Anyone tempted by Palmetto's Glock clone?

It was announced a few months back.

I'm not a Glock fan at all. But I'll probably pick one of these up.

You can get a full sized Canik for under $300, they are excellent pistols. I have one of the Canik ones, I'm interested to see how well PSA did with their design.

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/psa-ps9-dagger.862424/

Here's the original discussion.

I'd be in as a beta tester

The only thing I see to get excited about is the Glock magazine compatability. If you're not invested in or going to invest in Glock mags, it's just another budget polystriker pistol. Smith, Ruger, Remington, etc already sell a million different versions of that.

I am curious about them. Specially at the price point. I am more concerned with what parts are compatible. It would be nice if the striker, extractor, RSA and slide are compatible. The one article i read about when it first came out. I will the article that was posted here so see. I am also curious if holsters will work. I have a pile of holsters and parts for the G19.

I would make a comment about the same level of ugly as a Glock, but at a cheaper price point, but that wouldn't be very High Road of me, so I won't. What I will say is I would be curious to see range reports and for those who don't like Glocks due to the grip angle, I'd be curious how this stacks up.

I would be interested in how many numbers they can crank out. Time will tell on the quality. But if the quality is there, then I would guess that Glock would have some stiff competition. And I am guessing Competition is a good thing. I am wishing this New firearm all the luck possible. So far sounds like a winner.
It seems there is a era of newer quality guns and more competitive prices all the time.

If it’s as good as it sounds they’re going to sell a lot. I didn’t hear about the advanced optic one. For 350 I’ll be grabbing one of those in future if reviews are good. Already have a 17, 19 and 45 but was planning on getting one RMR cut or getting an MOS somewhere down the line. This would be better option. Only thing is I wouldn’t want a threaded barrel. No use for that not the extra length. Hopefully will have an optic version without threaded barrel.

I am looking forward to them coming on the market. I have a g19 but it look interesting.

I like the look and metal sights out of the box. Not sure if I would pick one up. The price is nice, but despite Glocks coming in a bit higher than some other poly strikers, I see them as hard use investment tools for volume shooters. They cost 500 bucks when something else comes in at 300. 300 bucks makes since for the person shooting a couple hundred rounds or less and tossing the pistol in a glove box and forgetting about it. I have a couple of guns bought for that purpose.

However, if its a gun you are going to shoot ragged, a Glock makes sense. Tons and tons of aftermarket support and a known build quality. I dont currently own any Glocks. I think I would opt for an M&P if I were in the market for a boring yet reliable duty pistol. Im not a Glock fan. Im not sure this gun would fill any need I could come up with for my personal use.

I do think I like the look a bit better than a Glock...but its still about as valid of a compliment as preferring a BM you made on Tuesday to the one you made on Wednesday

Fiv3r said:

I like the look and metal sights out of the box. Not sure if I would pick one up. The price is nice, but despite Glocks coming in a bit higher than some other poly strikers, I see them as hard use investment tools for volume shooters. They cost 500 bucks when something else comes in at 300. 300 bucks makes since for the person shooting a couple hundred rounds or less and tossing the pistol in a glove box and forgetting about it. I have a couple of guns bought for that purpose.

However, if its a gun you are going to shoot ragged, a Glock makes sense. Tons and tons of aftermarket support and a known build quality. I dont currently own any Glocks. I think I would opt for an M&P if I were in the market for a boring yet reliable duty pistol. Im not a Glock fan. Im not sure this gun would fill any need I could come up with for my personal use.

I do think I like the look a bit better than a Glock...but its still about as valid of a compliment as preferring a BM you made on Tuesday to the one you made on Wednesday

Click to expand...

Where are you getting the idea that it will not go the distance like a Glock or Other Quality firearms? Based simply on the lower price? You don't think Glocks get more money because of a popular name? If Glocks were to go down in price, then would you assume Glocks cannot any longer go the distance or made inferior to the present quality?

For less than the cost of 1000 rounds of 9mm why would I buy an unproven knock off? On top of that you can buy used G19s for $400-$450 all day long.

