The other day a couple of guys at my range were talking about a possible new offering from Glock that I had never heard about. They were claiming that Glock would soon be offering pistol caliber carbines. I did some searching online over the weekend and the only thing I can find are some carbine conversion kits that basically use the Glock pistol frame and the carbine conversion "upper". There's also the Kel-Tec Sub2000 that uses Glock mags. Maybe one of those was what they were referring to. Anyway, I was curious if anyone had heard of this. Fact, fiction, or misunderstanding? I like the idea of an actual Glock carbine and hope there's some truth to it. I own a Hi Point 9mm carbine (yes, I know its a hi point) but its been very reliable and a lot of fun to shoot.
Glock Carbine
- Thread starter marb4
- Start date
- Status
loadedround
Member
An all plastic Glock carbine....great!
There have been rumors about a Glock carbine for decades. Over the years, people “in the know” have claimed to have seen a prototype. My guess (no, I have no inside info) is that they tested a prototype years ago, and simply decided that while it was a neat little product, for them, it wouldn’t be profitable. For example (and these are only examples), maybe the molding equipment they own isn’t large enough to mold frames for a carbine, or their rifling tooling isn’t setup for longer barrels, and the massive cost of retooling for one product just doesn’t make sense.
As cool and fun as pistol caliber carbines are, and yes I own one myself, how many do they really sell? Marlin, Beretta, KelTec, Ruger, Vector, Kriss and others have tried it, and most have given up because pistol caliber carbines just don’t sell in volume. If you make a sub machinegun or SBR, everyone wants one, but the market of people who can or will go to the trouble to actually own one, is very small. If you make an inexpensive carbine (same cost as a pistol), no one is happy with the performance. If you make a carbine on par with the performance of a military carbine then the price is too high. Or you could manufacture an inexpensive carbine with sub-par performance and price it like a military carbine (not mentioning any names
).
Try as they have, police departments just don’t seem interested in issuing companion carbines with the officer’s pistols. You can make all sorts of great arguments for it, but it just doesn’t seem to drive sales. Don’t know why, but it simply doesn’t.
Any one care to guess who I'm referring to with the "sub-par performance and price it like a military carbine"?
As cool and fun as pistol caliber carbines are, and yes I own one myself, how many do they really sell? Marlin, Beretta, KelTec, Ruger, Vector, Kriss and others have tried it, and most have given up because pistol caliber carbines just don’t sell in volume. If you make a sub machinegun or SBR, everyone wants one, but the market of people who can or will go to the trouble to actually own one, is very small. If you make an inexpensive carbine (same cost as a pistol), no one is happy with the performance. If you make a carbine on par with the performance of a military carbine then the price is too high. Or you could manufacture an inexpensive carbine with sub-par performance and price it like a military carbine (not mentioning any names
).Try as they have, police departments just don’t seem interested in issuing companion carbines with the officer’s pistols. You can make all sorts of great arguments for it, but it just doesn’t seem to drive sales. Don’t know why, but it simply doesn’t.
Any one care to guess who I'm referring to with the "sub-par performance and price it like a military carbine"?
RustHunter87
Member
Quiet
Member
In 01-2011, the US Army submitted a RFP (W15QKN-11-R-F003) for an Individual Carbine as a possible replacement for the M-4 Carbine series and Glock is listed as an interested vendor for the program.
Beretta CX4?
That is my guess because their carbine looks and feels extremely cheaply made (looks as ugly as the Hi Point carbine and feels like one too) but costs $700.
R.W.Dale
Member
I can't confirm this but scuzzlebutt has it that glock recently extended their range to 100m at the smyrna facility
Sonuds like something may be in the works
Sonuds like something may be in the works
RON in PA
Member
Any body want to buy a bridge? I'll throw in a few flying elephants.
This rumor has been going around the internet forever.
This rumor has been going around the internet forever.
alaskanativeson
Member
Boy, you better say that softly. Around here (Cowboy Country) a fella could get tied to a bumper and dragged through sagebrush for saying such things! ;-)skt239 said:
MachIVshooter
Member
The same people who build a $500 handgun and sell it for a grand because we suck and they hate us.
smalls
Member
People at the range talking about things they know nothing about?
Impossible!
It has to be true! The guys at the gunshop said so!
Impossible!
It has to be true! The guys at the gunshop said so!
