrible, but if you are following through and keeping the trigger back after the shot, you just let it out until it resets and pull again, similar to a normal single action. It isn't the crispest break in the world, but I think it is definitely adequate. Regarding the actual break, it isn't any creepier than my Ruger Bisley, CZ-75, or XD 45. I'd put the crispness smack in the middle of my pistol collection.

Fiv3r
January 22, 2013, 02:34 PM
I've got no problem with them, they're consistent. I like my 26 a lot. I shoot it well enough to feel confident carrying it every day.

Does it have the same break as a SA? Nope. Is it horrible like a pocket .380? Not even close. Just about 5-6lbs of pull with some mush at the front. I never found it to be that bad at all. Then again, I don't have any race guns or anything overly "nice". All of my handguns shoot differently. During a trip to the range I'm going to work out my 26, my 1911, my Mk III, and my cap and ball Remington. NONE of those guns feel the same in the trigger department, but I still have a good time shooting them:)

Buckeyeguy525
January 22, 2013, 07:18 PM
I have personally always liked the Glock trigger. I think it is the best trigger out of all the polymer guns (stock). But many people do not like it. You won't find a Glock with a 1911 trigger, but you won't find a 1911 with Glock reliability either. You can get used to a trigger, you can't make a 1911 run like a Glock. I personally can shoot a Glock better than 99% of the people I see at my local range that use a 1911. Not trying to say I am a crack-shot, just saying that it's more the indian than the arrow.

Drail
January 22, 2013, 08:31 PM
"but you won't find a 1911 with Glock reliability either" and "you can't make a 1911 run like a Glock" Wanna bet? Bill Wilson and Ed Brown and Les Baer are rolling on the floor right now. You really need to get out more. Those are just about the most absurd statements I have ever heard regarding the 1911 platform.

Ankeny
January 22, 2013, 09:35 PM
I personally can shoot a Glock better than 99% of the people I see at my local range that use a 1911. You need to get out some more. Maybe go shoot some USPSA, Steel Challenge, etc.:D

Buckeyeguy525
January 22, 2013, 09:44 PM
Yes actually, I DO wanna bet. If you are in the Columbus area I would be more than happy to meet you at a local range for a little glock vs 1911 action? I'll bring a bucket of sand and you can bring your Wilson Combat, we will burry each in the bucket and then have a shoot-off.....I bet you I win.
You'll be left holding a $2500 club.

Drail
January 22, 2013, 09:49 PM
No thanks. Keep dunking your Glock in that bucket of sand, it will only get more "perfect" (or at least it will hold more sand). For the record, I don't own any Wilson Combat pistols either. I build mine from naked Baer frames and slides. And they have gone over a thousand rounds a day many times and never failed in twenty years of matches. I was doing this when Gaston Glock was still making curtain rods and cabinet hinges. But they were "perfect".

tomrkba
January 22, 2013, 09:50 PM
Neither. It is not a 1911 trigger. It is like a very light revolver trigger with a very short reset. I do not understand how people can complain about a Glock trigger and in the same breath talk about great double action revolver triggers. It is certainly better than my stock Hi-Power, which had a 14 pound trigger. The best revolver trigger I have was tuned by an excellent revolver gunsmith and weighs in at 9 1/4 pounds. It is exceptionally smooth and retains weight throughout the pull. My Glock trigger does the same, but cost $15 to work on (Ghost connector) with an overall pull around five pounds.

pittspilot
January 23, 2013, 12:13 AM
While it certainly can't rival a nice 1911 trigger, I have found that a Glock trigger works well when riding the sear. I can shoot it fast and quite accurately even though the trigger is heavy.

IMHO I wouldn't want a light trigger on a Glock.

1911 guy
January 23, 2013, 01:39 AM
Buckeye guy, we gonna "shoot for pinks"? When I win, I get to take and sell your pistol for a better one, right? When someone who knows how to properly maintain the pistol, a 1911 is just as reliable as any other out there. They were in hard use for decades by people who were familiar with maintaining equipment. It was only with the advent of the "casual shooter" and shooters who were unfamiliar with getting their fingernails dirty that the 1911 began to garner a reputation for unreliability. Of course bastardized copies that didn't hold tolerances fed into that rumor, too.

