Browning's design is primitive and crude by today,s standards. You don't drive a 1911 or 1944 Ford do you?
Sorry but, Glock DID revolutionize the gun world and for the better as far as I am concerned!
I have finally joined the ranks of Glock owners....
- Thread starter Rubber_Duck
- Start date
- Status
Sorry but, Glock DID revolutionize the gun world and for the better as far as I am concerned!
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
LockedBreech
Member
agent109 said:
It's not enough that you say it is, with all due respect. A factual claim has to be backed up with facts. I have provided facts, sources, and explanations about how Glock's design builds upon essential elements of Browning's design. You have not provided facts or evidence aside from your own opinions and impressions. The history of firearms design is very complex and is more complicated than simply pointing to the physical characteristics of guns. Even Browning built on some ideas that came before him.
Glock is a significant player in firearms history and will be talked about for a long time. But if we're speaking solely about design credentials, the brilliance and vision of design of firearms, than comparing Glock to Browning is a bit like comparing an up-and-coming Division II college running back with DeMarco Murray.
LockedBreech
Member
agent109 said:
What you're not seeming to want to hear is that design does not simply stop. It continues to evolve. When I carry a Glock 19 or a Sig P229 or an HK P2000 or a Ruger LCP, I am carrying Browning design principles that have continued to grow and be modified.
When I carry a Beretta 92, I am carrying the Walther P38 locking block and elements of Beretta designs from models 1951 and 1974. When I carry a Beretta Cougar or PX4, I am carrying a rotating-barrel locking system, one of the oldest firearm systems still in use.
One of the wonderful parts about firearms is how they build on a storied history of human innovation. That's far more beautiful than one stand-apart genius. Even Browning is only a piece of a much larger story.
"it has the ergonomics of a 2x4"
"they are as stylish as hot, blocky garbage."
"The grip angle still sucks."
"I don't think the grip angle will be a problem once I train myself"
Really? So, once you're been physically retrained and properly indoctrinated you'll swear that lipstick on a pig has somehow transformed it into a thing of beauty?
Wake up, ugly is still ugly but I suppose beauty IS in the eye of the beholder and there's no accounting for taste so I wish you much happiness with your plastic toy gun.
Signed,
An Old Timer
"they are as stylish as hot, blocky garbage."
"The grip angle still sucks."
"I don't think the grip angle will be a problem once I train myself"
Really? So, once you're been physically retrained and properly indoctrinated you'll swear that lipstick on a pig has somehow transformed it into a thing of beauty?
Wake up, ugly is still ugly but I suppose beauty IS in the eye of the beholder and there's no accounting for taste so I wish you much happiness with your plastic toy gun.
Signed,
An Old Timer
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Already did it on the other thread...but just for giggles:
Tilting barrel, short recoil operated with locking lug(s) on top of the barrel. Browning
Front slide dismount. Browning
Linkless lower lug camming to raise and drop the barrel against cross member permanently fixed to the frame. Saive
Detachable box magazine with release button mounted on the side of the frame. Borchardt and Georg Luger
Double stack magazine with single feed position. Browning and Saive
Striker fired. Borchardt/Luger again.
Plastic injection molded frame. H&K's unnamed engineers.
The dingus on the trigger....
Uh, well, I guess that was his.
Still shake my head over that one.
And what's this business about havin' to pull the trigger before it can be field stripped?
I read that and totally disagree with your logic. If both designs were taken to a patent court you would lose. There is nothing similar about a Glock and a 1911. Lets just start with the number of springs used as the first point! Not even close. The Glock pistol design would impress John Moses Browning and maybe even blow his mind. With all due respect for Mr. Browning, Glock is a far superior designed pistol by leaps and bounds.Already did it on the other thread...but just for giggles:
Tilting barrel, short recoil operated with locking lug(s) on top of the barrel. Browning
Front slide dismount. Browning
Linkless lower lug camming to raise and drop the barrel against cross member permanently fixed to the frame. Saive
Detachable box magazine with release button mounted on the side of the frame. Borchardt and Georg Luger
Double stack magazine with single feed position. Browning and Saive
Striker fired. Borchardt/Luger again.