JustinJ
Member
Exactly. Because all their R&D is apparently done by engineers who work for free and such a high level of QC certainly woudln't have additional costs.
kevin7769
Member
Just Right Carbine makes a M-4 looking carbine that takes Glock mags. Not a AR platform, just a lookalike. Possible that could be what you heard about? http://www.justrightcarbines.com/Home_Page.html
MachIVshooter
Member
Do you really expect us believe that their R&D and QC justifies a $400+ increase per pistol over the other premier plastic guns?
When you show me what a USP, P30, P2000, etc. can do that a Glock, M&P, FNP or XD can't, we'll revisit the cost/benefit ratio. So far, no one has been able to. And apparently, most of the shooting public isn't easily hoodwinked, either, as evidenced by the low percentage of HK handguns as compared to the others mentioned.
And bear in mind that I own/have owned all of the above except the FNP (have used them, though) before spouting off about the virtues of an H und K.
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
I guess Glocks, M&Ps, XDs, CZs, FNH FNP/FNX, etc, all appeared out of thin air and apparently don't have the same level of QC.
wlewisiii
Member
I think it's due to be released on the same day as the Glock 1911 and revolver.
Sad part is, I'd buy that revolver in a heartbeat.
I've been hoping for a Glock pistol carbine for years. Owned a Beretta CX4 in .40 S&W for awhile but it was just poorly done and went down the road. They were more concerned about style than functionality, and a promising concept was done a great disservice. If Glock does it right I bet they'd find a heck of a strong demand.
I'm gonna cross my fingers that this rumor comes true.....
I'm gonna cross my fingers that this rumor comes true.....
Wildbillz
Member
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2010
- Messages
- 1,023
When I took a Glock armors course years back they talked about it coming out in a couple of years. But Ruger beat them to it with the PC models and they were not real big sellers. I think glock saw that and decided a Police Carbine while neet was not profitable.
But thats just me
WB
But thats just me
WB
JustinJ
Member
I guess Glocks, M&Ps, XDs, CZs, FNH FNP/FNX, etc, all appeared out of thin air and apparently don't have the same level of QC.
Glock has essentially offered one design since it has existed. Adding a rail here or bigger mag release there doesn't cost quite as much as designing a completely new weapon like HK does on a regular basis. Lets also not forget that Glock did not do sufficient RD before issuing the Gen IV's as the recalls never should have been needed.
The SW M&Ps also have had a number of fairly common issues ecspecially when the gun was first introduced.
HK isn't perfect but there guns have a solid reputation for high reliability and durability from the get go. More so than any other gun maker of comparable size.
Springfield didn't even design the XD to begin with. I had an XD, Glock, MP, HKP2000sk and XD all in .40 at one time. All still remain but the XD. As far as i know they haven't had any major issues but i've never researched it either. I just don't care for the design.
I've never owned a CZ or FNP either but i have fired both and did not find their quality to be comparable with HK.
First, HKs aren't $400 over all the guns you listed. Second, if all these guns do the same thing why do you not own just one? I've heard the same arguement made about Hipoints and other cheap guns so why don't you carry one of those? Its not a matter of just doing something the other guns cant. Its a matter of doing it better.
Glock has essentially offered one design since it has existed. Adding a rail here or bigger mag release there doesn't cost quite as much as designing a completely new weapon like HK does on a regular basis. Lets also not forget that Glock did not do sufficient RD before issuing the Gen IV's as the recalls never should have been needed.
The SW M&Ps also have had a number of fairly common issues ecspecially when the gun was first introduced.
HK isn't perfect but there guns have a solid reputation for high reliability and durability from the get go. More so than any other gun maker of comparable size.
Springfield didn't even design the XD to begin with. I had an XD, Glock, MP, HKP2000sk and XD all in .40 at one time. All still remain but the XD. As far as i know they haven't had any major issues but i've never researched it either. I just don't care for the design.
I've never owned a CZ or FNP either but i have fired both and did not find their quality to be comparable with HK.
First, HKs aren't $400 over all the guns you listed. Second, if all these guns do the same thing why do you not own just one? I've heard the same arguement made about Hipoints and other cheap guns so why don't you carry one of those? Its not a matter of just doing something the other guns cant. Its a matter of doing it better.
MachIVshooter
Member
Median Price for standard, no-frills models in 9mm (Google shopping results):
M&P 9mm: $482
XD 9mm: $470
FNP9: $517
G17 Gen III: $492
HK USP9: $797
HK P2000: $868
HK P30: $897
M&P, XD, FNP, G17 average: $490
HK average: $854
Average difference: $364
MSRP:
M&P 9mm: $569
XD 9mm: $489
FNP9: $629
G17 Gen III: $599
HK USP9: $902
HK P2000: $941
HK P30: $1,054
M&P, XD, FNP, G17 average: $572
HK average: $966
Average difference: $394
Presently, I do only own one of the above: A G20
Heavy, low capacity, poor ergonomics, don't like SA enclosed hammer guns for carry.
