Glock practice pistols for law enforcement only?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Same for the larger .380s. It fuels my dislike for the company.
Click to expand...
The larger .380s haven't been sold in the U.S. because they can't legally be imported. Now that they have a manufacturing facility they could make them here, but the problem is that there's really not likely to be a market for them. The market for large .380ACP pistols isn't exactly booming. The reason Glock makes them at all is for markets where 9mm is restricted from civilian purchase.
Why should training be restricted from citizens?
Click to expand...
I've been told that the restriction is due to safety concerns. Some of the training pistols could be converted to live fire which might not be a safe configuration.

Also, Glock wants to limit the possibility that a police officer might ever face someone with a gun that the police officer immediately recognizes as a training gun but that has been converted to fire live ammo. One could argue that a person could paint a regular Glock to look like a training gun, I suppose, but I think that if someone pointed that out to Glock, they would reply that at if someone were to do that, at least Glock wouldn't be involved in the SNAFU.

Glock also doesn't sell cutaway pistols except to dealers or LE. I'm curious to hear what sort of conspiracy theory someone can come up with about that fact.
 
As said above, the .380s can't be imported unless for LEO's.

They are not selling practice guns to civilians for liability purposes. If Glock only sells training products to law enforcement they are unlikely to be sued. LEO training pistols are probably not going to be used by teenagers fooling around. Also, if for some reason a kid gets a LEO training gun they will have difficult time explaining why Glock had a duty to warn them about whatever stupid thing they did. Additionally, police departments can pay if someone pops their eye out with a simunition, so the one eyed guy will not have to look to hard for a deep pocket. Finally, I have a feeling that most police departments don't want foolish accidents reported too widely, which would also preclude lawsuits.

On the other side of the cost/benefit analysis, there is a very limited market for civilian training guns. How many are they going to sell, 100 a year maybe? What's the profit on each of those $100. $100x100 = $10,000. This is a pittance to a company like Glock -- it is certainly not worth opening themselves up all sorts of expensive multi-million dollar failure to warn product liability claims.
 
Yet a Sim gun could mess a fella up.
Click to expand...

A real Glock could mess a fellow up. So what? I see where your point is trying to go, but your logic got left behind at the airport with TSA. :scrutiny:

So, if under the guidance of a LEO firearms instructor, Dan puts a practice Glock in his mouth, pulls the trigger and dies, the agency gets sued. If Glock sells a practice gun directly to Dan, and then Dan puts it in his mouth, pulls the trigger and dies, Glock gets sued.
Click to expand...

Same reasoning applies in the case of a *real Glock*. There's either legal liability in the gun-in-the-mouth scenario you just described or there's not. Real Glock v. Sim (practice) Glock doesn't matter.

Glock doesn't want to be sued, and Dan's are everywhere on both sides of the badge. Rejoice in the fact you can buy a REAL Glock.
Click to expand...

A) Nobody wants to get sued; B) idiots are everywhere, to include many who can unfortunately access firearms, which includes some who wear badges and are issued guns by their employer; C) yes, I'm glad I can buy a real Glock (have several, in fact).

I'm also glad I still have my "9mm" Sim barrel from my former Sig 226 in my parts-n-pieces pistola stash. Said 226 is long gone, but I kept the Sim barrel just in case Santa happens to see fit to gift me with a case of "9mm" Sim ammo under the Xmas tree some snowy night. :D
 
Last edited:
A real Glock could mess a fellow up. So what? I see where your point is trying to go, but your logic got left behind at the airport with TSA.
Click to expand...
I've been led to understand that one of the main reasons is that a training gun could be assembled in a configuration using Glock factory parts that could chamber live rounds but would be dangerous to fire.

In a controlled environment, being used by LEOs and monitored by persons trained by Glock to insure their safe use, they're not worried about it. If they release them into the general civilian market, they would have to modify them so that they couldn't be assembled into dangerous configurations using Glock parts or they would face unacceptable liability risks.
I'm also glad I still have my "9mm" Sim barrel from my former Sig 226 in my parts-n-pieces pistola stash.
Click to expand...
That's VERY different. The Glock "T" guns are not just a barrel swap. The slides are different (partially composed of plastic) and the T guns are blowback. If you put a standard barrel in a Glock "T" gun and fired it, you would likely injure yourself and would blow up the gun.
 
MICHAEL T said:
Glock company is snobs . They only sell to civilians at high prices to make up for their loss selling to Police depts.
Click to expand...

