Are Glocks really all that?

Status
Not open for further replies.
...when I explained I was in the market for an M&P he told me that after 50K+ rounds the slide would crack. (search on net proved this to be true; done by toddg).

No offense, but that is a ridiculous generalization for anyone to make. A single gun, after 62,000+ rounds experienced a crack in the slide, so your gun shop guy somehow equates that to "all M&P's will crack the slide at (or about) 50K rounds". So, based on the recorded cases of glock kaboom's, all glocks will eventually explode in your hand? Based on the reports of some 1911's failing to feed JHP rounds, all 1911's will jam with hollow points? Search the inner-net and you'll also find reports of Glock slides cracking and parts failing at high round counts. Parts wear and sometimes fail given enough use and the stresses of firing, on ALL guns.

Any producer who has produced more than one pistol for more than one year has undoubtedly had parts break or fail on their products at some point.

There is no such thing as a gun that cannot nor will not ever break, fail or malfunction. If you insist on searching for some holy grail of perfection and function in a gun, you will never be satisfied with anything you purchase, ever.
 
I know this makes no sense, but my Glock doesn't feel as as good as my Sig's and HK's in my hand. But I shoot it much better. I don't know if there's a gun that will fit me perfectly since my index finger is amputated. My trigger finger is my middle finger.

My G35 is a keeper.
 
I went to a gun show yesterday. As the aisle I was in became blocked, I heard someone telling someone else which gun fits best in your hand. I'm not sure what brand he mentioned, but I thought to myself, I wonder who the bigger fool is, the guy who knows what gun fits best in someone else's hand, or the fool who believes him.

Buy what you like. I've fired Glock, HK, Sig, and tons of others. I have my opinion (but it is worthless to any of you).

If I were to try to talk you into something, I'd talk you into firing 44 magnum, not a brand of gun. Now that's a nice round to fire.
 
They're not for everyone.

That said, I love my 21SF and 26. I never thought I'd like Glocks, in fact the first time I shot my buddy's 19c I really didn't like it. But one day I was in the market for a hi-cap .45 and stumbled across a killer deal on the 21SF so I bought it on good faith. I'm so glad I did. I shoot it extremely well, and with almost 1,500 rounds down range it's been dead reliable. Both my Glocks have proven so reliable that the 21 is my house gun and the 26 is my EDC. I trust both with my life 100%. Next up on my list is a 20 or 20c in 10mm. Amazing, simple, reliable pistols...
 
I hear everyone gripe about the Glock grip angle, that seems to be the biggest complaint about them. I guess I must be a mutant because I like it much better than other plastic pistols. The sights seem to find my eye naturally and the recoil seems to not involve my wrist at all.

In my opinion, they are the PERFECT pistol...... if you are BLIND. They are better looking than a Hi Point at least :)

I love my G26 so much, it feels like it was made for me. I love everything about it except its looks.
 
I love my Glocks (23C, 36, 26), but I also love my S&W revolvers and my Kimber .45. WaterMan had the best advice. Buy the gun that fits your hand and that you can shoot well....and is reliable. Luckily, there are lots to choose from.
 
are these glocks really all they are cracked up to be?

Well, if you were to listen to all of the gamers, no, they aren't! They'll have you looking to drop a grand on some other pistol with over 60 parts.

If however you are a thinking man, then you would have to ask yourself a question, why do over 60% of all American LE carry a Glock, including the FBI, DEA, and the US Marshalls sevice? ;)
 
I think they blow. Weird humped grip, poor ergonomics, thick across the top, extra wide magazines because of the polymer sleeve. I'd never buy one and would only accept one as a gift so long as there'd be no backlash from trading it off immediately.

OTOH, I have fired them enough and observed them enough to see why Glock has rabid fans. If they fit you and your shooting style, they're pretty good.

If they don't fit, and you have people saying "you just have to adapt to it," or you have guys at the counter pushing them at you when you'd rather look at anything else, the existence of these pistols is pretty damn annoying.
 
If however you are a thinking man, then you would have to ask yourself a question, why do over 60% of all American LE carry a Glock, including the FBI, DEA, and the US Marshalls sevice?

Occam's razor says, as it always does in these cases, "Glock was the lowest bidder that met the minimum testing criteria and who could fulfill the bid."