Plastic injection molded frame. H&K's unnamed engineers.
The dingus on the trigger....
Uh, well, I guess that was his.
Still shake my head over that one.
And what's this business about havin' to pull the trigger before it can be field stripped?
We all know of the failed market attempt of Colt with the Gold Cup Match series 1911 line at the private sector when the US Government cancelled their contracts and you know of the Colt quality control problem that darn near put them out of business. Mr. Stoner saved their butts with another revolutionary design that time the M16 plastic gun.
Well I now know where one of the 10 million went. LOL!
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Well...those are the facts. What you believe is irrelevant.
Logic has nothing to do with it. It's purely mechanics. All you need to do is look.
And Browning's 1911 patents expired long ago. That's why everybody has'em out there on the market.
There's a big difference between a general similarity and patent infringement. Establishing sufficient similarity to support an infringement claim is a highly technical matter. Furthermore, we're talking about a 100+ year time frame. Patents do expire.agent109 said:I read that and totally disagree with your logic. If both designs were taken to a patent court you would lose...Already did it on the other thread...but just for giggles:
Tilting barrel, short recoil operated with locking lug(s) on top of the barrel. Browning
Front slide dismount. Browning
Linkless lower lug camming to raise and drop the barrel against cross member permanently fixed to the frame. Saive
Detachable box magazine with release button mounted on the side of the frame. Borchardt and Georg Luger
Double stack magazine with single feed position. Browning and Saive
Striker fired. Borchardt/Luger again.
Plastic injection molded frame. H&K's unnamed engineers.
The dingus on the trigger....
Uh, well, I guess that was his.
Still shake my head over that one.
And what's this business about havin' to pull the trigger before it can be field stripped?
What? They must have the same number of springs to be considered similar? Who made up that criterion? I guess you did?agent109 said:
However, the word "similar" means:
So it looks like, consistent with the meaning of the word, two guns could still be called similar -- even if they each have a different number of springs.
De gustibus non est disputandum.agent109 said:
What drivel. We're discussing gun designs, not the business fortunes of Colt.agent109 said:
Last edited:
Nom de Forum
Member
Not again!:banghead:
As has already been pointed out to you, Mr. Glock is not the innovative gun genius you think. You are someone who thinks Mr. Glock hit a home run when in reality in terms of gun innovation he was born on third base and stole home plate on a pitching error from other manufacturers. Gaston Glock was a midget standing on the shoulders of giants when he designed his pistol. All histories of Glock clearly state the Mr. Glock studied other designs and combined the best features of them into his pistol. That is not to say Mr. Glock's accomplishment is minor but it is far less impressive than the innovations of the men whose shoulders he stood upon when designing the G17.
Last edited:
Nom de Forum
Member
I don't think "that dingus on the trigger" was an innovation either. IIRC that predates the Glock on another design. I will attempt to find it.
Last edited:
Rubber_Duck
Member
Well, I never said it was a thing of beauty. I still think it's an ugly gun. But the ergonomics are not bad at all (there are worse designs out there) and I look forward to shooting it. I do have other guns that are beauty queens so don't you worry about that.
Nom de Forum
Member
Actually it is more like Re-drivel, Drivel: Drivel Never Dies, Drivel 4.0, Son of Drivel, Drivel: Part IV the Insanity, etc.
These repeated factual errors in multiple threads are so easy to refute by checking well respected firearms reference books and online sources. I have to wonder where Mr. Agent109 is getting his information and if all of his posted opinions are merely intended to be provocative for his own entertainment.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Ah! I'd forgotten about that Iver J.
Nom...Should we tell him that Gaston didn't actually design his pistol...that he hired some sharp engineers to do the scut work so he could take credit?