I'll probably get one. Glock's design is pretty simple and not really that hard to copy. If it works the same for a lower price point then why pay more? And I've already got 2 "real" Glocks and a Polymer 80 build, but I can appreciate a lower priced competitor.

However, if its a gun you are going to shoot ragged, a Glock makes sense. Tons and tons of aftermarket support

Click to expand...

From my understanding this is way more of "clone" than the other things people call Glock clones. It's supposed to be straight up parts compatible (with a Gen 3 Glock), so aftermarket support for the Glock is aftermarket support for the PS9 Dagger too. It's sort of doing with Glock what was done with the 1911.

Fiv3r said:

I like the look and metal sights out of the box. Not sure if I would pick one up. The price is nice, but despite Glocks coming in a bit higher than some other poly strikers, I see them as hard use investment tools for volume shooters. They cost 500 bucks when something else comes in at 300. 300 bucks makes since for the person shooting a couple hundred rounds or less and tossing the pistol in a glove box and forgetting about it. I have a couple of guns bought for that purpose.

However, if its a gun you are going to shoot ragged, a Glock makes sense. Tons and tons of aftermarket support and a known build quality. I dont currently own any Glocks. I think I would opt for an M&P if I were in the market for a boring yet reliable duty pistol. Im not a Glock fan. Im not sure this gun would fill any need I could come up with for my personal use.

I do think I like the look a bit better than a Glock...but its still about as valid of a compliment as preferring a BM you made on Tuesday to the one you made on Wednesday

Click to expand...

Would you be happier if PSA charged $500+ instead of $300? Would it then be considered for hard use or high volume shooting?

I am not trying to be a smarty pants or suggest that PSA’s pistol will be better, but I am pointing out a flawed argument. Specifically, the cost of something does not necessarily equate to it’s quality; “That thing costs more so it HAS to be better” is purely an assumption until a direct comparison, price notwithstanding, is made.

Perhaps the PSA is only 3/5 the quality of a Glock. Perhaps it’s even worse than that. Or perhaps the PSA is of the same/better quality than the Glock and PSA can sell their pistols for less because PSA operates off a different business model than Glock (sell more, but at lesser profit margin, build a loyal customer base to which you can rely upon to buy more especially after filling inboxes with multiple ads each day, etc).

I own about 10 Glocks of various models and agree that they are quality firearms. I also suspect that Glock makes a lucrative profit. I would not be surprised if it costs Glock well under $200 per pistol for materials, labor, and other costs.

I agree that we often pay for what we get. However, I also see and have fallen victim myself, knowingly and unknowingly, to paying more for something than what it’s worth. I hope the pistol does well. Competition amongst manufacturers and retailers is great for consumers!

Not my thing as I'm not a poly guy and if I was I would just pay the bit extra for a Glock. Anytime someone says, "its just like X", I would just as soon buy X. X being the original usually has more support and will be worth more down the road if I go to sell it.

Not hating on it but not for me.

Locally used Glocks run about $300 so the question is do you want a new PSA or a used Glock

giggitygiggity said:

Would you be happier if PSA charged $500+ instead of $300? Would it then be considered for hard use or high volume shooting?

I am not trying to be a smarty pants or suggest that PSA’s pistol will be better, but I am pointing out a flawed argument. Specifically, the cost of something does not necessarily equate to it’s quality; “That thing costs more so it HAS to be better” is purely an assumption until a direct comparison, price notwithstanding, is made.

Perhaps the PSA is only 3/5 the quality of a Glock. Perhaps it’s even worse than that. Or perhaps the PSA is of the same/better quality than the Glock and PSA can sell their pistols for less because PSA operates off a different business model than Glock (sell more, but at lesser profit margin, build a loyal customer base to which you can rely upon to buy more especially after filling inboxes with multiple ads each day, etc).

I own about 10 Glocks of various models and agree that they are quality firearms. I also suspect that Glock makes a lucrative profit. I would not be surprised if it costs Glock well under $200 per pistol for materials, labor, and other costs.

