The Innovative Glock in 1991

FFGColorado said:

Yet....

Click to expand...

How is best selling proof of innovation? And where is that list from? One website or gun shop? What does that prove?

Not a whole lot of difference between the Gen 2 Glock 19 I was issued in 1993 and a Gen 5 Glock bought today.

Glocks aren’t my thing but they’re good guns. I own several S&W M&P pistols and I think they’re better in every way then any Glock. And they’re sure as hell no longer “innovative”. Same product in a different box.

Homerboy said:

How is best selling proof of innovation? And where is that list from? One website or gun shop? What does that prove?

Not a whole lot of difference between the Gen 2 Glock 19 I was issued in 1993 and a Gen 5 Glock bought today.

Glocks aren’t my thing but they’re good guns. I own several S&W M&P pistols and I think they’re better in every way then any Glock. And they’re sure as hell no longer “innovative”. Same product in a different box.

Click to expand...

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Impressive how influencal and successful the design was considering just about every major manufacturer makes essencially the same gun now, often introduced as the "Glock killer" and ultimately failing to do so.

Frankly there's been precious little innovation in the handgun world since the Glock, just slight changes to grip geometry or trigger feel and monekying with overall size categories.

Man, I use to love reading those old Survivalist magazines. American Survival Guide, Survive Magazine and a few others. The golden age.

WB

yep. was a radical break through back then. still revelant today. good post on an interesting topic.

JR24 said:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Impressive how influencal and successful the design was considering just about every major manufacturer makes essencially the same gun now, often introduced as the "Glock killer" and ultimately failing to do so.

Frankly there's been precious little innovation in the handgun world since the Glock, just slight changes to grip geometry or trigger feel and monekying with overall size categories.

Click to expand...

Glock did one thing well. They nearly gave away free guns in exchange for PD trades that they then sold for a profit, anyway. Since the design has changed so little, departments could continue to use most of the parts they had on hand, not to mention magazines and leather gear, as the went from one generation Glock to the next. Average person walks into a gun shop and wants a Glock because he doesn't know any better. They're a good gun. Just not innovative.

There's been a TON of innovation over the last few years. S&W Shield was a HUGE seller for years. Glock had nothing to come close except the chunky and aged Glock 26.Then they showed up with the 43 after Smith, Ruger, and others already had a pistol in the class. Let's not forget the 19X! Take a Glock 19 slide and put it on a Glock 17 frame! WHOAA! Except Smith and Wesson did it 25 years ago with the 5903 SSV Sig has their 365 with 10 rounds in a package smaller than the 43 with their 7. Springfield the Hellcat with 11 rounds. Look back to 20 years ago and compare it to now. Whole different arena.

LOL...the "chunky and aged" G26...Still one of the most capable carry pistols made, the gun that convinced me to stop carrying the Browning HiPower after a couple decades.

JR24 said:

I do to. I hit my action movie stride ..........
.............
.......

You know, I was dead set on "upgrading" my Glock 21 to an XD a few years back. Superior trigger and ergos I thought, a bit smaller in the hand.

But when I finally got them side by side, Gen 4 21 felt better in my hand by a mile, XD just felt ... cheap... in comparison, though I know it's a well made gun. Guess I was just used to the Glock.

Click to expand...

I can appreciate that. We are all built a little different and have different likes and tastes and things can feel differently.

Even though I bought an XD 10mm I still kept the G20. Probably because I’m a 10mm fanboy. I always keep my 10’s!

Homerboy said:

Glock did one thing well. They nearly gave away free guns in exchange for PD trades that they then sold for a profit, anyway. Since the design has changed so little, departments could continue to use most of the parts they had on hand, not to mention magazines and leather gear, as the went from one generation Glock to the next. Average person walks into a gun shop and wants a Glock because he doesn't know any better. They're a good gun. Just not innovative.

There's been a TON of innovation over the last few years. S&W Shield was a HUGE seller for years. Glock had nothing to come close except the chunky and aged Glock 26.Then they showed up with the 43 after Smith, Ruger, and others already had a pistol in the class. Let's not forget the 19X! Take a Glock 19 slide and put it on a Glock 17 frame! WHOAA! Except Smith and Wesson did it 25 years ago with the 5903 SSV Sig has their 365 with 10 rounds in a package smaller than the 43 with their 7. Springfield the Hellcat with 11 rounds. Look back to 20 years ago and compare it to now. Whole different arena.