Glock cutting police departments breaks on pricing is why we have them today and why they make up such a large part of police issued sidearms nationwide. Including mine. However in my experience, my department gets them at blue label pricing. The same as any first responder, gssf member, and others. To claim they "sell to civilians at high prices to make up for losses" is an overstatement. Glocks pricing is in line with all of the polymer wonders they compete with. Such as S&W, Springfield, FN, etc.

Most all major firearms companies offer discounts to police agencies in expectations of large orders. If an entity orders 1000 Glock 17s and 1000 Colt M4s then Glock and Colt get to ship 1000 weapons to the dept. Shipping, logistics, and a quick payment on a bulk sale are all the keys to a discount. Why are prices at Walmart cheaper than a convenience store? Bulk orders, constant payment, and easier shipping logistics.

To call a company, that will rebuild your weapon at their facility while you wait, offer inexpensive replacement parts, factory install night sights cheaper than most people can purchase them for, etc etc snobs is a bit harsh.
 
Glock doesnt lose money selling anything. Those guns are much cheaper to produce and provide overhead for than you can imagine. They might make more money selling to individuals but they still make money selling to law enforcement especially considering trade in discounts and reselling of trade in guns. Rest assured Glock is making money.

As has been mentioned the LEO ONLY thing is for liability and 68 GCA reasons.
 
I kept the Sim barrel just in case Santa happens to see fit to gift me with a case of "9mm" Sim ammo under the Xmas tree some snowy night.
Click to expand...

I have several 9mm sim rounds rolling around in various tote boxes. I just won't leave them under your tree because you aren't being nice. Plus the rounds are all dried up now and would only mark by leaving a stinging welt.

Maybe it's because I have to train with them, that I just don't see the allure. I do see the inherent liability of releasing a "practice gun" that causes injury to the general public.
 
Call me weird. But i would jump on a modern double stack 380 in a heart beat. By modern i mean currently made and has a rail.
Click to expand...
You realize that these are blowback, not locked breech guns, right?

What you end up with is a gun the size and weight of the 26 (if you pick the 28) or the 19 (if you pick the 25) but that:
  • Has to have special .380 mags to work properly
  • Uses less powerful ammo but recoils more than the comparable 9mm version
  • Uses more expensive ammo.

The ONLY reason to have own one of these is if you're in an area where 9mm guns are restricted from civilian ownership or if you're a diehard collector.
 
JohnKSa, yes i know it would it would be the size and weight of a 19, harder recoiling blow back. And will take hard to find special mags. and the ammo is more expensive then 9mm.

And i still want one. Can not explain why, but i do.
 
I would not be shocked to find out they do that because they charge extra for them and likely what someone that is spending their own money would call an insane price.

Sell it to LEO only and you don't have a bunch of people on the internet asking why Glock makes a $500 pistol but if you want it a different color or cut up its $3000...
 
"380s are blowback so they are heavier recoil in and weaker than 9mm"

This is as much hogwash as anything else in this thread. Yes, historically .380 and smaller have been blowback, anything bigger or more powerful has been locked breach. It's a mechanical system that works on force. The springs are designed to resist that force. Give less force applied (380 vs 9mm, or even in a 32 or 25 chambered gun for that matter) and all you have to do is re-engineer the recoil spring. They made the 42 locked breach like the rest of the product line, they could do the same with any caliber if they chose to do so.

And if you look at say a 17 and build the same gun except in .380 with locked breach your looking at a gun with higher capacity, less probability for overpenetration, and lower recoil. Is it a tradeoff with 9mm, of course it is, but now we are back into the 1950s and 1960s argument between 45acp and 9mm. Modern 9mm is a lot more peppy than it was even 20 years or so ago so we could start the argument of 38 or 357 in a duty revolver just morphed into 380 or 9mm for duty guns.
Fact of the matter is that Glock excludes a large base of potential customers by offering a limited variety of guns (essentially 3 frames in various magwell lengths) and caliber bleed over sucks between them. I know of a lot of people who have tried 26 or 27 with poor results due to poor grip and heavier recoil than they want to shoot regularly. For a .380 version they buy a new reamer, make a new mag, and weaken the spring and suddenly they increase their potential customer base. Better still, since they already make the darned things, they can just make them and sell them here.

Glock seems to be taking a page from Bill Ruger's philosophy here, and make what will satisfy the masses, not to make what people actually want. That's why Ruger was always there, but only after Bill was out of the way did Ruger really modernize it's line and grow as a company. Glock needs to do the same, and they only have to look as far as the Walther PP to see reason to build the 26 or 42 sized guns in smaller caliber. Then they need to evaluate realistically the market on selling full sized guns in smaller caliber.

Now, on with the show.
 
