15 year old traditionalist.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skribs, you're right, "tacticool" refers more to the group who hang all sorts of things on a gun that basically doubles the gun's weight.

I guess my post is more about people who think anything more advanced than grandpa's old deer rifle is a newcomer and an abomination in the eyes of gun aficionados. Let me replace "tacticool" with "tactical" and see how that reads.

And I know FIVETWOSEVEN's question wasn't addressed to me, but I am actually starting to really like my Glock 17 :)
 
How much experiance do you actually have with these "newer" guns? I use to love all metal guns but now I lean a bit more towards polymer than metal. All it took was really just shooting them to embrace them. One thing I've noticed though is that sometimes, some young people about my age (18) and younger seem to embrace the older guns with the intent of being different. Once you get more experiance with the guns of this age, I'm sure you will change your views.

My HD 1100 has a wood stock on it with just an extension added on. Only change I could see myself making to it would be adding a pistol grip buttstock to help recoil when I shoot slugs.
I have plenty of experince with polymer guns. I grew up shooting glocks, my dads a Lieutenant with the pittsburgh police and owns a glock 22, glock 17, glock 36, and a glock 26. The first automatic pistol I ever shot was a glock. I even had to go through a defensive course at my range with my dads glock 17 last month and I was all over the place. Than I pick up my 1911 or my dads smith and wesson model 19 or 64 and there all in the same hole. I also have very tiny hands and a double stack glock just dosen't point naturally for me. In my opinion JMB was a genius and got it perfect right off the bat he built a weapon with perfect balance and feel without comprimising power and accuracy. could the 1911 be lighter, sure but then your sacrificing some of that perfect balance and handling quality. When you really think about it a glock is just a simplified browning hi power ( which I also love the feel of) with bad balance and bad looks. Maybe if my hands grow some more I might warm up to them like my dad did but until then I'll stick with my 1911.
 
I was the same way when I was your age, and I'm 29 now and still don't own any polymer guns. My father offered to get me an XD45 just like his for Christmas last year. I said I wanted a 1911 instead. I got a Rock Island Armory 1911 Tactical. It came with a magzine that had an ugly polymer baseplate. I ordered Colt 7-rounders with flush metal baseplates to replace it. They match the magazines from my father's Colt Combat Commander.

Polymer guns just don't appeal to me. Revolvers don't appeal to me much, either, though there's a few I want.
 
When you really think about it a glock is just a simplified browning hi power ( which I also love the feel of) with bad balance and bad looks.

No, just no. Glocks are no where on the same level as a Hi Power. They both have the same short recoil systems but thats it. I also can't really see you putting rounds in one hole in a defensive course with just a change of gun. Seems way too far fetched.
 
Im 15 years old and im a die hard traditionalist when it comes to just about everything including firearms. I don't care for glocks or any other polymer gun they feel like blocky toys to me and I can't shoot them very well. I prefer older guns like 1911s, smith and wesson revolvers ( not a big fan of airweights though) and most any other older designs like the colt 1903 pocket hammerless ( you can never go wrong with something JMB designed ) My generation however seems to be caught up on the newer tacticool designs. Is there anyone else from a younger generation who prefers older designs like I do I'd like to know im not alone.

I'd say that if you "can't" shoot Glocks well you need to practice some more.

There is nothing tacticool about a Glock or similar pistol.

I don't think your generation is caught up on anything because, well, you are 15.

You have a nice head start though.
 
I no there not on the same level but if you look at the barrel on a browning hi power and compare it to a glocks there almost identical. They both have the same cam lock up system and I think the hi power was a big basis for gaston when he was designing the glock. the main difference I see is that the glock is striker fired and the hi power is hammer fired. I take the hi power over the glock anyday though. And It may sound far fectched to you, but it's true. Im all over the place with a glock and in the center with a 1911. Glocks just point too awkwardly for me. while 1911s or hi powers are like an extension of my arm.
 
If you slow down, line up the sights and smoothly pull the trigger it should still hit where you are aiming. Even if you shoot the others better and are accurately on target more quickly IF you can slow down and deliberately shoot with good fundamentals you will hit just fine with the Glocks as well. Doesn't mean you will shoot them as well as something that points naturally for you..
 
If you slow down, line up the sights and smoothly pull the trigger it should still hit where you are aiming. Even if you shoot the others better and are accurately on target more quickly IF you can slow down and deliberately shoot with good fundamentals you will hit just fine with the Glocks as well. Doesn't mean you will shoot them as well as something that points naturally for you..
I'm not saying I can't hit a target with a glock I just can't keep as tight of groupings as I can with a 1911 hi power or similar gun.
 
I'm not saying I can't hit a target with a glock I just can't keep as tight of groupings as I can with a 1911 hi power or similar gun.

I can sympathise with that. I think GLOCKS are a really good design, and there are a good gun, just not for me. I don't know why, but they just don't fit my hand well.