Glocks aren't a terrible pistol. But neither are they the paragon of perfection they are portrayed as. They are a handgun developed for the lowest common demominator. While they will run longer with somewhat less maintenance than other designs, they do so at the cost of poor triggers, cheezy frames and marginal accuracy.

Those guns the pro shooters use are no more "stock" than a Monte Carlo on a NASCAR track is. That's true of all shooters using anybodies guns.

KAS1981
January 23, 2013, 03:04 AM
IMO all striker-fired plastic guns have crappy triggers.

hq
January 23, 2013, 07:28 AM
Glocks aren't a terrible pistol. But neither are they the paragon of perfection they are portrayed as. They are a handgun developed for the lowest common demominator. While they will run longer with somewhat less maintenance than other designs, they do so at the cost of poor triggers, cheezy frames and marginal accuracy.

I agree on everything else but marginal accuracy. I posted my personal experience with this in thread titled 'Beginning to understand Glock...' and believe me, as a die-hard 1911 fan that was really hard for me to swallow.

Then again, knowing exactly how much Glocks cost to manufacture, the product is nothing short of amazing. The trigger is abysmal but it works amazingly well in practice, ergonomics are dictated more by manufacturing process than the shape of an average human hand, virtually all design features are copied or adapted from other guns and just the thought of being mistaken for one of the fanboys who rave about Glocks online makes my stomach turn, but... objectively, they're better than many (including myself) give them credit for.

Glocks are a bit like dating an ugly girl. You don't want to be seen in public with one, but when you look past the public image they can be a lot of fun and do some things just as well or even better than bikini models when you least expect it. ;)

Inebriated
January 23, 2013, 08:36 AM
Glock's trigger should have no hindrance on how you shoot. If they do, that's you... not the gun.

Buckeyeguy525
January 23, 2013, 08:38 AM
No thanks. Keep dunking your Glock in that bucket of sand, it will only get more "perfect" (or at least it will hold more sand). For the record, I don't own any Wilson Combat pistols either. I build mine from naked Baer frames and slides. And they have gone over a thousand rounds a day many times and never failed in twenty years of matches. I was doing this when Gaston Glock was still making curtain rods and cabinet hinges. But they were "perfect".


I guess this is where my opinion varies from most. If you want a pistol to play games with or just go to the range, the 1911 is a great platform. However I don't consider a gun to be combat-reliable if I have to make sure it's clean and lubed at all times to go bang. All my firearms are defensive weapons, and defesenive situations do not always take place in clean environments. If you draw your 1911 and a bad guy knocks it down in the sand/dirt theres a much better chance of it not functioning than say a Glock. It's just the nature of the design. But I guess we will agree to disagree on it. Both Glocks and 1911's are very polarizing....and the fans of each are a-holes about it (myself being one). Most old timers get caught up in the history and nostalgia of the firearm, but I take it for what it is: an outdated design that is in no way superior to modern firearms, with the exception of a fantastic tigger.

Buckeyeguy525
January 23, 2013, 08:43 AM
Of course bastardized copies that didn't hold tolerances fed into that rumor, too

You are a man who knows what he is talking about. A 1911 has to be finely tuned in order to properly run, but even then I wouldn't say its as reliable as a glock. As for the pink slips, hell no! I wouldn't bet my favorite firearm that is set up the way I like it on anything! Especially considering how difficult it is to buy them right now. I would however be more than willing to make a monetary wager...?

Buckeyeguy525
January 23, 2013, 08:48 AM
They were in hard use for decades by people who were familiar with maintaining equipment. It was only with the advent of the "casual shooter" and shooters who were unfamiliar with getting their fingernails dirty that the 1911 began to garner a reputation for unreliability.

It was in hard use before the modern firearms came to be. Let me ask you this, WHY choose to use a firearm for defense/combat that requires so much maintenance in order to work when you can use a Glock/XD/Sig etc that doesn't and is more reliable? Just because it has a nice trigger? The thought process is beyond me on that one.

Drail
January 23, 2013, 11:01 AM
I give up. You win. I only wish I had not wasted so many years of my life working on inferior unreliable guns. I was a fool.

eldon519
January 23, 2013, 02:33 PM
Not to get too much off on a tangent, but I have never used a encountered a 1911 that was really stone-cold reliable. My 1911 is probably my most-shot pistol, but I don't have illusions about it just because of that.