WestKentucky: He was referring to the fact that the .380 Glock 25 and Glock 28 are both straight blowback, which tends to have a lot more felt recoil than an identical locked-breech gun. He wasn't referring to the Glock 42.

Again, there is zero advantage to those .380 Glocks: They're the same size as the 9mms, they have the same or more felt recoil, and they shoot a weaker and more expensive round. And no, a Glock 17-sized .380 wouldn't have a higher capacity; the cartridges are the same diameter.
 
Theohazard said:
WestKentucky: He was referring to the fact that the .380 Glock 25 and Glock 28 are both straight blowback, which tends to have a lot more felt recoil than an identical locked-breech gun. He wasn't referring to the Glock 42.

Again, there is zero advantage to those .380 Glocks: They're the same size as the 9mms, they have the same or more felt recoil, and they shoot a weaker and more expensive round. And no, a Glock 17-sized .380 wouldn't have a higher capacity; the cartridges are the same diameter.
Click to expand...
.380 is straightwalled, 9mm is tapered. Yes the bullet is the same diameter. And yes, those versions referenced are blowback, my point still stands though that they are missing a big chunk of potential while dancing around it, and even at that they are dabbling in it but not doing so in an importable way, or making a version domestically. It doesn't matter one way or the other to me, I would actually love to have a 42 sized gun in 32acp but it will never happen so I will buy a different gun from another manufacturer. Let's move this on along to asking why they don't make a 22lr version of...anything. It comes right back to arbitrarily limiting their own market, (hello colt, hk, bill ruger). It is more frustrating when they get so close but stay just out of reach. The real kicker of my whole point in this is that another company (issc?) Made the 22lr that everybody wanted because Glock chose not to, and all of the companies copying Glock have done more with their guns than Glock has. They can steer their market however they want, but cranial-rectum insertion is not doing anybody any good. It is nice when they pull out long enough to get a breath and put out guns people want like the long slides, the 42,43, 10mm versions, MOS, but it would be better if they kept their head out a little longer.
 
They made the 42 locked breach like the rest of the product line, they could do the same with any caliber if they chose to do so.
Click to expand...
The Glock 42 is a completely different gun designed especially for the .380ACP cartridge and especially designed to be locked breech. It's also much smaller and lighter than either the 25 or the 28.

If they made the 25 and 28 into locked breech guns they would have to change things considerably to get the gun to operate reliably. They didn't go to blowback for the heck of it, it's because the .380ACP won't reliably operate a locked breech system designed around the 9mm unless you modify it.

So they did a very simple modification to the barrel (maybe the slide too, can't remember for sure on that) that changed it into a blowback system. That allowed them to keep nearly the entire gun the same, simplifying manufacturing and keeping costs low.
And if you look at say a 17 and build the same gun except in .380 with locked breach your looking at a gun with higher capacity...
Click to expand...
The capacity would be the same if the dimensions of the gun/magazine stay the same. At its largest point, the .380ACP is 0.02" smaller in diameter than the 9mm. Multiply the diameter difference times 17 and you don't get enough extra space to shove another round into the magazine. If you made the magazine slightly larger or changed the magazine design then you could probably add a single round to the capacity. We might have guessed this without the need to resort to all the complex mathematics by looking at the 25 and 28 and noting that they both have exactly the same capacity as their 9mm counterparts. ;)

Also, as noted, you can't just rechamber a full-sized 9mm to .380ACP and expect it to work properly any more than you can rechamber a .380ACP to 9mm and assume it will work ok. Other changes would have to be made to get the gun running reliably. And by other changes, I mean significant changes--i.e. more than just a spring change. Locked breech guns are momentum driven and springs have less effect than most people intuit.

Anyway, the market for large .380ACP pistols is pretty low. There have been some pretty nice mid-size to fairly large .380ACP pistols on the market that have been discontinued, presumably due to lack of market interest.
For a .380 version they buy a new reamer, make a new mag, and weaken the spring and suddenly they increase their potential customer base.
Click to expand...
:D
If it were that easy and the market is crying out for full-sized .380ACP pistols, why isn't anyone making conversion barrels and modified magazines? I mean, you can readily get conversion barrels in 9x25 Dillon and that's not exactly a round that's jumping off the shelves.

Clearly there are only two possible options:

1. EVERYONE in the gun accessory/gunsmithing/caliber conversion industry has colluded with Glock to keep full-sized .380ACP pistols away from the American consumer.

OR

2. Absolutely no one but you has figured out that the American gun-buying market is starved for full-sized .380ACP pistols and that it would be super-simple to satisfy that request.

