Glock sights. Why the hate?
- Thread starter Trey Veston
- Start date
-
- Tags
- sights
- Status
I have witnessed two or three Glocks with plastic sights went off center due to the fact they are plastic and too easy to move from their position.
With that price tag a Glock should have factory adjusted steel sights and factory target group at 15 yards, just like german pistols or even CZ.
The first factory Glock with steel sights in the history is the 17 Gen4 FS Sport. It has glow-in-the-dark sights and the price is the same of a Gen5.
C'mon Glock, stop to be that scrooge and start to offer your line of pistols with factory installed steel sights!
With that price tag a Glock should have factory adjusted steel sights and factory target group at 15 yards, just like german pistols or even CZ.
The first factory Glock with steel sights in the history is the 17 Gen4 FS Sport. It has glow-in-the-dark sights and the price is the same of a Gen5.
C'mon Glock, stop to be that scrooge and start to offer your line of pistols with factory installed steel sights!
Last edited:
While the sight picture doesn't blow my hair back, my main issue with stock Glock sights are their durability. I had a front sight fly off of a G19, and another front site that went crooked on a G34 with the first outing. I've also had a loose rear sight that could be moved with a little finger pressure -- don't recall which gun that was on.
I either buy Glocks with night sights, or swap them over to my preferred SD sight (Ameriglo CAPS) upon purchase.
I either buy Glocks with night sights, or swap them over to my preferred SD sight (Ameriglo CAPS) upon purchase.
GunnyUSMC
Member
I hear this from time to time, but you have to ask a few things. How many different models have those other companies put out to compete with Glock that are no longer on the market.
And how much have they dropped the price on the guns they still offer.
The FNS sold for just over $600 when they came out. Now you can find them for just above $400.
I bought a Beretta APX when they first came out for just above $500. Now they are in the $400 range.
Glock hatter have a hard time with the fact that Glock makes a good gun that has proven itself. I’m starting to see Glock hatters like Democrats and Glocks like Trump. No matter what Glock does, the hatters will just hate it because it’s a Glock.
GunnyUSMC
Member
My son is the same.
Glock sights, if you do not like, are easily changed whereas Springfield XD's are quite a pain to change. You can also readily buy used leo firearms with night sights that are metal if you wish.
My problems with Glock deal more with the frame and reach to trigger rather than their make or accuracy. I've fired a Glock 17, 22,and 30, and I shoot their competitors better namely a Smith and Wesson M&P, a Ruger SR40, and a Springfield XD. Of the three, I prefer the model 30 better as it had the best hand fit compared with the other Glocks. But then again, I prefer revolvers to semi-autos (other than a BHP) so what do I know.
All in all, Glock is an innovative design, tough as nails, and a solution that works for a lot of folks--it ain't perfection but it will do quite well for most people.
My problems with Glock deal more with the frame and reach to trigger rather than their make or accuracy. I've fired a Glock 17, 22,and 30, and I shoot their competitors better namely a Smith and Wesson M&P, a Ruger SR40, and a Springfield XD. Of the three, I prefer the model 30 better as it had the best hand fit compared with the other Glocks. But then again, I prefer revolvers to semi-autos (other than a BHP) so what do I know.
All in all, Glock is an innovative design, tough as nails, and a solution that works for a lot of folks--it ain't perfection but it will do quite well for most people.
Mike .45
Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2017
- Messages
- 252
1911junkee
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
- Messages
- 56
I think it just gives some people something else to bitch about Glock about. If they put a set of high dollar sights on the gun, people would be bitching about having to pay to much because of it. Theres no winning for Glock.
The plastic sights work fine, and Id be willing to bet, that most who dont change them out, dont stress the sights enough for them to be an issue.
Personally, I prefer it the way they are, as I change them out anyway. I like the three-dot night sights, and put them on all my Glocks, even my 44's.
And as much as people bitch, Glocks are about the easiest sights to replace, and usually the cheapest as well. If you dont want to do it yourself, send them your slide, and Glock with put a set of night sights on it for about $60.
So youre still ahead changing them out. But Im sure for some, theres still a problem there too.
"There is no winning for GLOCK"
Actually there is, it is the largest selling pistol on the planet!
OP
OP
Trey Veston
Member
The Glock rear sight has a steel insert...
Oddly enough, couldn't find a picture of it online, so the only way to know that, is if you took one off.
JR24
Member
Agree
JR24
Member
Certainly hasn't been my experience, some of mine that I've changed out have been pretty darned stubborn to get moving even with a sight pusher tool.
