Why Glock?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I met an actual fanboy today. Only he was a Ford fanboy. He has never owned anything other than Fords, won't look at any other vehicle than a Ford, and has raised his daughter to not consider any other vehicle than a Ford.

I told him that my company vehicle was a 2016 Ford Escape and that it was the worst vehicle I have ever driven in the last 20 years. He about had a stroke. Interesting to see such loyalty in person.
 
And when it comes to the guns that police departments carry, I know that most of them in my area issue Glocks.


I do wonder what the breakdown of departments that issue a weapon vs departments that officers purchase from an approved "list".
The vast majority of departments near me dont even issue a weapon. Including the 4th largest city in the USA.

Rather surprised Louisiana Parishes "issue" weapons.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I agree S&W and Ruger failed in the L.E. market,
S&W? Dunno about that. Up here in the PNW, the M&P is a very, very common pistol in police, sheriff's office and corrections holsters. Seen a lot of 'em down in the SW and Midwest in my travels as well.

But I could care less about what "most LE agencies issue" -- frankly, police and military guns are based on the needs and abilities of the lowest common denominator when it comes to the end-users.

So talking about how great a pistol is based on the fact that a lot of government entities buy them is, to me, not exactly a convincing argument.

I shall be taking nothing but 1911s to the range tomorrow … well, maybe a couple 3rd gen Smiths, too.
 
I do wonder what the breakdown of departments that issue a weapon vs departments that officers purchase from an approved "list".
The vast majority of departments near me dont even issue a weapon. Including the 4th largest city in the USA.

Rather surprised Louisiana Parishes "issue" weapons.
In the last 5 to 10 years most of the SO started issuing weapons, sidearms and shotguns.
A few years ago the Louisiana State Police went to Glocks. They issued the G17 G3 RTF. Just before the G5 came out they had up graded to the G17 G4. The State Police also issues Troopers a backup weapon. They issued the S&W Bodyguard, but after a year they dropped the Bodyguard and issued the G43.
When the State Police went to Glocks a lot of the PDs and SOs went to Glocks.
I think it would interesting to see what LEOs carry across the nation.
 
Just one guys observations but here in central WI I've never seen a LEO with anything other than a Glock in the holster. Same goes for the Madison area and Milwaukee.

But I don't spent a ton of time interacting with LEO.
 
What does what police for using Glock's have to do with ordinary people. Many of these Ruger's handguns are on sale at CDNN. That company is noted for liquidating inventories. If we went by total LEO handguns in the world the Makarov would win hands down.

Addendum: The comment on the Makarov's was made elsewhere by one wild and crazy character found generally on another forum. This all happened at the dawn of time.
 
Do you own a Glock? Or shot one very much? I ask this because there are a good many people that say they don’t like Glocks or say that they don’t care for them that have never fired one, or have had very little contact with them.

You keep saying this but really... So what?

The person that spends 2 yrs and 1000s of rounds trying to like brand A is not better off than the guy that shoots it twice and realizes he doesn't like it for the same reasons.

Is there a minimum # or rounds or minutes someone has to invest in order to get the Gunny seal of approval that it's ok that they don't care for something?
 
You keep saying this but really... So what?

The person that spends 2 yrs and 1000s of rounds trying to like brand A is not better off than the guy that shoots it twice and realizes he doesn't like it for the same reasons.

Is there a minimum # or rounds or minutes someone has to invest in order to get the Gunny seal of approval that it's ok that they don't care for something?
The difference here is, the guy who spent some real time and effort to learn the gun, actually knows the gun to have a vaild opinion. The guy who shot it twice, doesnt. All he knows is, hes not familiar with it, and hasnt bothered to learn it, and its different from the one (and probably only) he has.

EVERYTHING new, takes a little time to get to know. And usually once thats done, the differences between things, isnt near as bad as you usually hear.
 
You keep saying this but really... So what?

The person that spends 2 yrs and 1000s of rounds trying to like brand A is not better off than the guy that shoots it twice and realizes he doesn't like it for the same reasons.

