Glock G41 confirmed?


PDA






dcarch
December 4, 2013, 03:54 PM
Hey all! I was just browsing one of my favorite blogs, the The Firearm Blog, and found this article (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/12/04/glock-41-45-acp-13-rounds-mrsp-775-confirmed/) which apparently seems to suggest that Glock is going to offer a new .45 caliber, 5.3'' barrel handgun, to be branded the G41. What's THR's take on this potential new offering?

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock G41 confirmed?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Hometeached1
December 4, 2013, 03:56 PM
If it is I would like to get one!

C0untZer0
December 4, 2013, 04:59 PM
Kind of a dup thread:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=735857

herrwalther
December 4, 2013, 06:40 PM
So a Glock 21 with a 1" longer barrel? Yawn.

VA27
December 4, 2013, 11:18 PM
Dear Glock,

Build a service-sized G36 and I'll buy one. So will a lot of other folks. While you're at it, a single stack 9mm pocket gun would be nice. 5X4 inches would be about right. Oh, and if you could see yourself clear to lose the plastic covered magazines you could make your guns a little slimmer.

Thanks,

VA27

JTQ
December 5, 2013, 08:41 AM
Build a service-sized G36 and I'll buy one.
In the .45 Auto "centric" forums I frequent, a single stack version of the G21 is what I often see requests for, though I suppose a big G36 would also be OK.

I don't ever see guys asking for a bigger G21. Of course I'm not on the competition forums where the Glock guys may be enviously looking at their buddies with those long barreled XDM Competition guns. Gotta keep up with the Jones's I guess.

bannockburn
December 5, 2013, 10:03 AM
Not looking for another larger Glock. Waiting on something a bit more compact and better suited to my smaller hand size.

Madcap_Magician
December 5, 2013, 11:09 AM
Almost the best news from the new Glock models, since the rumor about the G42 being a 9mm single-stack subcompact has not yet been confirmed, is that they're skipping the Glock 40 model number.

!!!:D!!!

... too confusing to a certain demographic.

1911 guy
December 5, 2013, 11:19 AM
Hate to be the party pooper, but...
Quotes from previous posters:

Build a service-sized G36 and I'll buy one. So will a lot of other folks. While you're at it, a single stack 9mm pocket gun would be nice. 5X4 inches would be about right. Oh, and if you could see yourself clear to lose the plastic covered magazines you could make your guns a little slimmer.

In the .45 Auto "centric" forums I frequent, a single stack version of the G21 is what I often see requests for,

Waiting on something a bit more compact and better suited to my smaller hand size.

As much as I admit that Mr. Gaston figured out how to market a marginal pistol extremely well, his limitation is that of a one-trick pony. When, in the entire history of Glock, have you seen a single stack? And you never will. When was the last time you saw one that wasn't needlessly over thick in the grip frame? Never. They all are by nature of following the current design model with zero appreciable deviation.

If Glock pistols fit your hands, go for it. If they don't, stop making happy thoughts and wishes, just move on to something that is better for your needs.

Just my thoughts.

Fishbed77
December 5, 2013, 11:36 AM
Oh, and if you could see yourself clear to lose the plastic covered magazines you could make your guns a little slimmer.

I've never understood the point of the plastic-coated Glock mags. Plenty of uber-reliable pistols use all-steel mag bodies just fine.

VA27
December 5, 2013, 12:17 PM
The original G17 mags were poly with steel reinforcing on 3 sides. You have to remember that Glock was primarially a plastics company so the mags had to be plastic. When fully loaded they would swell slightly and not drop free. This was to prevent accidental loss of a magazine in the field. Since the gun was designed to fill a military contract this sort of makes sense.

It was only after the American market complained about the mags not dropping free that the full metal-lined mags were constructed.

Glock could design a slimmer frame to take all metal mags. The question is, will they? I think not, since they had their chance to do that with the 36 and chose not to. Still, a guy can dream.

DT Guy
December 5, 2013, 12:24 PM
Is it because 'metal magaine vs. plastic gripframe' could lead to ugly wear?


Larry

wally
December 5, 2013, 12:26 PM
So a Glock 21 with a 1" longer barrel? Yawn.