I agree that we often pay for what we get. However, I also see and have fallen victim myself, knowingly and unknowingly, to paying more for something than what it’s worth. I hope the pistol does well. Competition amongst manufacturers and retailers is great for consumers!

Click to expand...

No I don't think the Glock is necessarily higher quality. Its just a known quantity. It has a track record of having the bejeezus shot out of it with minimal care or fuss. Armorers abound. Most parts of a Glock should work in this gun, but all parts of a Glock work in a Glock.

I'm not a fan of Glocks. I might buy a 20 in the future, but they aren't my duty pistol of choice in 9mm. I do like the looks of this gun over the Glock. That said, I'm not a huge fan of gun companies blatantly riding coat tails. I can understand magazine compatibility as thats a huge sticking point with the cost of ownership (and thus adoption) of many guns. However, when you are just stamping out the guts different enough to not get sued I kinda don't like that. To me, it feels a bit disingenuous. Its like the company just gave up on trying to invent a better mousetrap and just decided to paint it a different color and say it was for rats and costs 2 dollars less. Im sure it really is pretty much like what has happened to Colts 1911 over the last 109 years. It just feels a little early for companies to basically say, "Whelp, perfection enough for me!" and make the gun a near copy. I would rather a company keep hammering Glock and build and better or more innovative gun to make Glock sweat its market share.

I like various striker fired guns. I have owned many of them. I am not a fan of Glocks, how they shoot, or their rabid Fandom. However, if I could only buy one 9mm pistol to be pressed into a lifetime of service it would most likely be a 17 or 19. Not because its better but because it has proven to be long lasting and refurbishable by the end user.

So for me, at $300 I would pass. I havent found anything in that price range that I liked better than a Glock or at least held some of its value. SIG, FN, S&W, sure. Comparable guns at least attempting not to copy Glock success. Maybe as a boat gun or one to keep in the truck as back up. I dont doubt the Dagger is well built and I certainly don't shoot enough to wear one out. I just look at the 9mm Glock as a tool so ubiquitous that a lower dollar copy doesn't offer enough merit for me to invest in it over just getting a Glock and knowing what I am getting and knowing that there are 3 decades of parts available for the far foreseeable future.

I may give one a try...for $300 it's worth the risk.

Stay safe.

Glock could sell those pistols for a lot less. They use the most modern and economical means of producing them. They routinely give law enforcement personnel a very good discount for example. I hope this gets glock to lower their pricing or maybe even to make some real improvements. Their have been some modifications, but for example their triggers could be improved as others have done with partially cocked striker pistols. Instead of mos, mill the guns out for RMRs and holosuns.

I have a Gen 5 G19 I'm perfectly content with. Glock won't build the pistol I really want, which is a Gen 5 G23, so I've moved on. Discovered the P365 and love it.

If I was in the market for a compact 9mm, I'd be interested.

I have always believed that Glock, being in business for so many years and buying all the materials for production at the volume they do, could sell for much less. They are a Utilitarian type of firearm and advertised with fewer working parts. Presently they get the price because fans are willing to pay. But will that continue in a world where gun sales are increasing and more and more good quality firearms are being produced for less?

It will be interesting to see how things play out. Persoanlly I just wonder if they will be able to keep up with demand. There obviously will be a Market for the gun. People lined up to buy the Sig 365 which was a gun that was unproven, the LCP was a knockoff of the Keltec etc. People bought the unproven Ruger Wrangler etc. Yes people will buy the gun. It may go through a adjustment period like the Sig 365, but many guns do.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong
I have read on the internet the reason there are gen 3 clones popping up everywhere is because the patent has run out on the Gen 3 and you can't be sued for duplicating them.

There are plenty of genn 3 80% kits floating around. Maybe this is just their serialized version.

DukeConnor said:

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong
I have read on the internet the reason there are gen 3 clones popping up everywhere is because the patent has run out on the Gen 3 and you can't be sued for duplicating them.

There are plenty of genn 3 80% kits floating around. Maybe this is just their serialized version.

Click to expand...

Pretty much what I was thinking. The Glock design is going down the same road the AR-15 & 1911 designs did.