Click to expand...

You are contradicting yourself, claim Glock didn't innovate some models (and here I agree) by pointing to other guns in the same niche being made earlier, then claim the Shield and 365/Hellcat as examples of new innovation when a slimline single stack 9 has been around in many forms for ages and the Keltec P11 has been a 10 or 12 round 365 sized gun since 1995.

Now, the Shield and 365 might have refined a concept, and that's commendable and excellent but by your own agument, not innovation.

But, it's clear your objctive is simply to badmouth Glock, and you've accomplished that so as far as I'm concerned our argument here is over.

Reinz said:

I can appreciate that. We are built a little different and have different likes and tastes and things can feel differently.

Even though I bought an XD 10mm I still kept the G20. Probably because I’m a 10mm fanboy. I always keep my 10’s!

Click to expand...

The 10mm XD was really tempting to me. I don't have a Glock 20 and it would have been a great reason to get something different.

Had an XD9 4" long ago and I liked it just fine.

JR24 said:

You are contradicting yourself, claim Glock didn't innovate some models (and here I agree) by pointing to other guns in the same niche being made earlier, then claim the Shield and 365/Hellcat as examples of new innovation when a slimline single stack 9 has been around in many forms for ages and the Keltec P11 has been a 10 or 12 round 365 sized gun since 1995.

Now, the Shield and 365 might have refined a concept, and that's commendable and excellent but by your own agument, not innovation.

But, it's clear your objctive is simply to badmouth Glock, and you've accomplished that so as far as I'm concerned our argument here is over.

Click to expand...

Not contradicting myself at all. And not badmouthing Glock. They’re a good gun. I prefer M&P’s to them in a polymer gun because they fit my hand better, have steel sights, have the option for a safety, are generally cheaper, and have a better warranty. I’m just saying Glock has done nothing innovative since about 1990. Same old thing just repackaged.

And yes, they have been late to the ballgame on virtually every offering they have put out over the last 10 years. Pocket sized .380? Late to the game and the 42 is not as small as the LCP. Single stack 9? Came out how many years after the Shield? .22? The new Glock 44 is not getting good reviews.

They introduced their product at the right time and gave them away to get their foot in the door. They’ve been coasting for the last 30 years, offering the same product with minor tweaks that do very little to change the product, and they’re banking on those who drank the Kool-Aid to continue to pray at the altar of Gaston and continue to buy them.

and I’m aware of the Kel-Tec with 11 rounds. Only problem is I don’t consider Kel-Tec to be a quality enough weapon to trust my life to, and clearly many agreed since it was never the hot seller the Shield, 365, or Hellcat are.

amd6547 said:

LOL...the "chunky and aged" G26...Still one of the most capable carry pistols made, the gun that convinced me to stop carrying the Browning HiPower after a couple decades.

Click to expand...

The 26 is still a good gun, but the newer slimmer single stacks with the same capacity have unseated them from the throne. I owned a Glock 26 years ago as a companion to my 19. It is a fat little gun compared to current offerings. Truth be told, weight and size are all they matter in a carry gun and there are lighter and smaller guns with comparable capacity to the 26. If you’re comfortable with it, then enjoy it.

Homerboy said:

The 26 is still a good gun, but the newer slimmer single stacks with the same capacity have unseated them from the throne. I owned a Glock 26 years ago as a companion to my 19. It is a fat little gun compared to current offerings. Truth be told, weight and size are all they matter in a carry gun and there are lighter and smaller guns with comparable capacity to the 26. If you’re comfortable with it, then enjoy it.

Click to expand...

Which one of those single stacks can use 33rd mags?

amd6547 said:

Which one of those single stacks can use 33rd mags?

Click to expand...

Was waiting for that one. None. Who buys a concealed carry gun to stick a 14” magazine out of it? Range toy or Mall Ninja fantasy nonsense. I don’t even use the 8 round mag in my Shield. Smaller and lighter wins every time.

Although I will admit that if the zombie apocalypse ever really does happen, I’ll be in the lookout for a Glock 26.