As you get older an extra inch of sight radius can make a disproportionate difference!

Unfortunately I'm past the point where it makes enough difference :(


Is it because 'metal magaine vs. plastic gripframe' could lead to ugly wear?
Doubt it, even Taurus can get this right.

lpsharp88
December 5, 2013, 02:02 PM
When, in the entire history of Glock, have you seen a single stack? And you never will

Glock 36?
http://us.glock.com/products/model/g36

JTQ
December 5, 2013, 02:15 PM
VA27 wrote,
The original G17 mags were poly with steel reinforcing on 3 sides. You have to remember that Glock was primarially a plastics company so the mags had to be plastic. When fully loaded they would swell slightly and not drop free. This was to prevent accidental loss of a magazine in the field. Since the gun was designed to fill a military contract this sort of makes sense.
That's pretty funny.

The CZ75B was designed to retain magazines. A part is in the magwell to keep the mags from falling free.

The Glock on the other hand, had a poor magazine design, that would allow the mags to swell when loaded. In typical Glock fashion, the problem became a feature. "Ya, that's the ticket, it's a feature we designed into our guns to make them better. We changed the design to make them even more better, ya, that's the ticket."

Weevil
December 6, 2013, 12:13 PM
Why was it a "problem"???

They achieved the same thing as the CZ without adding more parts and increasing the complexity of their design.

Same results less parts.

bds
December 6, 2013, 06:59 PM
Because there were times when you needed to drop a partially filled magazine for another one. And if the mag was too swelled, it would not "drop free" even when empty. So it slowed down the mag change and required two hands.

A lot of us shooting matches back then developed the Glock wrist flick. When dropping empty mags, we flicked our shootng hand/wrist HARD to toss the empty mag out as the other hand reached for another mag.

We were happy when fully lined true "drop free" mags came out.

With any magazine fed pistol, when the mag is empty I prefer that mag come out of the pistol like yesterday.

As to metal mags marring/scratching frame, my M&Ps don't have any issue and mag always drop free even when full.

Speedo66
December 6, 2013, 08:16 PM
Not a terrible thing to have the mag stay in the gun if you're doing a tactical reload. Less chance of losing it.

JTQ
December 6, 2013, 09:07 PM
Weevil wrote,
Why was it a "problem"???

They achieved the same thing as the CZ without adding more parts and increasing the complexity of their design.

Same results less parts.
CZ's was done by design. The basic CZ75B still has that feature, I believe. Other models in the CZ line-up delete that feature if you don't want it.

On the other hand Glock was simply a bad magazine design, that gave their gun that "feature" by accident. Rather than saying, oops our mags don't work as intended, we'll call it a feature of our guns. Once they figured out how to properly make a magazine, they apparently determined that mags not dropping free was not such a good feature. They all work as intended now.

Weevil
December 6, 2013, 10:50 PM
Because there were times when you needed to drop a partially filled magazine for another one. And if the mag was too swelled, it would not "drop free" even when empty. So it slowed down the mag change and required two hands.

You're forgetting that just like the CZ-75 the mag was not supposed to drop free. Because of the mag-brake the CZ's mag won't drop free "even when empty" and also requires two hands to remove.

A lot of us shooting matches back then developed the Glock wrist flick. When dropping empty mags, we flicked our shootng hand/wrist HARD to toss the empty mag out as the other hand reached for another mag.

The Glock was not designed to be a target pistol for competition shooting. It was designed to win Austria's military contract and the Austrians like most Euro militaries did not want drop-free mags.

This is also why CZ went through all the trouble of adding a flat spring to prevent the mags from dropping free.

We were happy when fully lined true "drop free" mags came out.

With any magazine fed pistol, when the mag is empty I prefer that mag come out of the pistol like yesterday.


Just because you prefer drop-free mags doesn't mean there was a "problem" with the original non drop-free mags. The worked just as they were designed to work for the Euro military contracts Glock was going after, even if this wasn't what competition shooters in America wanted.

Weevil
December 6, 2013, 10:56 PM
CZ's was done by design. The basic CZ75B still has that feature, I believe. Other models in the CZ line-up delete that feature if you don't want it.