Nah. That'd be too much.
Now, that may be the point of departure. The grip angle is pretty dang close to the Luger's...and the Luger points well below shoulder level. At least it does for me.
Nom...Should we tell him that Gaston didn't actually design his pistol...that he hired some sharp engineers to do the scut work so he could take credit?
Nah. That'd be too much.
Now, that may be the point of departure. The grip angle is pretty dang close to the Luger's...and the Luger points well below shoulder level. At least it does for me.
Rubber_Duck
Member
FWIW, I've never liked the Luger P.08 either.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Neither would I, if I had to actually use one. It does point well, though.
GBExpat
Member
When I hit that line in your list, I laughed out loud ...1911Tuner said:
Nom de Forum
Member
When I hit that line in your list, I laughed out loud ...
Take a look at this century old "dingus" and you will be ROFLOL at the thought the trigger "dingus" was Gaston's idea.
http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/9320/10301565_1.jpg?v=8CDA09100704DD0
Wanderling
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2011
- Messages
- 923
Completely disagree.
In the engineering world, great implementation often trumps a great idea, and takes a special kind of talent. Kalashnikov didn't really "invent" anything either yet was a brilliant gun designer.
amd6547
Member
I am a Glock fan. After decades of shooting 1911's and hipowers, the Glock grip points and feels great to me.
I would love to show John Browning a Glock. I am sure he would be intrigued...and I would love see what he would design using our modern materials and methods.
I would love to show John Browning a Glock. I am sure he would be intrigued...and I would love see what he would design using our modern materials and methods.
Glocks and 1911s go together like Milk and Cookies.
If you don't understand this you are probably more of a fanboy than an actual shooter.
These two pistols are becoming my fast favorites of all the handguns I own for this the Modern World.
The G34 & G41 are nearly the same size and weight as a full size 1911 with similar shooting qualities and more onboard ammo.
What's not to like?
If you don't understand this you are probably more of a fanboy than an actual shooter.
These two pistols are becoming my fast favorites of all the handguns I own for this the Modern World.
The G34 & G41 are nearly the same size and weight as a full size 1911 with similar shooting qualities and more onboard ammo.
What's not to like?
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
I see we are at it again...... I'll never understand how people confuse their opinion with facts.
The notion that Browning, and others, deserves no credit for some design aspects of GLOCK guns is totally absurd. As has been documented by historians, and pointed out by 1911Tuner and others, Browning's designs have been duplicated in some cases, modernized in others, and incorporated in so many modern gun designs, I doubt they could all be accounted for.
GLOCKs are well executed derivatives of other designs.
If Gaston Glock deserves credit for anything, it is his ability to market his product, and work out some truly impressive military and law enforcement contracts, while still managing to sell to and support a civilian customer base at the same time. Those are truly impressive feats of business dealing, and quality mass production. He, and the company are to be applauded, but there is a big difference between acknowledging those accomplishments, and claiming that GLOCK guns are not derived from obvious ancestry. Doing that is simple idolization without cause.
The notion that Browning, and others, deserves no credit for some design aspects of GLOCK guns is totally absurd. As has been documented by historians, and pointed out by 1911Tuner and others, Browning's designs have been duplicated in some cases, modernized in others, and incorporated in so many modern gun designs, I doubt they could all be accounted for.
GLOCKs are well executed derivatives of other designs.
If Gaston Glock deserves credit for anything, it is his ability to market his product, and work out some truly impressive military and law enforcement contracts, while still managing to sell to and support a civilian customer base at the same time. Those are truly impressive feats of business dealing, and quality mass production. He, and the company are to be applauded, but there is a big difference between acknowledging those accomplishments, and claiming that GLOCK guns are not derived from obvious ancestry. Doing that is simple idolization without cause.
Last edited:
NGIB
Member
Never understood why being a fanboy was necessary. Guns are tools and they all serve a purpose...
- Status