As far as the 33rd mags, yes I own exactly one, which I bought for my G17. Why not? I occasionally kept a 30rd mag for my HiPower.
For the G26, I’m liking the Magpul 12rd mags for carry, with the Magpul 21rd mag for a backup. I sometimes carry with a G19 15rd mag with a grip sleeve.
My G26 is the last pistol I’d sell.

Miami_JBT said:

The difference between the G26 and the Hellcat and P365 is that the G26 is capable and reliable enough to be my primary duty gun as a cop.

Click to expand...

Agreed. The G26 doesn't win any more in terms of size or capacity. But for me it wins in shootability. Also, carrying iwb or belt there isn't a significant enough difference (for me) to choose the 365 or Hellcat.

Although, I actually carry the G27, with at least one G22 mag as a spare. 10-12 rounds (depending on whether I'm carrying flat-base or pachmayr +2 extension) of 40 plus 15-30 with the spare mags seems pretty good.

And the round-count is similar when i carry my somewhat larger G30 - which is my favorite Glock .45.

Cump said:

Agreed. The G26 doesn't win any more in terms of size or capacity. But for me it wins in shootability. Also, carrying iwb or belt there isn't a significant enough difference (for me) to choose the 365 or Hellcat.

Although, I actually carry the G27, with at least one G22 mag as a spare. 10-12 rounds (depending on whether I'm carrying flat-base or pachmayr +2 extension) of 40 plus 15-30 with the spare mags seems pretty good.

And the round-count is similar when i carry my somewhat larger G30 - which is my favorite Glock .45.

Click to expand...

Same.

I had a 365 for a while and it's a fine gun, was very accurate slow fire in my hands.

But, the thin profile and my hand geometry meant that I just couldn't find solid grip to lock the gun in rapid fire. How easily I could shoot rings round the 365 in any dynamic drill with the 26 (which I shoot nearly as well as my often carried 19) wasn't funny. Sure, the thinner profile made it a bit easier to conceal, I suppose, but it is too big for my pockets and as a belt gun, I can perfectly conceal a 19, let alone a 26 so an even smaller gun is of limited usefulness, to me.

Edit: also it's nice when I carried the 26 to have the 17 round mag in a pocket (with neomag) and the handy 33 round mags in my dresser drawer and truck glove box and travel bag.

I’m glad you guys like your Glocks. If I was still in the job carrying my Glock 19 I would continue to carry my old Glock 26. Makes sense to have a back-up or off duty piece.

But for concealed carry where I’m not carrying multiple mags, for me the 26 is too big when others do the same while being smaller and lighter.

This thread was about Glock innovation, not the merits of the Glock 26 over a Hellcat. Glocks are good guns and if they work for you then Continue to carry it. Makes no difference to me. I still don’t believe they’ve innovated anything for about 30 years, unless you consider finger grooves and grip texture innovative. I surely don’t.

TTv2 said:

I If striker triggers were so good they'd be getting used in competitions, but instead it's hammer guns, be it SAO or DA/SA.

Click to expand...

That's like saying, "if all-season tires were so good, they'd be used in drag racing."

Homerboy said:

How is best selling proof of innovation? And where is that list from? One website or gun shop? What does that prove?

Not a whole lot of difference between the Gen 2 Glock 19 I was issued in 1993 and a Gen 5 Glock bought today.

Glocks aren’t my thing but they’re good guns. I own several S&W M&P pistols and I think they’re better in every way then any Glock. And they’re sure as hell no longer “innovative”. Same product in a different box.

Click to expand...

Well, what it proves is that the design is successful, many use them, buy them(law enforcement and military)worldwide...and still do today(2020). I guess, like some(sig) they could change, change, for the sake of the marketeers and the perceived view of the 'market', but as GMC said, 'do one thing and do it well'...

You like S&W M&P, and you 'think' they are better in every way. I own several Glocks pistols, and think they're better in every way than any M&P...

These threads are always interesting...taking subjective reasoning, over numbers but the gun you like is subjective, yes? I guess, subjectively, many still like the old, tried and true, design of Glock but if ya don't want to buy/use/own one..don't...

BUT my Glocks do everything I ask of it, and do 'it' well..not sure what else it's supposed to do.

FFGColorado said:

Well, what it proves is that the design is successful, many use them, buy them(law enforcement and military)worldwide...and still do today(2020). I guess, like some(sig) they could change, change, for the sake of the marketeers and the perceived view of the 'market', but as GMC said, 'do one thing and do it well'...