On the other hand Glock was simply a bad magazine design, that gave their gun that "feature" by accident. Rather than saying, oops our mags don't work as intended, we'll call it a feature of our guns. Once they figured out how to properly make a magazine, they apparently determined that mags not dropping free was not such a good feature. They all work as intended now.


No it wasn't an "accident".

Glock was going after the same market that CZ was going after and that market did not want drop-free mags.


Do you really think that Glocks do the same thing by "accident" as CZs that have a spring added to on purpose to keep the mag from dropping free???

bds
December 7, 2013, 12:59 AM
Just because you prefer drop-free mags doesn't mean there was a "problem" with the original non drop-free mags. The worked just as they were designed to work for the Euro military contracts Glock was going after, even if this wasn't what competition shooters in America wanted.
Well, appeasing match shooters in America certainly turned out great for Glock ... financially.

Win, win.

I for one certainly appreciate the fully lined drop free mags. :D

So, anybody now want "non-drop free" Glock mags?

Weevil
December 7, 2013, 01:35 AM
Yes the American market did indeed prove a lucrative one...but when they first designed the pistol and it's mags they had no way of predicting the future. I'm sure no one even imagined how popular they would become in America, they were just trying to grab a military or police contract or two in Europe.


I wouldn't swear to it but I'm pretty sure that CZ has dropped the mag-brake feature on most if not all of their pistols for the American market as well.



Americans think there's a problem if the mags don't drop free.

:D

kBob
December 7, 2013, 09:00 AM
1992 I told someone highly placed with Glock at a convention that if they made a single stack with 1911 grip angle that took 1911 magazines and so a thinner grip that they would sell like hotcakes at that time. He said I was going to like what would soon be available......so far he has been wrong. Don't know my Glock numbers but the only one I have thought worth while was a mid sized .40 I borrowed when I had issues with a Star PD at a match.

-kBob

herrwalther
December 8, 2013, 01:02 AM
As you get older an extra inch of sight radius can make a disproportionate difference!

For a very small part of Glock's market: competition shooters. The most common barrel length for a concealed carry pistol is around 4 inches. There aren't many firearms with 5 inch unless you are carrying a full size 1911 or one of the 5" XD/XDM models. It just keeps looking like to me that Glock is chasing after small niches of customers compared to the customers they could be going after by keeping with popular firearm trends.

Queen_of_Thunder
December 8, 2013, 10:13 AM
For a moment I thought a G41 might be a Gock in 41mag. Oh well. I can hope.

snapshot762
December 8, 2013, 10:16 AM
It's a Glock, not interested.

Ben86
December 8, 2013, 10:31 AM
Unless it's a dedicated .22LR or a pocket 9mm I'm not interested.

Why can't Glock be more flexible with their design? They often ignore popular market demands and then offer some wild tangent with little demand. A Glock 36 slide on a Glock 30 frame? Really? I really wish they would be more creative.

HexHead
December 8, 2013, 12:54 PM
Hate to be the party pooper, but...
When, in the entire history of Glock, have you seen a single stack? And you never will. When was the last time you saw one that wasn't needlessly over thick in the grip frame? Never. They all are by nature of following the current design model with zero appreciable deviation.



Uhh, the Glock 36.

You don't know what you don't know.

HexHead
December 8, 2013, 01:02 PM
For a very small part of Glock's market: competition shooters. The most common barrel length for a concealed carry pistol is around 4 inches. There aren't many firearms with 5 inch unless you are carrying a full size 1911 or one of the 5" XD/XDM models. It just keeps looking like to me that Glock is chasing after small niches of customers compared to the customers they could be going after by keeping with popular firearm trends.
You're forgetting that Glock also has a market for their 34 and 24 with police SWAT teams. If you buy a "blue label" 34 through the GSSF purchase program, it's likely not going to have the 3.5 connector like the civilian models. I'd bet the 41 is being produced more at the request of police agencies than competition shooters.

Btw, Browninh HiPowers didn't have drop free mags either, by design. Unless you get those crappy 10 round ones with the external spring on them.