I posted this in a different thread, but it bears repeating:
I looked up some information on the outcome of the XM9 and XM10 pistol trials (the trials how we ultimately wound up with the Beretta M9 as our service pistol), and I was somewhat surprised at how poorly the 1911 performed. In the 1981 trial, the 1911 had a mean round between operational failure (from what I understand in the report, this would include a parts breakage or jam) of 165 rounds. Basically no guns passed the 1981 criteria and the Beretta and SIG had 158 and 209 rounds respectively. During the 1984 testing, the 1911 came in at 162 rounds. By comparison, the Beretta and SIG had jumped to 1,750 and 2,877 respectively.

The somewhat shocking-to-me outcome of this failure rate is that these particular 1911s in this particular test only had 95% probability of making it through a 7-round magazine without interruption. The SIG and Beretta were both 99% likely to make it through a 15 round magazine without interruption. By comparison, the 1911 was 90% for 15 rounds.

45_auto
January 23, 2013, 02:49 PM
What kind of 1911's were they testing? The last new ones the military bought was in 1953 I believe?

Were they testing 30 year old worn out 1911's against new Berettas and Sigs? The original 1911 acceptance testing went 6,000 rounds without a malfunction.

In fact, during a 6,000 round test fired over two days in 1910 that was personally supervised by John M. Browning, his sample pistol became so hot that it was simply dunked in a pail of water to cool it for further firing. Browning’s sample reportedly passed the test with no malfunctions.

http://www.browning.com/library/infonews/detail.asp?id=301

What happened between 1910 and 1984?

eldon519
January 23, 2013, 04:08 PM
I don't know, but it seemed to perform about the exact same in '81 and '84. The results were from a formally documented (and heavily scrutinized given the whole SIG-Beretta dispute) government trial. The document I was reading was an actual government report.

I don't know anything as to the validity of the 1910 test, but I would like to see a more reliable source than the Browning webpage. Even by their own account, the test was conducted by Browning himself which seems a potential conflict of interest if nothing else. That isn't so different than Glock conducting their own "torture tests."

tuj
January 23, 2013, 04:22 PM
Consistent, yes. Gets the job done, yes. Perfection, no.

Yeah that about sums it up. I shot a 34 recently and I was actually pleasantly surprised at how 'acceptable' the trigger was. I had just finished shooting my Pardini's so I had a very high measuring stick in my mind for triggers when I shot the 34.

If you want 'perfection', then as close as it gets in my mind is the Pardini GT-series. It's a single action gun with a more 'European' feel to the trigger. I prefer it to my Les Baer.

Not to get too much off on a tangent, but I have never used a encountered a 1911 that was really stone-cold reliable.

My STI Spartan has been very reliable out of the box. Pretty impressive for a $600 1911.

What happened between 1910 and 1984?

Absolutely nothing AFAIK. They pulled old 1911's that were worn or out of spec from the inventory and used them in the test against brand new pistols. Not fair for the venerable 1911.

The funny thing is, look at how close to the 1911 we still are....the Glock is still a short-recoil, locked breech, tilting barrel pistol. JMB got a lot of things RIGHT!

Buckeyeguy525
January 23, 2013, 06:44 PM
I apologize for highjacking the thread and turning it into a glock vs 1911 debate, which has been done to death. A wise man once said "whenever you're having an argument with an idiot, make sure he isnt doing the same thing". Agree to disagree. Every test thats ever been done where the 1911 did poorly was somehow "unfair" so theres really no point.

SDGlock23
January 23, 2013, 10:20 PM
Of all the polymer pistols I've owned, the Glock trigger is by far my favorite. I suppose each person has his/her own idea of what makes a good trigger, but to me the Glock trigger is consistent. It has a short reset and it's the same every single time. I especially like the "." connector on the Gen4's.

1911 guy
January 24, 2013, 12:56 AM
The information that is most telling is maintenance schedules. The M9 has periodic maintenance done based on round count. Frankly, that's the way it should be. However, the M1911 had no such support. If it broke, you fixed it. If it was worn slap out and should have been replaced before we'd ever heard of Viet-Nam, it was put back in the armory to bolster the "can't hit a barn" and "won't run right" myths.