You like S&W M&P, and you 'think' they are better in every way. I own several Glocks pistols, and think they're better in every way than any M&P...

These threads are always interesting...taking subjective reasoning, over numbers but the gun you like is subjective, yes? I guess, subjectively, many still like the old, tried and true, design of Glock but if ya don't want to buy/use/own one..don't...

BUT my Glocks do everything I ask of it, and do 'it' well..not sure what else it's supposed to do.

Click to expand...

We like what we like and that’s all that matters. I’m surely not trying to change your mind or anybody else’s. Somebody accused me of bashing in Glocks so I responded. The original point of the bread was how innovative Glock’s are. While that was true 30 years ago, I haven’t seen anything from Glock in the last 25 years that qualifies as innovative. Same product with slight tweaks. A Gen 1 Glock from 1986 is essentially the same product as a Gen 5, unless you consider a light rail and better grip texturing innovative. All Glock did is respond to customer demands and change their product slightly, which is why the finger grooves are gone on the Gen 5.

I listed why the M&P is a better gun. No real argument. Steel sights, option for safety, slightly lower price( at least before the madness. I got my M&P Compact 2.0 for $399 shipped 18 months ago), metal mags which are much easier to disassemble for cleaning, lifetime warranty. Grip angle for me is FAR superior than the Glock, and that’s a comment you’ll hear if you see any comparison videos. A friend of mine much prefers the M&P, but he’s been a Glock guy for 20 years and is too invested in the platform to change.

Enjoy your Glocks. They’re a good gun. I actually might pick up a Glock 17 one day, only because I have a Ruger PC9 that uses Glock mags so I have a bunch, including a couple of 33 rounders. If Ruger ever made a magazine adapter for M&P’s and Smith made 30 round mags I’d be all over them.

Homerboy said:

We like what we like and that’s all that matters. I’m surely not trying to change your mind or anybody else’s. Somebody accused me of bashing in Glocks so I responded. The original point of the bread was how innovative Glock’s are. While that was true 30 years ago, I haven’t seen anything from Glock in the last 25 years that qualifies as innovative. Same product with slight tweaks. A Gen 1 Glock from 1986 is essentially the same product as a Gen 5, unless you consider a light rail and better grip texturing innovative. All Glock did is respond to customer demands and change their product slightly, which is why the finger grooves are gone on the Gen 5.

I listed why the M&P is a better gun, IMHO. No real argument. Steel sights, option for safety, slightly lower price( at least before the madness. I got my M&P Compact 2.0 for $399 shipped 18 months ago), metal mags which are much easier to disassemble for cleaning, lifetime warranty. Grip angle for me is FAR superior than the Glock, and that’s a comment you’ll hear if you see any comparison videos. A friend of mine much prefers the M&P, but he’s been a Glock guy for 20 years and is too invested in the platform to change.

Enjoy your Glocks. They’re a good gun. I actually might pick up a Glock 17 one day, only because I have a Ruger PC9 that uses Glock mags so I have a bunch, including a couple of 33 rounders. If Ruger ever made a magazine adapter for M&P’s and Smith made 30 round mags I’d be all over them.

Click to expand...

No problem but it's interesting that a little research of the M&P, doesn't look like it has changed much since the summer of 2005 introduction...15.5 years.

M&P is a better gun, for YOU, great to hear...BTW-Just bought a Glock 48 for $520 out the door(8.5% sales tax and $15 BGC)..BUT 'we like what we like'..IS all that matters..

FFGColorado said:

No problem but it's interesting that a little research of the M&P, doesn't look like it has changed much since the summer of 2005 introduction...15.5 years.

M&P is a better gun, for YOU, great to hear...BTW-Just bought a Glock 48 for $520 out the door(8.5% sales tax and $15 BGC)..BUT 'we like what we like'..IS all that matters..

Click to expand...

It's changed a lot. Internally and externally. If you're not a fan I won't bore you with the details but the 2.0 is a totally different gun, and I'm not only talking about grip texture. The trigger alone is a vast improvement.

And since the M&P first arrived, S&W has made Compact, Sub Compact, Full size, all the main calibers, AR style rifles, pocket .380, Shield, Shield EZ.