You might want to try some of the other "newer" designs and see if you like those: Sigs, Rugers, Berretas....

Oh, almost forgot; I'm 21, and I like the "older" guns too.

Chris "the Kayak-Man" Johnson
 
24 years old here and a traditionalist at hart, but I will use a more modern design if/when it suits me. I have a Glock and stainless synthetic stocked rifles, but the tacticool bug has not bitten me.

My last two gun purchases were a 30+ year old Savage pump .410 shotgun and an 18 year old Ruger .22 pistol. Both wear wood stocks and blue barrels.
 
I no there not on the same level but if you look at the barrel on a browning hi power and compare it to a glocks there almost identical. They both have the same cam lock up system and I think the hi power was a big basis for gaston when he was designing the glock. the main difference I see is that the glock is striker fired and the hi power is hammer fired. I take the hi power over the glock anyday though. And It may sound far fectched to you, but it's true. Im all over the place with a glock and in the center with a 1911. Glocks just point too awkwardly for me. while 1911s or hi powers are like an extension of my arm.

They both use the Browning short recoil system. JMB used it for most if not all of his handguns and its been used in most semi auto handguns since. Glocks are no where close to being like a Hi Power other than the operating system and they are both semi auto handguns.
 
I'm not as young as 15 but 18 is close enough right? I enjoy my older style guns, Mosin's, Enfield's, lever guns and side by sides etc... but I never have a literal "problem" shooting any particular firearm. Shooting handguns all feel relatively the same to me; line up the sights evenly and hold where you want to hit, slowly bring the trigger straight back, repeat. If after 3 or 4 shots the grouping is off then adjust and unless the gun is seriously defective it should be really good. I don't find it hard to stay steady and all that, the sights stay put when I'm shooting.

However, with your complaint that you "can't" shoot a glock as well as a 1911 or hi power it seems you need to relax. The human hand is amazingly adaptable and while a gun might not POINT well for someone aiming is something else entirely. same goes for rifles and shotguns. When pointing a target you may be off because of the grip angle but when you aim all you have to do is adjust and adapt. No gun I've ever picked up has been so disfigured to the point that "aim-gripping" was uncomfortable or painful. It doesn't matter what the gun is shooting all of them well is what's important. If you find yourself in a situation that you need to use a gun and all that is available is a glock or "modern" handgun you can't just say "I won't shoot that" and curl up into a ball in the corner hoping that the guy breaking into your house was only looking for some tea and a pleasant conversation.

*sigh* but i digress. Yes fellow younger gun people enjoy older designs but personally I will shoot any and every gun possible and I will do the same thing for each one. To quote Steve Lee "I like guns I like the way they look, I like the shiny steel and the polished wood. I don't care if they're big or small if they're for sale, well hell, I want 'em all". Enjoy the shooting sports and be thankful that you can shoot at such a young age, not all of us have that kind of opportunity.
 
I'm 26....I think that qualifies me as young. Mabey not to the op however :)
I love the looks of the old traditional guns. The 1911's ,the browning hi powers, the colt pythons etc etc.
I do how ever lean towards the modern fire arms. I own 8 glocks and love them all. I shoot them very well, and they eat absolutly anything I feed them. I like my ruger sr series guns, and my hks. They'll feed anything and hold a lot of rounds. My RIA 1911 doesn't like hollow points, and won't hold as many rounds as one of my polymer guns.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. When my glocks, or hk's go bang 100% of the time no matter what I'm shooting in them.....now thats a beautiful thing. When my 1911 spits and sputters with anything other than federal fmj's....now thats just plain ole ugly.I appriciate both worlds very much and the history, but prefer the modern polymer framed guns.
 
Your RIA 1911 is based off of the original design, thats why it doesn't like HPs. If you were to get a more modern one like a S&W 1911 or a Kimber, it would feed HPs.
 
I am in my early 20's. To me an AK-47 clone is a "traditional" weapon, since it has a wooden stock and forearm and its design is over 50 years old (2011-1947 = 64 years). So by my definition, I would definitely consider myself a "traditionalist".
Just because something is traditional doesn't mean it can't be "tactical". The BHP, 1911, S&W 1917 revolver, M1, etc. could have been considered "tactical" as well as the Colt Detective Special and even the original Colt revolver and Winchester lever guns, when they were first introduced since they were designed or used by military or law enforcement. Also, I would still consider many of them as "tactical" today.
I do appreciate nice, old, "hunting-type traditional" guns, but prefer standard-capacity, military-caliber, semi-automatic weapons.
 
Tactical is a mindset, not a toolset. Some idiot can have the most "tricked out" AR 15 imaginable and still not be as tactical as an old man with a single shot .22 intent on protecting his family.
 