Every mechanical device needs some sort of maintenance. Some more than others. Not really a better or worse thing, just different strokes for different folks. The only edge a newer design has on a correctly built 1911 is when you want to deliberately abuse it. I fail to see the point that your Brand X pistol can get run over by a cement truck, given a bath in volcanic ash, be fed through a wood chipper and still function. Those are beyond the realistic uses of a handgun. And if normal maintenance is beyond or beneath you, maybe you are better off with a pistol designed for people who don't take particular care of their armament.

Again, I'm not trying to slam Glock as being a junk pistol. They're fine if they fit your hands. They're just not the be-all and end-all some claim them to be. And quite frankly, neither is the 1911. The smaller and more portable you make a weapon, the more compromises you have to make. The definition of handgun is small and portable. Personally, I'd like to confront life in general with something .30 caliber and supportd by something crew served. However, like everyone else that carries a handgun, I compromise.

hentown
January 24, 2013, 09:41 AM
Not going to wade through all the posts, so somebody might have already said this: You can spend $10-$12 on an aftermarket connector and do a little polishing of the mating surfaces in the firing mechanisms and considerably improve a Glock's trigger. I use aftermarket connectors in all my Glocks, including my daily-carry G26. (Yeah, I know, "Ayoob, modifications, aftermarket parts, blah, blah, blah." I take my legal advice from real lawyers and feel comfortable carrying a modified G26.;))

Fishslayer
January 24, 2013, 10:49 PM
Out of the box, definitely so-so. I would describe it otherwise but this is The High Road. ;)

They can be made better though. Just time & money. Unlikely they will achieve "perfection."

WinThePennant
January 24, 2013, 10:59 PM
Like anything else when it comes to Glocks, they SHOOT better than they FEEL in the hand. You can say that about the grip, and you can say that about the trigger. I don't even feel the trigger when I shoot. Just practice, and let nature take its course.

GLOOB
January 25, 2013, 06:46 AM
I find it easy to dryfire a Glock without disturbing the sights. I have owned and fired a surprising number guns with relatively crisp SA trigger pulls where this is not the case. Esp DA/SA guns... the SA breakpoint tends to be too close for me.

Perfection? Yeah, for my purposes I suppose it's pretty close.

Godsgunman
January 25, 2013, 11:05 AM
The trigger does seem to be growing on me a little more. It is pretty easy to stage and then feel when its "go time". Having never even fired a Glock before buying my 26 I guess I was caught off guard, definitely NOT what I was used to. Not too bad since Im more acquainted with it.

mljdeckard
January 25, 2013, 11:12 AM
The biggest reason I don't carry a Glock anymore is the trigger. Not terrible. But not as good as a 1911.

Roadking Rider
January 25, 2013, 06:01 PM
So,So. Not bad, not great either. IMO no striker fired straight out of the box pistols have great triggers.

481
January 25, 2013, 06:29 PM
While I wouldn't call it "perfection", I have become very accustomed to the standard trigger that comes on the Glock 17 (gen 3) which rolls nicely along at 5 pounds even after break-in according to my trigger pull scale.

SullyVols
January 25, 2013, 07:04 PM
Had a Glock 17, traded it for a 40 year old 4" S&W 19-3 during this recent semi-auto craze. I am much more comfortable with a revolver in my hand.

My 686 had a 13.5 lb. DA trigger (about 350 rounds ago) and 'felt' much better than the advertised 5.5 trigger on my Glock 17.

But again that isn't Glock's selling point. The Glock's selling points are its price and reliability.

Buckeyeguy525
January 26, 2013, 10:24 AM
1911 guy brings up a good point, the smaller the pistol the more problems you potentially face. I believe thats why Wilson Combat doesnt make a 45 with a barrel less than 4", the design just doesnt lend itself to that. My hat goes off to Wilson for bringing that to the attention of potential buyers, vs Kimber or any of the other big companies who will sell you a 3" 1911 for carry that you are supposed to bet your life on knowing that its flawed in that configuration.

Ankeny
January 26, 2013, 11:58 AM
Even more thread drift. While I too subscribe to the notion that buying a 1911 smaller than a Commander size gun can be asking for problems, there are no doubt thousands of sub 4.25 inch guns that run flawlessly. My 9mm EMP is a good example (I know the above post addresses .45). Another example is the Dan Wesson ECO. The ECO has been well received and they run like the Energizer Bunny. There are other examples as well.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock trigger - Perfection or So-So?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!