So what is it that they do better (aside from empty your wallet)? Please, enlighten us...
kevin7769
Member
IMO as to why buy a HK over the rest, its a feel thing, a P30 or HK45 just feel better in my hand then the other Poly framed guns. To me, again IMO, when making a gun purchase you combine what you can afford with what feels best in your hand. Glock's and XD's don't feel the best in mine, M&P's, XDM's and HK's do feel better with the HK winning that contest until it came to price. For now I'll stick with my Glock 21, if and when I can afford it I'd love to move up to a HK. Working at a gun shop I have the chance to see what people want to buy and help them with their decision. Recently had a woman go thru all our rental Poly frame 9's trying to decide what she liked so could make her purchase, she hated the Glock(both the 3&4), loved the HK except the price, it finally came down to the SR9 and the FN..she bought the FN. I get lots of people who buy a Glock because they think they should regardless of how it feels because thats what they were told to get, wrong reason for sure. If Glock comes out with a Carbine priced decently to go with my 21, I might give it a look.. I like the JRC's and like the price of the KelTec with Glock mags, just haven't been able to justify the purchase yet.. If there is a legitimate reason other then price to not buy HK's or any other brand thats great, but if only justification is the price..to each their own, get what you want/afford, let the other guy get what he wants/afford..
MachIVshooter
Member
That's what I'm saying; Price is the reason they don't sell near as many, because the guns themselves are not measureably better than the competition.
I don't try to talk people out of HK guns if that's what they really want. Heck, when I was 19, nobody could have talked me out of the USP stainless .45 I bought. It was only after owning many other pistols that I discovered there was no reason I had to spend $850 on the USP to get a high-quality, durable, reliable and accurate polymer handgun.
If someone feels the HK they bought was worth the price they paid, more power to 'em. I just grow very tired of fanboys trying to convince me and everyone else that the gun is better for reasons they either cannot articulate or are just plain false. I said in another thread recently, and I'll say it again: I have no problem paying top dollar for a handgun, and own more than one that exceed the pricepoint of the USP/P2000/P30. The difference is, these guns do perform in a way that similar guns at a lower price point do not. They are also far from the least expensive offering from their respective manufacturers; They're higher end models. The $850 USP is HK's cheap gun.
W.E.G.
Member
A pistol caliber carbine for law enforcement or military sales makes no sense without full-auto features.
Is there really a demand for such a thing in police and military these days?
How many semi-auto models would civilians buy?
My bet is that civilian curiosity vastly exceeds civilian willingness to pay for such a thing.
Pistol-caliber carbines with suppressors make dandy entry weapons.
The market for that sort of thing is slim as a razor.
Is there really a demand for such a thing in police and military these days?
How many semi-auto models would civilians buy?
My bet is that civilian curiosity vastly exceeds civilian willingness to pay for such a thing.
Pistol-caliber carbines with suppressors make dandy entry weapons.
The market for that sort of thing is slim as a razor.
JustinJ
Member
Don't know about median or MSRP but LGS sells P2000s for under $800. My SK came with a .40 and .357 barrel for $800.
Okay, Sigmas, Keltek P11s, Ruger P85s, etc. All are significantly less than a new Glock.
Superior QC means that with a given number of HK guns there will be fewer incidents of issues than a company with lower QC. Therefor the chance of your new gun having an issue is simply lower.
Large investments in RD means the company is innovative and offers new designs, modifications and accessories to their guns. It also means that new guns won't need to have their recoil springs replaced out of the box to run reliably. They have been thouroughly tested instead of letting the customers play guinea pig.
I don't know who your "us" is supposed to be but there are plenty others who recognize the quality of HK weapons. HK has earned a reputation for to hell and back reliability and durability. The only other pistol company with such a reputation is Glock and some Sigs. That's not to say others don't have the ability to perform under adverse conditions but the reputations have not been earned. Does this matter for a range gun, civilian CC gun or even LE gun? No, probably not. Its highly unlikely a civilian will carry his gun through mud and salt water just before needing it to fire. Some of us simply like having top of the line and the assurance that comes with it. I can understand why some believe the cost of an HK is not justified for their use. That is however different from "HK is no better than guns X, Y and Z."
The other thing i find interesting is that people who love to complain about HKs pricing never object to prices of the more expensive 1911s which will never be as reliable as quite a few modern designs.
- Status