Is there a minimum # or rounds or minutes someone has to invest in order to get the Gunny seal of approval that it's ok that they don't care for something?
AK103K answered your question.
Like I have said many times before, "There are a lot of people that know a lot about things they know very little about."
I was not being rude when I asked Styx if he owned a Glock, or if he had shot one much. I was just curious about how familiar he was with Glocks.
But if you need to know what guns get The Gunny Seal of Approval, here is a list of a few.
Glock
Sig P320
Beretta APX
S&W M&P
1911
Browning Hi Power
CZ 75
Ruger SR series

I remember when I first got my Beretta APX. My son and I went to the range with it and my M&P9. I shot the M&P better then the APX at first, but it was the first time I had ever fired an APX. I put about 100 rounds through the APX that day and found that I really liked the gun and the way it handled. My son shot one mag through the APX and said that he didn't care for it. After he shot a few more mags through it, he told that he was starting to like it.
My Sig P320 M17 is starting to grow on me. I may even buy a compact P320.

Glock is not the one and only gun on the market and it is not the gun for everyone, but that goes for other guns also.
Glock is popular for a few reasons. It has stood the test of time and has out lasted many different models put out by its competitors.
 
The difference here is, the guy who spent some real time and effort to learn the gun, actually knows the gun to have a vaild opinion. The guy who shot it twice, doesnt. All he knows is, hes not familiar with it, and hasnt bothered to learn it, and its different from the one (and probably only) he has.

EVERYTHING new, takes a little time to get to know. And usually once thats done, the differences between things, isnt near as bad as you usually hear.

Couple examples from my own experience with good guns from a lifelong Glock and 1911 shooter.

Last year I bought a Glock 19x and Sig Legion 226 SAO. Both good guns with good triggers (I like Glock triggers and consider them good), and known trigger types.

Both had more of a rolling break than I was used to on either my Glock or 1911s and both took a few hundred rounds to really learn the trigger, and had I just shot a mag, or even a hundred rounds, I would likely have been disappointed in how they shot.

But once I learned the guns they are two of my best shooters, especially at speed on drills I tend to shoot both faster and tighter groups with my 19x over 9mm 1911s and the Sig faster still.

So yeah, sometimes it takes a while to truly know if a gun is right for you.

Conversely, I decided to learn a DA/SA trigger on a very nice P229 and dedicated 6 months and several thousand rounds to shoot it exclusively and at the end of the day I was pretty good with it, good enough to be confident in carrying it even if I did throw a round 1-2" low at speed with the DA pull on drills at 10 yards. At the end of the task I pulled my Glock 17 out and ran them side by side, despite not having shot a Glock in 6 months and that 17 in a year and I immediately out shot the Sig with the Glock by a wide margin. So there certainly are guns that are "not for you", but I truly believe that barring not being able to reach the trigger anyone can shoot any gun well given time and effort.
 
The difference here is, the guy who spent some real time and effort to learn the gun, actually knows the gun to have a vaild opinion. The guy who shot it twice, doesnt.

Nawww.... I call BS.

Again, how much time and rounds does someone need to invest in order to have a valid opinion?

What ever your answer is IS YOUR OPINION.

I don't need to shake 200 sweaty hands to know I don't like it. I don't need to drive 10k miles in order for me know the Smart car isn't right for me and the ride stinks and the seats feel like cardboard. I don't need to date someone for 6 months to know she isn't right for me.

I don't need to use a hammer for a year framing houses in order to justify to someone else that for me, the swing doesn't feel right and the grip is too small.


All of those things are my opinion and are subjective things that I can figure out in very short order.

You may not be able to, but believe it or not, some ppl can.


So I'll ask again to those that share yours and Gunnys opinion, what is the magic amount of time or # rounds does it take for someone to have a valid opinion in your mind?

And is your opinion based on facts you can share or just anecdotes?
 
So yeah, sometimes it takes a while to truly know if a gun is right for you.

To play devil's advocate, a lot of us simply don't have the time or resources to do this as it is much more expedient to try a pistol for one range session and go with whatever feels and performs best from the get go.

Another factor in this discussion is personal investment. You naturally want to defend what you have resources into.

My brother-in-law bought a new CZ p10c and I had just bought my Glock G19 Gen 5 MOS. He had been hearing on the internet how the CZ was the new "Glock beater" and so had I. He had never shot a Glock. We took them to the range and shot them side by side. Glock had the better trigger, was more accurate, was more compact, and felt better in the hand for both of us. He even mentioned that the texture on the CZ irritated his shooting hand.