HexHead
December 8, 2013, 01:07 PM
Unless it's a dedicated .22LR or a pocket 9mm I'm not interested.

Why can't Glock be more flexible with their design? They often ignore popular market demands and then offer some wild tangent with little demand. A Glock 36 slide on a Glock 30 frame? Really? I really wish they would be more creative.
They don't give a crap about "popular market demand". They are backed up on production and sell every firearm they make, primarily through govt. and agency contracts. Civilian sales are just icing on the cake. They especially don't care what a bunch of idiots on the Internet want.

Potatohead
December 8, 2013, 01:35 PM
Lol.

Don't hold back hex..

GLOOB
December 8, 2013, 02:41 PM
He's completely right. For everyone wondering why Glock hasn't made this or that, yet, how much market research did YOU do? lol.

TestPilot
December 8, 2013, 03:04 PM
They don't give a crap about "popular market demand". They are backed up on production and sell every firearm they make, primarily through govt. and agency contracts. Civilian sales are just icing on the cake. They especially don't care what a bunch of idiots on the Internet want.

Company with this kind of attitude won't last long, and nor should it. Although I am not saying Glock do have that attitude.

For most pistol sales, government agency purchase is only a small fraction of of civilian sales. About 700~800 thousands of full time, and may be about a million including non-full time, police officers compared to a significant portion of over 300 million population? Also take into account that government agencies do not pay anywhere near the price per unit as civilians do.

It is the civilian demand that keeps the gun industry, and that's the way it should be. There is no way gun manufacturers would be where they are now without U.S. gun owners.

HexHead
December 8, 2013, 04:43 PM
Company with this kind of attitude won't last long, and nor should it. Although I am not saying Glock do have that attitude.

For most pistol sales, government agency purchase is only a small fraction of of civilian sales. About 700~800 thousands of full time, and may be about a million including non-full time, police officers compared to a significant portion of over 300 million population? Also take into account that government agencies do not pay anywhere near the price per unit as civilians do.

It is the civilian demand that keeps the gun industry, and that's the way it should be. There is no way gun manufacturers would be where they are now without U.S. gun owners.

You're only assuming US sales. It's a big world. Within the past year or so, they got the contract to supply the UK military.

burk
December 8, 2013, 05:56 PM
I work in a Big Box gun shop part time. We rarely put our Glocks on sale, especially compared to the other brands we carry. We have little or no problem selling them at retail. I would still assert that the 19/23 frame sizes are among the hottest guns in the American market. We also sell every 30SF and 36 we get fairly quickly too.

To be fair the 26/27 don't sell like they use too. But Glock is still doing plenty of business in the US. And while I too wish they would make a slim 9, they are still very relevant in the market.

TestPilot
December 8, 2013, 06:27 PM
You're only assuming US sales. It's a big world. Within the past year or so, they got the contract to supply the UK military.

Actually, I put more into consideration than you think.

Military contacts do not come all the time. They come and go. Even if there is a purchase program there is no guarantee a particular company will get the contract.

U.S. Military is far lager than that of UK, but do you think Beretta will survive just by catering to U.S. miliary? I think they did just that, and look at where they are now.

Even if I assume only 1/3 of US population buys guns, that is over 100 million. I do not think all the active duty soldiers in top 100 strongest country, military wise, put together will still top that. Of course, not all of them buys pistols, but then again, not all soldiers are issued pistols either. UK forces have about 205000 active personnel, but only buying 25000 pistols. Also, consider that many pistol buying U.S. civilian buys more than one. Even significant number of cops buy their own guns, lot of them by choice when ther are issued a pistol.

Also, to put things into proper perspective, global military and police market is not free competition. China has far more number of soldiers than us or even Russia, but I do not see China's military buying anything other than what is made in China anytime soon. Not only there is a national pride issue to nationalistic countries, there is also an interest to protect domestic defense industry. It's the same reason why you won't see Italian army usning any rifle other than ones with Beretta logo on it any time soon. Police wise, many countries have different culture and concept of policing compared to U.S. Most street cops in Japan do not carry pistols. A lot of countries are content with worn out handed down guns, not because it performs well, but their administration are stupid.