All government contracts are won by the lowest acceptable bid. There is no other credible answer. As it stands, Glock hasn't won every government trial that it has ever been in either.
 
1.00" of squared edge rectangular foolishness IMO. And you seem to throw one inch out there to imply no one has done better than that.
 
You keep telling yourself that.

Err... are you keeping your massive insider knowledge to yourself somehow? Because I am pretty darned sure that's the case. At least with all the aircraft parts and ancillary equipment I've ever ordered and dealt with.
 
Glocks are a good auto for the price. There are much finer guns out there but for all practical purposes a glock would do just fine.
 
Contracts? My friends and family in law enforcement all chose their own pistols. They had to meet certain criteria, but they all carry a Glock 22.

Anecdotally speaking, perhaps they are all sorely in need of a raise.
 
All government contracts are won by the lowest acceptable bid. There is no other credible answer.

As someone who works in government and has served on numerous selection committee's (for large software projects, not sidearm selection, but the process is similar regardless of the item), I can honestly say that this is not true. Typically, we put out an RFP (Request for Proposals). Various bidders then respond back with their proposals. We'll then bring them in, do interviews, look at samples of their work or previous projects, etc. Bid price is a factor in the selection criteria, but it is NOT the sole determining factor. As an example, when we were selecting a permitting/planning/zoning software implementation, we had 6 companies bid on the job. All had done such implementations before, and we probably could have made due with any of them, but we ended up going with the 2nd most expensive one, simply because their offering looked to be of higher quality.

This isn't really pro or anti-Glock. Personally I like them, but I tend to favor Ruger over any other brand. I'm just saying that the whole "the government always goes with the lowest bidder" mantra is mostly just a myth.

That said, while there are any number of factors, being from the computer side of things in my professional life, there used to be an old addage: "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.". Eventually that often got changed to "Nobody ever got fired for buying Intel.", or sometimes Microsoft. The basic thought though is that by buying the current "favorite" item, you deflect any possible blame if something goes wrong with them. If you buy Glocks and they mess up, then it's not your fault: everyone uses them - any sane person would take their recommendation. On the flip side if you bought say, CZ's, and they mess up, then there will be an immediate accusation: "Everyone else is buying Glocks - why didn't you?".

Not saying that Glocks, or CZ's, or whatever is bad. Indeed I think that for MOST of our law enforcement needs between Glock, Ruger, S&W, CZ, Beretta, FN, Steyr, SIG, etc - it's probably a wash. MOST of the big manufacturer's these days put out reliable products that would serve an officer just fine. I'm just saying that when purchasing a lot of guns, there is safety in going with the "obvious" choice.
 
Last edited:
I personally do not like Glocks. I don't like the grip angle. I don't like the trigger setup. In .45 acp, they seem clunky to me.

With that said, I am hugely impressed with how well the 9mm versions work. They seems to function well despite poor maintenance. I don't know much about the .40s and .357 sig varients. The 10mm versions seem to perform very well. The .45 acp versions seem to be the worst of the lot based on how I have seen them perform in matches.

I think the 9mm versions are probably some of the best guns around. Heck, my 75 year old mom CCWs a Glock 26 even! She is a bit slow on the draw, but she has no trouble putting rounds on target.

Should she come to pass before me, I will finally own a Glock - hers. They seem to be good guns, but simply don't appeal to me.
 
Occam's razor says, as it always does in these cases, "Glock was the lowest bidder that met the minimum testing criteria and who could fulfill the bid."

The standard video gamer has chimed in with the standard video gamer response, which is to say, they have no intelligent rebuttal, so they come up with the above quoted foolishness....

Glock wins because their cheap:eek:....If this were the case, then every LEA in north America would be issuing Ruger's.....;)
 
Err... are you keeping your massive insider knowledge to yourself somehow? Because I am pretty darned sure that's the case. At least with all the aircraft parts and ancillary equipment I've ever ordered and dealt with.
This is so silly it's almost embarrassing. Do you have any idea as to what you're even talking about? I'll tell you what, you run along and google up why the FBI & Marshalls service issue Glock pistols! Not just any two LEA, but two of the top LEA's in the world, and they chose Glock's, and you think to chalk it up to, they were cheap? Grow up....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top