But he kept the CZ and insists it's a superior gun to the Glock, mostly because it was $200 cheaper than mine. Whatever. I saw him shoot the Glock better heard his remarks, yet he paid for the CZ out of his own pocket and had done tons of internet research on it, so to him, it was superior to the Glock.
 
Nawww.... I call BS.

Again, how much time and rounds does someone need to invest in order to have a valid opinion?

What ever your answer is IS YOUR OPINION.

I don't need to shake 200 sweaty hands to know I don't like it. I don't need to drive 10k miles in order for me know the Smart car isn't right for me and the ride stinks and the seats feel like cardboard. I don't need to date someone for 6 months to know she isn't right for me.

I don't need to use a hammer for a year framing houses in order to justify to someone else that for me, the swing doesn't feel right and the grip is too small.


All of those things are my opinion and are subjective things that I can figure out in very short order.

You may not be able to, but believe it or not, some ppl can.


So I'll ask again to those that share yours and Gunnys opinion, what is the magic amount of time or # rounds does it take for someone to have a valid opinion in your mind?

And is your opinion based on facts you can share or just anecdotes?
There is no Magic number, but it's more then just a mag or two.
No one is telling you that you need to switch to a Glock. Just give something a good try before giving up.

You seem to be a little upset about opinions that don't follow yours. Now this is only my opinion, but it's based on your snide remarks.
You may not be able to, but believe it or not, some ppl can.
Is there a minimum # or rounds or minutes someone has to invest in order to get the Gunny seal of approval that it's ok that they don't care for something?
 
So I'll ask again to those that share yours and Gunnys opinion, what is the magic amount of time or # rounds does it take for someone to have a valid opinion in your mind?
I'll add how many rounds do I need to shoot before you'll accept that my trigger finger is done getting longer?
USMCGunny said:
There is no Magic number, but it's more then just a mag or two.
Good Lord I don't need to fire a single round to figure out I'm going to have trouble with trigger reach.
 
Last edited:
Nawww.... I call BS.

Again, how much time and rounds does someone need to invest in order to have a valid opinion?

What ever your answer is IS YOUR OPINION.

I don't need to shake 200 sweaty hands to know I don't like it. I don't need to drive 10k miles in order for me know the Smart car isn't right for me and the ride stinks and the seats feel like cardboard. I don't need to date someone for 6 months to know she isn't right for me.

I don't need to use a hammer for a year framing houses in order to justify to someone else that for me, the swing doesn't feel right and the grip is too small.


All of those things are my opinion and are subjective things that I can figure out in very short order.

You may not be able to, but believe it or not, some ppl can.


So I'll ask again to those that share yours and Gunnys opinion, what is the magic amount of time or # rounds does it take for someone to have a valid opinion in your mind?

And is your opinion based on facts you can share or just anecdotes?
Ive owned and shot a lot of different gun types over the years, and had a lot of "uninformed" opinions about some things myself, that kept me from embracing them at first blush. Its a lot easier to bitch about something you dont now, than it is to learn it.

I was a die hard 1911 guy, and the first couple of times I had a chance to fondle and then shoot a Glock, I swore they were junk (the proper 1911 fanboy response ;)) and everything about them was wrong.

Finally got one of my own, and put some time in with it and shot it a good bit, and learned the gun, and these days, the 1911's are the range toys, just to keep up on them, and a couple of Glocks ride in my holsters.

And since I shoot them both (as well as a number of others), I can easily switch back and forth now, without any problem too.

Same thing went on with my AK's when I first started fooling aroud with them . AR's are the only way to go, until you actually learn to run an AK, and find thay are easy to work and shoot, equally as accurate (when shot realistically), and all the negitive things I was convinced were there, seemed to magically disapper, when I got a little experience with the gun.

Same thing went on with pretty much every new or different gun I came across. And I quickly figured out, not to believe what Im told about things, unless it proves out in living with, and shooting them. And very few of those supposed deficenies or problems, actually ever played out too.

So, no, its not BS. Its simply a lack of education and experience with something you dont know, up until you do.

People generally dont like to admit that they might not know somethng, or be wrong, so its easier to put the heat on the object, than it is to admit that they are the likely sorce of the problem. ;)



To play devil's advocate, a lot of us simply don't have the time or resources to do this as it is much more expedient to try a pistol for one range session and go with whatever feels and performs best from the get go.