As much as I am into conspiracy theories, I'm thinking that it's option 2. Therefore my advice is for you to start contacting gunsmiths and gun makers and explaining how they're missing out on the chance of a lifetime. Once you give them the technical details on how to do the conversions so they can start raking in the cash I'm sure they'll happily reward you accordingly. Don't let them try to tell you that it's not as simple as you think it is--just let them know their objections are hogwash. They'll come around eventually.
 
Last edited:
Can everybody just please read Mr M-Cameron's post,

take the tinfoil hats off......im guessing this has more to do with marketing and profit than it does with any "civilians arent equal" conspiracy.

what is the "civilian" market for these?.......honestly, probably not very significant......im guessing not enough profit to set up distribution to shops and marketing for them.

what is the "LEO" market for these?.....probably pretty good....especially among larger depts.....and seeing as LEO can order directly from Glock, im guessing thats why they have access to the "training" guns.

im willing to bet if you went to your local Glock dealer, they would be able to order you one no problem if you really wanted one.
Click to expand...

My agency trains with them. There's nothing special about them at all. Same crappy plastic sights and gritty triggers. It makes no sense for Glock to market these trainers to the general public.

Are any civilians going to buy an entire training kit for several thousand dollars? Because without the entire kit, a single pistol is useless for training. These trainers are for force on force/shoot, no shoot scenario based training.

It would be like Firestone marketing tractor trailer tires to the general public. We all drive vehicles with tires, why shouldn't we be able to buy one tractor tire?
 
Technically legally they are considered real guns. Your not really missing out on anything. The training models cost more than the real guns. Range time and ammo are a better investment if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
As a newly minted Simunition certified instructor, I can tell you that as a civilian you don't want a G17T. Airsoft makes a lot more sense (for safety and cost reasons). If you really want one, stalk Gunbroker, they come up every month or so, beat up 17Ts and they go for ~$700. (I assume collectors cause they are rare?)

Dry fire is free so the trainer doesn't make a lot of sense for anyone who isn't an instructor IMO.

They should offer at least the non Sims guns civilians if they want, hardly any would sell though.
 
Even the G17R "reset" model is classified as real gun under us law. Seriously for most folks airsoft makes more sense.
 
What an odd set of complaints.

What do folks over to the Glock forums say on this?

Has anyone written a letter or email to Glock and said that they want to buy a fake training gun from them? Or complained directly to Glock that you are mad at Glock because they will sell you an actual gun but not a fake training gun?

Try launching an internet campaign to do this. Launch a campaign to get Glock to sell a double stack blowback .380 in the U.S. It didn't take 'em long to get a single stack 9 going (???)...so...since it's already made it oughta take a month.

Over to the Glock forum I'm confident several folks have the actual answers to these questions and documented ones at that. There is a bit of speculation here.

Glock not make money off sales to law enforcement!?! Shirley you jest! For their first decade or so in the U.S. they gave their guns away to law enforcement and still made a profit.

Sales to law enforcement are their bread and butter, steak and cake for that matter.

tipoc
 
Last edited:
The training Glocks are probably built on real Glock frames, so chances are they'd need to actually transfer through an FFL. They'd only sell a handful to hardcore Glock collectors, so it's likely not worth the effort to even put them up for sale, let alone the liability issues.

A large .380 is an odd duck. How popular are Beretta 84's and CZ-83's? Outside of cheap surplus pistols they are a hard sell, and especially when 9mm is both cheaper and spicier. There is such a thing as a Ruger LC380, but that's not quite what we are talking about.
 
1.Someone will always want what they can't legally own.
2. Doesn't have to be logical or economically reasonable.
3. If you want a training Glock, go to Wallyworld and buy a Crosman CO2 Glock and train away.
4. Being shot by a BB most likely would be the same pain level as simunitions.
5. Training one-on-one without proper protective gear anf training on the use thereof is hazardous at best.

SgtUSMC, Viet Vet (in country), AmLegion, VFW, LifeNRA, DAV
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Yo Mama
  • Locked
Please look at your xd magazines for me
Replies
2
Views
459
bannockburn
bannockburn
W
  • Locked
"Law Enforcement Only"
Replies
8
Views
839
PT-Partners
P
M
  • Locked
Glock Law Enforcement/Military/Public Service Sales
Replies
14
Views
6K
Weagle
W
P
  • Locked
Law enforcement going back to 9mm
2 3
Replies
71
Views
6K
fastbolt
fastbolt
D
  • Locked
Sig Sauer P226 Decocker
Replies
18
Views
2K
DallasCop2566
D
Back
Top