I don't care for glocks or any other polymer gun they feel like blocky toys to me and I can't shoot them very well.
No reason at all of course why the material of the gun should force it to feel like a "blocky toy" or make it difficult to shoot well. Like you, I don't admire Glocks very much but I think it is to do with ergonomics rather than materials. I am sure JMB would have used polymer for certain components had he had it available.
 
Your RIA 1911 is based off of the original design, thats why it doesn't like HPs. If you were to get a more modern one like a S&W 1911 or a Kimber, it would feed HPs.
I've been looking at the s&w E series 1911, what a beauty but its pricey because of the scandium frame I'm guessing.
The two kimbers I've been exposed to were nothing but trouble. I'm not painting kimber out bad by any means, but thats a high price tag to have trouble. I know every manufacturer is going to let lemmons out time to time, my ruger sr series pistols were nothing but trouble until they made a trip back to the factory in AZ. That said they don't have the price tag of a kimber either.
 
You have a lot of time ahead of you. Your tastes may change.


In the end it matters little what the gun IS, only what it can DO, and how much fun it is to shoot
 
The pistol I love the most is a Ruger Single Six. (It will be a poor trade for my father the day I get it, but it will give me fond memories for the rest of my life.)

The pistol I rely on is a G21SF.

To me, there isn't really a gun there when it is my hand. There are sights and a steady pull on a trigger. At some point, there is a bang and a flash of light. (If you really, really get into a focusing on the basics of the trigger pull it is not uncommon for your eyes not to blink until after recoil is in progress. Practice shooting is my zen.) It doesn't matter if it is irons, scope, red dot / single stage, two stage, set stage / wood, iron, polymer.

They are tools, for a purpose. I like the look of an old hand saw, even if it is rusted from hanging on a wall for twenty or fifty years. Sometimes I use the hand tools for the sheer pleasure of it. That doesn't mean I don't have multiple power saws for jobs.

To detract from one set of tools is to detract from them all. There are ups and downs to each and every tool in most scenarios when you change the variables. For instance, my perfectly free-floated CZ527 in SC had made a huge shift just taking it down to LA. Wood still can have issues with moisture and temp, where poly doesn't. Steel doesn't have as much (as far as frames/stocks are concerned), but could you imagine the weight of an all metal rifle or shotgun? And oddly, I've seen more cracked frames on steel framed autos than poly's. (14 or 15 to 1).

Metal rusts, wood rots, poly can have weird reactions with chemicals, etc., etc.

Right tool for the right job doesn't mean the same thing for every craftsman. But two craftsmen that use different tools for the same job doesn't mean that one is wrong or the other right in most cases. Sometimes, there is only one, but those times are quite rare. Live and let live (except goblins in your cave). Advice and experience should be tactfully used more than condescension and derision.

On that note, I'm not tacticool. I'm not old school. I'm practical. I buy guns like I buy tools: for specific jobs at specific times. And occasionally my wife lets one of either slide buy that I got on pure whim with no comment. My Mosin gets the same care that my SIG 556 gets. My Glock the same that my Beretta does.

If that whole things sounds a bit philosophical, it should. Every person that speaks the words "In my opinion" is speaking subjectively. Pretty literally. There needs to be more open attitudes. On both sides of a lot of fences. There is more than enough room for all of us in the same room at the same time. I've 'converted' more than a few 1911 die hards to go poly after shooting my Glock. And the best shooting handgun I ever shot was a heavily modded 1911.

As far as materials, grip angles, etc... think about hammering nails. Not every nail needs the same hammer. Not every nail is a straight down strike. And sometimes all you have is a wrench.

YMMV.
 
I found it funny that I always preferred lever action rifles growing up in the mid-west. Until I was the first person to shoot perfect on the Marines pop up range at Camp Geiger for my battalion. Its funny I was labeled a "non-combatant" but I had alot of trigger time there after. :what::D:neener:
 
I much prefer my Glock. I have a friend who loves the older wood and steel guns but they are not for me. I just prefer the newer guns. I would say the 1911 being the only exception. However I would ask, if I took my old Sig P226R and threw on a pair of wooden grips, does that count as an older gun? Or a traditional gun?
 
I'm 21, and while I appreciate the reliability and ruggedness of a Glock, as others have said, they just don't have the appeal of a Browning design.

The 9mm Glocks don't feel awkward to me, but I've never handled a gun that is such a natural pointer and feels so tailor-made for my hand as a High Power. Even my family heirloom Luger doesn't feel quite as good in the hand after handling the HP. I also like how slim and small the High Power is for a service-size handgun. I think this gives it an advantage over the fatter Glocks for concealed carry, as the Glock would probably tend to print more.
 
I love old 1911's, heck it's my name on here, and I love alot of older rifles. However, I prefer more modern designs like a Sig, AR, and SCAR platforms. In a handgun though I much prefer steel or aluminum to polymer and vise versa for a rifle. I don't think anyone likes carrying a steel and wood rifle up a mountain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top