Look at pistols like HK45, Mk23 etc. Huge investment for R&D, aimed for government sales, but very limited adoption in the end. Companies like H&K would have been far more hesitant if they could not count on civilian sales. Probably American civilians bought more HK45c than NAVY SEAL did.

plouffedaddy
December 8, 2013, 06:37 PM
I'll be putting one in my safe ;)

herrwalther
December 8, 2013, 08:57 PM
For a moment I thought a G41 might be a Gock in 41mag. Oh well. I can hope.

Far too much work involved for a one trick pony company like Glock. They tried to reinvent the wheel with the 45GAP to fit their frames but that didn't turn out well.

If you buy a "blue label" 34 through the GSSF purchase program, it's likely not going to have the 3.5 connector like the civilian models. I'd bet the 41 is being produced more at the request of police agencies than competition shooters.

I have yet to see any gun store stick with the Blue label program for more than a few years. The owner of a store I found the other day was explaining some of the unnecessary paperwork required to get blue label firearms. Police have little use for a longer barrel as most of their pistol shooting takes place at distances a CCW shooter would be concerned with.

VVelox
December 10, 2013, 04:51 AM
What is the purpose of selecting for non-drop free magazines?

tuj
December 10, 2013, 02:06 PM
Couple things. Glock makes a tremendous amount of money on every gun it sells, whether it be to law enforcement, military, or civilians.

These days Glock GmbH has an estimated $100 million in sales, two-thirds of it from the trigger-happy United States. A gun that retails for $500 can be manufactured for $75, and the company has a pretax margin nearing 60%,

http://www.forbes.com/global/2003/0331/020.html

And that was in 2003. Glock adopted a marketing strategy that by discounting from the MSRP heavily to law enforcement and military, they would gain traction in a smaller, but highly-influential segment of the market. I don't know how many times I've heard "I want a Glock because that's what cops carry". But believe me, they made good margin on every gun sold to LEO's too. The civilian market is the most important because 1) its the biggest and 2) it carries the most margin.

From the same article:

in notifying 12 record labels that the company objects to artists using the word “Glock” in rap songs such as Dr. Dre’s “B!***es Ain’t S**t,” mainly out of fear that Glock’s name will become a generic term for handgun.

And yet 10 years later, that's exactly what its become. You say 'He's got a Glock.' and everyone knows you are talking about a handgun. Its getting to be like 'coke' or 'frisbee'.

Second, the Europeans have always had a thing for wanting to hold onto their magazines. Consider that many fine police guns in Europe have or had heel mag releases. I don't exactly understand why this is, and I've never understood the point of a reload-with-retention in IDPA either. IF I needed to use my gun, and IF I had to reload because of a lack of ammo or a malfunction, I see no benefit in retaining the magazine. Even if it still contains rounds, if there was a malfunction, that mag should be considered suspect until it can be full evaluated in controlled conditions. I guess maybe when you are issued a SIG-210 and the mags are like $100 / piece you might want to hold onto them in practice, but when your life depends on it? No way. As to why the Glock mags didn't initially drop free, I don't know. Call it a feature or a mistake...either way its fixed now.

Ben86
December 11, 2013, 12:24 AM
They don't give a crap about "popular market demand". They are backed up on production and sell every firearm they make, primarily through govt. and agency contracts. Civilian sales are just icing on the cake. They especially don't care what a bunch of idiots on the Internet want.

Forgive me for wanting a company to tailor it's product to customer demand. I know that's such a strange concept, that most other companies seem to adopt more readily than Glock. I realize that sales-wise it may not be necessary for them at the moment, but I hardly believe it would be pursued at a loss. They are edging themselves out of a lot of markets by not expanding their product line.

I find it odd that they release new models that seem pointless (supposedly in the interest of market demand) when other more obvious concepts have been in popular demand for years. I am a big Glock fan. However, I find their unwillingness to broaden their product line in a significant way disappointing.

AKMtnRunner
December 11, 2013, 11:50 AM
I recently bought a model 21 for my nightstand. If I had the choice, I would have preferred the 41 for that role.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock G41 confirmed?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!