Another factor in this discussion is personal investment. You naturally want to defend what you have resources into.

My brother-in-law bought a new CZ p10c and I had just bought my Glock G19 Gen 5 MOS. He had been hearing on the internet how the CZ was the new "Glock beater" and so had I. He had never shot a Glock. We took them to the range and shot them side by side. Glock had the better trigger, was more accurate, was more compact, and felt better in the hand for both of us. He even mentioned that the texture on the CZ irritated his shooting hand.

But he kept the CZ and insists it's a superior gun to the Glock, mostly because it was $200 cheaper than mine. Whatever. I saw him shoot the Glock better heard his remarks, yet he paid for the CZ out of his own pocket and had done tons of internet research on it, so to him, it was superior to the Glock.
Most people tend to have what they have, and because of that, its got to be the best choice. You hear it all the time.

Nothing wrong with that, as long as what you have, is something of reasonable quality and reputation, and you do take the time and make the effort, to get good with it.

Someone who does that, regardless of what it is thay have, will likely be a lot better off, than someone who tries to buy thier skill, with a high dollar, fancy super gun, and a lot of add on crutches, that are supposed to make up for their lack of skill.

The majority of firearms out there are pretty simple, if you bother to take the time to learn them. There really are only a couple of basic types you need to learn, and once you have that down, you can shoot pretty much anything, without too much trouble.

Personally, I think if you learn to shoot a DA revolver , DAO, youre going to find everything else is pretty easy. And shooting DAO is easy, but you do need to put in a little time and effort to learn.

But, as we see all the time, people dont seem to want to put in that effort, even with what they have, let alone, broaden their horizons, and learn as much as they can with as many as they can.

And its those people, who are usually the ones, who tell you that the things they arent familar with, are junk, or not shootable.

"You dont know, what you dont know", is very much the truth.

Im a firm beliver, that if you can't shoot something well, barring something actually being mechanically wrong with the gun, its not the guns fault. ;)

But you know the usual response there. :)
 
Ive owned and shot a lot of different gun types over the years, and had a lot of "uninformed" opinions about some things myself, that kept me from embracing them at first blush. Its a lot easier to bitch about something you dont now, than it is to learn it.

I was a die hard 1911 guy, and the first couple of times I had a chance to fondle and then shoot a Glock, I swore they were junk (the proper 1911 fanboy response ;)) and everything about them was wrong.

Finally got one of my own, and put some time in with it and shot it a good bit, and learned the gun, and these days, the 1911's are the range toys, just to keep up on them, and a couple of Glocks ride in my holsters.

And since I shoot them both (as well as a number of others), I can easily switch back and forth now, without any problem too.

Same thing went on with my AK's when I first started fooling aroud with them . AR's are the only way to go, until you actually learn to run an AK, and find thay are easy to work and shoot, equally as accurate (when shot realistically), and all the negitive things I was convinced were there, seemed to magically disapper, when I got a little experience with the gun.

Same thing went on with pretty much every new or different gun I came across. And I quickly figured out, not to believe what Im told about things, unless it proves out in living with, and shooting them. And very few of those supposed deficenies or problems, actually ever played out too.

So, no, its not BS. Its simply a lack of education and experience with something you dont know, up until you do.

People generally dont like to admit that they might not know somethng, or be wrong, so its easier to put the heat on the object, than it is to admit that they are the likely sorce of the problem. ;)

So you don't have answer to my 2 very basic questions asking for clarification.
 
So I'll ask again to those that share yours and Gunnys opinion, what is the magic amount of time or # rounds does it take for someone to have a valid opinion in your mind?

And is your opinion based on facts you can share or just anecdotes?
OK, specifically to each question....

The amount of time it takes, is the amount of time it takes to actually learn the gun. That isnt a mag or two, as Gunny stated.

How long did it take you to become proficent with whatever it is you swear by, and to have a vaild opinion of it?

A couple of mags from someone elses gun, or how it feels in a gun shop, does not qualify.

I do my best to base my opinions on actual experience. I see an awful lot of people basing it on what theyve heard. What do you base it on?
 
For me. It was 12 years and countless rounds thru the pipe for 7 different types of glocks. (Caliber and size). I do not like glocks compared to alot of striker guns. But i still carry one all day. They are dependable and accurate.
 