And yes, they have steel inserts on the bottom.
Thinking on it, I think I'd like the sight picture better with a blacked out rear sight, think I still have stock sights on my 17, might black out that rear site and see how it feels.
JR24
Member
Does your observation count blue label? Cause I've gotten a couple blue labels through a LEO I know and they came with the same plastic sights as the red label.
As for a department selecting night sights as standard, yeah I get that.
I was referring to contract pistols. I don't know of any department that specs the standard plastic sights.
Doesn't mean they don't exist but it sure doesn't seem common.
JR24
Member
Gotcha, thanks for clarifying.
jmohme
Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2014
- Messages
- 469
I picked up used CZ75b a few months ago, and a new Shadow 2 three weeks ago.
I have been to the range every week and have yet to shoot the CZ's any better, or get a tighter group than I do with my Glock G20 with its non adjustable sights.
Theohazard
Member
I love that Glock offers crappy plastic sights. Most handguns come with sights that have a poor sight picture, even the ones that have metal tritium sights. At least with Glocks I know that I didn’t pay much extra for sights I’m just going to replace anyway.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
Yea, but many of the competition cost $100-$200 less and still come with steel sights. I don't think Glock is passing the savings onto you.. My M&Ps, Beretta APXs, XD's, CZs, etc all cost me under $400 respectively and all came with polymer steel sights and I believe steel guide rods.
I'm not a fan of the sights Glock sights because of the goal post rear and the fact that their polymer. I'd prefer, especially at that point, steel sights. Yes, the polymer sights will work, but they are not as durable and can not take the abuse that steel can plan and simple.
Last edited:
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
I wonder why that is, and if our service members were issued guns with polymer sights, how they'd stand up to years of abuse and use. Why gamble either way. EOM steel Glock sights and night are not expensive, and no one can argue with a straight face that the polymer sights and better than steel...
Theohazard
Member
Steel sights or not, most of the competition also has bad sights that could stand to be replaced. And Glock does offer their guns with factory metal three-white-dot tritium sights, and those guns cost more. So with Glock you have an option to spend less on a gun with crappy lower-end plastic sights, which makes sense if you’re going to replace the sights anyway.
I wish my Beretta M9A3 had also been offered in a cheaper version with crappy sights since I’m planning to get rid of the factory three-white-dot tritium sights it came with.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
I guess it does make sense to spend less for the plastic sights if you're going to replace them.
I don't have an issue with the steel 3 dots that come on most carry guns. Many XD's and some others even ship with a serrated blacked rear and a fiber optic front which are both steel, and they can be had for under $400. Some polymer frame Sig's even ship with Sig night sights at the Glock price point.
Most on this forum own a collection of guns, and they do not want to spend hundreds to thousands of dollars replacing sights on all of them. I guess it does make sense to spend less for the plastic sights if you're going to replace them, but the steel sights that Glock offers should be standard at the plastic sights price point.
I said adjusted not adjustable. Which means choosing the right height of the sights and set the correct windage at the factory . They do it with plastic sights, they can do it with steel sights.
The question is still: when you buy a stock Glock, would you rather have plastic sights or steel sights?
JeffG
Member
Has anyone ever actually broke off a stock Glock sight during normal use?
I have never seen that. Most police departments either replace them with tritium metal sights, or order them with those sights. Duty and uniform wear takes a toll on equipment. A large percentage is just the day to day bumps and dings of wearing an exposed gun. Part of my training with an auto pistol, is loading and racking the gun with one hand. Using the stock sights on the edge of a table, concrete surface, or boot heel to rack the slide would render plastic sights useless in short order. In my opinion the sights mounted on a slide should be metal, but the reality is, the stock sights should serve day to day just fine. Sorry if a bit wordy. JeffG
I think Glock prices have been holding up due to three factors.
1. Perception of higher quality.
2. Perception of better customer service.
3. Investment by customers in the platform.
I'm not going to comment on 1 or 2 as people can and will make up their own minds. 3 though means if you already have holsters, magazines and will change sights regardless you are not really saving much by buying a $200 cheaper pistol.
1. Perception of higher quality.
2. Perception of better customer service.
3. Investment by customers in the platform.
I'm not going to comment on 1 or 2 as people can and will make up their own minds. 3 though means if you already have holsters, magazines and will change sights regardless you are not really saving much by buying a $200 cheaper pistol.
- Status
Similar threads