Nawww.... I call BS......

So I'll ask again to those that share yours and Gunnys opinion, what is the magic amount of time or # rounds does it take for someone to have a valid opinion in your mind?

And is your opinion based on facts you can share or just anecdotes?

So you don't have answer to my 2 very basic questions asking for clarification.

Your questions may seem “basic” and straightforward, but certainly there are degrees of individual abilities, familiarity, training and education that comes into play.

Obviously, this is probably 95+% opinion based, but the quality of the opinion will certainly increase as more facts come into play.

For example, if a shooter grabs a scoped 30-06 bolt action rifle and fails to mount and hold the gun properly, the chances of getting hurt from scope bite or other recoil actions are high, and they may form the opinion that the 3006 is too difficult to shoot.

I see many shooters at the ranges and in matches who fail to grip guns properly. Does that affect their opinions? I would expect that it does.

You question is neither simple nor a “one size fits all” scenario.
 
Last edited:
There is no Magic number, but it's more then just a mag or two.
No one is telling you that you need to switch to a Glock. Just give something a good try before giving up

I agree in concept but when someone says they tried and didn't like it, and the reply is basically that they didn't try hard/long enough then we need to start getting down to brass tacks and flush out the details because generalizing groups of people bases on a cpl anecdotal stories of different ppl completely unrelated not trying hard/long enough... and still not be able to quantify what that means.


You seem to be a little upset about opinions that don't follow yours. Now this is only my opinion, but it's based on your snide remarks.

Really? What is my opinion and who's don't flow mine?

And that wasnt a snide remark. You're reading too much between the lines and last time I check there was just blank space.;)

You've said things about ppl having an opinion on glocks while have limited to no experience with them. AK103K said those opinions don't matter because not enough trigger time. You deferred to his answer rather than answering yourself.


I'm just wondering when some one else is allowed to have their opinion be considered valid.

So now we no its more than a mag or 2 in your mind. Pretty vague, still.

And was your opinion based on facts or anecdotal stories that are tangently related?
 
How long did it take you to become proficent with whatever it is you swear by, and to have a vaild opinion of it?

I don't swear by any gun. I don't wear blinders.

A couple of mags from someone elses gun, or how it feels in a gun shop, does not qualify.

Again I call BS.

I can tell in less than 5 seconds if I'll have difficulty reaching the trigger or that my eyes can't see the sights well or other instant disqualifying particulars.

If you cant, bummer for you. If those things are never an issue for you... then good for you.
 
I'll add how many rounds do I need to shoot before you'll accept that my trigger finger is done getting longer?

Good Lord I don't need to fire a single round to figure out I'm going to have trouble with trigger reach.

Sorry Mav, you don't fit into their box so your opinion doesn't matter much if any.

Btw, I have that issue too.
 
To play devil's advocate, a lot of us simply don't have the time or resources to do this as it is much more expedient to try a pistol for one range session and go with whatever feels and performs best from the get go.

Another factor in this discussion is personal investment. You naturally want to defend what you have resources into.

My brother-in-law bought a new CZ p10c and I had just bought my Glock G19 Gen 5 MOS. He had been hearing on the internet how the CZ was the new "Glock beater" and so had I. He had never shot a Glock. We took them to the range and shot them side by side. Glock had the better trigger, was more accurate, was more compact, and felt better in the hand for both of us. He even mentioned that the texture on the CZ irritated his shooting hand.

But he kept the CZ and insists it's a superior gun to the Glock, mostly because it was $200 cheaper than mine. Whatever. I saw him shoot the Glock better heard his remarks, yet he paid for the CZ out of his own pocket and had done tons of internet research on it, so to him, it was superior to the Glock.

Sure, that makes sense and I was totally there when I was inexperienced with Glocks and a hater. I suspected I could get it to work if I tried but didn't want to spend my limited funds and range time on learning the gun (ammo in the bush, AK is crazy expensive) and was, flatly, missing out on what turned out to be the plastic gun that fit me best.

It's why I decided to finally hear down and really spend time trying to learn my Sig's DA/SA trigger, sure some wouldn't want to spend the range time at home dry firing but I did have the time and inclination.

What I won't do is bag on DA/SA guns as worse or a bad option, just the least efficient for me.

And defending your purchase is only natural, kind of a branch of our natural tribalism instincts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top